Repealing the ACA would increase federal budget deficits by $137 billion over the 2016–2025 period

[usmbguest5318]

The claim in the title is from the Congressional Budget Office.

Before you make a fool of yourself, click the damn link and read the report.

More than leaving it in place?

Bull fuckng shit.

We don't even know the exact nature of the replacement. How can it be judged that it would cost $100 billion to repeal Obamacare.

Click the link. Read carefully and completely what you find there. Then you'll know the answer to your question.

 

[ColonelAngus]

The claim in the title is from the Congressional Budget Office.

Before you make a fool of yourself, click the damn link and read the report.

More than leaving it in place?

Bull fuckng shit.

We don't even know the exact nature of the replacement. How can it be judged that it would cost $100 billion to repeal Obamacare.

Click the link. Read carefully and completely what you find there. Then you'll know the answer to your question.

Hey, I am just glad to see snowflakes using the CBO as a data source. They abandoned that for the past 8 years....specifically with regards to Obamacare.

Federal Subsidies for Health Insurance Coverage for People Under Age 65: 2016 to 2026

Odd how this CBO report was ignored....

So, for the record, is the CBO full of shit, or is it a reliable source?

 

[AntonToo]

It's just more of memememe fantasizing.

Americans have long rejected your attitudedes

So then, you do not care about what Americans want Gruber Jr, you are brilliant and will force it down our throats. OK, explains everything. There you have it USMB, how a lefty really thinks!

I have no problem making those that are doing well in this country like myself contributing more to society to ensure that our citizens, Americans, have safety nets to fall back on in tough times and old age and yes have access to affordable healthcare.

Standard fair "but I really don't give a shit about anything beyond my four walls!!" pleads from ridiculous conservatives do not impress. These attitudes are straight barbaric.

And you use the gun of the government to get the rest of us to go along with it.

How Brave of you......

I use my voice and vote in our great civilized, democratic governing system.

So can you.

When 1/2 the country figures out it can rob the other 1/2 via a majority vote, that is the end of the Republic.

Whatever, I don't feel robbed, neither should you.

 

[imawhosure]

So then, you do not care about what Americans want Gruber Jr, you are brilliant and will force it down our throats. OK, explains everything. There you have it USMB, how a lefty really thinks!

I have no problem making those that are doing well in this country like myself contributing more to society to ensure that our citizens, Americans, have safety nets to fall back on in tough times and old age and yes have access to affordable healthcare.

Standard fair "but I really don't give a shit about anything beyond my four walls!!" pleads from ridiculous conservatives do not impress. These attitudes are straight barbaric.

And you use the gun of the government to get the rest of us to go along with it.

How Brave of you......

I use my voice and vote in our great civilized, democratic governing system.

So can you.

When 1/2 the country figures out it can rob the other 1/2 via a majority vote, that is the end of the Republic.

Whatever, I don't feel robbed, neither should you.

Now leftists are going to tell us not only how to think, but how to feel! Boy oh boy, we can't even do that right, we need lefty help. Hey, should we LOVE our wives today? I dunno, ask a lefty! They are going to tell us all how to feel-)

 

[martybegan]

So then, you do not care about what Americans want Gruber Jr, you are brilliant and will force it down our throats. OK, explains everything. There you have it USMB, how a lefty really thinks!

I have no problem making those that are doing well in this country like myself contributing more to society to ensure that our citizens, Americans, have safety nets to fall back on in tough times and old age and yes have access to affordable healthcare.

Standard fair "but I really don't give a shit about anything beyond my four walls!!" pleads from ridiculous conservatives do not impress. These attitudes are straight barbaric.

And you use the gun of the government to get the rest of us to go along with it.

How Brave of you......

I use my voice and vote in our great civilized, democratic governing system.

So can you.

When 1/2 the country figures out it can rob the other 1/2 via a majority vote, that is the end of the Republic.

Whatever, I don't feel robbed, neither should you.

Well ain't that mighty white of you.

 

[BlueGin]

My plan was constant for over a decade, then all of sudden Obamacare came into effect and I had to change things, all at a higher cost to me than previously, for less benefits.

And keep sucking Obama's dick, but remember to clean your mouth off afterwards, asshole.

Fuck you and your little mememememe world.

Grandfathered Plans

You are the greedy one here, wanting me to subsidize your crap so you can continue your lazy lifestyle.

Get a fucking job, or a better one and take care of your own shit.

WTF? What of my crap do you subsidize? Fuck off, I pay for everything and then some.

You are a pathetic little man to even go there.

Look Antontoo------> If you people want Ocare, then you can keep your plan! I don't care if you keep Ocare, as long as there is an option NOT to!

Understand the basic reality of the debate--------> We are NOT demanding you do what we say, but YOU are demanding we do what YOU say! Keep Ocare if you like, whatever you want to do is fine, as long as WE have a choice.

Now, even a leftist can understand that what I have stated is FAIR; and what is wrong with being FAIR? Freedom is about choices. The more choices you have, the more free you are! So there you have it!

CONSERVATIVES ON THIS BOARD-----------> Are any of you demanding that any leftist on this board can NOT keep their high deductibles, or help others buy health insurance if they so choose to?

See Antontoo, all of us agree YOU can help others all you want, and KEEP your high deductibles to boot if makes YOU personally happy

There is nothing in Obamcare for me other than general well being of this country.

I am well insured, well employed, healthy and otherwise blessed in this world and it is exactly because my concern does not end at my picket fence that I support Obamacare and further reforms it lays foundation for.

America is a great country of the willing and able - there is no reason why we can't have world's best healthcare, not the over-priced, under-delivering, people-screwing mess we have had going on for the last 3 decades.

Obamacare IS under delivering for many low income folks particularly seniors. So when a senior falls on ice and knocks their teeth out...who pays the 45k bill that Medicare denies for dental surgery?

Answer...the low income patient.

And that is just one example I deal with every single day in dealing with Medicare/Medicaid.

Government healthcare sucks ass.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The claim in the title is from the Congressional Budget Office.

Before you make a fool of yourself, click the damn link and read the report.

More than leaving it in place?

Bull fuckng shit.

We don't even know the exact nature of the replacement. How can it be judged that it would cost $100 billion to repeal Obamacare.

Click the link. Read carefully and completely what you find there. Then you'll know the answer to your question.

Hey, I am just glad to see snowflakes using the CBO as a data source. They abandoned that for the past 8 years....specifically with regards to Obamacare.

Federal Subsidies for Health Insurance Coverage for People Under Age 65: 2016 to 2026

Odd how this CBO report was ignored....

So, for the record, is the CBO full of shit, or is it a reliable source?

I don't have a problem with that report to which you linked and implied I read. I read it. It doesn't contradict the CBO report I linked to in the OP. What "your" document does is expound in greater detail on one major component of the larger ACA.

When I advised you to read the document to which I linked, I kinda expected that you'd take that to mean that you should also carefully and completely read the content you submit as well. I can tell from your comments above and the content of the document to which you linked that you have not carefully and completely - or even to page three of it - read that document.

The document you have linked to is the CBO's report about the health insurance coverage component of the ACA. I'm perfectly willing to accept the CBO's projections about the costs associated with that component of the ACA. The document I linked in my OP is about the entirety of the ACA. The CBO made the distinction quite clear in the summary of the document you put before me.

Quoted verbatim from the report you linked:

• Q: How Much Do the ACA’s Insurance Coverage Provisions Cost?
  
  • A: The effects of the health insurance coverage provisions of the ACA are incorporated into the estimates of overall health insurance coverage and are a subset of the estimates of the net federal subsidies associated with such coverage that are discussed above. To separate the effects of the ACA’s coverage provisions from those broader estimates, CBO and JCT compared their current projections with estimates of what would have occurred if the ACA had never been enacted. In 2016, those provisions are estimated to reduce the number of uninsured people by 22 million and to result in a net cost to the federal government of $110 billion. For the 2017–2026 period, the projected net cost of those provisions is $1.4 trillion.Those estimates address only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA, which do not generate all of the law’s budgetary effects. Many other provisions—such as various tax provisions that increase revenues and reductions in Medicare payments to hospitals, to other providers of care, and to private insurance plans delivering Medicare’s benefits—are, on net, expected to reduce budget deficits.

Just a Suggestion or Two:

• When you provide non-partisan and rigorously developed documents to support or explain an idea you express, it's in your interest to have read and fully comprehend the document in its entirety so you know what other people will find there when they read it. You must do that because the authors of such documents/studies don't care whose/what point of view is bolstered by their findings; they are simply sharing information based on their highly credible research and they will be quite clear about what are the valid and invalid kinds of implications readers may take from their reports.
  
  That said, when you find such documents, while they may not always serve as the "be all end all" on the matter, they are far and away better sources of support than is any partisan or haphazardly arrived at article, editorial or pseudo-study (i.e., any so-called study that does not fully disclose its methodology so that it can be replicated or extrapolated upon by readers who desire to do so.
• Do not assume that the person with whom you discuss a topic is a fool. Better to wait for them to multiply make the kinds of mistakes only fools do. Once you and they have done that, by all means, let 'em have it and give it to 'em good.
  
  Do you by any chance play chess? If you do, I suspect you've come across the guidance that instructs players to never assume or rely on your opponent not finding the moves to defeat you. The same concept applies to debates and discussions; however debate has another one: don't let your mouth write a check your brain can't cash. In addition to the literal implications of that proviso, another is that you have to stay on topic. (You violated that by trying to drill into the health care insurance component of the ACA when the discussion topic is about the impact of repealing the ACA as a whole.)

 

[BlueGin]

When hospitals deal with Medicare patients and know certain procedures needed are not covered by Medicare. Patients are required to sign an ABN form (Advance beneficiary notice of non coverage). Stating they agee to pay these charges out of their own pocket before they are performed. Again. Government healthcare sucks ass.

 

[AntonToo]

WTF? What of my crap do you subsidize? Fuck off, I pay for everything and then some.

You are a pathetic little man to even go there.

Look Antontoo------> If you people want Ocare, then you can keep your plan! I don't care if you keep Ocare, as long as there is an option NOT to!

Understand the basic reality of the debate--------> We are NOT demanding you do what we say, but YOU are demanding we do what YOU say! Keep Ocare if you like, whatever you want to do is fine, as long as WE have a choice.

Now, even a leftist can understand that what I have stated is FAIR; and what is wrong with being FAIR? Freedom is about choices. The more choices you have, the more free you are! So there you have it!

CONSERVATIVES ON THIS BOARD-----------> Are any of you demanding that any leftist on this board can NOT keep their high deductibles, or help others buy health insurance if they so choose to?

See Antontoo, all of us agree YOU can help others all you want, and KEEP your high deductibles to boot if makes YOU personally happy

There is nothing in Obamcare for me than general well being of this country.

I am well insured, well employed, healthy and otherwise blessed in this world and it is exactly because my concern does not end at my picket fence that I support Obamacare and further reforms it lays foundation for. America is a great country and deserves world's best healthcare, not the over-priced, under-delivering mess we have had.

And fucking me over, you forget that part.

Why should I pay full price when others get government assistance? Plus why should I pay full price for something less than what I got before?

NOBODY is charging you ANYTHING for Obamacare subsidies.

You ramblings about ME somehow fucking YOU over is your psychosis kicking into overdrive.

My taxes pay for them. Someone has to pay for the subsidies. and my rates go up because insurance companies are capped at how much they can charge higher risk people, thus I have to subsidize them on that front.

No they don't, unless you maybe go bed-tanning or flip secondary houses at over $500,000 profit. There are no significant middle class taxes that fund subsidies.

As far as covering higher risk people, yes that does add cost, but neither Trump nor most Republicans are looking to get rid of provisions for pre-existing conditions.

 

[AntonToo]

When hospitals deal with Medicare patients and know certain procedures needed are not covered by Medicare. Patients are required to sign an ABN form (Advance beneficiary notice of non coverage). Stating they agee to pay these charges out of their own pocket before they are performed. Again. Government healthcare sucks ass.

For example, which procedure is not covered?

 

[BlueGin]

When hospitals deal with Medicare patients and know certain procedures needed are not covered by Medicare. Patients are required to sign an ABN form (Advance beneficiary notice of non coverage). Stating they agee to pay these charges out of their own pocket before they are performed. Again. Government healthcare sucks ass.

For example, which procedure is not covered?

Anything Medicare deems not medically necessary at any given time. That the doctor feels is necessary.

 

[AntonToo]

When hospitals deal with Medicare patients and know certain procedures needed are not covered by Medicare. Patients are required to sign an ABN form (Advance beneficiary notice of non coverage). Stating they agee to pay these charges out of their own pocket before they are performed. Again. Government healthcare sucks ass.

For example, which procedure is not covered?

Anything Medicare deems not medically necessary at any given time. That the doctor feels is necessary.

Can't answer the question can you?

Listen snowflake, let me break it down for you - there are guidelines by ANY insurance provider on what treatment gets approval. For example in most cases before you get MRI scan you have to get a CT and only if it is inconclusive proceed to higher resolution test. I see approvals and rejections for treatments all the time from private insurances.

 

[Dragonlady]

The claim in the title is from the Congressional Budget Office.

Before you make a fool of yourself, click the damn link and read the report.

And 30 million less people will be covered. How does this make sense to anyone?

Single payer is the only real solution.

It makes sense because the stupid oppressive government should not be in the business of providing health care. That is a personal responsibility of the individual and the government should not be taking money from the people that earned it and giving it away to he people that didn't earn it. That is thievery.

It is in the public's best interests to provide basic healthcare to all of its citizens, and it's cheaper than the mess you've gotten yourselves into vis a vis spiraling costs.

 

[BlueGin]

When hospitals deal with Medicare patients and know certain procedures needed are not covered by Medicare. Patients are required to sign an ABN form (Advance beneficiary notice of non coverage). Stating they agee to pay these charges out of their own pocket before they are performed. Again. Government healthcare sucks ass.

For example, which procedure is not covered?

Anything Medicare deems not medically necessary at any given time. That the doctor feels is necessary.

Can't answer the question can you?

Listen snowflake, let me break it down for you - there are guidelines by ANY insurance provider on what treatment gets approval. For example in most cases before you get MRI scan you have to get a CT and only if it is inconclusive proceed to higher resolution test. I see approvals and rejections for treatments all the time from private insurances.

Are you denying Medicare/Medicaid patients sign ABN's to pay out of pocket for items denied by Medicare?

Advance Beneficiary Notice of Noncoverage | Medicare.gov

 

[AntonToo]

When hospitals deal with Medicare patients and know certain procedures needed are not covered by Medicare. Patients are required to sign an ABN form (Advance beneficiary notice of non coverage). Stating they agee to pay these charges out of their own pocket before they are performed. Again. Government healthcare sucks ass.

For example, which procedure is not covered?

Anything Medicare deems not medically necessary at any given time. That the doctor feels is necessary.

Can't answer the question can you?

Listen snowflake, let me break it down for you - there are guidelines by ANY insurance provider on what treatment gets approval. For example in most cases before you get MRI scan you have to get a CT and only if it is inconclusive proceed to higher resolution test. I see approvals and rejections for treatments all the time from private insurances.

Are you denying Medicare/Medicaid patients sign ABN's to pay out of pocket for items denied by Medicare?

What I'm denying is that this is somehow unique to this coverage. Insurance companies rarely cover EVERYTHING and while they don't require such consent form they can still refuse payment for certain procedures and out-of-guidelines scenarios that hospital may bill you for.

 

[BlueGin]

When hospitals deal with Medicare patients and know certain procedures needed are not covered by Medicare. Patients are required to sign an ABN form (Advance beneficiary notice of non coverage). Stating they agee to pay these charges out of their own pocket before they are performed. Again. Government healthcare sucks ass.

For example, which procedure is not covered?

Anything Medicare deems not medically necessary at any given time. That the doctor feels is necessary.

Can't answer the question can you?

Listen snowflake, let me break it down for you - there are guidelines by ANY insurance provider on what treatment gets approval. For example in most cases before you get MRI scan you have to get a CT and only if it is inconclusive proceed to higher resolution test. I see approvals and rejections for treatments all the time from private insurances.

Are you denying Medicare/Medicaid patients sign ABN's to pay out of pocket for items denied by Medicare?

What I'm denying is that this is somehow unique to this coverage. Insurance companies rarely cover EVERYTHING and while they don't require such consent form they can still refuse payment for certain procedures and scenarios that hospital may bill you for.

When did I say other insurance providers don't deny payments?

 

[AntonToo]

For example, which procedure is not covered?

Anything Medicare deems not medically necessary at any given time. That the doctor feels is necessary.

Can't answer the question can you?

Listen snowflake, let me break it down for you - there are guidelines by ANY insurance provider on what treatment gets approval. For example in most cases before you get MRI scan you have to get a CT and only if it is inconclusive proceed to higher resolution test. I see approvals and rejections for treatments all the time from private insurances.

Are you denying Medicare/Medicaid patients sign ABN's to pay out of pocket for items denied by Medicare?

What I'm denying is that this is somehow unique to this coverage. Insurance companies rarely cover EVERYTHING and while they don't require such consent form they can still refuse payment for certain procedures and scenarios that hospital may bill you for.

When did I say other insurance providers don't deny payments?

Are you playing stupid?

You clearly insinuate that public coverage is subpar because they somehow uniquely deny certain coverage. They don't, so your point is bust.

 

[BlueGin]

Anything Medicare deems not medically necessary at any given time. That the doctor feels is necessary.

Can't answer the question can you?

Listen snowflake, let me break it down for you - there are guidelines by ANY insurance provider on what treatment gets approval. For example in most cases before you get MRI scan you have to get a CT and only if it is inconclusive proceed to higher resolution test. I see approvals and rejections for treatments all the time from private insurances.

Are you denying Medicare/Medicaid patients sign ABN's to pay out of pocket for items denied by Medicare?

What I'm denying is that this is somehow unique to this coverage. Insurance companies rarely cover EVERYTHING and while they don't require such consent form they can still refuse payment for certain procedures and scenarios that hospital may bill you for.

When did I say other insurance providers don't deny payments?

Are you playing stupid?

No. but obviously you are.

 

[AntonToo]

Can't answer the question can you?

Listen snowflake, let me break it down for you - there are guidelines by ANY insurance provider on what treatment gets approval. For example in most cases before you get MRI scan you have to get a CT and only if it is inconclusive proceed to higher resolution test. I see approvals and rejections for treatments all the time from private insurances.

Are you denying Medicare/Medicaid patients sign ABN's to pay out of pocket for items denied by Medicare?

What I'm denying is that this is somehow unique to this coverage. Insurance companies rarely cover EVERYTHING and while they don't require such consent form they can still refuse payment for certain procedures and scenarios that hospital may bill you for.

When did I say other insurance providers don't deny payments?

Are you playing stupid?

No. but obviously you are.

You clearly insinuate that public coverage is subpar because they somehow uniquely deny certain coverage. They don't, so your point is bust.

 

[BlueGin]

Are you denying Medicare/Medicaid patients sign ABN's to pay out of pocket for items denied by Medicare?

What I'm denying is that this is somehow unique to this coverage. Insurance companies rarely cover EVERYTHING and while they don't require such consent form they can still refuse payment for certain procedures and scenarios that hospital may bill you for.

When did I say other insurance providers don't deny payments?

Are you playing stupid?

No. but obviously you are.

You clearly insinuate that public coverage is subpar because they somehow uniquely deny certain coverage. They don't, so your point is bust.

Then explain why Medicare patients need to pay for a secondary insurance provider to make up the difference or else pay out of pocket?