When did Junk Plans become Junk Plans

[Quantum Windbag]

They became junk when insurers began cancelling them in droves and the Administration needed a talking point to persuade people Obamacare was actually doing them a favor.
Perhaps a few really stupid ones fell for it.

The ones that are subsidized could care less if others lost their insurance.

I think the ones they consider crap plans are the ones that most doctors would actually accept. Few doctors are willing to accept Obamacare patients because they will only be paid a fraction of what it actually costs to care for the patients.

'Crap plans' paid a big chunk of our medical bills and it was affordable. Obamacare will offer a small payment for medical bills, tell the doctors to eat the rest and it is not affordable to the majority. Less for more money, that's the liberal way.

Obviously you have no clue what you are speaking about. When people go to a doctor's office they are asked to provide identification and their insurance cards. If the person presents a card that only provides junk insurance the doctor's often turn down providing service. I have seen it happen and I have talked to my doctor about junk insurance. They know that the insurance company will not pay the claim and the person requesting service cannot pay for the service. In other words, they know that they will not be paid for their services so they refuse to provide them to avoid the hassle.
Get back to us when you know what a junk policy is.

I am sorry, I couldn't get past the second sentence of this farcical post.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Junk plans were made possible by a health care industry which invested trillions of dollars into the elections of our politicians. They did this in order to create a state protected monopoly.

This meant that a handful of companies could divide the country into fixed no-compete zones which allowed them to raise rates and decrease services without fear of losing customers.

It also meant they could offer plans with terrible coverage and deductibles people couldn't pay . . . because there were no alternatives being offered by other market competitors (who didn't exist because the existing players divided the country up into fixed markets where many people only had one option).

This was the opposite of what was promised in 1980 when we began deregulating everything. We were told that if we got government out of health care and allowed corporations to make higher profits, than we would see competitive pricing and expanded covered. But we saw the exact opposite. We saw a profusion of junk plans along with an increasing number of good plans that became too expensive for average workers. We saw the kind of price inflation that only occurs with government protected monopolies.

ObamaCare created regulations that targeted junk plans with the hope of replacing them with good plans. The idea was that if enough people joined the state and federal exchanges, the sheer volume would bring the cost curve down so that the corporations could offer better plans at more competitive premiums. Problem is: one of our two political parties is heavily invested in the failure of the exchanges. To the degree that the Republicans can obstruct the exchanges, they can prevent the volume needed by health insurance companies to bring down premiums and offer good policies to those who lost junk policies.

My guess is that the demand for health care is so large, that ObamaCare will slowly spread to the point where it will be hard to take it away. This means that more and more people will be able to trade their junk policy for something much better. However, Republicans are trying awfully hard to prevent this. Their goal is to make sure that the system cannot offer better alternatives to those who lose junk policies. If they succeed, they have a chance at killing ObamaCare and restoring the health care monopoly that funds their elections.

The ACA really didn't change this. In fact, in some areas it made it worse. The deductibles for plans in the exchange are outrageous; there's no way a middle class family will be able to afford reaching the deductible. Add on to that the fact that some of the "extra coverage" you get from the ACA are in areas a lot of people don't want or need. I do not need maternity coverage, or psychological coverage, or substance abuse coverage. But I'm now forced to pay for those things that I will never use. If I buy a car without built in GPS or bluetooth, I didn't just buy a junk car. It was a car that has only what I need, and I was able to pay less for it.

The only upside to the ACA cost wise, is that people who are poor will pay less for the plan. They'll pay more for nearly everything else related to their health care, but not their premiums.

 

[BobPlumb]

In all the debate over Obamadon'tcare, I don't recall much discussion about "Junk Plans". It was always about "you could keep your insurance if you like it".

Period.

Then our Affirmative Action Non-Hero gets has skinny ass caught in a wringer and all of sudden, these became junk plans.

I am sure there might have been a few statements about this prior to the BIG LIE being exposed, but I don't recall hearing it at all.

If the left can't produce 1000 clips of this, then they have to admit that this is nothing more than a scorched earth effort to divert from the fact that our incompetent president is also an incompetent liar.

ALL OF A SUDDEN THE LEFT BECOMES CONCERNED about our junk plans.

And Ed Shultz has the moxy and the dead brain cells to push this pile of horseshyt.

If you are from the left, don't bother posting about what the plans did and did not cover, that is just more smoke. It really does not matter if you think they are junk or not.

You were pretty quiet on the whole topic prior to the BIG LIE. That is what this is about. Negs to anyone who compares plans.

And maybe I am wrong about this. But I just don't recall seeing it.

All I heard was the may plan (good or bad) and doctor were safe from any issues because of Obamacare.

Let's see it.

I want to know when any plan became anything better than a junk plan. All insurance is junk. You pay the insurance company, they pay the doctor. They're not paying the doctor out of the kindness of their heart. They're in it for profit. That means that, in the long run, you're always paying more than they're paying the doctor. Get rid of Obamacare, and just ban insurance. That way the market can deal with costs the way that markets are meant to deal with them. If the services are too expensive for people to afford, the providers will have to adjust their prices on their own accord if they want to stay in business.

I get your point and I believe the private sector and free market system runs better without government calling the shots.

Health insurance, like auto insurance, was intended to help people in the event of a catastrophic accident or illness. It was government tying it to people's jobs and interfering with what companies had to provide that messed things up. Government wouldn't allow them to compete across state lines and the lack of competition and government control increased prices. Health care suppliers and big pharms also learned to take advantage of insurers by raising their prices. The insurance companies, along with government regulations kept a fountain of money flowing and everyone was ready to grab what they could. Medicare fraud was a huge problem for the last 20 years.

My brother had a lengthy hospital stay due to a serious illness. The final bill was well over 1 million. The amount he was responsible for was around $10,000. Not bad. Without insurance, he would never have been able to pay. The money insurance paid for his hospital stay was waaaay more than he ever paid in.

When government insists that insurance pay for every doctor visit and every pill we take, the costs go up. It would be insane to expect auto insurance to pay for oil changes and other minor things. If the government forced auto insurance companies to follow the same rules they set for health insurers, no one would be able to afford it.

Insurance was a brilliant idea. You make small payments, they invest it along with other payments and make money. Then they are prepared to make a large payout in the event of a serious illness or injury. The amount people paid in would be a small fraction of what the insurance company would pay out.

Leave it to government to get involved and decide that employers must provide it and that insurance must cover damn near everything. Between increased obligations for the insurance companies and no competition, it is any wonder that costs went up?

Yes, they want to make money. It would be downright stupid to start a business that was designed to lose money. It was government run insurance, like Medicare, that caused hikes in medical care and insurance costs because they only paid a small fraction of the bill, leaving other insurance companies to pick up the slack. Hospitals and doctors do need to stay in business, so the cost gets passed on.

Government has a tendency to take a good thing and turn it into a disaster by making volumes of regulations in an effort to micromanage the country.

Whenever I see posts like yours I can't get the thought of Archie Bunker out of my head. What an interesting coincidence. Ya think.......

All in the family was a pretty damn good TV show. Coming from a Meat Head, I will take that as a compliment.

I was sure you would be proud to be compared to Archie Bunker. After all, Archie was a racist idiot with low IQ. You seem to fit that pattern perfectly.

Of course those that make fun of Obama must be racist with low IQ. How dare I or anyone do such a thing to your messiah? That's right out of the left wing play book. You play the race card because you have nothing to defend Obama's lies.

 

[Kosh]

Obviously the far left is proud of the fact that people now pay more for less.

 

[The Rabbi]

In all the debate over Obamadon'tcare, I don't recall much discussion about "Junk Plans". It was always about "you could keep your insurance if you like it".

Period.

Then our Affirmative Action Non-Hero gets has skinny ass caught in a wringer and all of sudden, these became junk plans.

I am sure there might have been a few statements about this prior to the BIG LIE being exposed, but I don't recall hearing it at all.

If the left can't produce 1000 clips of this, then they have to admit that this is nothing more than a scorched earth effort to divert from the fact that our incompetent president is also an incompetent liar.

ALL OF A SUDDEN THE LEFT BECOMES CONCERNED about our junk plans.

And Ed Shultz has the moxy and the dead brain cells to push this pile of horseshyt.

If you are from the left, don't bother posting about what the plans did and did not cover, that is just more smoke. It really does not matter if you think they are junk or not.

You were pretty quiet on the whole topic prior to the BIG LIE. That is what this is about. Negs to anyone who compares plans.

And maybe I am wrong about this. But I just don't recall seeing it.

All I heard was the may plan (good or bad) and doctor were safe from any issues because of Obamacare.

Let's see it.

Insurance companies have been offering "junk plans" for years. They are nothing new, however the the phrase is used in the trade and so it is unknown in the general population. Junk plans offer little and are basically a scam by the insurance companies. They are great plans if you are not sick or in a serious accident. If you sign up for a junk plan you pay a low premiem but if you have a serious problem you are SHIT OUT OF LUCK.
If you want some insight into junk plans (which I seriously doubt) rent the video "The Rainmaker" with Matt Damon. The story deals with a lawyer who goes after an insurance company that sells junk policies.
The truth of the matter is I do not think you are here to learn anything. You are here to throw mud!

FYI, The Rainmaker is about a lawyer who who sues an insurance company for not paying an insurance claim. It is a straight up case of insurance fraud, and has less to do with junk plans than the many plans that Obama currently hates for exposing his lies.

His proof comes from a Hollywood movie. What does that say about the veracity of the rest of his post?
How many policies sold were actually scams? Yeah, not a lot. Because if they were that bad people would cancel them.
It is the leftist world view that unless gov't is there to "help" people are just too damn stupid to figure it out for themselves.

 

[JoeB131]

In all the debate over Obamadon'tcare, I don't recall much discussion about "Junk Plans". It was always about "you could keep your insurance if you like it".

Period.

Then our Affirmative Action Non-Hero gets has skinny ass caught in a wringer and all of sudden, these became junk plans.

I am sure there might have been a few statements about this prior to the BIG LIE being exposed, but I don't recall hearing it at all.

.

You don't?

Because the "underinsured" has been part of this discussion all along.

How Many Are Underinsured? Trends Among U.S. Adults, 2003 and 2007 - The Commonwealth Fund

The number of underinsured U.S. adults—that is, people who have health coverage that does not adequately protect them from high medical expenses—has risen dramatically, a Commonwealth Fund study finds. As of 2007, there were an estimated 25 million underinsured adults in the United States, up 60 percent from 2003.

Much of this growth comes from the ranks of the middle class. While low-income people remain vulnerable, middle-income families have been hit hardest. For adults with incomes above 200 percent of the federal poverty level (about $40,000 per year for a family), the underinsured rates nearly tripled since 2003.

 

[ron4342]

bobplum posted:
All in the family was a pretty damn good TV show. Coming from a Meat Head, I will take that as a compliment.

Ron sez:
I was sure you would be proud to be compared to Archie Bunker. After all, Archie was a racist idiot with low IQ. You seem to fit that pattern perfectly.

bobplum posted:
Of course those that make fun of Obama must be racist with low IQ. How dare I or anyone do such a thing to your messiah? That's right out of the left wing play book. You play the race card because you have nothing to defend Obama's lies.[/QUOTE]

Ron sez:

Excuse me but my Messiah is Jesus Christ, NOT President Obama. That said shit for brains, you stated you took it as a "compliment" to be compared to Archie Bunker. I merely pointed out that Archie was a racist idiot with a low IQ who was pretty much a baffoon in the series "All In The Family." I further pointed out that I was not surprised you took pride in comparing yourself to Archie. And as for playing the race care, it was played in your initial post when you stated you cannot see President Obama with out thinking of the music from "The Jeffersons." That was playing the race card and I just followed up on what you posted. If you are not happy with being called a racist, I COULD GIVE A SHIT. You are what you are.
Oh, and one other thing, I have not mentioned or defended President Obama. I just pointed that your comment was both idiotic and racists. GFY

 

[BobPlumb]

All in the family was a pretty damn good TV show. Coming from a Meat Head, I will take that as a compliment.

I was sure you would be proud to be compared to Archie Bunker. After all, Archie was a racist idiot with low IQ. You seem to fit that pattern perfectly.

Seeing that the far left elites (like you) are more racist than Archie Bunker and have lower IQ's than an ameba, not sure how you can cast any stones.

Whenever I see Obama on TV I can't get the theme song of Sanford and Son out of my head.

Whenever I see posts like yours I can't get the thought of Archie Bunker out of my head. What an interesting coincidence. Ya think.......

All in the family was a pretty damn good TV show. Coming from a Meat Head, I will take that as a compliment.

You left out my original post making fun of Obama. So you were not defending Obama?

Junk plans.......Fred Sanford ran a junk yard in case you don't understand the reference.

 

[ron4342]

Insurance companies have been offering "junk plans" for years. They are nothing new, however the the phrase is used in the trade and so it is unknown in the general population. Junk plans offer little and are basically a scam by the insurance companies. They are great plans if you are not sick or in a serious accident. If you sign up for a junk plan you pay a low premiem but if you have a serious problem you are SHIT OUT OF LUCK.
If you want some insight into junk plans (which I seriously doubt) rent the video "The Rainmaker" with Matt Damon. The story deals with a lawyer who goes after an insurance company that sells junk policies.
The truth of the matter is I do not think you are here to learn anything. You are here to throw mud!

FYI, The Rainmaker is about a lawyer who who sues an insurance company for not paying an insurance claim. It is a straight up case of insurance fraud, and has less to do with junk plans than the many plans that Obama currently hates for exposing his lies.

His proof comes from a Hollywood movie. What does that say about the veracity of the rest of his post?
How many policies sold were actually scams? Yeah, not a lot. Because if they were that bad people would cancel them.
It is the leftist world view that unless gov't is there to "help" people are just too damn stupid to figure it out for themselves.

First of all, my proof is not based on a Hollywood movie. However, the movie gives an excellent example of how the junk insurance plans cheat Americans. As you are apparently not smart enough to read or understand what is going on I thought a visual aid may be a help to you.
And as for people cancelling their plans when the find out they are trash, THEY DO NOT FIND OUT THEY ARE TRASH UNTIL THEY FILE A CLAIM. Then when they do file a claim and find out their plan WILL NOT help them it is to late to do anything about it. The primary reason given for filing for personnal bankrupcy in this country is the inability to pay medical expenses. Almost 2,000,000 people file for bankrupcy due to medical costs in this country each year. Most of them probably have junk plans that have declined their claims.
Oh, and as for that village in Kenya that is missing its idiot, it sounds like a real opportunity for you. Have you applied? You should.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Yes, there are shitty, "junk" policies out there. I've seen 'em, I've spoken with billing departments of doctors offices on behalf of my clients about them.

But they represent a very small portion of the policies that have been taken away. The rest were plans that were more personalized, working just fine, or didn't include stuff the gods of the ACA deem are "essential", like maternity coverage for a 50-year old guy.

One of two things is happening here: (a) The apologists don't know this and/or don't care, but they're gonna defend this pig of a law for purely political reasons, or (b) the apologists DO know this and are simply lying. Either way, they've grabbed on to this bullshit "junk policy" meme and they've run with it, probably because they've determined it's all they have here.

It really is that simple.

.

 

[JoeB131]

.

Yes, there are shitty, "junk" policies out there. I've seen 'em, I've spoken with billing departments of doctors offices on behalf of my clients about them.

But they represent a very small portion of the policies that have been taken away. The rest were plans that were more personalized, working just fine, or didn't include stuff the gods of the ACA deem are "essential", like maternity coverage for a 50-year old guy.

One of two things is happening here: The apologists don't know this and/or don't care, but they're gonna defend this pig of a law for purely political reasons, or the apologists DO know this and are simply lying.

It really is that simple.

.

It strikes me that if these plans were so good, big insurance wouldn't have had a problem modifying them to comply.

I mean, you can whine about the 50 year old's maternity coverage all day, but really, if there is never a payout for that, what is the expense, exactly?

Fact is, simple solution. No more 8 figure salaries for Insurance CEO's and no dividends paid to Insurance Company stockholders until they create policies that comply.

Easy-peasy.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Yes, there are shitty, "junk" policies out there. I've seen 'em, I've spoken with billing departments of doctors offices on behalf of my clients about them.

But they represent a very small portion of the policies that have been taken away. The rest were plans that were more personalized, working just fine, or didn't include stuff the gods of the ACA deem are "essential", like maternity coverage for a 50-year old guy.

One of two things is happening here: The apologists don't know this and/or don't care, but they're gonna defend this pig of a law for purely political reasons, or the apologists DO know this and are simply lying.

It really is that simple.

.

It strikes me that if these plans were so good, big insurance wouldn't have had a problem modifying them to comply.

I mean, you can whine about the 50 year old's maternity coverage all day, but really, if there is never a payout for that, what is the expense, exactly?

Fact is, simple solution. No more 8 figure salaries for Insurance CEO's and no dividends paid to Insurance Company stockholders until they create policies that comply.

Easy-peasy.

Joe, this is all about the "8 figure salaries" for you, it's not about what I wrote. You're going to defend this horrific law no matter what it costs or damages, because you just want to get those guys.

.

 

[mudwhistle]

In all the debate over Obamadon'tcare, I don't recall much discussion about "Junk Plans". It was always about "you could keep your insurance if you like it".

Period.

Then our Affirmative Action Non-Hero gets has skinny ass caught in a wringer and all of sudden, these became junk plans.

I am sure there might have been a few statements about this prior to the BIG LIE being exposed, but I don't recall hearing it at all.

If the left can't produce 1000 clips of this, then they have to admit that this is nothing more than a scorched earth effort to divert from the fact that our incompetent president is also an incompetent liar.

ALL OF A SUDDEN THE LEFT BECOMES CONCERNED about our junk plans.

And Ed Shultz has the moxy and the dead brain cells to push this pile of horseshyt.

If you are from the left, don't bother posting about what the plans did and did not cover, that is just more smoke. It really does not matter if you think they are junk or not.

You were pretty quiet on the whole topic prior to the BIG LIE. That is what this is about. Negs to anyone who compares plans.

And maybe I am wrong about this. But I just don't recall seeing it.

All I heard was the may plan (good or bad) and doctor were safe from any issues because of Obamacare.

Let's see it.

It was all a big secret that was kept from everyone who voted for him, and became just another cover story for the ACA once it's true effects became well known. They feel that calling any cancelled plans "junk plans" excuses the big lie, just like calling the attacks in Benghazi the result of protests over some stupid video on youtube.

Both are bold-faced lies.

 

[JoeB131]

.

Yes, there are shitty, "junk" policies out there. I've seen 'em, I've spoken with billing departments of doctors offices on behalf of my clients about them.

But they represent a very small portion of the policies that have been taken away. The rest were plans that were more personalized, working just fine, or didn't include stuff the gods of the ACA deem are "essential", like maternity coverage for a 50-year old guy.

One of two things is happening here: The apologists don't know this and/or don't care, but they're gonna defend this pig of a law for purely political reasons, or the apologists DO know this and are simply lying.

It really is that simple.

.

It strikes me that if these plans were so good, big insurance wouldn't have had a problem modifying them to comply.

I mean, you can whine about the 50 year old's maternity coverage all day, but really, if there is never a payout for that, what is the expense, exactly?

Fact is, simple solution. No more 8 figure salaries for Insurance CEO's and no dividends paid to Insurance Company stockholders until they create policies that comply.

Easy-peasy.

Joe, this is all about the "8 figure salaries" for you, it's not about what I wrote. You're going to defend this horrific law no matter what it costs or damages, because you just want to get those guys.

.

The Horrific Part was what "those guys" did. Sold people shit insurance, and then claimed Acne was a pre-existing condition for cancer or that a liver transplant was "expiramental" and let a 17 year old girl die. And then they collected their 8 figure salaries and thought all was good, with 46 million uninsured and 25 million underinsured (most of the plans that are being cancelled).

Now, we could have just extended Medicare to everyone, and called it a day. Doctors wouldn't like not making as much money, and the other parasites would be eliminated completely...

But you guys were so intent that "those guys" get to keep making their profits, and things that would have prevented these problems like a Public Option or a Medicare Buy-In for those over 55 (who can't get decent insurance for love or money), and now you are weeping crocadile tears for the poor schlub who didn't realize how badly he was being ripped off?

 

[Mac1958]

It strikes me that if these plans were so good, big insurance wouldn't have had a problem modifying them to comply.

I mean, you can whine about the 50 year old's maternity coverage all day, but really, if there is never a payout for that, what is the expense, exactly?

Fact is, simple solution. No more 8 figure salaries for Insurance CEO's and no dividends paid to Insurance Company stockholders until they create policies that comply.

Easy-peasy.

Joe, this is all about the "8 figure salaries" for you, it's not about what I wrote. You're going to defend this horrific law no matter what it costs or damages, because you just want to get those guys.

.

The Horrific Part was what "those guys" did. Sold people shit insurance, and then claimed Acne was a pre-existing condition for cancer or that a liver transplant was "expiramental" and let a 17 year old girl die. And then they collected their 8 figure salaries and thought all was good, with 46 million uninsured and 25 million underinsured (most of the plans that are being cancelled).

Now, we could have just extended Medicare to everyone, and called it a day. Doctors wouldn't like not making as much money, and the other parasites would be eliminated completely...

But you guys were so intent that "those guys" get to keep making their profits, and things that would have prevented these problems like a Public Option or a Medicare Buy-In for those over 55 (who can't get decent insurance for love or money), and now you are weeping crocadile tears for the poor schlub who didn't realize how badly he was being ripped off?

Joe, it really is clear you don't know how this works, and that you're buying in to the standard propaganda because it fits nicely with your rage. I get that.

Your post is so replete with a lack of understanding that I don't have the energy.

And before you (once again) simplistically lump me in with "you guys", you may want to review what I would like to see, which is based on a decent understanding of health care costing, pricing, reimbursement and delivery, and not on rage & ignorance: Post 43, http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...y-politics-and-unintended-consequences-3.html

You're very angry and you simply and clearly don't understand the terribly complex nature of the topic you're discussing. Not much I can do with that.

.

 

[JoeB131]

[quo

Joe, it really is clear you don't know how this works, and that you're buying in to the standard propaganda because it fits nicely with your rage. I get that.

Your post is so replete with a lack of understanding that I don't have the energy.

And before you (once again) simplistically lump me in with "you guys", you may want to review what I would like to see, which is based on a decent understanding of health care costing, pricing, reimbursement and delivery, and not on rage & ignorance: Post 43, http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...y-politics-and-unintended-consequences-3.html

You're very angry and you simply and clearly don't understand the terribly complex nature of the topic you're discussing. Not much I can do with that.

.

No, guy this is NOT fucking complicated. In fact, EVERY OTHER COUNTRY has figured this out, provide universal coverage at a fraction of what we are spending, and they get far better results.

Ed Hanaway's 83 million dollar package for not working anymore is not necessary to providing good health care. But they gave it to him because he was the guy who decided people like Nataline Sarkisyan were too expensive to keep alive.

 

[Mac1958]

[quo

Joe, it really is clear you don't know how this works, and that you're buying in to the standard propaganda because it fits nicely with your rage. I get that.

Your post is so replete with a lack of understanding that I don't have the energy.

And before you (once again) simplistically lump me in with "you guys", you may want to review what I would like to see, which is based on a decent understanding of health care costing, pricing, reimbursement and delivery, and not on rage & ignorance: Post 43, http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...y-politics-and-unintended-consequences-3.html

You're very angry and you simply and clearly don't understand the terribly complex nature of the topic you're discussing. Not much I can do with that.

.

No, guy this is NOT fucking complicated. In fact, EVERY OTHER COUNTRY has figured this out, provide universal coverage at a fraction of what we are spending, and they get far better results.

Ed Hanaway's 83 million dollar package for not working anymore is not necessary to providing good health care. But they gave it to him because he was the guy who decided people like Nataline Sarkisyan were too expensive to keep alive.

While I prefer the plan I provided, I would actually take single payer over this horrific monstrosity. The Democrats were afraid to have that conversation, so here we are. And you guys will have to defend it.

This is gonna be a shitstorm, so have your ducks in a row to spin for it.

.

 

[JoeB131]

[


While I prefer the plan I provided, I would actually take single payer over this horrific monstrosity. The Democrats were afraid to have that conversation, so here we are. And you guys will have to defend it.

This is gonna be a shitstorm, so have your ducks in a row to spin for it.

.

Guy, I've been hearing that shit from the "Oh my god, the Black guy stole Romney's Plan" crowd for the last four years. ObamaCare is going to eat your babies and shit. It's tiresome.

Do I think ObamaCare made too many comprimises in order to get passed? Yup.

Do I think it's needlessly bureaucratic? Absolutely.

Is it still a damn sight better than what we had? Yes, yes it is.

 

[mudwhistle]

[


While I prefer the plan I provided, I would actually take single payer over this horrific monstrosity. The Democrats were afraid to have that conversation, so here we are. And you guys will have to defend it.

This is gonna be a shitstorm, so have your ducks in a row to spin for it.

.

Guy, I've been hearing that shit from the "Oh my god, the Black guy stole Romney's Plan" crowd for the last four years. ObamaCare is going to eat your babies and shit. It's tiresome.

Do I think ObamaCare made too many comprimises in order to get passed? Yup.

Do I think it's needlessly bureaucratic? Absolutely.

Is it still a damn sight better than what we had? Yes, yes it is.

A damn sight better?

The name of the law should be changed to fit what it does.

It makes health care less affordable, so the name doesn't fit. That is what it does. That, contrary to what you claim, is what it's designed to do.

 

[JoeB131]

[


While I prefer the plan I provided, I would actually take single payer over this horrific monstrosity. The Democrats were afraid to have that conversation, so here we are. And you guys will have to defend it.

This is gonna be a shitstorm, so have your ducks in a row to spin for it.

.

Guy, I've been hearing that shit from the "Oh my god, the Black guy stole Romney's Plan" crowd for the last four years. ObamaCare is going to eat your babies and shit. It's tiresome.

Do I think ObamaCare made too many comprimises in order to get passed? Yup.

Do I think it's needlessly bureaucratic? Absolutely.

Is it still a damn sight better than what we had? Yes, yes it is.

A damn sight better?

The name of the law should be changed to fit what it does.

It makes health care less affordable, so the name doesn't fit. That is what it does. That, contrary to what you claim, is what it's designed to do.

Actually, it insures more people than we had insured before.

In teh process, it eliminates plans that were garbage that insurance companies sold with a straight face.