All Forums | Politics

Republicans won't have to repeal Obamacare after all.

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 774
Posts: 29
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #1
https://nypost.com/2016/07/24/the-latest-nail-in-obamacares-coffin/


I wonder how long it will take for darkdonkey 12 to come up with a link from 2014 to argue with me about the long term viability of Obamacare.

On a macro level, what does this trend show about the grasp that liberals have on these key problems our country has.

Cigna, United Healthcare, now Humana. 

This certainly isn't good news for the biggest accomplishment of the last 8 years.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #2

...Count it as another nail in ObamaCare’s coffin: Humana, one of the country’s top insurers, announced Thursday that it’s pulling out of ObamaCare exchange plans in all but a few states next year.

It will offer policies in “no more” than 11 state marketplaces, down from 19. The numbers don’t add up: Humana took nearly $1 billion in losses from the coverage this year....




 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2002
Posts: 16326
Posted: #3
Obama care designed to fail. The hard Left wants single payer to put US citizens on a slow death march.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #4
Quote Originally Posted by sundance:

Obama care designed to fail. The hard Left wants single payer to put US citizens on a slow death march.

Ah, so you are saying that Obamacare will 'repeal' itself?

Nice to see another one that gets it!
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2010
Posts: 35347
Posted: #5
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


Ah, so you are saying that Obamacare will 'repeal' itself?

Nice to see another one that gets it!

If that's the case why did Congress waste so much time failing to do it?   What were they?   0-52 or something?
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2015
Posts: 5863
Posted: #6
Quote Originally Posted by BWS77:


If that's the case why did Congress waste so much time failing to do it?   What were they?   0-52 or something?
Einstein said, "Insanity:  doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Congressional Republicans are insane, and so are the voters:  the GOP has a 90%+ chance of retaining control of the House.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #7
Quote Originally Posted by BWS77:


If that's the case why did Congress waste so much time failing to do it?   What were they?   0-52 or something?

Easy, Just like Bernie has to listen to his constituents that want free education. Congress had to listen to their constituents that wanted no mandates for their spending.

Ironic isn't it that Obamacare's 'official' name is the Affordable care act....

The name fooled 99% of the dumbalibs.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #8
Quote Originally Posted by BWS77:


If that's the case why did Congress waste so much time failing to do it?   What were they?   0-52 or something?

Perhaps the other explanation I came up with is that even the GOP congress thought it might take 6 or seven years for Obamacare to eat itself. They probably never imagined that it would happen quite this soon.

Still waiting for darkdonkeys post on how wonderful the biggest accomplishment of the last 8 years really is and why all this is nothing really.
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2002
Posts: 16326
Posted: #9
They all knew it would fail. I have stated the following in here previously. My daughter had to use Obamacare. Her monthly payment was about $150 with a deducible of 6-7k. What a joke of a policy. That is insanity. DC a cesspool of idiots to be kind.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2005
Posts: 7336
Posted: #10
According to healthinsurance.org, insurance industry overall enjoyed billions in profits for years under Obamacare. Lower cost companies fare better.  Although Obamacare business may be a small unprofitable part of operations, greedy companies would rather bail out of exchanges instead of staying to turn business around for the benefit of the country. 

According to huffingtonpost, Obamacare is not in danger of collapse.  In markets, exit and entry of firms are normal even before Obamacare existed.  Future premium increases should help to make markets sustainable for insurers.  Tax credits which discount premiums help insulate most customers from rising premiums.

America still has the most unaffordable healthcare system in the world because it is mostly geared toward maximizing profits.  Hospitals charge high prices because they can get away with it.
 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #11
3rd pretty much nailed it, but I'll add my usual discourse on this subject. 

Its hysterical to hear about cost increases and reduced insurers because, want to guess what existed before Obamacare... ?

Yep, increases at a rate of 7x since 1980...which accounting for wages and inflation is a 475% increase. Exhibit 3 on the link below gives a good understanding. 

https://kff.org/health-costs/issue-brief/snapshots-health-care-spending-in-the-united-states-selected-oecd-countries/

So what happened in 1980 that set all of this off? Its called EMTALA and it guaranteed that any person, regardless of insurance, would not be denied health treatment. As one would expect, this resulted in huge costs for hospitals, which was passed on to the consumer, and more importantly, the insurance industry since that is an entity that provides guaranteed payment. That leads to the current situation. 

So how do we deal with it? Well, the good aspect of ObamaCare addressed the uninsured piece. Many bad or remain to be seen aspects exist. But companies opting out of the exchanges will make no difference because the lowest bar price is set for the lower tiered plans. 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 1399
Posted: #12
Doesn't change the fact that Obamacare has been an abject failure and the Repubs basically offer no solutions.    Same w education the current system is in decay and the repubs offer no solutions.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2005
Posts: 7336
Posted: #13
Obamacare is an slight improvement over the old system.  Reforms are hard to implement but Obama succeeded whereas other Presidents failed.  In 2016,  author of book "Surviving American Medicine" gave higher grades to Obamacare than in 2014.

A- for more Americans insured.  B for new benefits not previously covered such as preexisting condition. C for public confidence.  C for price of healthcare.  B for quality of healthcare.  C for more use of electronic medical records. 
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #14
Quote Originally Posted by shiek:

Doesn't change the fact that Obamacare has been an abject failure and the Repubs basically offer no solutions.    Same w education the current system is in decay and the repubs offer no solutions.


at my work just as in politics, i will always take the side of the people who make an effort to solve a real problem, even if that effort is flawed, over the group that sits on their behind and does nothing other than whine and complain. 

reason number 472649869 why i don't vote republican. 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #15
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:



at my work just as in politics, i will always take the side of the people who make an effort to solve a real problem, even if that effort is flawed, over the group that sits on their behind and does nothing other than whine and complain. 

reason number 472649869 why i don't vote republican. 

That's a very fair point. But, I think the reason my people didn't do anything to address the problems is partly because we see federally mandates to purchase goods or services as unconstitutional. Without that fundamental aspect of the law, it never gets off the ground.

I will give you that they could have gotten to the drawing board in the first place and I will say thats the corrupt part of the Dc Cartell that needs to be destroyed.

I think there are several things you can do with creative tax breaks with limits for doctors and Hospitals for  genuinely treating the uninsured. 

Voting for the likes of HRC is the same as asking a pack of wolves to watch the pasture. The Clinton's are heckled to this day by Haitians asking where the earthquake money is. All the Clinton's think about when a tragedy happens is how they can profit on it.
 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #16
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


That's a very fair point. But, I think the reason my people didn't do anything to address the problems is partly because we see federally mandates to purchase goods or services as unconstitutional. Without that fundamental aspect of the law, it never gets off the ground.



O'Rielly? You mean like the federal mandate of making hospitals and doctors provide free goods and services for those that cannot afford it?

Where is the faux outrage in that? 


 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #17
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:

3rd pretty much nailed it, but I'll add my usual discourse on this subject. 

Its hysterical to hear about cost increases and reduced insurers because, want to guess what existed before Obamacare... ?

Yep, increases at a rate of 7x since 1980...which accounting for wages and inflation is a 475% increase. Exhibit 3 on the link below gives a good understanding. 

https://kff.org/health-costs/issue-brief/snapshots-health-care-spending-in-the-united-states-selected-oecd-countries/

So what happened in 1980 that set all of this off? Its called EMTALA and it guaranteed that any person, regardless of insurance, would not be denied health treatment. As one would expect, this resulted in huge costs for hospitals, which was passed on to the consumer, and more importantly, the insurance industry since that is an entity that provides guaranteed payment. That leads to the current situation. 

So how do we deal with it? Well, the good aspect of ObamaCare addressed the uninsured piece. Many bad or remain to be seen aspects exist. But companies opting out of the exchanges will make no difference because the lowest bar price is set for the lower tiered plans. 



this article came out the other day.  they don't make it seem like the sky is falling.


https://healthaffairs.org/blog/2016/07/21/obamacare-premiums-are-lower-than-you-think/
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #18
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:


O'Rielly? You mean like the federal mandate of making hospitals and doctors provide free goods and services for those that cannot afford it?

Where is the faux outrage in that? 



Um no.The federal mandate that requires a citizen to purchase a good or a service.

Like natural gas. It helps me heat my house and cook my food but how can a government justifiably force me to purchase? I can choose to be cold or deal with it in other ways.

I spoke of doctors and hospitals giving free service to people that can't afford them in exchange for tax breaks with limits. 

Are you having trouble reading again?
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #19
Like natural gas. It helps me heat my house and cook my food but how can a government justifiably force me to purchase? I can choose to be cold or deal with it in other ways.


a difference would be, if you don't buy natural gas, then you don't heat your house, use your stove, etc.  it has no effect on me.

if you don't buy health insurance when you can afford it, not if but when you have a medical problem and go to the hospital, i have to pay for you. 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #20
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:

Like natural gas. It helps me heat my house and cook my food but how can a government justifiably force me to purchase? I can choose to be cold or deal with it in other ways.


a difference would be, if you don't buy natural gas, then you don't heat your house, use your stove, etc.  it has no effect on me.

if you don't buy health insurance when you can afford it, not if but when you have a medical problem and go to the hospital, i have to pay for you. 

As I've said there are other ways to deal with it that aren't so expensive....like getting creative with tax breaks for doctors and hospitals...with limits for treating poor, uninsured.

If I don't get sick or break any bones then it is a huge waste of money.

You cant deny that the solution your guys chose to go with is a ginormous ponzi scheme. 

And, it's becoming more and more reasonable that the system was designed to fail so they would need less Vaseline to force single payor on us.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #21
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


As I've said there are other ways to deal with it that aren't so expensive....like getting creative with tax breaks for doctors and hospitals...with limits for treating poor, uninsured.

If I don't get sick or break any bones then it is a huge waste of money.

You cant deny that the solution your guys chose to go with is a ginormous ponzi scheme. 

And, it's becoming more and more reasonable that the system was designed to fail so they would need less Vaseline to force single payor on us.


that may be true, but i'm far from the expert on this stuff.  but it goes back to the original issue.  if our healthcare system is a mess 9it is) and obamacare has serious issues (i don't doubt that it does) and there are ways to improve it (i'm sure there is), republicans can either do nothing but whine about it or get off their fools and do something about it. 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2005
Posts: 7336
Posted: #22
Clubdirt refers to healthaffairs article that Obamacare premiums are less than people think.  Under Obamacare, Americans are paying less for healthcare insurance with better coverage.  A larger market allows insurers to split costs and more competition in transparent market reduce rates.  Without Obamacare, insurance would naturally be more expensive with more people uninsured or inadequately insured.
 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #23
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


Um no.The federal mandate that requires a citizen to purchase a good or a service.

Like natural gas. It helps me heat my house and cook my food but how can a government justifiably force me to purchase? I can choose to be cold or deal with it in other ways.

I spoke of doctors and hospitals giving free service to people that can't afford them in exchange for tax breaks with limits. 

Are you having trouble reading again?

Club pointed out the fallacy in your comment, but I'll add a few. 

You call yourself a conservative, yet you are advocating a free ride. 

But why stop at health care. Why not just allow people to walk into a grocery store and take food, even if they can pay for it? I mean, since you are willing to offer a tax break to the owners of the grocery store, it all works out, right? 

Of course, you understand that tax breaks only work when one has a profit. If a hospital incurs millions of dollars in caring for patients, and thus, has no profit, a tax break means nothing. 

Then again, since you are advocating everyone getting a free ride, it doesn't matter. 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2009
Posts: 6679
Posted: #24
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


As I've said there are other ways to deal with it that aren't so expensive....like getting creative with tax breaks for doctors and hospitals...with limits for treating poor, uninsured.

If I don't get sick or break any bones then it is a huge waste of money.

You cant deny that the solution your guys chose to go with is a ginormous ponzi scheme. 

And, it's becoming more and more reasonable that the system was designed to fail so they would need less Vaseline to force single payor on us.

So are you advocating people shouldn't be required to purchase car insurance? Your argument would be:

If I don't get into an accident then it's a huge waste of money.

Please don't tell me there's a difference because I am sure my insurance premium "factors" into case of uninsured motorists.

 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 34007
Posted: #25
Quote Originally Posted by bunny651:

So are you advocating people shouldn't be required to purchase car insurance? Your argument would be:

If I don't get into an accident then it's a huge waste of money.

Please don't tell me there's a difference because I am sure my insurance premium "factors" into case of uninsured motorists.




Better yet !..........If you don't own a car or don't drive ..even more  of a waste of money.


All Forums | Politics
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2025 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.