Obamacare/ACA Megathread

[Cthulhu 2020]

And instead give the public a brand new bureaucratic board of appointed, unelected political hacks who will be in charge of denying health care instead. What a bargain (not).

"Death panels" already existed and were based almost purely on cost and your plan. Had a crappy plan? Be prepared to be turned down for treatment because it would cost too much.

The ACA adds incredibly stringent restrictions on who the insurance companies can deny coverage to (effectively narrowing the powers of the death panels), and creates an appeals process that was not there before where people can challenge the decision rather than being SOL.

Considering these death panels (that already existed) were one of the many ways that insurance companies cut corners on costs, you can't cry "death panels" and then turn around and complain about premium hikes.

It really is just yet another one of those hypocritical political rhetoric games that the opponents are playing. They contradict themselves in so many ways.

[Zython]

You can stop there. Shed this false premise you are locked into. Simply because you want to limit government power does not mean what remains is laissez-faire. Returning the federal government to its properly enumerated Constitutionally prescribed role is not laissez-faire.

You will NOT silence me in an attempt to cover your crap-stained tracks. You said yourself that it was wrong for the government to be involved in the economy in any way (0.00001% was your figure IIRC). Now, you will either own up to your own words, or admit that you're a liar.

[Endus]

You can do some research about the great depression and how the FED admitted they caused it on purpose.

Yeah. No. That's beyond even the reasonable monetarist theories, and even those have been largely discredited.

[lockedout]

Yeah. No. That's beyond even the reasonable monetarist theories, and even those have been largely discredited.

Despite the varied theories espoused by many establishment economists, it was none other than the Federal Reserve that caused the Great Depression and the horrific suffering, deprivation and dislocation America and the world experienced in its wake. At least, that’s the clearly stated view of current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.

[mvaliz]

Despite the varied theories espoused by many establishment economists, it was none other than the Federal Reserve that caused the Great Depression and the horrific suffering, deprivation and dislocation America and the world experienced in its wake. At least, that’s the clearly stated view of current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.

OK... NOW I finally know you're winging it....

Because I did a google search for Ben Bernake Great Depression, and one of the first articles that came up had that EXACT same parragraph... to the very letter and punctuation... that you wrote. All you did was copy/paste it and didn't bother putting a link - pretending it's your own words.

http://www.wnd.com/2008/03/59405/

Despite the varied theories espoused by many establishment economists, it was none other than the Federal Reserve that caused the Great Depression and the horrific suffering, deprivation and dislocation America and the world experienced in its wake. At least, that’s the clearly stated view of current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.

http://www.wnd.com/2008/03/59405/

You just grabbed the VERY first thing that worked for you and copy/pasted it. You didn't even put a link OR even bother to back up the claims with your own opinion.

EDIT: As for my opinion... it's ridiculous to believe that the government could cause a STOCK MARKET CRASH, and this was even BEFORE there were regulations in-place.

[paralleluniverse]

And there are consequences for over-paying for stuff you DON'T need - particularly when you hand that money over to a proven liar and cheat like the government. The CBO has already said that America's sky-high health care costs are only going to get worse under Obamacare - and no one knows what the heck Obamacare will do to the deficit. Some projections say it'll help the deficit - while others say it'll make things worse. As I said though, doing something really stupid simply because you think you have to so "something!" isn't smart. It is - in fact - just stupid.



And instead give the public a brand new bureaucratic board of appointed, unelected political hacks who will be in charge of denying health care instead. What a bargain (not).

You've gotten it all backwards. The major driver of long run budget deficits is rising medical costs. CBO has projected a significant slowing in these costs since Obamacare has been enacted: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/43947

Moreover, CBO projects that Obamacare will reduce the deficit and that repealing Obamacare will increase deficits by $109B over 10 years: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/43471

So stop spouting bullshit and lies and get the facts straight.

[Ausr]

OK... NOW I finally know you're winging it....

Because I did a google search for Ben Bernake Great Depression, and one of the first articles that came up had that EXACT same parragraph... to the very letter and punctuation... that you wrote. All you did was copy/paste it and didn't bother putting a link - pretending it's your own words.

http://www.wnd.com/2008/03/59405/



http://www.wnd.com/2008/03/59405/

You just grabbed the VERY first thing that worked for you and copy/pasted it. You didn't even put a link OR even bother to back up the claims with your own opinion.

EDIT: As for my opinion... it's ridiculous to believe that the government could cause a STOCK MARKET CRASH, and this was even BEFORE there were regulations in-place.

Reminds me of the one guy we had around here who would copy/paste Yahoo! Answers word for word in an attempt to make it seem like their own. I want to say it was Vyxn, actually.

[SirRobin]

Well from what I recall the Fed caused the Great Depression by doing the opposite of what they should have. The Fed did the opposite when the Financial Crisis happened. That's why we got a Great Recession with ten percent unemployment instead of a second Great Depression with twenty-five percent unemployment. Of course the Fed is in uncharted waters now so its still a pretty scary time.

[The Riddler]

Annnnnnd once again, you're wrong!

And once again you're wrong. If the death panel is as toothless as you claim, then Democrats wouldn't be opposing it as little as 2 months ago including the ultra neo-con Howard Dean...

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...28542498014414
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch...from-democrats

No, the Private Sector caused the economic meltdown because without the regulations in place they ran absolutely crazy and crashed the entire system.

The private sector did not repeal Glass-Steagall. The Government did. The Government holds the primary responsibility because they were the ones that changed the laws. Without the changes to the law, the private sector could not have done what they did. That does not excuse the private sector from behaving badly - and also does not excuse the millions of private citizens who lined up at the trough. It was a 3-party problem with plenty of blame to go all around - but the ULTIMATE fault for allowing the ball to start rolling? That was government. I've always described the collapse as a situation where (A) Government ordered banks to throw an irresponsible party (B) banks happily invited citizens to an irresponsible party and (C) citizens gorged themselves sick irresponsibly. Everyone is to blame, but it all started with (A).

You said yourself that it was wrong for the government to be involved in the economy in any way (0.00001% was your figure IIRC)

Read again, Sherlock. I said that allowing the government to have control over 0.001% of the economy should be fought stridently. You're the one that flew off the handle after that and assumed that means that government should not be involved in ANYTHING. Or did you miss the part where I said "restrict government to Constitutionally prescribed functions"? In no part of the Constitution does it prescribe that the Federal government should just be handed control of 15% of the economy just because some doofus like Obama thinks he can run health care better.

So stop spouting bull&$@!! and lies and get the facts straight.

Right back at you and your lying BS...

http://www.politifact.com/virginia/s...amacare-will-/

As of this point in time there are only PROJECTIONS about the deficit. The GAO has projections that Obamacare will reduce the deficit. They also have projections that Obamacare will INCREASE the deficit. And guess what? Not a single blooming person on the planet has any idea which it will be. Anyone who claims otherwise is a lying BS-er. No one even knows which one is more LIKELY at this point.

President Clinton constantly bragged about is "projected surplus". The fact is that the Clinton surplus was all on paper. It was a projection. An idea. A concept. Or - to perhaps put it more accurately - it was a WISH. "If all the stuff I want lines up, and nothing unexpected happens, and people do exactly what I think then we'll have a wonderful surplus!" It was bullcrap based on assumptions and more than a little fantasy. Likewise, there is no reason to assume the rosy "projections" that Obamacare will reduce the deficit. It is far more likely based on the past couple weeks that Obamacare will go belly-up, absolutely NOTHING about it will go as 'projected', and it will either be a wash for the deficit or end up adding to it.

[Tierbook]

Reminds me of the one guy we had around here who would copy/paste Yahoo! Answers word for word in an attempt to make it seem like their own. I want to say it was Vyxn, actually.

you mean me? i copied a guy talking about how it took less time for America to join the war and beat Germany in WW2 than it did for the government to get a functioning website.... i even said it was from a comment on yahoo. That's the only way you know it was from a comment

[SirRobin]

What was that about President Clinton?

- - - Updated - - -

Or this part about Clinton?

[Cthulhu 2020]

What was that about President Clinton?

- - - Updated - - -

Or this part about Clinton?

In before "Raegonomics" or some claim that it wasn't Clinton's budget.

[Ausr]

you mean me? i copied a guy talking about how it took less time for America to join the war and beat Germany in WW2 than it did for the government to get a functioning website.... i even said it was from a comment on yahoo. That's the only way you know it was from a comment

No, not you. This guy pretty much claimed it was his own opinion.

[Tierbook]

No, not you. This guy pretty much claimed it was his own opinion.

whats wrong with claiming you agree with a statement

[The Casualty]

whats wrong with claiming you agree with a statement

Copypasting an idea and stating you agree with it is vastly different from copypasting an idea and presenting it as your own.
And I'm fairly certain that was Vyxn he was referring to.

[SirRobin]

Oh and since someone brought up politifact?

Barack Obama promises you can keep your health insurance, but there's no guarantee

Barack Obama says that under his health care law, those who have health insurance will keep it

[paralleluniverse]

Oh and since someone brought up politifact?

Barack Obama promises you can keep your health insurance, but there's no guarantee

Barack Obama says that under his health care law, those who have health insurance will keep it

I already addressed this earlier.

Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post's fact checker, gave President Obama four Pinocchios for telling people that under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) they would be able to keep their insurance plan, if they liked it. Kessler points out that many plans are being terminated because they do not comply with the minimum standards laid out by the ACA. The people on these plans are not able to keep their insurance.

Kessler notes that the plans in existence as of the time the ACA was passed would be grand-fathered, which would mean that the plans in effect at the time that President Obama was pushing the bill could still be offered even if they did not meet all the standards laid out in the ACA. The plans being terminated because they don't meet the minimal standards were all plans that insurers introduced after the passage of the ACA, knowing that they would not meet the standards that would be put into law in 2014.

However Kessler points out that the ACA sharpy restricts the ability of insurers to alter the grandfathered plans and still maintain their status. For example, they can only raise their premiums or deductibles by a small amount above the rate of medical inflation.

Kessler interprets this as a narrow restriction that would cause many plans to lose their grandfathered status. However, the price increases charged by insurers are not events outside of the control of insurers. If an insurer offers a plan which has many committed buyers, then presumably it would be able to structure its changes in ways that are consistent with the ACA. If it decides not to do so, this is presumably because the insurer has decided that it is not interested in continuing to offer the plan.

Whether such a decision can be blamed on the ACA and interpreted as a violation of President Obama's pledge depends on how people think about the commitment. Insurers change and drop their plans all the time. (As the co-director of a small business, I can give personal testimony on that one.) If people thought that Obama's pledge meant that he would freeze the insurance market -- in effect have the government take over the industry and prohibit any changes to existing policies -- then Kessler is absolutely right, Obama broke the pledge. Under the ACA insurers still can change and eliminate plans.

However if people interpreted the pledge as meaning that the ACA would not directly eliminate the insurance plans that people had at the time, then Obama was being honest. The ACA did not end plans that were in effect at the time the plan was being passed.

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/...ker-assessment

[Ausr]

whats wrong with claiming you agree with a statement

No, there's a difference between you admitting "Hey, I know it's an Answer! but this guy says I want to say" versus " Copy/pasta someone's opinion and saying it's your own."

[SirRobin]

I already addressed this earlier.

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/...ker-assessment

So does politifact. Though they don't claim four pinocchios.

[paralleluniverse]

So does politifact. Though they don't claim four pinocchios.

But it's not necessarily a false statement as explained. The plans were changed, if they weren't they could have stayed despite not meeting Obamacare minimum standards.