despite all the hype against it, can we all agree that Obamacare is a runaway success

[MavsSuperFan]

Didnt really affect me as i had insurance, but its pretty much eliminated the problem of uninsured people in america.

Also helped out people who had junk coverage.

If you're low income (under 3.5k per month) the cheaper policies (after the subsidy) are almost free.

[Godzuki]

i think it is since everyone has coverage now. no more ridiculousness of putting it all on the hospitals.

but you never will hear any owning up, just like the bailouts you never hear owning up, just like the economy you never hear owning up....despite what used to be constant doom and glooming.

[DeuceWallaces]

Thankfully I've been insured the past 6 years through work so I didn't follow much about it or pay attention to the coverage, but it's good that it seems to be doing well and people who need it are finally covered.

[johndeeregreen]

Americans, please inform me if I am incorrect, but Obamacare basically forced Americans to purchase their own health insurance, and forced insurance providers to provide it regardless of their current health, is that correct? At least in a general way?

[MavsSuperFan]

Americans, please inform me if I am incorrect, but Obamacare basically forced Americans to purchase their own health insurance, and forced insurance providers to provide it regardless of their current health, is that correct? At least in a general way?

Obamacare basically forced Americans to purchase their own health insurance
Yes, it is mandated there are financial penalties for not being insured.


forced insurance providers to provide it regardless of their current health
Pretty much, pre-existing conditions are no longer a basis of rejecting coverage, i believe it still might increase the costs though.

Also you missed the biggest part. the subsidies. I could be wrong, but iirc say you are making about 3.5k a month, you could qualify for about $680-700 in subsidies per month to help cover your insurance.

If you choose a cheap plan (even the cheapest ACA plans are better than the junk that were allowed to be sold previously) you could end up paying like 10-20 dollars a month for insurance.

But don't get it twisted Obamacare was basically a love letter to the insurance companies. mandating insurance spreads the risk, and they get tons of new customers, (the subsidies go to the companies eventually).

[TheReal Kendall]

Naw bro. I don't like it. It forced me to pay more than what I was paying through my job and it forced them to stop offering it.

Have you actually looked at the plans they offer?

[MavsSuperFan]

Naw bro. I don't like it. It forced me to pay more than what I was paying through my job and it forced them to stop offering it.

Have you actually looked at the plans they offer?
The ACA set minimum standards for insurance policies.

Your old policy must have been crap. Although the premiums were low you were flushing money down the toilet.

Various factors affect the quality of the policy.

- how high the deductible is, The lower the better. If say your deductible is 10k per year, unless something catastrophic happens you will never reach the deductible and basically have no benefit from your insurance

-what are your co pays: the lower the better.
-what healthcare facilities are in your policies network.
-does your policy allow you to go to out of network doctors/hospitals,
etc.

your old policy was deemed to be a rip off so they were forced to stop selling it.

[MavsSuperFan]

Thankfully I've been insured the past 6 years through work so I didn't follow much about it or pay attention to the coverage, but it's good that it seems to be doing well and people who need it are finally covered.
Same, the uninsured problem was overhyped, in a country of 310 million+ only 40 million or so were uninsured.

it was people who didn't have good jobs, which usually provide insurance or were too poor to buy it and yet not poor enough to qualify for medicaid and were too young for medicare

[shlver]

The ACA set minimum standards for insurance policies.

Your old policy must have been crap. Although the premiums were low you were flushing money down the toilet.

Various factors affect the quality of the policy.

- how high the deductible is, The lower the better. If say your deductible is 10k per year, unless something catastrophic happens you will never reach the deductible and basically have no benefit from your insurance

-what are your co pays: the lower the better.
-what healthcare facilities are in your policies network.
-does your policy allow you to go to out of network doctors/hospitals,
etc.

your old policy was deemed to be a rip off so they were forced to stop selling it.
What a ridiculous generalization. There were plenty of people perfectly happy with their policy that needed to drop because their policy did not meet the terms of the ACA. A lot of policies were cancelled due to more narrow provider network requirements.

[Godzuki]

The ACA set minimum standards for insurance policies.

Your old policy must have been crap. Although the premiums were low you were flushing money down the toilet.

Various factors affect the quality of the policy.

- how high the deductible is, The lower the better. If say your deductible is 10k per year, unless something catastrophic happens you will never reach the deductible and basically have no benefit from your insurance

-what are your co pays: the lower the better.
-what healthcare facilities are in your policies network.
-does your policy allow you to go to out of network doctors/hospitals,
etc.

your old policy was deemed to be a rip off so they were forced to stop selling it.

that would be true if everyone was being priced as a individual but the biggest inequity to health insurance prior to Obamacare was that big companies could leverage amazing health insurance costs for their employee's. where as those who worked independently or for small businesses had to pay full rates...or those that didn't work were pretty much fukked.

its like phone plans these days where the more people u sign up the better deal you're going to get. healthcare was more so a group package than phone plans, the more people a company could sign up the bigger discount they would get, and it was significantly better than those in small business or individual plans.

that is probably a big reason why some whose companies stopped providing healthcare after Obamacare are paying more. but it was a huge inequity between those who worked for big companies and those that didn't in terms of their healthcare costs. Its probably why Republicans were so against it since many do work for bigger companies with healthcare plans included at very large group rate discounts.

[ThePhantomCreep]

What a ridiculous generalization. There were plenty of people perfectly happy with their policy that needed to drop because their policy did not meet the terms of the ACA. A lot of policies were cancelled due to more narrow provider network requirements.

If it didn't meet the ACA minimum requirements it was probably a junk policy or close to it.

[shlver]

Yes, it is mandated there are financial penalties for not being insured.


Pretty much, pre-existing conditions are no longer a basis of rejecting coverage, i believe it still might increase the costs though.

Also you missed the biggest part. the subsidies. I could be wrong, but iirc say you are making about 3.5k a month, you could qualify for about $680-700 in subsidies per month to help cover your insurance.

If you choose a cheap plan (even the cheapest ACA plans are better than the junk that were allowed to be sold previously) you could end up paying like 10-20 dollars a month for insurance.

But don't get it twisted Obamacare was basically a love letter to the insurance companies. mandating insurance spreads the risk, and they get tons of new customers, (the subsidies go to the companies eventually).
A love letter? More like taxpayer money for the remainder of the actual costs of the "almost free policies." What happens if the person can't meet the deductible? Yes, the hospital or doctor eats the cost.

[shlver]

If it didn't meet the ACA minimum requirements it was probably a junk policy or close to it.
Read what I wrote and understand it. Many disqualifying policies covered people with complex medical problems. They had provider networks that were outside the narrow provider restrictions in the ACA. Yes, narrow provider networks streamlines healthcare industries in a market oriented fasion, but it still doesn't change the fact that people were happy with their policies, providers, and treatment plan.

[Nanners]

obamacare is certainly an upgrade from what we had before, but a true single-payer system like you see in virtually every other developed nation would be even better.

[MadeFromDust]

Epic fail

http://www.dividedstates.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/obama-epic-fail-solar-bankrupt.jpg

[ThePhantomCreep]

Epic fail

http://www.dividedstates.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/obama-epic-fail-solar-bankrupt.jpg

Facts > unfunny pics


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/08/05/obamacare-causes-steep-drop-in-uninsured-in-deep-red-states/

[KNOW1EDGE]

Americans, please inform me if I am incorrect, but Obamacare basically forced Americans to purchase their own health insurance, and forced insurance providers to provide it regardless of their current health, is that correct? At least in a general way?

Exactly. Some people think that is a good thing.

I think it is taking away more of my freedoms and placing additional restrictions on my life

[DeuceWallaces]

Same, the uninsured problem was overhyped, in a country of 310 million+ only 40 million or so were uninsured.

it was people who didn't have good jobs, which usually provide insurance or were too poor to buy it and yet not poor enough to qualify for medicaid and were too young for medicare

:oldlol: Uh, the uninsured is not a myth or hype. You can't have more than half the work force uninsured. That is no good.

[KevinNYC]

Didnt really affect me as i had insurance, but its pretty much eliminated the problem of uninsured people in america.

Also helped out people who had junk coverage.

If you're low income (under 3.5k per month) the cheaper policies (after the subsidy) are almost free.

No, we cannot agree it's a runaway success. It's succeeding, so far. Many of the stories like that it was a trainwreck and no one would sign up for it or would ruin the economy, or prices would double have proven false, , but it's still a work in progress.

It has made an impact on the number of uninsured people, it has not eliminated it.

[DwnShft2Xcelr8]

Finally have insurance coverage in 7 years. Thanks, Obama.

[kentatm]

obamacare is certainly an upgrade from what we had before, but a true single-payer system like you see in virtually every other developed nation would be even better.


:applause:

and the fact that Repubs say Obama didn't negotiate anything w/healthcare is complete shit considering he ran on single payer and ended up having to go with what is essentially Romneycare (and what Dole pushed when he ran against Clinton) to get it through.

[TheReal Kendall]

The ACA set minimum standards for insurance policies.

Your old policy must have been crap. Although the premiums were low you were flushing money down the toilet.

Various factors affect the quality of the policy.

- how high the deductible is, The lower the better. If say your deductible is 10k per year, unless something catastrophic happens you will never reach the deductible and basically have no benefit from your insurance

-what are your co pays: the lower the better.
-what healthcare facilities are in your policies network.
-does your policy allow you to go to out of network doctors/hospitals,
etc.

your old policy was deemed to be a rip off so they were forced to stop selling it.

Those plans that are offered by obamacare all have high deductibles unless you pay over $180-$200+ a month. These were all individual plans.

That would mean I would be basically paying $100+ a month for nothing because I never get hurt or sick(knock on wood). And on top of that if I did get injured I would still have to pay the bill until the deductible was met.

Maybe it's good for some people but I was happy with my $50 insurance plan.

[Cleverness]

Cosmic injustices are the focus... "a poor child was diagnosed with xyz, and he needs help. We should all help provide healthcare to this child." Or "this very nice lady does not have health insurance because she was denied... this is wrong, and someone should be forced to provide her with healthcare."


Smoking and obesity are the biggest healthcare problems, not the kid who was unfortunately diagnosed with leukemia. Healthcare costs are high because we value prolonging the life of elderly, and people in the US do not take care of themselves. Even when patients have medication ($), they choose not to take it and end up in the hospital ($$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$).

#1 reason a patient is admitted to the hospital for acute decompensated HF? Non-adherence to medications
#1 reason a patient is admitted to the hospital for COPD? Non-adherence to medications
#1 reason a patient is admitted to the hospital for DM? Non-adherence to medications

#1 reason for COPD/HF? Smoking
#1 reason for DM? Obesity

I've seen unemployed HIV patients get $60,000 drugs/yr and routinely call ambulances for rides across the city... unemployed Hep C patients with history of IV drug abuse lined up receive an $85,000 drug (sofosbuvir) while asking if it's OK if they still use black tar. These people were covered before and after "obamacare".

The solution to the healthcare problems in this country is to take responsibility for your health and exercise/eat healthy, not to rely more on government mandates.

[KevinNYC]

Those plans that are offered by obamacare all have high deductibles unless you pay over $180-$200+ a month. These were all individual plans.

That would mean I would be basically paying $100+ a month for nothing because I never get hurt or sick(knock on wood). And on top of that if I did get injured I would still have to pay the bill until the deductible was met.

Maybe it's good for some people but I was happy with my $50 insurance plan.You're not paying for nothing. You now have good insurance and if something does happen to you, you can do more than knock on wood.

When I had my knee injury playing basketball, I was very healthy and fit and was sick. I just required surgery.

[Nanners]

The solution to the healthcare problems in this country is to take responsibility for your health and exercise/eat healthy, not to rely more on government mandates.

Sup starface? Got yourself a new account I see.

Believe it or not, medical emergencies happen to healthy people.

A good friend of mine was diagnosed with a rare cancer (germ cell, its similar to what lance armstrong had from what i gather) in novemeber of 2013. He is a 31 year old non-smoker in excellent physical shape. He was between jobs at the time and uninsured.

Thanks to obamacare he was able to get insurance on january 1st of 2014. This never would have happened before obamacare, since his cancer was considered a pre-existing condition, and he wouldnt have been able to afford insurance anyway. In the end, he got about 99% of his chemo and surgeries covered and he was recently declared cancer free. Without obamacare he would be hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt in the best case scenario, worst case scenario he would be left dying/dead.

It puts a huge smile on my face knowing that the koch brothers tax dollars helped to pay for my friends cancer treatments.

[Cleverness]

Sup starface? Got yourself a new account I see.

Believe it or not, medical emergencies happen to healthy people.

A good friend of mine was diagnosed with a rare cancer (germ cell, its similar to what lance armstrong had from what i gather) in novemeber of 2013. He is a 31 year old non-smoker in excellent physical shape. He was between jobs at the time and uninsured.

Thanks to obamacare he was able to get insurance on january 1st of 2014. This never would have happened before obamacare, since his cancer was considered a pre-existing condition (and he wouldnt have been able to afford insurance anyway). In the end, he got about 99% of his chemo and surgeries covered by medicare and he was recently declared cancer free. Without obamacare he would be hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt in the best case scenario, worst case scenario he would be left dying/dead.

It puts a huge smile on my face knowing that the koch brothers tax dollars helped to pay for my friends cancer treatments.

I don't know who starface is. My old account was keepinitreal, but I noticed someone else had a similar name, so I made a new account.

I'm not saying that healthy people are immune to everything. I already know that cosmic injustices exist, as I already pointed out. "Obamacare" has pros/cons. You pointed out a 'pro' (cosmic injustices are reduced in a way), but it does not fix the much much much bigger problem (smoking and obesity).

Heart Disease and Stroke: $432 billion/year.
Diabetes: $174 billion/year.
Lung Disease: $154 billion/year.

Healthcare costs are higher for people who make poor lifestyle choices. Who should pay for those choices?

[Nanners]

I don't know who starface is.

yes you do. you aint fooling anyone.

you sure chose a hilarious name this time :oldlol:

[Nanners]

Its pretty damn unlikely hed be left dying.
Despite all the reports that the US healthcare system is worse than other developed nations, statistically we have the highest rate of survival for curable diseases (including cancer) and by a very large margin over many countries.

yeah, thats why i said "best case scenario he would have hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt"

[Cleverness]

yes you do. you aint fooling anyone.

you sure chose a hilarious name this time :oldlol:

:biggums:

Anyways, HepC is contracted from IV drug abuse in 90% of patients.

Should their $100,000 treatment regimen be paid for by taxpayers?

[RoseCity07]

The concern I hear is that it's great but Obama settled. He got the foot in the door though. The right wing is shitting down their leg over Obamacare.

[Fawker]

WTF is obama care. show me the card. The patients with real medical cards get admitted and treated ahead of them

[Nanners]

:biggums:

Anyways, HepC is contracted from IV drug abuse in 90% of patients.

Should their $100,000 treatment regimen be paid for by taxpayers?

great question starface - that reminds me of another aspect of healthcare in developed nations that the USA needs to adopt - perscription drug price caps. a quick googling shows that there is a ton of controversy over the price that gilead is charging for their hep c treatment.

should taxpayers pay a fair and reasonable price for this hep c treatment that adequately compensates the company for their R&D + the risks they took? yes

should taxpayers pay $100,000 for this hep c treatment? no

should drug users forfeit their right to medical treatment? no

should smokers forfeit their right to medical treatment? no

should fat people forfeit their right to medical treatment? no

should poor people forfeit their right to medical treatment? no

[MadeFromDust]

Facts > unfunny pics


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/08/05/obamacare-causes-steep-drop-in-uninsured-in-deep-red-states/

http://curezone.com/upload/Members/trapper/2013/free_poster_bj6a8pgs73_EPIC_FAIL.jpg

[Cleverness]

great question starface - that reminds me of another aspect of healthcare in developed nations that the USA needs to adopt - perscription drug price caps. a quick googling shows that there is a ton of controversy over the price that gilead is charging for their hep c treatment.

should taxpayers pay a fair and reasonable price for this hep c treatment that adequately compensates the company for their R&D + the risks they took? yes

should taxpayers pay $100,000 for this hep c treatment? no

should drug users forfeit their right to medical treatment? no

should smokers forfeit their right to medical treatment? no

should fat people forfeit their right to medical treatment? no

should poor people forfeit their right to medical treatment? no


You're insane. "Right to medical treatment"? :biggums:

The prices are high because of the government, lol.

If a smoker decides to stop taking his medication, taxpayers should pay for his expensive hospital admission?

If a HF patient decides to stop taking his medication, taxpayers should pay for his expensive hospital admission?

If a DM patient decides to stop taking his medication, taxpayers should pay for his expensive hospital admission?

I guess taxpayers should, since it's in your bill of rights. :biggums:

[Nanners]

The prices are high because of the government, lol.


correct, sort of.

the prices are high because the government allows pharma and private insurance lobbyists to write the laws and regulations.


I guess taxpayers should, since it's in your bill of rights.

yes they should. in virtually every developed nation on this planet, citizens have a right to taxpayer funded healthcare. this is no different from how americans have a right to taxpayer funded education, police, firefighting, and a variety of other social services.

[Cleverness]

correct, sort of.

the prices are high because the government allows pharma and private insurance lobbyists to write the laws and regulations.



yes they should. in virtually every developed nation on this planet, citizens have a right to taxpayer funded healthcare. this is no different from how americans have a right to taxpayer funded education, police, firefighting, and a variety of other social services we take for granted in this country.

I will not argue that governments should fund military, roads, bridges, protecting the environment, schools (even though our K-12 public school system is complete garbage), and much more.

However, I strongly believe that long-term poor lifestyle choices (such as IV drug abuse, obesity, and smoking) should not be rewarded with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of goods and services (drugs/healthcare costs).

[Nanners]

However, I strongly believe that long-term poor lifestyle choices (such as IV drug abuse, obesity, and smoking) should not be rewarded with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of goods and services (drugs/healthcare costs).

and what about all of the grey area between poor lifestyle and random chance? who/what is going to decide which medical needs are legitimate and which are undeserved? let me guess - obamas death panel :oldlol:

[Cleverness]

and what about all of the grey area between poor lifestyle and random chance? who/what is going to decide which medical treatments are legitimate and which are undeserved? let me guess - obamas death panel :oldlol:

I don't know what Obama's death panel is. But I do know that even with "Obamacare", some healthcare costs are covered and others are not. For example, plastic surgeries for those born with physical "defects".

There isn't a lot of grey area. Smoking is the #1 cause of HF and COPD. Obesity is the #1 cause of CVD/DM. These are lifestyle choices.:hammerhead:

Heart Disease and Stroke: $432 billion/year.
Diabetes: $174 billion/year.
Lung Disease: $154 billion/year.

Random chance is not on that list, but yeah, this is what health insurance is for.:hammerhead:

[Nanners]

There isn't a lot of grey area.


i know you see the world in black and white starface, but there actually is a lot of grey area.

you keep saying smoking is the #1 cause of COPD. do you know the #2 cause of COPD? its air pollution.

so if someone who lives in a polluted city like LA or Houston smokes cigs in their 20s, quits smoking in their 30s, then gets COPD in their 50s, what should we do then? do we cover their healthcare?

[Cleverness]

i know you see the world in black and white starface, but there actually is a lot of grey area.

Again, I don't know who starface is - kinda getting annoying that you keep mentioning him.

I don't see the world in black and white, but what I'm saying has very little grey area... obesity and smoking are lifestyle choices that lead to:

Heart Disease and Stroke: $432 billion/year.
Diabetes: $174 billion/year.
Lung Disease: $154 billion/year.

From what I said, please tell me about the lot of grey area.

[Cleverness]

i know you see the world in black and white starface, but there actually is a lot of grey area.

you keep saying smoking is the #1 cause of COPD. do you know the #2 cause of COPD? its air pollution.

so if someone who lives in a polluted city like LA or Houston smokes cigs in their 20s, quits smoking in their 30s, then gets COPD in their 50s, what should we do then? do we cover their healthcare?

He is 50 years old. He can purchase the healthcare he chooses. COPD maintenance medications are probably 5% of his total salary, and if he works, he probably has insurance. Why should the government step in?

[Nanners]

He is 50 years old. He can purchase the healthcare he chooses. COPD maintenance medications are probably 5% of his total salary, and if he works, he probably has insurance. Why should the government step in?

because starface, i think healthcare should be a right, treated no differently than things like public education.

[Cleverness]

because starface, i think healthcare should be a right, treated no differently than things like public education.

i know you see the world in black and white starface, but there actually is a lot of grey area.

You think that healthcare should be a right, but should all plastic surgery be covered by taxpayers? It is considered healthcare. who/what is going to decide which medical needs are legitimate and which are undeserved? let me guess - obamas death panel


I hope you understand how annoying/uninformed you sound.

[Nanners]

just give it up starface. i have been posting here for 5 years and lurking for even longer. i can recognize your weak ass bullshit from a mile away.

cosmetic surgery is not the same as "healthcare", and really its pretty obvious how this kind of thing should be dealt with.

do you want big tits? you pay for them.

were you born with a birth defect or injured injured in a freak accident and your face is all ****ed up? taxpayers got your back.

[masonanddixon]

In the long term it means people can abuse the system and receive more benefits for their bullshit.

Also no doctor wants an Obamacare system

[Cleverness]

just give it up starface. i have been posting here for 5 years and lurking for even longer. i can recognize your weak ass bullshit from a mile away.

cosmetic surgery is not the same as "healthcare", and really its pretty obvious how this kind of thing should be dealt with.

do you want big tits? you pay for them.

were you born with a birth defect or injured injured in a freak accident and your face is all ****ed up? taxpayers got your back.

I already told you my other username on here. If you look at my previous posts and compare them to the other person, then you'll notice significant differences (unless you initially thought I was starface and now you're just trolling me with the starface thing).

Anyways, cosmetic surgery is not black/white. If a girl is born with a mole on her face, can she have it removed and paid for by taxpayers? Viagra, testosterone, alopecia medication, all free and paid for by taxpayers? Some men have ED and/or feel very tired without testosterone.

When I was in undergrad a decade ago, I did not qualify for financial aid. I was probably in the same mindset as you: college and healthcare should be free, just like in some other countries.

Now that I'm educated, and I've seen things firsthand, I know that the answer isn't to expand government and raise taxes. I hope you will someday figure it out too.

[Nanners]

Anyways, cosmetic surgery is not black/white. If a girl is born with a mole on her face, can she have it removed and paid for by taxpayers? Viagra, testosterone, alopecia medication, all free and paid for by taxpayers? Some men have ED and/or feel very tired without testosterone.


i say we should assume the best of people rather than the worst, when in doubt we should always provide care. like the legal system - innocent until proven guilty.

its better to provide healthcare to 10 people that do not need/deserve it than withold from 1 person that does need/deserve it.



Now that I'm educated, and I've seen things firsthand, I know that the answer isn't to expand government and raise taxes.
lol it just gets better and better, now the college dropout is "educated".


I hope you will someday figure it out too.

dont hold your breath

[Cleverness]

i say we should assume the best of people rather than the worst, when in doubt we should always provide care. like the legal system - innocent until proven guilty.

its better to provide healthcare to 10 people that do not need/deserve it than withold from 1 person that does need/deserve it.


lol it just gets better and better, now the college dropout is "educated".



dont hold your breath


"its better to provide healthcare to 10 people that do not need/deserve it than withold from 1 person that does need/deserve it."

There's a better way than that... it's called giving the power to the people to decide what is best for themselves as an individual, not by having the government provide plastic surgery to everyone who feels they need it.



"lol it just gets better and better, now the college dropout is "educated"."

Interesting that you are still holding onto this notion that I am starface, someone you assume is a college dropout. I currently hold a doctorate degree. I could prove you wrong, but I would be giving out some of my personal information for nothing in return. Plus, your response would just be, "OK, I was wrong, but I still think healthcare should be a right [and reward poor lifestyle choices]"

Now, if you were willing to bet against me having a doctorate degree, then it would be more enticing to prove you wrong. :D

[Nanners]

Interesting that you are still holding onto this notion that I am starface, someone you assume is a college dropout. I currently hold a doctorate degree. I could prove you wrong, but I would be giving out some of my personal information for nothing in return. Plus, your response would just be, "OK, I was wrong, but I still think healthcare should be a right [and reward poor lifestyle choices]"

Now, if you were willing to bet against me having a doctorate degree, then it would be more enticing to prove you wrong. :D

you are correct. if you somehow managed to prove you are not starface, i would indeed say "OK, I was wrong, but I still think healthcare should be a right [and reward poor lifestyle choices]". i have no problem admitting when i am wrong about something, but its gonna take a lot more than bullshit hypotheticals from some random guy on the internet to make me rethink my position on healthcare.

but please, go ahead and try to prove me wrong. i fvcking dare you, starface.

[Cleverness]

you are correct. if you somehow managed to prove you are not starface, i would indeed say "OK, I was wrong, but I still think healthcare should be a right [and reward poor lifestyle choices]". i have no problem admitting when i am wrong about something, but its gonna take a lot more than bullshit hypotheticals from some random guy on the internet to make me rethink my position on healthcare.

but please, go ahead and try to prove me wrong. i fvcking dare you, starface.

Again, I don't know if you're trolling or not with the starface thing, but don't be mad you were wrong! I'm just some random guy on the internet, voicing experiences, facts, and opinions.:cheers:

When you subsidize something, you get more of it. Our corrupt government is still subsidizing red meat and like you said, gov't has made corrupt deals with pharmaceutical companies... yet we are to trust the government with our healthcare? The gov't is directly subsidizing obesity, lol

The answer to the healthcare problem isn't subsidizing poor choices (obesity, smoking, unprotected sex, IV drug abuse, etc.).

[Nanners]

The answer to the healthcare problem isn't subsidizing poor choices (obesity, smoking, unprotected sex, IV drug abuse, etc.).

so what exactly are you proposing we do about the healthcare problem? you seem to love love to talk about all the problems but you are not really offering any solutions. are you just saying we should stay with our old system? people should just buy private health insurance or get it from their employer and all the people who fall through the cracks are fvcked?

the healthcare problem is not just obesity, smoking, unprotected sex and drug abuse, there are plenty of "cosmic injustices" as you put it. i have witnessed it first hand, some people just get unlucky (like my friend who had cancer). shouldnt we provide some kind of safety net for those people?

[Cleverness]

but please, go ahead and try to prove me wrong. i fvcking dare you, starface.

I don't just buy into anyone who "fvcking dares me" to do something. "fvcking dares" mean nothing to me. $2,000 means something to me, though.

[Cleverness]

so what exactly are you proposing we do about the healthcare problem? you seem to love love to talk about all the problems but you are not really offering any solutions. are you just saying we should stay with our old system? people should just buy private health insurance or get it from their employer and all the people who fall through the cracks are fvcked?

the healthcare problem is not just obesity, smoking, unprotected sex and drug abuse, there are plenty of "cosmic injustices" as you put it. i have witnessed it first hand, some people just get unlucky (like my friend who had cancer). shouldnt we provide some kind of safety net for those people?

I already stated the solution: eat healthy and exercise. That is the best healthcare coverage one can possibly get, and if someone wants additional coverage, they can purchase health insurance. We cannot fix all cosmic injustices. There are innocent people in jail right now, but we can't let everyone free for the few who were wrongly accused. Same thing regarding healthcare.. some people are diagnosed with a rare cancer, but we can't force everyone to subsidize the consequences of obesity, smoking, drug abuse, and non-adherence to medication.

About 85% were already covered before "Obamacare" and those who were not covered were in the process of getting coverage (it can take years to get complete healthcare coverage from the government for something such as disability), young and relatively healthy Americans in their 20s, and people who simply chose to spend their money on other things besides healthcare coverage. Obamacare simply raises prices of health insurance and forces Americans to purchase private health insurance. People are paying higher premiums and deductibles now, so it's not like the government stepped in for everyone and said, "we got your back."

I don't know the entire situation with your friend, but that it could have been prevented if he bought his own health insurance while he was between jobs. He's 31, so he should have plenty of money saved through 401K/Roth IRA by now. He can always withdraw contributions from his Roth IRA tax free, borrow from 401K to pay for any medical bills, etc.

Increasing taxes only hurts the middle class.. they work and pay for things. When you tax the business owners, they must increase prices to make up for the losses, otherwise the shareholders will take their money elsewhere. It's crazy how many people are on government programs (eg food stamps) now.

[I]Government cannot correct cosmic injustice. Esteemed economist Thomas Sowell wrote a fabulous book on this topic. Nobody likes to see cosmic injustice: kids with serious health problems through no fault of their own, families whose homes are destroyed in natural disasters, etc. However, when government steps in to correct a cosmic injustice, the price must be paid by someone else

[Breezy]

Success for the ACA means 2 things. Lower costs and better health outcomes.

We live in a complex complicated society where there are a million factors playing a part in our overall health so we need to have it around for 20 years or so before a legitimate study could be done to determine it's effectiveness . Even then it would be nearly impossible to disentangle the obamacare effect from everything else that's going on.

The cost argument is already settled. It's more expensive than the already shitty system we were under. The CBO now say's it will cost 1.4 trillion over the next 10 years.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44176

[NumberSix]

Obamacare is a joke. If you want people to have healthcare, offer single payer, not forced purchase of private insurance.

[KevinNYC]

The cost argument is already settled. It's more expensive than the already shitty system we were under. The CBO now say's it will cost 1.4 trillion over the next 10 years.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44176

What are you talking about?

The CBO estimates that the ACA will REDUCE our budget deficit.


In March 2010, just before the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was enacted, CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimated that changes in direct spending and revenues under the legislation would reduce federal budget deficits by $124 billion over the 2010–2019 period and by roughly one-half of 1 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) over the ensuing decade (see the cost estimate for H.R. 4872, Reconciliation Act of 2010 [Final Health Care Legislation], March 20, 2010). In the four years since those estimates were produced, there have been significant changes in the economic outlook, in the health care and health care financing systems, in CBO and JCT’s estimating methodologies, in provisions of law that relate to the ACA, and in the implementation of the ACA as guided by judicial decisions and administrative actions. All of those changes could affect the impact of the ACA on budget deficits, potentially in significant ways.

In response to the request for an estimate of the net impact on the deficit of the ACA, the following points are important:

Based on revisions to the estimated budgetary effects of aspects of the ACA that CBO and JCT have analyzed, the agencies have no reason to think that their initial assessment that the ACA would reduce budget deficits was incorrect.

If you're comparing the ACA to the shitty system we were under, you have include the costs of the shitty system to make the comparison, you don't compare the ACA to zero.

[Nanners]

I already stated the solution: eat healthy and exercise. That is the best healthcare coverage one can possibly get, and if someone wants additional coverage, they can purchase health insurance. We cannot fix all cosmic injustices. There are innocent people in jail right now, but we can't let everyone free for the few who were wrongly accused. Same thing regarding healthcare.. some people are diagnosed with a rare cancer, but we can't force everyone to subsidize the consequences of obesity, smoking, drug abuse, and non-adherence to medication.

About 85% were already covered before "Obamacare" and those who were not covered were in the process of getting coverage (it can take years to get complete healthcare coverage from the government for something such as disability), young and relatively healthy Americans in their 20s, and people who simply chose to spend their money on other things besides healthcare coverage. Obamacare simply raises prices of health insurance and forces Americans to purchase private health insurance. People are paying higher premiums and deductibles now, so it's not like the government stepped in for everyone and said, "we got your back."

I don't know the entire situation with your friend, but that it could have been prevented if he bought his own health insurance while he was between jobs. He's 31, so he should have plenty of money saved through 401K/Roth IRA by now. He can always withdraw contributions from his Roth IRA tax free, borrow from 401K to pay for any medical bills, etc.

Increasing taxes only hurts the middle class.. they work and pay for things. When you tax the business owners, they must increase prices to make up for the losses, otherwise the shareholders will take their money elsewhere. It's crazy how many people are on government programs (eg food stamps) now.

Government cannot correct cosmic injustice. Esteemed economist Thomas Sowell wrote a fabulous book on this topic. Nobody likes to see cosmic injustice: kids with serious health problems through no fault of their own, families whose homes are destroyed in natural disasters, etc. However, when government steps in to correct a cosmic injustice, the price must be paid by someone else—a someone else who had nothing to do with causing the injustice being addressed. Thus, every time government fixes or eases a cosmic injustice, it creates a new one by sticking somebody with the bill—either a financial one or one measured in some other sort of cost. For example, each affirmative action college admission by definition mean some other applicant must be turned down. We may be willing, as a society, to bear an injustice in order to fix some cosmic injustices (e.g., many will willingly chip in to pay for a child’s medical care), but we cannot create a world free from all cosmic injustice.

so your solution is just that people should just borrow from their 401ks to pay for medical bills? that is beyond stupid. first of all, a third of americans have nothing saved for retirement, and 60% of americans have less than $25000 saved in their 401k, (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/03/20/3416808/retirement-savings-survey/) so obviously the vast majority of people arent able to just dip into their retirement fund to pay for an expensive medical emergency like cancer. besides, a person shouldnt be expected to sacrifice their retirement just because of a medical emergency, thats just whack.

my friend had no money or retirement account to buy health insurance with when he was diagnosed. also, without obamacare, nobody would have been willing to sell him coverage anyway, since his cancer was a pre-existing condition. it sounds like your solution for him is to hand him an ayn rand book and tell him to go fvck himself.

not everybody has a rich daddy that protects them from "cosmic injustices" like you do, starface. society can and should provide a safety net, thats what civilized people do.

[Cleverness]

so your solution is just that people should just borrow from their 401ks to pay for medical bills? that is beyond stupid. first of all, a third of americans have nothing saved for retirement, and 60% of americans have less than $25000 saved in their 401k, (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/03/20/3416808/retirement-savings-survey/) so obviously the vast majority of people arent able to just dip into their retirement fund to pay for an expensive medical emergency like cancer. besides, a person shouldnt be expected to sacrifice their retirement just because of a medical emergency, thats just whack.

my friend had no money or retirement account to buy health insurance with when he was diagnosed. also, without obamacare, nobody would have been willing to sell him coverage anyway, since his cancer was a pre-existing condition. it sounds like your solution for him is to hand him an ayn rand book and tell him to go fvck himself.

not everybody has a rich daddy that protects them from "cosmic injustices" like you do, starface. society can and should provide a safety net, thats what civilized people do.

1.) You are convinced that I am starface, a person without a doctorate degree. How much are you willing to wager on this?

2.) Your friend is 31 and has nothing saved. Being irresponsible comes at a price. I wasn't suggesting he pay out-of-pocket for his rare cancer.. I was suggesting that he pay for health insurance simply while he's between jobs. What insurance coverage did he have between jobs that paid for everything?

I know patients who were laid off from their job and they currently have to pay $100-400 for each physician visit. I hope they can sign up for the same insurance coverage as your friend.

3.) That rich daddy comment made me a bit upset... I actually come from a poor background. None of my family members have a college degree. I had to work 40 hours/wk while I was in undergrad to pay for college and eventually received student loans for professional school. It's way easier to become successful if you spend less time making excuses and more time educating yourself.

:coleman:

[Nanners]

3.) That rich daddy comment made me a bit upset... I actually come from a poor background. None of my family members have a college degree. I had to work 40 hours/wk while I was in undergrad to pay for college and eventually received student loans for professional school. It's way easier to become successful if you spend less time making excuses and more time educating yourself.



my what a bootstrappy story you have there:oldlol:

dont know why i am even bothering responding to one of starfaces endless troll accounts, normally i would have stopped a while ago.

[Cleverness]

my what a bootstrappy story you have there:oldlol:

dont know why i am even bothering responding to one of starfaces endless troll accounts, normally i would have stopped a while ago.

How much are you willing to wager? You seem pretty confident.

What insurance did your friend have? Or were you just trolling?

[Nanners]

How much are you willing to wager? You seem pretty confident.

i am willing to wager that i will stop calling you starface if you somehow prove me wrong :oldlol:



What insurance did your friend have? Or were you just trolling?

why dont you put that imaginary degree of yours to use and actually read my post you quoted earlier


Thanks to obamacare he was able to get insurance on january 1st of 2014. This never would have happened before obamacare, since his cancer was considered a pre-existing condition

i have bolded the relevant part for you. he ended up being able to pay for private insurance, but the only reason that insurance was available to him was thanks to the affordable care act.

[Cleverness]

i am willing to wager that i will stop calling you starface if you somehow prove me wrong :oldlol:



why dont you put that imaginary degree of yours to use and actually read my post you quoted earlier


You are confident that I am starface, a person without a doctorate, yet you will not wager anything? Scared to lose, huh? So much talk about starface, but nothing to back it up.

[Nanners]

You are confident that I am starface, a person without a doctorate, yet you will not wager anything? Scared to lose, huh? So much talk about starface, but nothing to back it up.

you are kidding right? are you really suggesting i bet real money against some new alt account with 170 posts on something that cannot really be proven in the first place? cant say i have met anybody with a doctorate that is as dumb as you. :oldlol:

i might consider actually betting money if you were an established member and i thought there was any chance you would actually pay me when i won.

[Cleverness]

you are kidding right? are you really suggesting i bet real money against some new alt account with 170 posts on something that cannot really be proven in the first place? cant say i have met anybody with a doctorate that is as dumb as you. :oldlol:

i might consider actually betting money if you were an established member and i thought there was any chance you would actually pay me when i won.

My old account is keepinitreal. It has 566 posts and join date Apr 2011. http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=286165

What do you have to lose? You are so confident, yet again, you won't back it up.

[Nanners]

My old account is keepinitreal. It has 566 posts and join date Apr 2011. http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=286165

What do you have to lose? You are so confident, yet again, you won't back it up.

keepinitreal is a nobody. i said "established member"

you want me to stop calling you starface then go ahead and try to prove me wrong.

if you dont want to prove me wrong and you really cant stand being called starface, i would encourage you to put me on ignore.

[Cleverness]

you want me to stop calling you starface then go ahead and try to prove me wrong.

if you dont want to prove me wrong and you really cant stand being called starface, i would encourage you to put me on ignore.

I just find it annoying when people talk a lot of ****, but they never back it up (and you've been doing that the entire thread, despite me telling you over and over that I am not him).

[DukeDelonte13]

In the long term it means people can abuse the system and receive more benefits for their bullshit.

Also no doctor wants an Obamacare system


i don't think you know what obamacare is :oldlol:


Anyways, thanks Obama. I save $500 a month thanks to obamacare.

I would have had to pay out the ass for my wife's pregnancy. It literally would have been cheaper for me to pay out of pocket cash for all the visits and delivery than to pay for a maternity rider through my insurance company.


And you know what my dumbf*ck former insurance company tells me (Anthem) "Dukedelonte13, we think you should grandfather yourself in so you don't have to suffer with these new health care policies".

:biggums:

[MadeFromDust]

http://sandrarose.com/images19/Obama-frown-500x326.jpg

[KevinNYC]

can we all agree that Obamacare is a runaway successOP's thesis is closer to becoming true.

[QUOTE]Premiums Set to Decline Slightly for Benchmark ACA Marketplace Insurance Plans in 2015

An early look at the cost of health insurance in 16 major cities finds that average premiums for the benchmark silver plan

[boozehound]

"its better to provide healthcare to 10 people that do not need/deserve it than withold from 1 person that does need/deserve it."

There's a better way than that... it's called giving the power to the people to decide what is best for themselves as an individual, not by having the government provide plastic surgery to everyone who feels they need it.



"lol it just gets better and better, now the college dropout is "educated"."

Interesting that you are still holding onto this notion that I am starface, someone you assume is a college dropout. I currently hold a doctorate degree. I could prove you wrong, but I would be giving out some of my personal information for nothing in return. Plus, your response would just be, "OK, I was wrong, but I still think healthcare should be a right [and reward poor lifestyle choices]"

Now, if you were willing to bet against me having a doctorate degree, then it would be more enticing to prove you wrong. :D
you would say doctoral degree or doctorate. not doctorate degree. what is your D in?

[KevinNYC]

OP's thesis is closer to becoming true.

Obamacare Effect Linked to Lower Medical Cost Estimates (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-05/obamacare-effect-linked-to-lower-medical-cost-estimates.html)

[QUOTE]Estimates of U.S. health-care spending for the next five years have been lowered by two federal agencies, and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is getting much of the credit.

U.S. health spending in 2019 will be $4 trillion, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said this week, or $500 billion less than the agency projected in 2010 when President Barack Obama

[KevinNYC]

OP's thesis is closer to becoming true.

Per Capita Medicare Spending Is Actually Falling (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/04/upshot/per-capita-medicare-spending-is-actually-falling.html?abt=0002&abg=1)

[QUOTE]Medicare spending isn