|
Post by lainey on Oct 1, 2013 11:34:24 GMT -4
I feel for all the federal government employees who are now on furlough. Please remember to vote Andy Harris out of office next November. He voted to quit paying you meanwhile, he is still getting his.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Oct 1, 2013 12:08:03 GMT -4
I feel for all the federal government employees who are now on furlough. Please remember to vote Andy Harris out of office next November. He voted to quit paying you meanwhile, he is still getting his. Huh?? I saw the House send a proposal over and the Senate said, "no, we aren't even going to look at it." Then I saw the House send another proposal over and the Senate said, "no, we aren't even going to look at it." Then I saw the House send another proposal over but the Senate said, "don't bother, we aren't going to look at it." Then I saw the House say, "let's talk about it," but the Senate said, "no, we're going home." And somewhere in there the Senate took the weekend off but I don't remember at which iteration. I saw the House trying to do something and the Senate trying to do nothing. The Senate succeeded.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Oct 1, 2013 15:31:39 GMT -4
I saw the house vote like 150+ times to repeal obamacare. They failed every time to repeal it, so now they are taking it out on the working man by blocking all spending. My way or the high way I guess, we better get walking! What bill did Andy write offering some compromise, I must have missed that one..... Did he write a bill to fix some of the issues with Obamacare? Nope, I must have missed that one too. I did see him try repeatedly, ad nauseum, to repeal and he kept failing. At what point does one quit banging ones head against a brick wall? I guess Andy is not done beating us yet. He is a real hard liner, that Andy Harris. That wont pay a federal employees mortgage. But don't worry, Andy is still getting paid to be completely ineffective.
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on Oct 1, 2013 16:09:55 GMT -4
A compromise between two bad ideas is still a bad idea.
|
|
|
Post by bluecrabber on Oct 1, 2013 16:50:07 GMT -4
Did he write a bill to fix some of the issues with Obamacare? Nope, I must have missed that one too. I did see him try repeatedly, ad nauseum, to repeal and he kept failing. At what point does one quit banging ones head against a brick wall? I guess Andy is not done beating us yet. He is a real hard liner, that Andy Harris. That wont pay a federal employees mortgage. But don't worry, Andy is still getting paid to be completely ineffective. Hard to write a bill to fix the Affordable Care Act when nobody knows whats in it.. I will wager you would be really hard pressed to find any politician who has read the entire bill.. including Obama himself.. Various reports have the Act between about 1000 pages and 2400 pages.. I'll use the 1000 page number since I am relatively sure the 2400 page number is the draft that has lots of space for comments. But, even at 1000 pages, that means reading 100 pages a day would take 10 solid days of reading (most politicians could not read 10 pages a day). How many of our Congressmen and women and Senators do you think have read the bill? And, how about comprehension? Do you think they have it fully understood? And then you have to add the hundreds of accompanying implementation documents that are being prepared.. This is my whole problem with the bill. None of these elitist career politicians have read it. I can't find anybody who has read the entire bill.. Nancy Pelosi had the gonads to say on TV "We need to pass this bill so we can find out what's in it" :/
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on Oct 1, 2013 18:09:35 GMT -4
Congressmen can't even understand how an island "floats". How are they supposed to comprehend a complicated legal document?
|
|
|
Post by emsguru on Oct 1, 2013 18:39:29 GMT -4
www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/30/five-reasons-americans-already-love-obamacare-plus-one-reason-why-theyre-gonna/ I don't think you'll find too many people who dislike some of the provisions. I honestly think that Republicans want it repealed cause they are afraid that it might work. Dems aren't going around saying "its the best thing since sliced bread" because they have a slight fear it won't work. Honestly I say keep it in there. see how things go. I don't see how our healthcare system could get any worse. If it turns out to be a complete failure then come up with a better idea.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Oct 2, 2013 7:18:22 GMT -4
No, you won't find too many people who dislike some of the provisions. At the same time, you won't find too many people who would dislike the idea of ending world hunger - until they learn how it will be done.
The idea of Obamacare, providing affordable care to everyone, is terrific. The reality of Obamacare, what it will cost, will turn out to be something less than terrific. Take a look at each of the provisions in the article and think about what the cost will be and where the funding will come from. Does it cost nothing to have an adult on their parent's insurance while paying no additional premiums? Does it cost nothing more for a high-usage patient than for a low-usage patient? Does it cost nothing more for a company to add health insurance coverage when they hire employee number 51? The provisions all look great but you need to see the implementation details to know the full picture.
I suspect the Republicans know that once the program is in place it will be impossible to remove, whether it works or not. I suspect the Democrats know that once the program is in place it will be impossible to remove, whether it works or not. I suspect this standoff is less about what will work or what is right for the country and more about both parties just trying to get their way.
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Oct 2, 2013 7:53:02 GMT -4
Republicans need to realize that Obamacare is now the law of the land. They lost - get over it! Address the problems that lie ahead instead of crying over the past. Penalizing the working public for your failure to do your job is going to be self destructive come election time. The ads are already running. Obamacare will fall on its own in time. We've only been exposed to the good parts of the plan; keeping kids on your insurance till age 26, no penalties for pre-existing conditions, etc. When the bad parts are start coming to light, there will be a public outcry. Until then, get back to work!
BTW: According to factchecker, Obamacare is actually 9,625 pages. However, if you download the entire document, you will get 20,202 pages because of the small print in which it is written. There are also another 7,432 of associated regulations. Definitely not an easy read. No wonder nobody knows whats in it.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Oct 2, 2013 21:29:32 GMT -4
Republicans need to realize that Obamacare is now the law of the land. They lost - get over it! . The American workers lost.
|
|
|
Post by bluecrabber on Oct 3, 2013 7:33:45 GMT -4
Not only do people, including politicians not know what is in the bill, the notion of Obamacare is completely misuderstood by the sheeple..
Let's do some math:
The "Bronze" plan of ACA will provide insurance for about $250 a month, if you qualify for cost assistance. Otherwise, it will run about $400 a month for an individual. Not too bad right? Well, not real good either when you consider the Bronze plan only pays 60% of the bill..
People that are already struggling from paycheck to paycheck (assuming they work) will not be able to afford the Affordable Care Act...
:/
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Oct 3, 2013 9:27:07 GMT -4
And if you can't afford an extra $250/$400 a month, you get fined. My understanding is they will attach your bank accounts to insure they get their/your money. Socialist America is coming to your hometown!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2013 11:09:31 GMT -4
The penalty and the consequences for not getting insurance is specifically written into the law, isn't it?
Here's my understanding of it.....the IRS can't garnish wages, seize assets, levy liens, freeze bank accounts, send agents after you, arrest you, harass you, send collection agencies, call you.....you check a box on your tax return whether you have insurance or not. If you don't, they will send you a letter advising you to get insurance or be penalized. The penalty, $95* per person the first year, will be assessed against future tax refunds.
|
|
|
Post by markp on Oct 3, 2013 11:15:20 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Oct 3, 2013 15:36:36 GMT -4
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2013 16:12:52 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Oct 3, 2013 16:26:54 GMT -4
Are there contradictions between the two? The MoneyMorning site predicts that Pelosi's predictions are incorrect. If either of them could make accurate predictions then they would predict the next PowerBall numbers and get out of the business of predicting the effects of Obamacare. The healthcare.gov website is factual and designed to portray Obamacare in the best possible light. The information is probably accurate but I suspect they did not spend a great deal of time pointing out any negatives of the plan.
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Oct 4, 2013 8:26:44 GMT -4
Who knows for sure mj? That's part of the problem. They had to pass it to know what's in it, and they still don't know because they haven't read it. It's very hard to read and understand. The bill is filled with references to other laws, bills, and regulations, and those references are not explained in context with the language of the bill. From Obamacare: (2) in subsection (c)(2)(C)— (A) by striking ‘‘9.8 percent’’ in clauses (i)(II) and (iv) and inserting ‘‘9.5 percent’’; and (B) by striking ‘‘(b)(3)(A)(iii)’’ in clause (iv) and inserting ‘‘(b)(3)(A)(ii)’’. (b) COST SHARING.—Section 1402(c) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is amended— (1) in paragraph (1)(B)(i)— (A) in subclause (I), by striking ‘‘90’’ and inserting ‘‘94’’; (B) in subclause (II)— (i) by striking ‘‘80’’ and inserting ‘‘87’’; and (ii) by striking ‘‘and’’; and H. R. 4872—4 (C) by striking subclause (III) and inserting the following:
Replaced by section 10101(d). ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A group health plan (other than a self-insured plan) shall satisfy the requirements of section 105(h)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to prohibition on discrimination in favor of highly compensated individuals).Seriously, our congress can't add 2+2 and agree on the same answer. Do you think they can read and understand this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2013 8:36:41 GMT -4
I'm not understanding the questioning of the accuracy of the healthcare.gov website, it is the place you go to if you want to shop, gain information and sign up for healthcare insurance.
So, if for some reason it's all a sham or some form of socialist conspiracy, how about this.....Isn't the best predictor of what Obamacare is going to do, right up north in Massachusetts with Romneycare? Isn't Obamacare modeled after or very similar to Romneycare?
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Oct 4, 2013 8:45:38 GMT -4
I'm not understanding the questioning of the accuracy of the healthcare.gov website, it is the place you go to if you want to shop, gain information and sign up for healthcare insurance. So, if for some reason it's all a sham or some form of socialist conspiracy, how about this.....Isn't the best predictor of what Obamacare is going to do, right up north in Massachusetts with Romneycare? Isn't Obamacare modeled after or very similar to Romneycare? Hard to tell mj. They seem very similar on the outside. People from Massachesetts hate Romneycare. Hopefully, Obama learned from Romneycare and removed the parts people disliked, but I'm not gonna bet on it. www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/mar/20/romneycare-and-obamacare-can-you-tell-difference/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2013 9:33:53 GMT -4
A recent poll by the Massachusetts Medical Society, a statewide physician group, finds that most people in Massachusetts today are generally satisfied with the health-care system there. “Eighty-four percent of residents expressed satisfaction with the care they received over the last year, including 56 percent who indicated they are ‘very satisfied’ and 28 percent who are ‘somewhat satisfied,’” the survey report states. Seventy-three percent of residents reported that gaining access to health care they need is “not difficult,” and for serious medical problems, 86 percent said the amount of time they needed to wait was not a problem. While no health-care insurance system – private or public – is perfect, the bottom line in Massachusetts, as the Hill newspaper in Washington reported last month, is that “The vast majority of Massachusetts residents are satisfied with their healthcare under the state's 2006 reform law.” www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0929/Romneycare-vs.-Obamacare-Lessons-for-today-s-shutdown-debacle-videoEvery resident is required by law to have insurance, or pay a fine. To date, 99% of the state’s residents have health insurance, up from around 90% before healthcare reform. That number changes drastically depending on which segment of society you look at. At least 24% of low income residents did not have health insurance prior to the 2006 law, according to the Urban Institute, a Washington DC non-partisan think tank. Today, just 8% of low income adults do not have healthcare coverage. Overall, the number of uninsured, which was estimated to be as high as 650,000, more than the population of the city of Boston, has been wiped out. People in Mass. are covered. By comparison, the national average in 2010 had 16% of the population without healthcare coverage. It’s worse in some states. Texas has 16% of its population going without health insurance, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. “I think it has been a huge success,” says Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, an independent state watchdog that has a reputation as the “keeper of the keys” on the state budget numbers. “Romney should be proud of it. It has been one of the biggest policy achievements in this state over the last 25 years,” he says. Although on the national level Republicans talk of overturning “ObamaCare”, no Republican is the Massachusetts government is serious about overturning its predecessor, “RomneyCare”. In fact, politicians in Massachusetts by and large don’t want to overturn RomneyCare; they want to make it better and bring costs down at the same time, rather than just bring costs down and let everyone fend for themselves in the meantime, stuck on thousand dollar a month premiums for healthcare coverage. Employers are not up in arms over universal, affordable healthcare coverage either, says Widmer. A two year old study from Urban Institute revealed that concerns over employers dropping coverage or scaling back benefits because of health reform have not been realized. www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2012/01/20/romney-care-massachusetts-healthcare-reform/About 98 percent of state residents are insured under the legislation Romney signed in 2006, a 10 percent rise from the previous three-year average. Government costs haven’t ballooned, officials say, and 63 percent of residents support the law. The Massachusetts law has “turned out to be a success,” said David Cutler, an economics professor at Harvard University in Cambridge who helped policy makers draw up the law, in a telephone interview “People have gotten coverage. They got coverage at the rate we thought, and at the cost we thought.” “There were concerns that there would be spiraling spending and out-of-control cost overruns,” said Shor, whose authority was set up by the law to offer state-subsidized coverage to those below a certain income level. “That has just eminently not been the case at all.” www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-26/romneycare-s-98-success-rate-defies-gripes-on-obama-law.html
|
|
|
Post by kiboater on Oct 4, 2013 10:18:40 GMT -4
We currently have a great healthcare system. One of the things that scares me about a government takeover of our healthcare is stuff like this: online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303918804579108991879368028.html or do a goggle search for: "Merck to Cut Staff by 20% as Big Pharma Trims R&D" Here is the first part of the article: Merck & Co. said it plans to slash its 81,000-strong workforce by 20% over the next two years, a stark show of the diminishing research-and-development capabilities of some of America's biggest health companies. The company also said it would close offices in New Jersey and discontinue some late-stage drug development, all in the service of saving about $2.5 billion annually by 2015. The cuts will dramatically reduce the size and scope of Merck, one of the U.S. pharmaceutical industry's most enduring companies and the second-largest by sales after Pfizer Inc. PFE -0.21% Known for introducing the first measles vaccine, Merck attracted scores of young scientists and physicians in the 1980s and 1990s, who helped turn the company into one of the market's most widely held and widely followed stocks.
|
|
|
Post by emsguru on Oct 4, 2013 11:01:22 GMT -4
We currently have a great healthcare system. One of the things that scares me about a government takeover of our healthcare is stuff like this: We do. If you have insurance. Especially if you have good insurance. However if you have no insurance its not all that great. Not sure about the "government takeover" part. I highly doubt in 2 years you're going to see MD Primary Care turn into Federal Government primary care. Anne Arundel Federal Government Medical Center.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Oct 4, 2013 11:12:15 GMT -4
We currently have a great healthcare system. One of the things that scares me about a government takeover of our healthcare is stuff like this: We do. If you have insurance. Especially if you have good insurance. However if you have no insurance its not all that great. Not sure about the "government takeover" part. I highly doubt in 2 years you're going to see MD Primary Care turn into Federal Government primary care. Anne Arundel Federal Government Medical Center. It isn't so much that the Govt. will change the name on the building, it's more that they will require that everyone has insurance, they will require that the insurance meets standards that they set, and I believe they will require that doctors and hospitals provide services according to Govt rules. They may not change the name but they will be in control. People are finding out today that their current insurance plans do not meet Govt standards and are not acceptable under Obamacare. Yes, you can keep the insurance you have today (if the company doesn't cancel it) but since it is not considered to be adequate, you will still need to purchase an Obamacare plan or pay the penalty. (NOTE: This is like a small percentage of people but it is a non-zero percentage)
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Oct 4, 2013 11:12:54 GMT -4
You may be correct mj. As I read more, it seems the first several years were way more costly than expected. This was the basis for the notion that Romneycare was bankrupting Mass. However after the first four years, the costs have been coming down every year. I would suspect Romneycare at 70 pages is a lot easier to read.
Companies on a tight budget, or strict profit margins will cut hours and lay off workers to avoid any additional costs. That's going to happen any time there is an opportunity to use a loophole in the regulations to beat the system. It's always been that way.
|
|