- Joined
- Feb 12, 2006
- Messages
- 24,373
- Reaction score
- 14,953
- Location
- Wisconsin
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
This should help us to all better understand how some people get to that place.......
Well, he feels that the ACA is bad.
He doesn't know facts or details, but he feels it in his gut. And we all know, guts are truthier than brains.
Well, he feels that the ACA is bad.
He doesn't know facts or details, but he feels it in his gut. And we all know, guts are truthier than brains.
This should help us to all better understand how some people get to that place.......
Since you cannot point to a successful Federal Entitlement program unless you call success being trillions in unfunded liabilities and costs that continue to explode being a success, then nothing you say matters because it is all your opinion ignoring history and reality
I will wait for history to provide proof of what I posted. All social programs were created with good intentions but all go astray over time for they are managed by bureaucrats with no incentive to generate quality
I will wait for history to provide proof of what I posted. All social programs were created with good intentions but all go astray over time for they are managed by bureaucrats with no incentive to generate quality
I have to believe some here work for the govt. and are here to sell Obamacare and continue to fool some very good people.
Obamacare hasn't been fully implemented yet but deductibles are increasing, people have lost their plan and their doctors, and taxes have been increased making the program look better than it truly is or will be. The employer mandate hasn't been implemented yet but big govt.
Did these cost saving reforms result in lower Medicare taxation?
Well, it wasn't simply Republicans that were trying "to spin that as if the ACA cut the budget for Medicare for awhile", it was the CBO in their early estimates of the costs of the PPACA when they wrote:
www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/03-30-healthcarelegislation.pdf
Of course, the "savings" and "deficit reduction" of the PPACA disappeared as later CBO estimates show. Currently the law will cost $140 billion a year. The "cuts" that were supposed to take place in Medicare were to be cuts in payments but Congress, as most expected, cancelled those cuts. Smoke and Mirrors. Medicare spending actually grew by 25.3% over the past 5 years, which is a greater increase that the 18.9% increase in private insurance and 20.2% increase in overall health care spending.
No, because Medicare was underfunded. It has, however, resulted in improved solvency for Medicare...
Medicare Is Not
Medicare, Social Security march toward insolvency | TheHill
Trustees Project An Additional 4 Years Of Solvency For Medicare | Kaiser Health News
... which means you are less likely to have a tax increase...
And from the vapid endless string of GOP bumper sticker slogans you reel off (apparently without regard for what you're responding to), one might assume you report directly to Reince Priebus
The employer mandate is pending for about 7-8 million employees. The other 100+ million employees it applies to have been living under it for the better part of a year. Society didn't collapse. And apparently folks you didn't even notice it's been implemented for the overwhelming majority.
Ok, so facts are optional in your world. I knew that. You can see the list of those who qualify here:
https://www.tn.gov/tenncare/article/tenncare-medicaid
Don't like that? Here's the state summary:
The charity has about 70 guys, all of them poor, most of them working. Almost none of them qualify for Medicaid unless they are classified as disabled. So it doesn't matter much what you "buy" that is what the program covers.
No, you categorically dismissed studies about healthcare in general. You're dismissing them because you know that studies in general don't support your stance- based on the conclusions they reach, not the way they get there.
...actually, the PPACA is delivering results in many of the areas promised. Of course the PPACA needs tweaking. All major legislation does. My point, however, was to state its time for the Republicans to realize its here to stay and work to fix what they don't like, as the idea of it ever being repealed is fantasy.
They did not take money from Medicare.... instead, the PPACA mandated reforms in Medicare, namely moving from a pay per services model to a pay for results model, that are to create savings in Medicare. The $726B that was consistently talked about in the last election were that anticipated savings of these reforms.
And taking victory laps over something that has been implemented for a year or less is quite interesting.
What you refuse to accept that unlike you....studies are not my master. You are accepting the studies merely because they agree with your point of view. There are studies that go both ways on any given issue. Healthcare included. I am betting that you are not on board with those that you disagree with.
The new markets have been open for nearly two years, but my primary interest is in the improvements to quality and care delivery that have been going on for 4-5 years now. Health care in America has been reinventing itself--for the better--for half a decade now. You might want to tune in at some point.
I still don't buy it. Your links are not the complete picture. Even before obamacare, those in Tennesee earning 106% of the federal poverty level or lower qualified for medicaid. Any of those guys in your group of 70 that are truly poor qualified for medicaid even before Obamacare. If they still cannot make ends meet, how much a month do they spend on vices like tobacco, booze, recreational use of drugs, etc? You link points out that 1.3 million in the state are covered by medicaid. There population of the state is only around 6.5 million.
I'm a liberal. We pretty much always side with the consensus of the experts in any given area. Conservatives are driven by ideology. Ideology sometimes matches up with the facts and sometimes not. So, sometimes conservatives are on the same side of an issue as the experts and sometimes not. Liberals are pragmatists. Pragmatists decide which side of an issue to be on by looking at the facts, the practical effects on the real world, the evidence, etc. So, we pretty much side with the facts and experts. Issues where conservatives align with the experts are not politically controversial. The politically controversial issues are where conservative ideology and practical reality diverge, so on politically controversial issues, liberals always are aligned with the experts and conservatives never are. You haven't noticed that yet?
The new markets have been open for nearly two years, but my primary interest is in the improvements to quality and care delivery that have been going on for 4-5 years now. Health care in America has been reinventing itself--for the better--for half a decade now. You might want to tune in at some point.
Not sure if you know....but he doesn't believe 'quality' was part of the ACA.
He doesn't need fancy studied or 'facts' to know this. He knows it from his gut.
I don't know if you understand that what is written somehow never comes into being with liberal social programs.
Do you have some Sean Hannity cliche book that you consult for each post, regardless of the topic?
Guess this one was #45 under 'social programs'.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?