Unsubstantiated. More Fentonian bull****, I expect.
Same thing. Just story-telling. Zero evidence.
Sounds good. Maybe we can get a beer hall putsch going.
One of yer more convincing arguments.
Hey, it goes back to 2008. When do you think "unemployment started rising"?
After six years of conflict and divisiveness based on irresponsible, right-wing temper tantrums, …
>>you now have, according to that, slightly less than 45 million people without coverage.
According to what?
New federal data released Tuesday reveal that 36 million people in the United States were uninsured in 2014. That number marks a significant drop from the 48.6 million Americans without insurance in 2010, the year the Affordable Care Act was signed into law.
The new data from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) are based on interviews with 111,682 people. The findings show that the number of uninsured Americans of all ages dropped to 36 million in 2014 from 44.8 million in 2013. "That's pretty sharp," says study author Robin A. Cohen, a statistician at the NCHS.
"This is another set of data tracking what I think has become a pretty broad consensus that the Affordable Care Act is having a significant impact on reducing uninsurance," says Sabrina Corlette, a senior research fellow and project director at the Center for Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University (who was not involved with the research.) — "The Number of Uninsured Americans Continues to Drop," Time, June 23, 2015
Here's a report on another survey: "America's Uninsured Rate Is Down To 10% - And Falling," Forbes, June 16, 2015
I just heard a little bit of Obama speaking. One thing he mentioned was keeping premiums down. I just wonder how anyone on the left swallows that one, and still claims to have integrity. He will keep lying as long as they keep supporting it.
I may not agree with you politically, but I believe you are definitely right that it was fortuitous for their party, that the GOP Congress was not forced to take-up reforming healthcare leading into an election year.:lamo
You see, that is the reason why I don't want to see Republicans touch Obamacare. This meme about "republican approach" has been used for years to try to avoid blame for the mess Democrats caused throught their unilateral actions.
If Republicans were to take up any Obamacare issues, they would then own the entire effort.
It's best to let the spotlight shine on the best effort of the Democrats who unilaterally own Obamacare.
Well, it's true.
Slower Premium Growth Under Obama
I think we can all see the side that lacks integrity here.
Being insured and being able to afford treatment are two separate things. That is why disapproval remains high.
If people can't use it or don't like it it doesn't matter how free it is.
Your link shows slower premium growth, in case you don't understand that, it means the premiums are still growing, still rising.
Well, it's true.
Slower Premium Growth Under Obama
I think we can all see the side that lacks integrity here.
Increasing at a slower rate. Apparently you don't understand that.
I'm with you, justabubba -
An employment based healthcare system is asinine!
As I commented before: "In severe recession (like 2009), the rest of the civilized world suffers an economic crisis - but we suffer an economic crisis AND a healthcare crisis"!
Why?
And in other terms: Why would we want to stifle entrepreneurship by having employees unable to risk new ventures due to putting their families in jeopardy by lacking healthcare?
It's nonsense.
The language that you are referencing is four words out of a 900 page bill. Such minor mistakes in the language are extremely common and, in any other ordinary political climate, such a mistake would have been fixed as a rather routine practice. But given the Republican's antithesis to any remote resemblance of an attempt to work with the President on this issue (or nearly any other issue before the Trade Agreement), such a fix had to wait until it got all the way to the Supreme Court.
Your link shows slower premium growth, in case you don't understand that, it means the premiums are still growing, still rising.
Just like my ex wife who when told we couldn't afford to buy her more clothing right now just replied, "well then I'll buy them on sale, that way we SAVE money instead of spending it". :lamo
You fail to recognize how you change a law. Obamacare was passed within a very narrow time period, before and after which there is not enough support to pass it. If there is not support to make a change to the bill, it is not up to the SC to change it, it says what it says. Most of America, including Congress, does not want Obamacare.
It is Obvious, for some reason, the court has decided that they will not rule against this law, no matter what the Constitution says, or even what the bill itself says.
Otherwise, I'm not sure why you think Republicans should abandon their beliefs and become liberals and support Obama. Why don't the Democrats just join the Republicans instead, and get rid of the bill? What's wrong with them? Why won't they work with Republicans? They seem to be very hostile to Republicans on this law.
Your link shows slower premium growth, in case you don't understand that, it means the premiums are still growing, still rising.
Just like my ex wife who when told we couldn't afford to buy her more clothing right now just replied, "well then I'll buy them on sale, that way we SAVE money instead of spending it". :lamo
:lamo
Still increasing, apparently YOU don't understand that.
Look, it's an easy lie to engineer. Choose the highest period of increase under another president's time and then you're able to state, see, I'm not half as bad as him!
Is there any wonder why the majority of these "fact check" operations are arms of the liberal/progressive machine?
Amen brother! That's really the one thing that I never did get about the ACA opposition. The ACA removes a HUGE burden and obstacle to getting out from under some corporate yoke and starting your own business. I just couldn't understand why 'free market' types almost never mentioned it as a potential upside for the small business person. I at least expected it as, "sure, this is potentially a great deal for entrepreneurs, but...not worth the cost" or whatever. but I never saw the first part...
Well, it's true.
Slower Premium Growth Under Obama
I think we can all see the side that lacks integrity here.
I think this is what the liberals / progressives call a successful program. Ticks all the right boxes:
- Accomplishes nothing it claims to do, nothing it was sold to the electorate as
- Increase costs on those that work
- Gives away stuff to those who don't
- Puts government more in control of it, determining winners and losers
- Redistributes wealth from those who work for it to those that don't
- Guts the middle class
Yep. Pretty much.
On the the "Accomplishes nothing it claims to do, nothing it was sold to the electorate as", you can count Dodd-Frank in that as well, 'cause it was sold on ending 'Too big to fail' and yet, it's cause little else beyond hastening bank mergers into too big to fail.
Yeah, a real 'win' there for the hard working electorate.
Actually, I do understand that quite well.
What I also understand is that no one ever said the ACA will lower overall premiums or health care costs.
The concept of 'bending the cost curve' was apparently too complicated for a lot of ACA opponents to understand.
don't read the news do you.
Millennials
O-Care premiums to skyrocket | TheHill
and the big one for next year
Obamacare: 2016 sticker shock | WashingtonExaminer.com
so yes your post is irrelevant in the face of facts.
Obamacare Increases Large Employers' Health Costs - Forbes
yep your post is even more irrelevant.
Look, it's an easy lie to engineer.
Do you have any sources for this, clownboy?Bull****. Discounts Obama's closed door meetings with insurance execs and promising the act would not include single payer well BEFORE any congressional debate.
I'll defer to yer judgement on that. I don't have any personal experience as a liar.
Yep, his decisions have led to some very entertaining Mid-term results.
He's keeping the Albatross alive and that means we get to look forward to another election cycle of Democrats avoiding ObamaCare like the plague....and then losing.
Hey, remember when the Democrats were going to turn Texas " Blue " ??
Lol ! We added more GOP seats. We're Redder than we were before.
Do you have any sources for this, clownboy?
(and I'm not asking this in antagonism)
Because I too have been concerned with the President's early meetings, but have generally bought into the argument that the lesson learned from HillaryCare's failure was: "The insurance & hospital industries killed it, so they need to firstly be brought onboard this time". But I still have some skepticism, especially in light of some of the President's actions since then (the TPP not being the least).
A decision on no single-payer or public option in those meetings, if a true, would be heinous IMO, unless that was truly the only way forward. I don't believe that occurred due to seeing the public option come up for vote, and losing by only one vote (Sen Joe Lieberman - Hartford CT - insurance capital of the country).
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?