Why Republicans Refuse to Reconcile Themselves to Obamacare

[Greenbeard]

Yes, that's the summary. Btw, there are several versions. Have you seen Mitch's version that he hauled out on a hand truck.

That's not a summary, that's the actual legislation. Are you reading the things you're posting?

 

[opendebate]

Show me. Show me someone who is "hardworking" and cannot afford a hundred or so dollars a month.

...and this person better not own a cell phone, or pay a cable bill. This person better not own a home bigger than they need, or spend more than what's needed for basic necessities like food and clothing. I'd be willing to bet that whomever you choose, will be either a) covered under Medicare or Medicaid, or b) really can afford health insurance, but elects not to, in lieu of other non-discretionary income.

...and again, I was generalizing. Don't go trying to prove your point by pulling a .001%'er out of your butt either. Everything has exceptions, so don't expect me to think of your exception as the norm.

Well that's an irresistible invitation for what is certain to be an enlightening exchange. I'll try really hard to avoid my butt.

Have you actually shopped for health insurance, individual coverage?
Have you ever been responsible for children on your own. Do you understand how expensive it is to provide for a family?

 

[sangha]

That would be funny had Obama not assured us that health care costs would be going DOWN. Hence AFFORDABLE Care Act. Any other comedy you wish to share.

Only a fool believes the promises of a politician

 

[Velvet Elvis]

Well that's an irresistible invitation for what is certain to be an enlightening exchange. I'll try really hard to avoid my butt.

Have you actually shopped for health insurance, individual coverage?

Why yes, I have. Just as recently as five years ago, when I was laid off from my job. First order of business was to disconnect the cable TV and sign up for Blue Cross/Blue Shield. It was the cheapest plan I could afford at $190.00 a month. Did it hurt financially? Yes. Was it the responsible thing to do? Yes.
My health is more important than cable TV.

Have you ever been responsible for children on your own.

No. See my next point for the reason.

Do you understand how expensive it is to provide for a family?

No, because I have the personal responsibility to know that I can't afford children, in the long term. I never just randomly stuck "Joey" into any old woman who'd spread her legs, without thinking of protection FIRST. Even now while married, we practice birth control. It's called responsibility. It's called effective planning of life.

 

[sangha]

Why yes, I have. Just as recently as five years ago, when I was laid off from my job. First order of business was to disconnect the cable TV and sign up for Blue Cross/Blue Shield. It was the cheapest plan I could afford at $190.00 a month. Did it hurt financially? Yes. Was it the responsible thing to do? Yes.
My health is more important than cable TV.


No. See my next point for the reason.


No, because I have the personal responsibility to know that I can't afford children, in the long term. I never just randomly stuck "Joey" into any old woman who'd spread her legs, without thinking of protection FIRST. Even now while married, we practice birth control. It's called responsibility. It's called effective planning of life.

Since birth control is not 100% effective, it is irresponsible to have sex with your wife if you can't afford children

 

[Velvet Elvis]

Since birth control is not 100% effective, it is irresponsible to have sex with your wife if you can't afford children

It's been 100% for 20 years. If it ever lets us down, there's always the choice of either "A." Adoption or abortion. Regardless, it's a responsible decision.

 

[wbcoleman]

Apparently nobody can agree on how many pages it is, let alone what it says and more importantly, what it means.

I counted them tonight. 2,407 plus 55.

 

[sangha]

It's been 100% for 20 years. If it ever lets us down, there's always the choice of either "A." Adoption or abortion. Regardless, it's a responsible decision.

It is also irresponsible for a married adult to be so ignorant about the fact that BC is not 100% effective.

 

[wbcoleman]

I have to ask, have you read the entire bill, and determined exactly what was "deeply flawed" based on that reading -- rather than media reports?



That isn't even close to what it does. It doesn't change insurance for the vast majority of Americans, who still get their insurance from their employers.

I think that answers my first question.



That's because she was discussing the legislative process. The Senate was still hashing out the bill, so the House had not way of knowing for certain what would be included in the Senate bill until it was passed.

Good to see that you're criticizing the bill not based on its policy, but a fundamental misunderstanding of how the legislature works.

This is such total nonsense. And you, implying that unlike me you're an expert on the bill, are claiming that when Mrs. Pelosi emitted her famous faux pas, "[t]he Senate was still hashing out the bill, so the House had not way of knowing for certain what would be included in the Senate bill until it was passed."

DO YOU REALLY WANT TO STAND BY THAT "EXPERT" CLAIM???

 

[wbcoleman]

I look at your link and click "Obamacare bill" on the left sidebar. I then click where it says "You can download the Full ObamaCare Bill here: Full Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) Bill."

It's very clearly 955 pages long. Which I could've sworn I just said.

To repeat, the main bill is 2,401 pages and the second bill is 55.

 

[opendebate]

Why yes, I have. Just as recently as five years ago, when I was laid off from my job. First order of business was to disconnect the cable TV and sign up for Blue Cross/Blue Shield. It was the cheapest plan I could afford at $190.00 a month. Did it hurt financially? Yes. Was it the responsible thing to do? Yes.
My health is more important than cable TV.

No. See my next point for the reason.

No, because I have the personal responsibility to know that I can't afford children, in the long term. I never just randomly stuck "Joey" into any old woman who'd spread her legs, without thinking of protection FIRST. Even now while married, we practice birth control. It's called responsibility. It's called effective planning of life.

First of all I don't know what kind of crappy policy you can get for $200.00 per month. I shopped and read and dissected that stuff until my eyes bled and still found nothing worthwhile for less than $350. So you can say you have insurance but what is its real value when you actually have to use it? For many it is not a matter of giving up luxuries to afford it, it is a matter of giving up other necessities. And you can not convince me that a single mother who works two jobs to provide for her kids and still can not afford health insurance is not working hard enough.

 

[Velvet Elvis]

It is also irresponsible for a married adult to be so ignorant about the fact that BC is not 100% effective.

Stop trolling. I never said it was 100%. I said it's been 100% so far.

 

[Velvet Elvis]

And you can not convince me that a single mother who works two jobs to provide for her kids and still can not afford health insurance is not working hard enough.

Neither can you convince me that "single mother" wasn't stupid enough to put herself in that situation. Lay in the bed you make for yourself, and stop whining if you pee in it.

 

[opendebate]

Neither can you convince me that "single mother" wasn't stupid enough to put herself in that situation. Lay in the bed you make for yourself, and stop whining if you pee in it.

Have you never taken every precaution possible and still wound up in over your head? I was driving my car down the road, I had health and auto insurance and savings and a semi-truck smashed into me and demolished both me and my car. I was as prepared as I could be to provide for myself and my kids but this one moment blew all that to hell. **** happens and until you know the truth about how someone ended up where they are you should reserve judgment and not immediately assume they are their because they had not taken responsibility

 

[Velvet Elvis]

I don't reserve judgment because I have the freedom to judge. If you don't like it, suck it. It's my opinion.

 

[sangha]

Stop trolling. I never said it was 100%. I said it's been 100% so far.

Which means you're still risking making a baby that you can't afford

 

[obvious Child]

Obamabots have been repeating this mantra for years, to little effect. It really isn't a big mystery that if you cherrypick a half dozen giveaways out of a 2,700 page scheme, they'll poll well. So what???

Uh, it's hardly cherry picking when those are the bulk of the law.

Point still stands that the whole people hate Obamacare doesn't gel when people love Obamacare's parts.

I'd love to see a poll on the GOP's status quo.

"Should people be allowed to effectively steal the premiums of responsible companies and tax payers because they refuse to pay for their own insurance as under the GOP's status quo proposal?

Try that out. Tell me how it goes.

 

[Velvet Elvis]

Which means you're still risking making a baby that you can't afford

...and as I said...if it fails, I've always got the two "A's" to choose from.

 

[Visbek]

This is such total nonsense. And you, implying that unlike me you're an expert on the bill....

I'm pointing out the rather obvious flaws in your criticism.

On one hand, you blast legislators for allegedly not reading the bill -- even though they have staffers to go through it, and thus they do actually know what they're signing.

However, you apparently haven't read the bill yourself. Which means, according to your own standards, you're uninformed about the bill.

That doesn't change because of a bunch of furious last-minute changes that were taking place in the Senate before they voted -- which, by the way, was NOT the final version of the bill.

Thus, again: Instead of taking on the substance of the bill, you're attacking it based on quotes taken out of context. Nice work.

 

[Montecresto]

The situation's that emerged isn't all that bad. Health care price inflation right is at or near an all-time low and group health insurance premium increases last year were the smallest since the late '90s. We've been seeing the slowest health spending growth and the slowest per beneficiary Medicare cost growth ever recorded. The overall slowdown in health spending growth has caused hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicare and Medicaid spending over this decade to quite unexpectedly melt away. These are unprecedented times.

Currently, the United States spends more on health care services than any other country, exceeding $2.6 trillion, or about 18 percent of gross domestic product. Most years, medical spending rises faster than inflation and the economy as a whole.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/10/seven-factors-driving-your-health-care-costs.html

 

[Montecresto]

Only a fool believes the promises of a politician

Well that's certainly true, but then who believed him other than Greenbeard?

 

[Montecresto]

I counted them tonight. 2,407 plus 55.

I know, tell Greenbeard.

 

[wbcoleman]

First of all I don't know what kind of crappy policy you can get for $200.00 per month. I shopped and read and dissected that stuff until my eyes bled and still found nothing worthwhile for less than $350. So you can say you have insurance but what is its real value when you actually have to use it? For many it is not a matter of giving up luxuries to afford it, it is a matter of giving up other necessities. And you can not convince me that a single mother who works two jobs to provide for her kids and still can not afford health insurance is not working hard enough.

What sort of medical insurance does a single, childless, healthy twenty-five old need? They need a cheap policy with a large deductible which covers catastrophic care and calls for routine care to be paid out of pocket. Exactly what Obamacare has outlawed.

 

[wbcoleman]

I'm pointing out the rather obvious flaws in your criticism.

On one hand, you blast legislators for allegedly not reading the bill -- even though they have staffers to go through it, and thus they do actually know what they're signing.

However, you apparently haven't read the bill yourself. Which means, according to your own standards, you're uninformed about the bill.

That doesn't change because of a bunch of furious last-minute changes that were taking place in the Senate before they voted -- which, by the way, was NOT the final version of the bill.

Thus, again: Instead of taking on the substance of the bill, you're attacking it based on quotes taken out of context. Nice work.

This is such total nonsense. Not only do you appear every bit as unacquainted with the contents of the scheme as anyone else -- I don't recall seeing you provide any scoops on any of the bombshell surprises of the past 3 1/2 years -- you don't even appear up-to-speed on the legislative history of the scheme. After Mrs. Pelosi's famous taunt, the House passed the Senate bill VERBATIM, and nearly three months had gone by since Senate passage. Not one word was changed. Every change was placed into a separate 55 page long reconciliation bill.

 

[wbcoleman]

Uh, it's hardly cherry picking when those are the bulk of the law.

Point still stands that the whole people hate Obamacare doesn't gel when people love Obamacare's parts.

I'd love to see a poll on the GOP's status quo.

"Should people be allowed to effectively steal the premiums of responsible companies and tax payers because they refuse to pay for their own insurance as under the GOP's status quo proposal?

Try that out. Tell me how it goes.

This is ridiculous. The exchanges and the financing schemes are "the bulk of the law," the goodies are icing. Why are supporters of the scheme reduced to nonsense like this?