Obamacare

Post Reply New Topic

^^^
And insurance companies - with the blessing of the Republican party - hasn't been doing that?

because single-payer was seen as unfeasible.

Do you realize that you could photoshop any member of the Republican party onto that cartoon who has ever talked about programs for the poor being a drain on America and it would make just as much sense?

It was pitched from day one as way for millions of uninsured Americans to gain access to healthcare (i.e. fixing health insurance).

And no, it did not solve all the country's problems by a long shot. As I have repeatedly stated, it is very far from ideal, just better than what we had before. If we could get people like you to help fix the massive problems with it instead of just saying that it is evil in its entirety, and get those who support it to get their heads out of their *sses and admit there are issues, it could actually become much much better.



And how exactly is that any different than before the ACA? At least now there are some minimum standards along with a prohibition on insurance companies dumping you the moment you get sick or increasing your premiums for using it for preventive care too often.

I'd find humor in it even it I were photoshopped into it.
It's always better to laugh and make others bawl than to bawl and be laughed at by others.

That reminds me of a Monty Python bit I saw somewhere.

ruveyn

The problem with Obama care is that it does not pay for the 6 million dollar bionic man.

Your argument is that since the ACA does some good, then that justifies any deficiencies. So, perhaps next year we can create even more spending programs to make up for the deficiencies in ACA? And if those don't work, then who cares, we can make more spending programs later! [sarcasm intended]

1. Look at George Bush's Medicare prescription drug plan expansion.

How could it be wrong to help people get free medicine, rather than cheaper ones in Canada and Mexico , see here ... http://www.usdebtclock.org/ .... a 22.5 trillion projected "prescription drug liability" ....DOH!

2. What about Medicare and Social Security? Look at all the good they do, isn't it good to help people? , see here ... http://www.usdebtclock.org/ .... ... 88 trillion "Medicare liability" and 16 trillion "Social Security liability" ....DOH!

3. What about the ACA, isn't it better to help people than worry about deficiencies ? see here .... [link to future unfunded ACA liability COMING SOON]

You forgot to adjust for inflation.

In case you haven't noticed, I have never said to ignore the problems with the ACA. Ever. I continually say that we need to fix the problems, not scrap it altogether. If you are worried about the budget, start thinking about closing some of the hundreds of overseas military bases that cost us a small fortune to foreign governments and another small fortune to keep operational. Or we could stop provided financial aid to governments where human rights abuses are the standard operating procedure. Or perhaps reform our policy of paying government contractors even if they do not deliver on time or do not deliver at all. Or maybe we could patch some of the holes in our tax system where large corporations can pay little or no taxes, or even receive tax refunds for millions more than they paid. And why not develop programs that raise people's standard of living enough that they no longer qualify for government assistance rather just than complain that they cost too much money?

Why cut programs that benefit many when we could cut financial benefits for a few corporations and their executives who are currently able to make a fortune by running a company into the ground in the long term just to score some record profits this quarter before moving on to the next corporation for huge a huge sign on bonus? Or actually punish corporations for fraud instead of letting them settle for significantly less than the amount they received by defrauding the American public?

If your argument consist almost entirely of "there are flaws with it so it should be eliminated," then I suppose you support the repeal of every single law ever passed in this country.

Sure, or save money by not going to war, or the million other ways we waste money.

However, the rich and powerful won't let that happen.

Private insurance companies already do this. In Oregon, assisted suicide is legal when a patient is terminally ill. Insurance companies attempted to eliminate chemo therapy options in favor of assisted suicide coverage. Whenever they got caught and the media flipped out, they magically changed their position. Funny how that works.

My God, that's truly evil.

Hmm.......
That's a change. I thought the left embraced euthanasia. I figure there'll be a lot more of it under ACA in the years to come.
Guess it'll be a lot less "evil" then, eh?

The left embraces assisted suicide, not euthanasia. What makes you think that the ACA will cause states where assisted suicide is illegal to change their laws, or states like Oregon to promote it more?

There's a world of difference between choosing the time to leave this life, and being left no choice by the maggots who run the insurance companies.