It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Affordable Care Act "obamacare", on track to meet enrollee goal

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Seriously, we all have to start with a non-partisan view. If you drink the Kool-Aid you will never see what is happening and that is what our PTB want. Us to argue with each other and not hold the government accountable.

LeBron James trying to get people to sign up? Do you think he did that for nothing? I am sure his fee could have insured at least a dozen people for free. Now, think about this..

The 'known' cost of the federal website that keeps crashing so far is about 300,000,000 dollars. Now, a single person plan is about 5k on average. So for the cost of the website that does not work we could have given coverage to almost 60,000 people who do not have medical insurance.

The US government gave 4,400,000,000 (billion folks) to the state exchanges for 'websites'. For the cost of that we could have insured 800,000 people.

So, for JUST websites, the US could have insured 1 million people. Sad part is that the states took the money and are pointing residents to the federal sites. Do you not see the scam here folks? At the same time, put in a ton of hidden taxes and have medical plan rates rise. On average, medical plans have risen 60% in the last 3 years. WTF?We need regulation not the ability for healthcare to make more money.

And no not forget that the healthcare companies were promised subsidies also.

It is a Freaking black hole and everyone says yeah yeah yeah when it has not worked.

In my heart, I wish it did. There are millions without coverage and millions with who cannot get what they need. Remember, most of the provisions and fees and taxes were postponed till 2014. When they all start to hit and when this is said and done, it is estimated to cost 1,500,000,000,000(trillion dollars) . That cost would have covered 30,000,000 people for the ten year period. So, do the math....we could have simply subsidized with the cost and it would have worked.


edit on 04am30amfu2014-04-01T10:36:28-05:001028 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


We have the regular people who voted for these clowns to thank.

They aren't getting a pass.

They drank the Kool-Aid, they believed the "hype" and "chains".

Now we are stuck with a failed plan, higher taxes, higher unemployment, more expensive healthcare, poorer healthcare. . . . thanks to Obamacrae.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


I suppose those would definitely be two topics with no relation at all to each other. I'd be pretty quick to call out right sided pundits or talking heads that tried getting into one, atop the other for subjects. I'm sure someone in the media will try, but I'll have a real heavy sigh if so.


The latest polls clearly show that Americans support what is in the ACA...and the polls also show more support for the ACA but negative support for obamacare when there the same thing. There is so much negative spin about the ACA from one side of the isle and you have to add a bunch of outright lies about it...yet not one ounce of any attempt to improve or fix things that can be fixed with it.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Who would believe anything that the Administration has to say about this?

The Administration led by Barack Hussein 'If you like your plan you can keep it period' Obama!



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Compared to the USA spending 5 times what the military budget is per year yet being one of the sickest nations on the planet.

Oh whatever are you gonna do when the ACA isn't fodder for the spin you so desperately need?



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 10:49 AM
link   
An estimated 45 million people (at least) were uninsured before the exchanges opened up. LA Times

I would have thought that response would have been in the tens of millions right away.

They insured 20% (I'm being generous here) of the uninsured.... not counting those who lost coverage due to the enactment of the ACA itself.

What a success!



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   

LDragonFire
reply to post by beezzer
 


Compared to the USA spending 5 times what the military budget is per year yet being one of the sickest nations on the planet.


Another topic for another thread.


Oh whatever are you gonna do when the ACA isn't fodder for the spin you so desperately need?


We'll have constant reminders from folks like yourself who enjoy draconian rule, poorer healthcare, more expensive healthcare, redistributed wealth programs and higher taxes.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Stick to the argument. I think most of us know that military spending is out of control, has been and probably will be even though they are reducing it and cutting benefits. That is another story for another time. But if you want to look at current admin waste look into funding and bankruptcy for his 'green companies' Could have used that cash for benefits too....

This is about the PPACA. The Tax package and kick back dream for lobbyists and big business alike.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 



The latest polls clearly show that Americans support what is in the ACA...


Where are you getting that data from? If you're referring to the data which is contained in another thread around here, the story that linked to, showed and titled itself as Democrats approving, not Americans. It showed Indies and Repubs falling in combined support while Dems were rising a bit. That's what the chart in that one indicated, if folks clicked through to read the full story behind the headline/title.

If you know of some other polling which shows Americans, as a general group and outside partisan lines, have a rising approval rate for the ACA regulations, I'd be very interested in seeing it and checking out the methodology used to get there. A weekly spot poll? Or something more in depth, for instance?

Personally? Seeing PARTS of the ACA fail is a simple requirement to the future prosperity of our nation. Some of it was bad, piled on bad and made worse in the "compromising" both parties made in 2009. They took something half way decent...and compromised it into trash we're stuck living with now.

Outside those parts? I don't want to see it fail entirely. It's removed the old system as it's laid down the new one ..as Pelosi said it would in '09. It's done what she said it would, too. We have two choices now. We can somehow reform the ACA to make it work or we can have NO health system of any kind by destroying that one, and hope people live long enough sans care, to wait for a new one to be built.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Wrabbit2000

Bilk22
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


It's only bi-partisan because it would otherwise be a head anchor around the necks of the Dems in an election year. They shoved it down our throat and should suffer the consequences for it. It, as you said, was not a bi-partisan vote to pass this abomination.


The democrats I call friends and some I don't..are regular people. Normal Americans. They aren't playing politics for the election year. They're being clobbered by the same mandate you and I are supposed to be. They're suffering the same as we are. Having Obama in office has done nothing to help "dems" over "repubs" which I've seen. Not those among average America and normal citizens.

We're in it together....Red and Blue in a purple goo. That's us, as the public and the public is mad together, IMO.
edit on 1-4-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: Snip of a little OT commenting
I have to disagree. They voted for it in lockstep. Now they want to run from that. They need to be called out as an example. Then both Reps and Dems with think twice about taking the same unilateral actions.
edit on 71205Tuesdayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 





Sad thing is this was suppose to be the saving of the American Health Care System. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...


If they really wanted to 'save' the American healthcare system?

They would spin off, and unwind medicare, and medicaid off in to the private sector.

Medicare,medicaid that wonderful state ran 'single payer' system.

That between them already have over 100+ million people on them.

They are 'rejoicing' over 7 million.

And that number is pulled out of the administration rear end.

Like every other fact and figure they throw at the masses.

They don't even question it.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   

butcherguy
An estimated 45 million people (at least) were uninsured before the exchanges opened up. LA Times

I would have thought that response would have been in the tens of millions right away.

They insured 20% (I'm being generous here) of the uninsured.... not counting those who lost coverage due to the enactment of the ACA itself.

What a success!
I feel the numbers are much more bleak than they would dare tell us. It's why they are so secretive about them and claim they don't know exactly who paid and so forth. It's a disaster and the Dems are trying to save this abomination for Obama's legacy or his legacy will be because of his skin color alone.

Now before I get called every slur in the book (not necessarily by the poster I responded to), I believed that Colin Powell was qualified and would have been a good leader. Maybe not a good politician, but a good leader, and would have voted for him in a minute.
edit on 71510Tuesdayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


Woe woe woe there partner.

I don't see where it states those number are for people that have paid and are actually on a plan yet. It is for people that have placed something in the "shopping cart" but there has been nothing provided to actually show how many people have completed the purchase.



Semantics is a very heavily used format for this administration and the lovers of 0bama.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


If I had a dime for every time a Progressive used this line, I would be as wealthy as Warren Buffet.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Bilk22
 





I feel the numbers are much more bleak than they would dare tell us.


Yep if they really were what they sold themselves as 'The most transparent administration in US history'.

We would know the real numbers.

How many enrolled.
How many paid.
How many did not previously didn't 'have' insurance.
How many people signed up with 'prexisiting' conditions.

They are full of crap.

Defending the indefensible.

The ACA is pure fascism, and they don't care.
edit on 1-4-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:18 AM
link   

sheepslayer247
reply to post by muse7
 


Im glad that some people were able to get the insurance they need. Or should we say, forced to purchase.

What people don't talk about is how many people had insurance before the ACA, but lost it because it was cheaper for their employer to pay the fine than to provide that insurance; or lost their insurance because the plan they had was not "good enough" under the new regulations.

The insurance plan I had for my kids wasn't good enough, apparently, and now I pay about 50% more than I used to for almost the same coverage.....except the deductible is double.

The ACA is nothing more then a corporate giveaway and if we do not comply.....we pay the price.
edit on 1-4-2014 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-4-2014 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)


This is why we must keep pushing for universal healthcare.

Obama was right in responding to the healthcare crisis, but he did not go far enough and should of never even tried to appease Republicans because they wanted to maintain the old system rescission and all .

Don't like Obamacare, well then lets get universal coverage going



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:20 AM
link   

neo96
reply to post by Bilk22
 





I feel the numbers are much more bleak than they would dare tell us.


Yep if they really were what they sold themselves as 'The most transparent administration in US history'.

We would know the real numbers.

How many enrolled.
How many paid.
How many did not previously didn't 'have' insurance.
How many people signed up with 'prexisiting' conditions.

They are full of crap.

Defending the indefensible.

The ACA is pure fascism, and they don't care.
edit on 1-4-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


The Insurance companies are Nazis, they need to be put down in their place.

Opt in Universal Healthcare, then YOU are free to buy private insurance and I am free to pay for my medicare, both are happy.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   
I thought the goal was "to insure the 40 million uninsured", so the goalpost has been moved to 7 million now in order to claim victory?

The reason for high medical costs is:
1) To cover what patients can not pay.
2) To cover what insurance does not pay.
3) To cover malpractice insurance.

The proverbial $5 aspirin roughly pays for the $2.50 that insurance (company or government program) will not pay, the $0.50 that patients can not pay (pro bono work), $0.75 of malpractice insurance, $1 for office overhead (staff payroll, electric, rent, etc), $0.20 for the doctor to live on and pay their personal bills and finally $0.05 for the aspirin itself. In other words the doctor would only bill $2.50 if the insurance company would pay the full $2.50, but they don't. They would only pay $1.25 of a bill for $2.50 so the doctor is forced to bill $5.00 to get the $2.50 that they need.

And if you consider that malpractice insurance may come from the same company (through various back room holdings) the insurance is really only paying out $2.00 and receiving a small kickback. But rest assured that insurance companies are taking in $5.00 for every $2.50 they spend. It is a payola pyramid scheme that calculated that it needed 17 million healthy people to pay their monthly premium of $263/mo for 12 years without a significant payout. That is to say $3156/yr ($37,872 over 12 years) for each of those 17 million. That is $53.805 Billion per year ($645.66 Billion over the 12 years) to go untouched in order for this thing to break even. The US spent $54.5 billion in Foreign Aid from 2009-2012.

What Obamacare really says is that insurance companies need 4 times what we spend on foreign aid per year in order to stay in business. And they will get that by premiums or government subsidizing those premiums.

Oh, and one other little thing...the plans offered where you live are not the same as the ones where I live (unless we both happen to live in the same county in the same state). They vary in cost of premiums per month, amount of deductible per year, percentage of coverage and percentage of coverage after the deductible up to and beyond the annual out of pocket caps (which are allowed to be exceeded by what they were capped at per law). A silver plan in NY may pay 80-20 after the deductible whereas a silver plan in TN might pay 90-10. And after you hit the cap in NY it will pay 90% where TN pays 100%.

So anytime anyone can explain how this law is fair (or even affordable) I am ready to listen. Just keep in mind that the number of pages altering the law after the fact is far more than original law that passed Congress.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


the total number of enrollees is whatever they want to pull out of their bum.....



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   

matafuchs
Seriously, we all have to start with a non-partisan view. If you drink the Kool-Aid you will never see what is happening and that is what our PTB want. Us to argue with each other and not hold the government accountable.

LeBron James trying to get people to sign up? Do you think he did that for nothing? I am sure his fee could have insured at least a dozen people for free. Now, think about this..

The 'known' cost of the federal website that keeps crashing so far is about 300,000,000 dollars. Now, a single person plan is about 5k on average. So for the cost of the website that does not work we could have given coverage to almost 60,000 people who do not have medical insurance.

The US government gave 4,400,000,000 (billion folks) to the state exchanges for 'websites'. For the cost of that we could have insured 800,000 people.

So, for JUST websites, the US could have insured 1 million people. Sad part is that the states took the money and are pointing residents to the federal sites. Do you not see the scam here folks? At the same time, put in a ton of hidden taxes and have medical plan rates rise. On average, medical plans have risen 60% in the last 3 years. WTF?We need regulation not the ability for healthcare to make more money.

And no not forget that the healthcare companies were promised subsidies also.

It is a Freaking black hole and everyone says yeah yeah yeah when it has not worked.

In my heart, I wish it did. There are millions without coverage and millions with who cannot get what they need. Remember, most of the provisions and fees and taxes were postponed till 2014. When they all start to hit and when this is said and done, it is estimated to cost 1,500,000,000,000(trillion dollars) . That cost would have covered 30,000,000 people for the ten year period. So, do the math....we could have simply subsidized with the cost and it would have worked.


edit on 04am30amfu2014-04-01T10:36:28-05:001028 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)


What we need is opt in Medicare for ALL.

It's not too late, the future is wide open.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join