The real threat of Obamacare is the Independent Payment Advisory Board

Originally posted by Danbones
same to you

its a bi partisan kinda thing
n'est pas?

edit on 30-6-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

Same to me?
What did I make up in this thread?
Feel free to quote any lie I posted or apologize for this.

Originally posted by habitforming
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Yeah, old people die in the streets all the time over in Europe.
Oh, wait. They actually live longer healthier lives than Americans.
Stop posting lies just because you hate being so scared alone. You want people to be scared with you. You have no clue what you are scared of so you have to make something up.

It is not getting you anywhere, is it? See if any of you had a legit argument against HCR, it might not have passed. Instead you sat around crying about imaginary death panels and saying "Socialism" so often that it might accidentally actually apply once or twice.

Grow a pair and be a #ing man for crying out loud. Stop being so scared and stop lying to make other people come be scared with you.

How much longer do people live vs. the U.S. ??

2 years maybe ?

And why would that be ?

Healthier food perhaps ?

Are there any stats on this.

reply to post by neoholographic


Let us not forget Keith Olbermann's horrid slobbery disgusting rant on national tv about his father in that "ghoulish" desire to promote Obamacare at the final hour. I have never watched Olbermann again since then. I just could not believe he did this.

Originally posted by habitforming

Originally posted by neoholographic
At the end of the day, it was his CHOICE. Under Obamacare he would not have this choice. It will be decided for him by the IPAB. This board is truly a threat to Seniors and the weakest and sickest among us.

Wait a minute.
You are saying your dad made a bad choice.
You are also saying that Obamacare is going to force other people like your dad to make the same choice he made without Obamacare?
Oh ok.

Not to speak for anyone, but in reading the comment written by neoholographic, I took it that his father had a choice. As we all have a right to decide things for ourselves. Even if we sometimes make the wrong decisions the fact remains that those are ours to make, and not a panel of people who don't know or care anything about us. The bottom line shouldn't have much to do (if anything at all) with money or cost. Not when our lives are on the line!

Originally posted by habitforming
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Yeah, old people die in the streets all the time over in Europe.
Oh, wait. They actually live longer healthier lives than Americans.
Stop posting lies just because you hate being so scared alone. You want people to be scared with you. You have no clue what you are scared of so you have to make something up.

It is not getting you anywhere, is it? See if any of you had a legit argument against HCR, it might not have passed. Instead you sat around crying about imaginary death panels and saying "Socialism" so often that it might accidentally actually apply once or twice.

Grow a pair and be a #ing man for crying out loud. Stop being so scared and stop lying to make other people come be scared with you.

Bwahahahahahahaaaahahahahahaahahhahahaah
second line bwahahahahahahahahaha
really your post has to be one of the most insidiously ridiculous rant I've seen in a while. I have tons of practical reasons to be against Obamacare and I have made several posts already in the last 24 hours. I'm not scared, I'm disgusted to be very plain about it. I'm disgusted with all the Democrat lies and the people who believe and promote them and then call everyone else liars like you just did. You see, because I have looked at this stuff, I have read documents, and I didn't just drink the Obama kool-aid. I never did, since I first heard he was for sex ed for kindergartners. After that I was forever immune to his supposed charm. He lies a mile a minute. I also know that most of the stuff coming out of Congress is garbage and designed to enslave us. I have studied the UN Agenda 21, The Communist Manifesto, and the Humanist Manifesto I and II. I understand that the NWO is coming and Bush sr told us so sometime around 1990. I understand that the Rockefeller agenda is depopulation. I understand what Maurice Strong and Al Gore are trying to.
So please spare me the dribble.

I'm also quite certain you have lots of statistics on those countries where people are living longer than Americans???? And it must be because the govts are running things so efficiently? Why don't I believe that? Ohhhhh because the Soviet Union proved that centralized planning by govts doesn't work.
Is the Cuban thing with those nasty hospitals where the flies are buzzing around dead patients and people have to bring their own linens just an anomaly of socialized health care? Why do you choose not to believe the very evidence in front of you, and instead believe the Utopian lies prepared by social planners who deliberately want to depopulate the entire world down to around 500 million or so? It's not as if they aren't saying it all right out loud. You should check Holdren's book where he advocates medicating the water supplies to forcibly sterilize millions upon millions of people without their knowledge even. After that then you can make an informed comment about me.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


I cannot help but notice that in all that claptrap you never once disputed the facts I posted.
Is this you admitting you are lying about healthcare in the UK or did you have a hard time understanding my post?

reply to post by habitforming


Here's something else for you habit.

Americans who supported President Obama and his visions for health care reform, largely did so because they wanted to "fix" these problems. They believed President Obama when he claimed to be the man who could accomplish this feat where others had failed. He certainly has a gift for speech and an uncanny ability to gather support for his ideals. But, President Obama is a trained lawyer and politician, so we should not be surprised by his ability to "convince" others. If only he had meant the things he said, and done the things he promised….

Certainly, the worst thing about Obamacare is that it takes away your right to make your own choices about the treatment of your body. Under this law, you are required to be in a "qualified" healthcare plan, and you must attach proof that you are enrolled when you file your income taxes. The IRS now has the power to track you and penalize you if you do not provide proof of your enrollment. You no longer have the right to choose any healthcare plan you would like for your family or yourself. Persons can no longer have low cost catastrophic-only coverage, which is a great choice for healthy, young people. The law allows the HHS Secretary to decide which services will be required for the plan that you are required to buy.

www.fortwayne912.com...

I am guessing you are both a Statist and a Utopian, thinking the wonderful govt will take care of all of us if only the stupid people would get out of the way and just stop being so darn greedy....I've heard all this nonsense before. It is naivete at best, and possibly even an outright lie...only you know for sure which it is in your case.
I do have a question for you. Why do you want bureaucrats in govt to have this much control over your life? If you feel this way about health care do you also feel this way about other things? Do you know that the Affordable Health Care law also will force restaurants to put calorie counts and other information on their menus and/or have it available?
I bet I know more about this piece of legislation than you do.
Why don't you prove to me that you know anything at all about it.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Still not able to dispute what I posted when I called you out on your lies?
Fun to watch you dance around it though.

I have something for you too but I am waiting for you to actually respond to my post before I distract you with anything else.

Originally posted by RobinB022

Originally posted by habitforming

Originally posted by neoholographic
At the end of the day, it was his CHOICE. Under Obamacare he would not have this choice. It will be decided for him by the IPAB. This board is truly a threat to Seniors and the weakest and sickest among us.

Wait a minute.
You are saying your dad made a bad choice.
You are also saying that Obamacare is going to force other people like your dad to make the same choice he made without Obamacare?
Oh ok.

Not to speak for anyone, but in reading the comment written by neoholographic, I took it that his father had a choice. As we all have a right to decide things for ourselves. Even if we sometimes make the wrong decisions the fact remains that those are ours to make, and not a panel of people who don't know or care anything about us. The bottom line shouldn't have much to do (if anything at all) with money or cost. Not when our lives are on the line!

Yeah, that is what I thought he said too.
That is why I responded to it already.

reply to post by habitforming


Here's more fun stuff

If your doctor does not adhere to the guidelines set by the HHS Secretary, they will be penalized with loss of ability to practice within the "qualified plans." Since everyone is required to be in a "qualified plan," then that doctor will no longer practice.
"Physician autonomy is a thing of the past," has already been declared by the new head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Donald Berwick. "The Epitaph of Profession" in the British Journal of General Practice, 2009.

www.fortwayne912.com...
I'm guesing you are not a doctor so you don't care how it impacts them. What were we saying about selfish people? Did you say you were from a former communist country and you miss the old politburo???

reply to post by habitforming


It's very clear what he said. He said under Obamacare his Dad would not have a "CHOICE".

reply to post by xuenchen


There are all kinds of stats on this stuff. Where have you been in this debate? The problem with the stats is that they show that industrialized nations with national healthcare enjoy healthier populations with fewer babies dying and people living longer so you probably never heard this from your right wing task masters.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by habitforming

 

It's very clear what he said. He said under Obamacare his Dad would not have a "CHOICE".

I KNOW WHAT HE SAID AND I RESPONDED TO IT.
Is this a group home?

Originally posted by habitforming
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Still not able to dispute what I posted when I called you out on your lies?
Fun to watch you dance around it though.

I have something for you too but I am waiting for you to actually respond to my post before I distract you with anything else.

What lies my dear? You are generalizing too much any way. It is easy enough just to tell someone they lie and not pinpoint anything specific.
You cannot refute me with that bunk. It is just Alinksy style garbage to be frank. I can debate you with real facts and analysis.

Emanuel states:"When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated."
Dr. Emanuel admits that his plan appears to discriminate against older people. He explains that by saying, "Unlike allocation by sex of race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination… Treating 65-year-olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not."
 One would think that a person with these dangerous ideas would not have any position of power within the American health care system. Unfortunately, under Obamacare, Dr. Emanuel has tremendous control over the rationing of health care. He holds two official positions: health policy advisor at the Office of Management and Budget and member of the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER). The CER council is responsible for rationing health care under Obamacare.

www.fortwayne912.com...


Here's more...taxes and I can keep finding more evil stuff in this evil act

Taxes that took effect in 2010:
1. Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,961-1,971

2. Codification of the “economic substance doctrine” (Tax hike of $4.5 billion). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 108-113

3. “Black liquor” tax hike (Tax hike of $23.6 billion). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 105

4. Tax on Innovator Drug Companies ($22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,971-1,980

5. Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike ($0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,004

6. Tax on Indoor Tanning Services ($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,397-2,399

Taxes that took effect in 2011:

7. Medicine Cabinet Tax ($5 bil/Jan 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957-1,959

8. HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike ($1.4 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,959

Tax that took effect in 2012:

9. Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Min$/Jan 2012): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957

Taxes that take effect in 2013:

10. Surtax on Investment Income ($123 billion/Jan. 2013): Creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income: Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 87-93


Read more: atr.org...

atr.org...

So really I think you ought to be coming up with some specific refutation on these things or you are just bloviating like a good socialist would.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


You are adding onto your non-response. I am still waiting for one simple thing and that is your refutation. Until I see that, no reason to respond to anything else you post.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
What lies my dear? You are generalizing too much any way.

You have been so busy trying not to respond to it that you forgot?

It is easy enough just to tell someone they lie and not pinpoint anything specific.

Even easier to read page one of this thread.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
For those in the UK and other places where Universal healthcare is practiced and claim to have a great system, check out this article...the elderly do not get the care they need because they don't need it enough....

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Originally posted by habitforming
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Yeah, old people die in the streets all the time over in Europe.
Oh, wait. They actually live longer healthier lives than Americans.
Stop posting lies just because you hate being so scared alone. You want people to be scared with you. You have no clue what you are scared of so you have to make something up.

It is not getting you anywhere, is it? See if any of you had a legit argument against HCR, it might not have passed. Instead you sat around crying about imaginary death panels and saying "Socialism" so often that it might accidentally actually apply once or twice.

Grow a pair and be a #ing man for crying out loud. Stop being so scared and stop lying to make other people come be scared with you.

Originally posted by habitforming
reply to post by xuenchen

 

There are all kinds of stats on this stuff. Where have you been in this debate? The problem with the stats is that they show that industrialized nations with national healthcare enjoy healthier populations with fewer babies dying and people living longer so you probably never heard this from your right wing task masters.

Well Professor,

Which set of stats are you talking about ?

U.N. maybe. Or private studies ?

Educate me please.

Can those stats be fully trusted ?
(whichever ones they come from)

Originally posted by habitforming
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

You are adding onto your non-response. I am still waiting for one simple thing and that is your refutation. Until I see that, no reason to respond to anything else you post.

lol you are waiting for one simple thing? My goodness I am posting all sorts of reasons why Obamacare is one of the most evil pieces of legislation. I usually don't ask people this, but have you been drinking or something? Otherwise you might make more logical excuses for believing this horrid legislation is a great thing.
In fact didn't I point out where somebody is too selfish to care about how this affects other people, like the doctors who treat patients????Hmmmm? Where's your answer to that buddy.


Here's more taxes, and please please put down the beer or whatever you're drinking and listen up

12. Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers ($20 bil/Jan 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax. Exempts items retailing for

reply to post by habitforming


habit, you are claiming that Europeans live longer than people in the US because they have better health care and I posted an article from the UK that says elderly people were not getting the care they need because some govt bureaucrats say they don't need it enough.

Then you are telling me I lied about it. I guess the Telegraph lied then. Why don't you write a letter to the editor telling them how angry you are they are lying about older people not getting enough care because you are so convinced that Universal health care is the most wonderful thing since sliced bread and you simply cannot stand to have your opinion refuted by some statistics.

Originally posted by habitforming
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

You are adding onto your non-response. I am still waiting for one simple thing and that is your refutation. Until I see that, no reason to respond to anything else you post.

You do not want to bother with my posts because you cannot refute facts and statistics. Go ahead then and write to the Telegraph telling them their article is bogus and you don't like them telling the truth about how the healthcare program there is unsustainable and needs an overhaul.

They say that unless “brave and radical decisions” are taken now, the NHS will be flooded with tens of thousands of elderly people who could be cared for elsewhere, costing the taxpayer millions of pounds a year.
Almost a million older people in need of some form of care do not receive it because their needs are not considered severe enough need or do not qualify for financial support, it has been estimated.


It is thought that many of those who eventually end up in hospital could have avoided being admitted had they had basic care at home.

At present anyone with assets including their home worth more than £23,500 gets no help with their care, and many people below that level still have to pay much of their costs.

www.telegraph.co.uk...


Universal? Maybe not so much.


Here's another statement from another article in the Telegraph

NHS patients should expect continued rationing of common operations for years to come, while hospital closures are “inevitable”, according to an influential think-tank.

www.telegraph.co.uk...



RATIONING

RATIONING