532 replies to this topic

[*JB*]

One more thing -- Why would foreign doctors come here to lose money. When it costs more to file a medicare claim then they earn, no one can make money. When you lose money on each "sale" you can't make it up on volume.

[Rogerdodger]

Why would foreign doctors come here to lose money.

How many of these critical do-gooders work for free?
How many of them pay their housekeepers and yard keepers a "living wage" with full benefits? Zero.

Why the hate? Their arrogance is showing.
They have their hand in your shower and interpret your reaction to loss of freedom and choice as hate.
America's forefathers hated loss of freedom too.
These critics have been raised with freedom and don't understand what tyranny is.
They especially hate it when you exercise your freedom.
You obviously need (but hatefully reject) cradle-to-grave government care and 24/7 watchers.
While no one will watch the watchers.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 06 February 2014 - 09:14 PM.

[*JB*]

Lee, et al --

Lets see how lazy you are or are not --

In 2009, we were told it would cost $27,000 per newly insured person.
Now we’re told it will cost $2.004 trillion (that’s $80,000 per newly insured person) a three-fold increase since passage.

SEE actual CBO report just released -- if you really want to know the truth of what THE GOVERNMENT reports
--
*price-tag now eclipses $2 trillion -- (see table B-1)
*there will be 31 million uninsured after 10 years (see Table B-2)

http://www.cbo.gov/s...Outlook2014.pdf

[salsabob]

...

Finally someone is doing their research, not just reading Salon or Atlantic. In any case, whatever the reason, that same report (page 111) says that there will be more uninsured in 10 years than if the ACA was not passed AND the loss of actual HEALTH CARE and doctors. Back to emergency rooms as primary care, more incentive to not strive to better their life -- and -- to be dependent on the government subsidies.


IOW, more destruction of the dynamism of the of the American economy....all at the cost of trillions and deterioration of the health system.

Really? That's kind of weird because on page 111 of the actual report -

http://www.cbo.gov/s...Outlook2014.pdf

- the only reference I see to numbers covered is this regarding the Medicaid Expansion -

CBO and JCT project that the number of people
enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP will be substantially
higher—by 8 million in 2014 and by 12 million to
13 million people every year between 2015 and 2024—
than would have been the case in the absence of the ACA
(see Table B-2 on page 108). The increase anticipated
after 2014 reflects the expectation that more people in
states that have already expanded Medicaid will enroll in
the program and that more states will expand eligibility
for Medicaid (although those increases will be partially
offset by fewer people enrolling in CHIP starting in
2016—funding projected for that program in CBO’s
baseline is reduced in that year).7

and this regarding estimated changes in employer-based insurance numbers -

CBO and JCT project that, as a result of the ACA,
between 6 million and 7 million fewer people will have
employment-based insurance coverage each year from
2016 through 2024 than would be the case in the absence
of the ACA. That change is the net result of projected
increases and decreases in offers of health insurance
from employers and changes in enrollment by workers
and their families. For example, in 2019, an estimated
11 million people who would have had an offer of
employment-based coverage in the absence of the
ACA will lose their offer under current law, and
about 3 million people who would have enrolled in
employment-based coverage will still have such an offer
but will choose not to enroll in that coverage. Those
decreases in employment-based coverage will be partially
offset by an estimated 7 million people who will newly
enroll in employment-based coverage under the ACA.

The lost of employer-based insurance to the remaining 7 million might get the uninformed's panties further into a wad but the CBO has been pretty clear that those people will be mostly picked up by the larger number of people covered by the ACA exchanges of eventually 20 million.

While CBO is now estimating the 2014 target will only reduce the uninsured by 13 million rather than the pre-website screw-up estimate of 14 million, it isn't changing its longer term projection of a 25 million reduction in the uninsured by 2019.

You might want to check your edition of the CBO report to see if it is either the Faux New or the Koch Brothers' versions.

Edited by salsabob, 06 February 2014 - 10:19 PM.

[salsabob]

Why would foreign doctors come here to lose money.

How many of these critical do-gooders work for free?
How many of them pay their housekeepers and yard keepers a "living wage" with full benefits? Zero.

Why the hate? Their arrogance is showing.
They have their hand in your shower and interpret your reaction to loss of freedom and choice as hate.
America's forefathers hated loss of freedom too.
These critics have been raised with freedom and don't understand what tyranny is.
They especially hate it when you exercise your freedom.
You obviously need (but hatefully reject) cradle-to-grave government care and 24/7 watchers.
While no one will watch the watchers.

No one with a brain, but without insurance, talks like this.

It typically comes from folks either cuddled by their socialist Medicare or their heavily govt-subsidized employer-based insurance.

[salsabob]

Lee, et al --

Lets see how lazy you are or are not --

In 2009, we were told it would cost $27,000 per newly insured person.
Now we’re told it will cost $2.004 trillion (that’s $80,000 per newly insured person) a three-fold increase since passage.

SEE actual CBO report just released -- if you really want to know the truth of what THE GOVERNMENT reports
--
*price-tag now eclipses $2 trillion -- (see table B-1)
*there will be 31 million uninsured after 10 years (see Table B-2)

http://www.cbo.gov/s...Outlook2014.pdf

Wow, you think that's bad, total your cell phone bill up for 10 years and see what that comes to!

Now, tell me what the GDP is for each of those 10 years, what govt revenues will be and what percentage of that those ACA expenditures represent. Then, most important, tell me the chances of some knuckleheads in Congress using whatever those answers turn out to be to raise our taxes.

Because if taxes are not raised (or other govt spending cut) under the ultimate stupidity of trying to balance the federal budget, those expenditures have absolutely no downside. What it does represent is a lot of upside in terms of increased demand in the economy which is exactly what we need now and what we will need even more of in the future.

Oh, and to get that remaining 31 million uninsured number down, we're going to have to provide citizenship to about 17 million illegal aliens and spend a lot more money in reaching out to millions more people too poor and uninformed (among many other things) to sign up for insurance (i.e., Medicaid) that they were likely already eligible for even before Obamacare. Are you saying you want that to actually happen or is that 31 million concern of yours just crocodile tears?

Edited by salsabob, 06 February 2014 - 10:55 PM.

[Rogerdodger]

Obamacare is so good that "they" are working hard to prevent full implementation until after the 2014 elections.
Dems running for election refuse to even be seen with the president.
The horror stories connected to command and control healthcare are so prevalent that they seem no longer shocking or newsworthy.
...Unless you are the cancer patient who is now without a doctor or insurance or medicine.
Or the struggling unskilled worker who has just had his hours cut.
But as dictators always say: "The end justifies the means."
Not working or even going to prison seems to be the best option here.
Yawn.


Admin Eyeing ANOTHER Insurance Extension...

CBO Director: 'Creates a Disincentive for People to Work'...

Go to Prison, Get Obamacare...

CA Obamacare Exchange Shuts Down Portion Of Website Listing Doctors...

Subsidy Cliff: Earn $1 More in Wages, and You Could Pay $20,000 More for Insurance...

I've Been Trying Since November -- But I Still Can't Sign Up...

Edited by Rogerdodger, 07 February 2014 - 10:41 AM.

[Rogerdodger]

Public Healthcare will be a failure like Public Education:

U.S. High-School Students Slip again in Global Rankings

US students are falling behind most all developed countries, even after decades of policy reforms, reforms which usually only empowered unions & strengthened government largess while ignoring student needs.
Look at the administration's shutting down very successful school vouchers and home schooling.
Al the while sending their children to private schools.
See: Waiting For Superman
See: Education Reform will come when...

"The United States' standings haven't improved dramatically because we as a nation haven't addressed the main cause of our mediocre PISA performance — the effects of poverty on students," Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers union, said in a statement.
LINK

Of course the wrong solution to poverty is to "spread the wealth around."
This is proven by the failure of the "Great Society" and the "War on Poverty", liberal solutions which have DESTROYED the family, replaced fathers with government handouts. Why work? Why study?

Edited by Rogerdodger, 08 February 2014 - 12:21 PM.

[AChartist]

Roger, I think I found the bottom line, they create the poverty to create the debts, because it is how they print up the missing units of currency interest due to the owners. Any one that ever worked to create an economic value knows the difference. There are just so few of those left that will never form a majority again. And will be blocked out by the madison avenue / hollywood cult in any case. I always thought it was very suspicious how the orwellian de-education was sure to make such a big deal about the spin on J. McCarthy story relative to all the deleted history. Wealth can never be created without creating economic value, and it cannot be stolen or the minute numbers of creators will just stop. All of my preparations are oriented to stopping at the soonest possible before harvesting. My new conclusion is the same old conclusion, written in US code and ruled on by Supreme Court. It is illegal to tax labor. Funny how that was all written in there, in history, in Law. Labor is an equal exchange of time and talent for remuneration, of no profit, of no taxable gain. Taxing labor is felony physical violence. It will collapse because it is repugnant to Natural Law. Just isolate yourself as best possible and they will all consume each other, just save yourself by isolation from them. Only small numbers will have the labor strength, intellectual or business capacity to survive them. I think it was said by you know who, give to ceasar what is ceasar's, make friends with mammom. It means pay your taxes coexisting within the same space, to preserve self and come out the other side, Unfortuneately only small numbers will have the intellectual or physical capacities to pay taxes and survive it at the same time. Well it is by observation, only 1% of intellectual or labor capacity, to survive them. 1% starts at 250k, it may take about 125k at the margin for many many years to survive them, I think it is 5-7% above 125k that may survive them if very careful, working from that close margin of survival from $125k. By self I mean family and loved ones, you cannot save family without saving self too. Its all in there, in the book, its the same demon bloodline since the beginning of time. ( well maybe with the whole life I am worth more dead than alive, there are exceptions )

[Rogerdodger]

If Obamacare is the "law of the land", and it is so wonderful, and it is good for the economy, and the congressman who wanted to delay it a year is such an idiot and racist,

Then why the hell did Obama just delay it another year? HMMM????

BREAKING: Employer health care mandate delayed until 2016 for firms with 50-99 employees.