Progressives tout California Health care "success"

[Doc]

I stand corrected

 

But still, think back to every Whopper you had in the 90s. DId you enjoy my special sauce

Never ate Whoppers. I only had plain double cheeseburgers when I ate at BK.

Those 90's flashbacks must be getting rough...

 

Dude... You are now batting 0 for 2. "Special sauce" is used on a Big Mac... FWIW, that is McD's ;-)

 

:-P

 

You know... McD's used the "two all-beef patties, special sauce..." jingle. Burger King w/the "...Hold the pickles, hold the lettuce, don't upset us..."

 

Anway... Not that you didn't break from company policy w/the mayo & ketchup and add you own "special sauce." You are such a rebel!

There's a "special sauce" on a Whopper.

[B-Man]

[OCinBuffalo]

You still have that quote in your signature that means exactly the opposite of what you posted it for. It's still funny you are so stupid to have done it and even funnier that once it has been pointed out to you, you have left it up. Oh, and the Tea Party was still defeated in Michigan over Obamacare. Boom!

Yeah, and when I fully explained it...you didn't reply. Now, you've brought it up again, as if your lack of reply = you "got" me.

 

Go back to to that thread, and reply, or again, STFU.

 

In this thread? You haven't replied to the issue at hand either. Show us your command of Medicaid, and why 4 years from now in Michigan...doesn't matter... or STFU. conner would at least try to reply. All you've done is repeat yourself, and that's what you've been doing in other threads as well.

 

I dare you to look like a bigger tool at PPP. All I've done is, in B-Man's words, "grind you up". By all means, keep providing me material.

[B-Man]

Dissension in the ranks.........they want National Health Care.....................just not affecting their plans.

 

 

Citing Obamacare, 40,000 Longshoremen Quit the AFL-CIO

by Warner Todd Huston

 

In what is being reported as a surprise move, the 40,000 members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) announced that they have formally ended their association with the AFL-CIO, one of the nation´s largest private sector unions. The Longshoremen citied Obamacare and immigration reform as two important causes of their disaffiliation.

 

In an August 29 letter to AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, ILWU President Robert McEllrath cited quite a list of grievances as reasons for the disillusion of their affiliation, but prominent among them was the AFL-CIO's support of Obamare.

"We feel the Federation has done a great disservice to the labor movement and all working people by going along to get along," McEllrath wrote in the letter to Trumka.

 

The ILWU President made it clear they are for a single-payer, nationalized healthcare policy and are upset with the AFL-CIO for going along with Obama on the confiscatory tax on their "Cadillac" healthcare plan.

 

The Longshoreman leader said, "President Obama ran on a platform that he would not tax medical plans and at the 2009 AFL-CIO Convention, you stated that labor would not stand for a tax on our benefits." But, regardless of that promise, the President has pushed for just such a tax and Trumka and the AFL-CIO bowed to political pressure lining up behind Obama's tax on those plans.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/09/01/Citing-Obamacare-40-000-Longshoremen-Quit-the-AFL-CIO

[Tiberius]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/insurance-rates-released-wis-gov-182101530.html

 

 

Hey, if the truth hurts, just don't tell the whole truth!

 

A month ago Walker's Office of the Commissioner of Insurance announced that 13 insurance companies would be offering plans to individuals through the exchange, but did not provide any details about rates or coverage areas.

On Tuesday, the insurance commissioner released an analysis showing what it said was the difference between what individual coverage will cost for a plan with a $2,000 deductible and prescription drug coverage currently and through the exchange. It did not examine costs in the group market.

The analysis looked at rates for individuals aged 21, 40 and 63 in nine Wisconsin cities. Rates would increase in all 24 of its scenarios, ranging from 9.7 percent for a 63-year-old in Kenosha to nearly 125 percent for a 21-year-old in Madison.

However, the analysis didn't take into account federal subsidies, which are expected to lower costs as much as 77 percent, or show the difference in benefits or co-pays.

"I think they've done nothing but confuse and mislead the public rather than give them serious information," said Robert Kraig, director of the health care advocacy group Citizen Action Wisconsin. "These look cooked and they're even hard to analyze because of the way they were released."

[Doc]

Just like the supposed savings from the handful of state exchanges. Except that while the "teaser" premiums might actually be lower in year 1, year 2 will see huge increases.

[Alaska Darin]

http://finance.yahoo...-182101530.html

 

 

Hey, if the truth hurts, just don't tell the whole truth!

You mean like "The rates are going to increase across the board, unless you factor in FEDERAL SUBSIDIES"...?

 

That means the rates are going to INCREASE and SOMEONE ELSE IS GOING TO HAVE TO PAY. Guess what? We're BROKE. BROKE. There's no more OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY available.

 

Jesus Christ you're stupid.

[Tiberius]

You mean like "The rates are going to increase across the board, unless you factor in FEDERAL SUBSIDIES"...?

 

That means the rates are going to INCREASE and SOMEONE ELSE IS GOING TO HAVE TO PAY. Guess what? We're BROKE. BROKE. There's no more OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY available.

 

Jesus Christ you're stupid.

 

1) We are broke?? What does that even mean? That is just such an ignorant statement. By that measure this country has almost always been broke in its history. Good to know

 

2) Someone else would have to pay if they didn't have insurance anyway. See Ocin's quote in sig if you want to find out the truth--Yes, I know you hate the truth.

 

3) The truth would be out of pocket expenses for the consumer. Should a good that is imported and has a tariff on it be advertised without the tariff cost included? Duh!

[B-Man]

No, It’s Not ‘Complicated’; Obamacare Increases Premiums for Most People

 

Liberal reporters and bloggers are trumpeting today a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation which claims that premiums under Obamacare will be “lower than expected.” Talking Points Memo describes the Kaiser paper as, potentially, a “big blow to one of the main conservative talking points against the Affordable Care Act: rate shock.”

 

But when you thumb through the Kaiser report, you learn something interesting. Its authors did not actually measure whether or not Obamacare would increase premiums relative to what they are today, because they claim it would be too “complicated.”

 

So if the Kaiser authors didn’t compare Obamacare rates to pre-Obamacare rates, how do they arrive at their conclusion that premium increases will be “lower than expected?” By comparing rates in 2014, under Obamacare, to rates “implied” by a Congressional Budget Office projection about premiums in 2016.

 

That is to say, what matters to the Kaiser authors is not whether rates will go up relative to what they were before Obamacare. What matters is whether rates will go up by even more than the CBO predicts. Their thinking can be summarized this way: If a car today costs $10,000, and the CBO predicts the same car will cost $15,000 next year, next year’s price is “lower than expected” if the price only goes up by 40 percent, instead of the predicted 50 percent.

[Doc]

No surprise. And these are just "teaser rates." The premiums after this first are gonna shoot way up.

[B-Man]

Just How Bad Will the Labor-Market Effects of Obamacare Be?

By Veronique de Rugy

 

 

My colleague Matt Mitchell sends me the two following papers from University of Chicago’s Casey Mulligan on the cost implications of the ACA. The first one looks at the average marginal income rates for workers under the ACA (a.k.a Obamacare). He finds that that price tag is fairly heavy:

The Affordable Care Act includes four significant, permanent, implicit unemployment assistance programs, plus various implicit subsidies for underemployment. Every sector of the economy, and about half of nonelderly adults, is directly affected by at least one of those provisions. This paper calculates the ACA’s impact on the average reward to working among nonelderly household heads and spouses.

 

The law increases marginal tax rates by an average of five percentage points (of employee compensation), on top of the marginal tax rates that were already present before the it went into effect.

The ACA’s addition to labor tax wedges is roughly equivalent to doubling both employer and employee payroll tax rates for half of the population.

 

If you don’t want to read this paper, you can also read his August piece in the New York Times about health-care inflation and the arithmetic of labor taxes. “The Affordable Care Act also creates explicit taxes on employers, subsidies for layoffs and various implicit taxes on employees with many of the same economic characteristics as taxes on employers,” he writes. The piece goes into a discussion he has had with Harvard professor David Cutler about the impact of the law and concludes: “As time goes by and additional research results become available, it increasingly appears that even the experts failed to fully appreciate the labor-market-depressing effects of the Affordable Care Act at the time it was passed.” (He also has a blog post on this issue here, and one here, called “Taxing employers and employees.”)

The second article, a sister piece to the one mentioned above, looks at the difference in projected costs between Obamacare and the 2006 Massachusetts health-care reform (a.k.a Romneycare). He finds that the Obamacare is projected “to add about twelve times more to average labor income tax rates nationwide” than Romneycare added in Massachusetts after its passage.

 

more at link.....................

[OCinBuffalo]

http://finance.yahoo...-182101530.html

 

 

Hey, if the truth hurts, just don't tell the whole truth!

EDIT: I see you're still too chickenshit to reply to my sig directly, or, to explain your understanding of Medicaid, in the context of how this Michigan thing isn't a giant cluster!@#$ waiting to happen. I've already given you what to google: "unfunded Medicaid mandate", "how does Medicaid work", and "Medicaid reimbursement".

 

Yes, nothing like quoting a political organization. They are sure to be objective. It literally says "health care advocacy group" in your quote. Are you that dumb? We have news articles, facts, etc., and in response, you present hackery and spin?

 

And you wonder why I laugh at you.

 

For the last time, my sig represents one thing: If the prototype of Obamacare, which is precisely what my sig refers to, went bankrupt when it was used on a small scale, with few dependencies, it is certain to do the same in the large scale, real world version, with 10x the dependencies.

 

If you knew anything about systems work, you'd know what a protoype is, and why we build them.

 

But, people like you don't build large systems for a living. People like me do that. Therefore, we know a bad design when we see it. You don't even know the premsises for creating a good system design. Unfortunately, instead of getting a group of people like me to create Obamacare, they got a bunch of clowns like your "political advocacy group", to build it.

 

Lawyers and loons? Building systems? FAIL. Hell...I would have done the work for free, and many others like me as well, had we known about this abortion they were going to produce, and how badly it would F things up in every aspect of our professional lives going forward.

 

But none of that matters to you: You are now supporting perhaps the single biggest system failure of all time, and the only reason? Political D-baggery.

 

You don't even know what you don't know.

Edited September 6, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[B-Man]

Suddenly, they're noticing that Obamacare isn't living up to the hype: WaPo: Left behind: Stories from Obamacare’s 31 million uninsured.

 

 

 

 

Annals Of Medicine: The Problem Is Not Just ObamaCare.

 

“Bad though ObamaCare is, however — and for anyone who needs a refresher course, let me recommend my friend Sally Pipes’s Broadside on the subject, The Cure for Obamacare — it is well to remember that ObamaCare is not the only thing wrong with American medicine.

 

Alas, it was possible to shove ObamaCare down the throats of the American people only because the delivery of medical care in this country had already been so heavily bureaucratized.”

[B-Man]

HISTORY: Four Years Ago Today, Barack Obama Offered America a Pile of Empty Promises. And he’ll repeat that tomorrow night, and for the next 3+ years.

 

Tomorrow night, President Barack Obama will address the nation on the subject of Syria and its alleged use of chemical weapons. He intends to use the credibility inherent in the presidency to persuade a skeptical nation that military strikes on Syria are necessary.

 

But he has a major credibility problem. Four years ago today — September 9, 2009 — President Obama addressed a joint session of Congress. Presidents typically reserve addresses to joint sessions of Congress for weighty matters. National crises. War and peace.

 

Obama used that joint session address to speak on the “crisis” of health care.

 

During that speech, he told America that his health care plan would not require any change for those who already have health insurance:

Here are the details that every American needs to know about this plan. First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. (Applause.) Let me repeat this: Nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.

 

 

Reality: Obamacare’s 30-hour work week has made America a part-time nation. Forced with the choice of paying for Obamacare’s mandates or dropping insurance for their workers, many employers are dropping coverage and cutting work hours down to less than 30 hours per week. Nearly all of the jobs created during Obama’s presidency have been part-time jobs. Unemployment among the young and minorities is at crisis levels, but Obama is ignoring this crisis.

 

He also told America that his plan would not increase the deficit:

And here’s what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits — either now or in the future. (Applause.) I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period.

 

 

Reality: Obamacare adds more than $6 trillion to the deficit. Maybe. The truth is and always was, no one really knows what Obamacare will end up doing to the deficit. It is too complex a package, with too many secondary consequences, to be scored accurately.

 

Four years after that speech, Obamacare remains deeply unpopular. Between the delayed mandates and its impact on the jobs and health insurance picture, Obamacare is a dagger aimed at the heart of the American economy and Obama’s presidency. Because it was a pile of empty promises.

 

So, rather than scrap the law that clearly isn’t working, the Obama administration is going to spend $12 million taxpayer dollars advertising.

[IDBillzFan]

Seaworld cutting hours of part-time employees.

 

The list continues to grow.

 

But hey...if you like your doct...aaaahhhh,fuggit.

Edited September 11, 2013 by LABillzFan

[B-Man]

Obamacare Chess Game

 

The internecine battles over defunding Obamacare consumed far too much of the August recess, but the House is back with a plan that could put this conflict to rest and get conservatives back on the same side in fighting the destructive health law.

 

That would “Allow Congress to consider Obamacare funding separately from regular government functions—there’s no need for a government shutdown.”

 

The Republican leadership on Tuesday outlined a strategy in a meeting with members to do just that. They proposed a plan to fund the government through mid-December while forcing the Senate to vote on defunding Obamacare.

 

But the proposal already is facing blowback from those who say it doesn’t go far enough.

 

“There’s going to be tremendous pressure on the conference to vote against this idea,” said Representative John Fleming (R., La.), who said he would not support the budget bill.

 

 

Obamacare Rules for Congress May Be Delayed

 

 

 

The Defunding Schism

By Ramesh Ponnuru

 

 

 

.

Edited September 12, 2013 by B-Man

[OCinBuffalo]

It's interesting that these same media outlets who have been supporting Obamacare from day one...are now treating this as some "human interest" story, as if they've never had anything to do with it, this is all some wacky thing that came out of nowhere, and that it didn't orgininate from their party, and their people.

 

Also: Wanna hear my new joke? We are just about to the place where this joke is dead on:

 

 

The media decides to hold a memory contest for its members. After multiple preliminary rounds, only 3 contestants remain. The first rattles off the name, address, and phone number of everybody named Murphy in NYC. The second one names all of the cities and towns in California, and their populations. But the third won the contest, and why?

 

Because he could remember supporting Obamacare.

[IDBillzFan]

The unions are doing a great job sticking with Obama on ACA.

 

Oh, wait. No, they're not. President of International Brotherhood of Elec. Workers speaks out.

 

http://youtu.be/4fwGKD-GzTE

[Joe Miner]

Crazy

The unions are doing a great job sticking with Obama on ACA.

 

Oh, wait. No, they're not. President of International Brotherhood of Elec. Workers speaks out.

 

http://youtu.be/4fwGKD-GzTE

 

Crazy.

 

A union guy not upset about the fundamental problems with the law, just upset about how it impacts him.

 

Obama has a pocket fix for this, as soon as the unions scream loud enough he'll just exempt them.

 

Problem solved.