It's curtains for the new healthcare plan

[billvon 2,400]

This from a left-leaning site:

=============
The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruled that some of the administration's ads promoting the new program were illegal while others were misleading. GAO investigators also found that the White House illegally withheld data from Congress on the cost of the new law. The new federal web site allowing people to compare plans and prices was delayed by weeks, while just 300 customer service reps manned the phones to help new enrollees. Yet over six million people immediately lost their coverage, while hundreds of thousands more would be refused treatment because of malfunctions in the computer systems linking providers and insurers. In response to the mushrooming crisis, governors in mostly Democratic states spent billions to continue coverage for their residents, while the President pleaded with insurance companies not to cut off their current policyholders. Nevertheless, the White House sided with insurers and rejected bipartisan calls to delay the enrollment deadline even as public approval plummeted to 25 percent. It's no wonder John Boehner called the rollout of the President's signature domestic policy achievement "horrendous."
==============

[winsor 186]

billvon

This from a left-leaning site:

=============
The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruled that some of the administration's ads promoting the new program were illegal while others were misleading. GAO investigators also found that the White House illegally withheld data from Congress on the cost of the new law. The new federal web site allowing people to compare plans and prices was delayed by weeks, while just 300 customer service reps manned the phones to help new enrollees. Yet over six million people immediately lost their coverage, while hundreds of thousands more would be refused treatment because of malfunctions in the computer systems linking providers and insurers. In response to the mushrooming crisis, governors in mostly Democratic states spent billions to continue coverage for their residents, while the President pleaded with insurance companies not to cut off their current policyholders. Nevertheless, the White House sided with insurers and rejected bipartisan calls to delay the enrollment deadline even as public approval plummeted to 25 percent. It's no wonder John Boehner called the rollout of the President's signature domestic policy achievement "horrendous."
==============

Gee, a multi-thousand page piece of legislation whereby attorneys intend to correct the failings of the medical profession - what could possibly go wrong?

Let me get this straight - a service that is simply unaffordable, and is required by everyone, was covered by insurance for those with the most limited costs. Those with prohibitively expensive existing conditions were uninsurable, and those without insurance either did without said hideously expensive care or were ruined financially if they sought it.

The solution boils down to everyone giving an affordable amount of money to a massively inefficient bureaucracy, which will then see to it that they receive care that they could in no way pay for on their own.

Right.

The fact that the ACA is, and will continue to be, a complete goat-rope is anything but surprising. Anyone who was unable to predict what a disaster it was guaranteed to be is unlikely to find fault with it when it is a disaster in practice. The level of denial necessary to get it passed is sufficient to find it acceptable now that it is fait accompli.

If the war on drugs is any indication, we are capable of living with policies wherein the cure is orders of magnitude worse than the disease for untold decades on end, and the worse the failure the more we redouble our efforts.

I again state that our only inexhaustible resource we have at our disposal is stupidity. The ACA is a case in point.


BSBD,

Winsor

[mirage62 0]

Naaaa they'll get it worked out, you can trust the gov to get it right.

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

[lawrocket 3]

Fundamentally the ACA seeks to offer people market level services at below market prices - to them. These below market prices match market costs by ensuring either: (1) that other pay above market prices for market level services; or (2) subsidizing, thus making sure that the "price" is low.

Offering below-market prices for market-level goods and services is a money loser and creates instability and ends up raising the total costs as the programs are remarkably good at needing bailouts.

Ultimately resulting in above-market costs for below-market services.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 3]

Umm, guys . . . I think you might have missed something here.

Bill didn't, but so far everybody else has.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

Bill didn't post a link. I suspect he's playing some kinda joke.

But, it did get me thinking. Imagine if some corporate CEO made the same promises about a service (let's say it's a banker promising that everyone wil make money than they have, if you like your account you can keep it, it'll be less expensive) and the fuckin' guy would have the SEC and FBI all over his ass and be ready to spend time at Club Fed.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[chutem 0]

2004

[lawrocket 3]

chutem

2004

SO basically, the whole Obama/Bush "Can't tell the difference" thingy has yet abother point?

Lefties defend Obama so often by saying "Bush did it." Which says it all

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[regulator 0]

I'm willing to say that Bush did quite a few things wrong. Why are liberals so willing to point to bush being the problem yet they lack the testicular fortitude to man the fuck up and say that obama's policies are shit?

NSA
Benghazi?
Obamacare?
Beuller?
Beuller?

[quade 3]

regulator

I'm willing to say that Bush did quite a few things wrong. Why are liberals so willing to point to bush being the problem yet they lack the testicular fortitude to man the fuck up and say that obama's policies are shit?

NSA
Benghazi?
Obamacare?
Beuller?
Beuller?

Of the five things you listed (okay, really only 3), only 1 was actually Obama's idea. The NSA was inherited from Reagan (yes, really), and while Benghzi wasn't a shining moment, it no more Obama's fault than 9/11 was GWBs.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 212]

quade

***I'm willing to say that Bush did quite a few things wrong. Why are liberals so willing to point to bush being the problem yet they lack the testicular fortitude to man the fuck up and say that obama's policies are shit?

NSA
Benghazi?
Obamacare?
Beuller?
Beuller?

Of the five things you listed (okay, really only 3), only 1 was actually Obama's idea. The NSA was inherited from Reagan (yes, really), and while Benghzi wasn't a shining moment, it no more Obama's fault than 9/11 was GWBs.

Inherited, yes, forwarded and EXPANDED, absolutely.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Channman 2]

lawrocket

Bill didn't post a link. I suspect he's playing some kinda joke.

But, it did get me thinking. Imagine if some corporate CEO made the same promises about a service (let's say it's a banker promising that everyone wil make money than they have, if you like your account you can keep it, it'll be less expensive) and the fuckin' guy would have the SEC and FBI all over his ass and be ready to spend time at Club Fed.

"if you like your account you can keep it"...there has been a legal product which has destroyed 10's of thousands of families financially over the years...it's known as "Variable Universal Life, or Variable Life Insurance" SEC seems to think it OK

[wmw999 2,123]

Quote

I'm willing to say that Bush did quite a few things wrong. Why are liberals so willing to point to bush being the problem yet they lack the testicular fortitude to man the fuck up and say that obama's policies are shit?

Interesting. "Bush did quite a few things wrong" but "Obama's policies are shit."

What's the difference between that, and "Bush's policies are shit" and "Obama did quite a few things wrong?"

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[DaVinci 0]

quade

***I'm willing to say that Bush did quite a few things wrong. Why are liberals so willing to point to bush being the problem yet they lack the testicular fortitude to man the fuck up and say that obama's policies are shit?

NSA
Benghazi?
Obamacare?
Beuller?
Beuller?

Of the five things you listed (okay, really only 3), only 1 was actually Obama's idea. The NSA was inherited from Reagan (yes, really), and while Benghzi wasn't a shining moment, it no more Obama's fault than 9/11 was GWBs.

Reagan had the NSA recording the data from Americans phone calls to each other? Source?

And it was not the terrorist act of Benghzi that Obama is getting blamed for, but the coverup that is the problem.

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

Umm, guys . . . I think you might have missed something here.

Bill didn't, but so far everybody else has.

But in this case, BDIF really isn't a good move to make to try to support the current ACA mess. Unless you want to make a more nuisance argument that all change is difficult to transition through. Which *can* be true, but is not so compelling to those who are suffering.

[quade 3]

DaVinci

Reagan had the NSA recording the data from Americans phone calls to each other? Source?

Is that what I said? No. Reagan created the NSA. It's buried in EO12333 which also outlaws political assassination (something that would have been far less expensive than going to war several times). Reagan was short sighted in its creation. Since it was a deep black project to begin with, it was ripe for unchecked expansion and abuse.

Quote

And it was not the terrorist act of Benghzi that Obama is getting blamed for, but the coverup that is the problem.

There has been no systemic "coverup" of Benghazi except in the minds of conspiracy theorists. None. Certainly no more so than 9/11. Get real.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Is that what I said? No. Reagan created the NSA

And the NSA was listed because of the recent scandals... you know the ones where they spied on Americans? You didn't miss that did you? It was kinda a big deal.

You ignored the reference while trying to tie it to Reagan. Typical.

Quote

There has been no systemic "coverup" of Benghazi

The WH knew it was not because of a video, yet they made the claim.

Maybe time to pay attention to more than what you want to see.

[billvon 2,400]

I'm willing to say that Obama did quite a few things wrong. When will conservatives be able to man the fuck up and say that Reagan's policies were shit?

[devildog 0]

billvon

This from a left-leaning site:

=============
The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruled that some of the administration's ads promoting the new program were illegal while others were misleading. GAO investigators also found that the White House illegally withheld data from Congress on the cost of the new law. The new federal web site allowing people to compare plans and prices was delayed by weeks, while just 300 customer service reps manned the phones to help new enrollees. Yet over six million people immediately lost their coverage, while hundreds of thousands more would be refused treatment because of malfunctions in the computer systems linking providers and insurers. In response to the mushrooming crisis, governors in mostly Democratic states spent billions to continue coverage for their residents, while the President pleaded with insurance companies not to cut off their current policyholders. Nevertheless, the White House sided with insurers and rejected bipartisan calls to delay the enrollment deadline even as public approval plummeted to 25 percent. It's no wonder John Boehner called the rollout of the President's signature domestic policy achievement "horrendous."
==============

yawn
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/06/1253646/-Obamacare-hearings-recall-resignations-of-Bush-HHS-Medicare-chiefs#

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[kallend 1,628]

Right wing hypocrisy score 10/10

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mirage62 0]

.......About the same time that the liberals will be able to man the FUCK UP and say Obamas policy's were shit.

And btw what the hell does Regan (good or bad) have to do with the healthcare problems?

Obama roll out of the ACA is shit, period. We need health care reform, but your blinded by you love of Obama if you can't see this isn't a complete cluster fuck.

But at least you didn't blame Bush ...... This time.

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

[quade 3]

mirage62

And btw what the hell does Regan (good or bad) have to do with the healthcare problems?

Bwahaha . . . uhm . . . he was against it . . . before he was for it.

As a spokeshole from the medical establishment he was vehemently against it. Maybe you've heard his recording where he says it's socialist and will cause America's downfall.

THEN, as President, he advocated for and expanded Medicaid tremendously.

So . . . he has quite a fucking lot to do with it.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[davjohns 1]

"It's curtains for the new healthcare plan"

I refuse to pay for drapes. I just refuse.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[Andy9o8 0]

The allusion is an illusion.

[wmw999 2,123]

And the elision of either is 'lusion

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)