Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on March 15, 2012, 08:55:31 PM
-
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2012/03/15/cbo-obamacare-could-make-20-million-people-lose-employer-based-insuranc
Fuck you and die every Obama drone.
-
http://freebeacon.com/cbo-undermines-obamacare-claims-for-the-second-time-this-week
Fuck you are de a slow death every Obama drone.
-
The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that Obamacare will cost taxpayers $1.76 trillion, double the $900 billion price tag advanced by the president, and could lead businesses to cut off coverage to 20 million Americans, according to a report released Wednesday.
From the Washington Examiner:
The CBO released its latest cost estimate of Obamacare’s spending provisions showing that the law will cost $1.76 trillion through 2022. But even that doesn’t capture the law’s true price tag.
Since Obamacare will not be fully implemented until 2014, we will not know until next year what a full 10-year cost estimate of the law looks like. But, extrapolating yesterday’s estimate forward, The Washington Examiner‘s Phil Klein predicts the final ten-year cost of Obamacare will exceed $2 trillion, more than double what Obama said it would cost.
On Thursday, the CBO provided an equally explosive report on the number of people who will lose privately provided health insurance once Obamacare is fully implemented. The office provided best case (5 million) and worst case (20 million) estimates on the report, both of which are far higher than previous estimates.
From the Hill:
Under CBO’s best estimate, 11 million mostly low-wage workers would lose their employer coverage. About 3 million would choose to drop their coverage to go into the new subsidized health exchanges or on Medicaid, while another 9 million would gain employer-sponsored coverage, for a net total of 5 million people losing employer coverage in 2019. …
Last year, CBO’s best estimate was that only 1 million people would lose employer-sponsored coverage.
This entry was posted in Obama Administration and tagged CBO, Health Care, Obamacare. Bookmark the permalink.
-
^WHAT A FUCKING' LOSER^
-
I warned all the Obama c u n t s.
-
Obamacare drives up health care costs for everyone (We told you so!)
sf gate ^ | 3/16/2012 | Sally C. Pipes
Posted on March 16, 2012 7:14:09 AM EDT by tobyhill
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently released their annual report on health care spending in America. And surprise, surprise - spending continues to grow. It amounted to 17.9 percent of the nation's gross domestic product in 2010, or $2.6 trillion. But the annual rate of growth was lower than it had been most of the past 50 years - just 3.9 percent.
Naturally, the Obama administration took credit for this sliver of good news. "Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, we're keeping costs down and making health care more affordable," wrote Nancy-Ann DeParle, deputy chief of staff for policy, on the official White House Blog.
But an in-depth look at that report reveals that Obamacare has done little thus far to slow the growth of American health spending. In fact, the federal health care reform effort is already increasing the share of spending shouldered by taxpayers. Worse yet, the implementation of Obamacare has barely begun.
As the law's various provisions begin to take effect, the pace of spending will only accelerate. The report was clear about what's restraining health care spending - and it's not Obamacare. As the report put it, the "impact of the recent recession continued to affect the purchasers, providers and sponsors of health care." The agency's researchers went on to cite "[p]ersistently high unemployment, continued loss of private health insurance coverage, and increased cost sharing" as reasons that "led some people to forgo care or seek less costly alternatives." In other words, it's the economy, stupid.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
-
-
bump
-
It makes no sense for an employer to pay for health insurance. Do they pay for car insurance too? Home? life? Maybe we should mandate that!
-
It makes no sense for an employer to pay for health insurance. Do they pay for car insurance too? Home? life? Maybe we should mandate that!
same logic for government health care, do they pay for car insurance too? Home? Life?
-
'Only' 20 million may lose health insurance coverage (ObamaCare)
The Washington Examiner ^ | March 17, 2012 | The Editors
Posted on March 18, 2012 4:11:23 PM EDT by 2ndDivisionVet
For many months after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act -- aka Obamacare -- became law, it was mainly the measure's conservative opponents who ruefully contemplated then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's remark that "we have to pass the health care bill so you can see what's in it." Opponents anxiously wondered if people might actually like what they found in the law once it was on the books. If that occurred, odds were good Obamacare would never be repealed. And there would be no stopping government takeovers of other major sectors of the economy.
More recently, as revelations have accumulated concerning what could happen once Obamacare is fully implemented, it may well be the measure's liberal proponents who have the most to fear from learning more about Obamacare. The report released Thursday by the Congressional Budget Office could only magnify such fears because the analysis devastated President Obama's most frequently uttered claim on behalf of his health care reform: "If you like your present coverage, you can keep it."
Rather than accurately describing a key feature of his proposal, Obama's reassuring claim was calculated to ease fears of the unknown among millions of Americans who worried about what might happen to them and their families under a complicated, bureaucratic health care program. After all, why worry about things like those new government-run health insurance exchanges if you get to keep the health insurance coverage that you like?
Now comes CBO saying that a computer model used by it and the Joint Committee on Taxation to project the impact of changes in federal health care policy could result in as many as 20 million Americans losing the insurance they currently have through their employers. A more likely outcome, according to CBO, would be only 5 million people losing their present coverage. But whether the actual total proves to be 20 million or 5 million or some figure in between, such losses undermine Obama's credibility with large numbers of people who were previously willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Politically damaging as such an outcome would be to the president's re-election campaign, however, there is a qualifier buried deep in the CBO report that should keep Obamacare backers wide-awake at night. "Models of the health insurance system, including those developed and used by CBO and JCT, are generally based on observed changes in behavior in response to modest changes in incentives, but the legislation enacted in 2010 is sweeping in its nature," CBO said in a classic Washington CYA formulation.
"Given the high degree of uncertainty, some Members of Congress have asked how CBO and JCT's estimates of the effects of the ACA on health insurance coverage would differ under alternative assumptions about the behavior of employers. The analysis presented in this report is illustrative of a wide range of possible outcomes regarding employers' behavior but does not reflect all of the dimensions of uncertainty inherent in CBO and JCT's projections of insurance coverage," CBO continued. In other words, the congressional authors acknowledge that nobody can be certain just how bad things will be once Obamacare is fully implemented.
-
It makes no sense for an employer to pay for health insurance. Do they pay for car insurance too? Home? life? Maybe we should mandate that!
Providing assistance to keep employees as healthy as possible absolutely makes sense for an employer. Paying for car insurance doesn't do that.
-
Will you Obama c. U nts admit what a disaster this is?
-
I actually lost my health insurance coverage already thanks to Obamacare.
-
I actually lost my health insurance coverage already thanks to Obamacare.
it's also pricing millions of self emoloyed out of the market.
This is why I will be as demeaning and dissresfuectful towards this ghetto communist. Respect is earned. Obama deserves only misery and ill will. Fuck him and every stupid fucking idiot who voted for him.
-
Liberal retards run for the hills when this topic comes up.
-
Liberal retards run for the hills when this topic comes up.
And they have the balls to attack me! I have been proven right on far more than I have been proven wrong. This topic is definately one I have nailed to the tee and these idiots still march on like nothing.
-
The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that Obamacare will cost taxpayers $1.76 trillion, double the $900 billion price tag advanced by the president, and could lead businesses to cut off coverage to 20 million Americans,
Medicare Supplements (http://www.nationalmedicaresupplements.com/) according to a report released Wednesday.
From the Washington Examiner:
The CBO released its latest cost estimate of Obamacare’s spending provisions showing that the law will cost $1.76 trillion through 2022. But even that doesn’t capture the law’s true price tag.
Since Obamacare will not be fully implemented until 2014, we will not know until medicare supplemental insurancenext year what a full 10-year cost estimate of the law looks like. But, extrapolating yesterday’s estimate forward, The Washington Examiner‘s Phil Klein predicts the final ten-year cost of Obamacare will exceed $2 trillion, more than double what Obama said it would cost.
On Thursday, the CBO provided an equally explosive report on the number of people who will lose privately medigap provided health insurance once Obamacare is fully implemented.
Medicare Supplement Insurance (http://www.americanseniors.com/) The office provided best case (5 million) and worst case (20 million) estimates on the report, both of which are far higher than previous estimates.
From the Hill:
Under CBO’s best estimate, 11 million mostly low-wage workers would lose their employer coverage. About 3 million would choose to drop their coverage to go into the new subsidized health exchanges or on Medicaid, while another 9 million would gain employer-sponsored coverage, for a net total of 5 million people losing employer coverage in 2019. …
Last year, CBO’s best estimate was that only 1 million people would lose employer-sponsored coverage.
This entry was posted in Obama Administration and tagged CBO, Health Care, Obamacare. Bookmark the permalink.
-
The healthcare bill in its written form was just horrible.
I really don't see what's so tough about it either.
Are you for babies having healthcare no matter what?
Are you for people having access to medicines and preventive checkups?
Are you for extending the age of children being on parents plans?
Are you for removing "pre-existing conditions"?
Ok. Put those into a bill.
It's like 4 lines. No big deal.
Who would argue against that?
The Healthcare bill is a damn shame. While ideologically I was for healthcare reform of some sort (see previous lines of text) this could not have been done more poorly.
-
The healthcare bill in its written form was just horrible.
I really don't see what's so tough about it either.
Are you for babies having healthcare no matter what?
Are you for people having access to medicines and preventive checkups?
Are you for extending the age of children being on parents plans?
Are you for removing "pre-existing conditions"?
Ok. Put those into a bill.
It's like 4 lines. No big deal.
Who would argue against that?
The Healthcare bill is a damn shame. While ideologically I was for healthcare reform of some sort (see previous lines of text) this could not have been done more poorly.
If i locked you in a room for a month and told you to devise the worst possible plan imaginable, you could not have topped the mess that is obamacare.
-
Providing assistance to keep employees as healthy as possible absolutely makes sense for an employer. Paying for car insurance doesn't do that.
I'm pretty sure getting to work each day is just as important. It makes little sense to have your employer cover your insurance.
-
I'm pretty sure getting to work each day is just as important. It makes little sense to have your employer cover your insurance.
Not everybody drives a car to work.
Investing in employees health does not make little sense.
-
Not everybody drives a car to work.
Investing in employees health does not make little sense.
And not everyone gets sick. So why have the company pay for it? Thing is they shouldn't.
-
Not everybody drives a car to work.
Investing in employees health does not make little sense.
If a company values it's employees, then they will cover things like this.
If they do not, then you don't have to work there... If you have no skill or qualification to start your own business or work for a company who values it's employees, then you should re-evaluate your life choices.
-
(http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/s320x320/427643_412752488751101_165553226804363_88548746_2029093156_n.jpg)
-
Obamacare's Flawed Economic Foundations
WSJ ^ | March 19, 2012 | Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Vernon Smith
Posted on Tuesday, March 20, 2012 2:16:58 AM by trappedincanuckistan
ObamaCare will be argued next week in the Supreme Court. While the justices will consider the intricacies of constitutional law, at their heart the arguments in favor of the legislation have to do with the economics of health care.
Consider the individual mandate to purchase health insurance. The Obama administration defends the mandate on the ground that a person's decision to not buy health insurance affects commerce by materially increasing the costs of others' health insurance. The government adds that health care is unique and therefore can be regulated constitutionally in ways other markets cannot.
In reality, the mandate has almost nothing to do with cost-shifting. The targeted population—the young, healthy and not poor who choose to forgo coverage—has a minimal role in the $43 billion of uncompensated health-care costs. In 2008, for example (the latest figures available), the Department of Health and Human Service's Medical Expenditure Panel Survey showed that the uncompensated care of the mandate's targeted population was no more than $12.8 billion—a tiny one-half of 1% of the nation's $2.4 trillion in overall health-care costs. The insurance mandate cannot reasonably be justified on the ground that it remedies costs imposed on the system by the voluntarily uninsured.
The government's other defense is that the health-care market does not exhibit textbook competition. No market does. The economic features relied upon by the government—externalities, imperfect information, geographically distinct markets, etc.—are characteristic of many markets.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
-
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2012/03/15/cbo-obamacare-could-make-20-million-people-lose-employer-based-insuranc
Fuck you and die every Obama drone.
Wháts the problem they are poor fuck em right?
-
It makes no sense for an employer to pay for health insurance. Do they pay for car insurance too? Home? life? Maybe we should mandate that!
It makes no sense for employers to keep their employees healthy ???
-
And not everyone gets sick. So why have the company pay for it? Thing is they shouldn't.
You are pretty shit at your job, huh..?
-
Broken obamatheclown promise#9058230948023043820.
-
Video: Wasserman-Schultz Admits People Will Lose Their Health Insurance Under ObamaCare
The Hope For America ^ | 3/22/12 | Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Martha MacCallum
The bad hair day chairperson of the DNC had a semi-contentious interview with FNC's Martha MacCallum.
Wasserman-Schultz was asked about the CBO report which states that 20 million people will lose their health insurance coverage under ObamaCare. She tried to answer that one by stating, essentially, that they won't lose "coverage" even if they lose "their coverage".
And that's an important distinction.
Because Obama told us that we would be able to keep our existing health insurance plan under ObamaCare. That clip is included at the end of this video.
In summary: No, you can't necessarily keep your health insurance plan under ObamaCare.
-
Obama-care is an epic failure and it hasnt even taken off yet.
I pray to god that the supreme court winds up striking it down, or someone does the right thing and gets it off the books.
Whats funny is right now I have no health insurance so this directly affects me - Im in school and my wife is pregnant. And I still would rather have no insurance than have the government force me into buying health insurance against my will.
-
Obama-care is an epic failure and it hasnt even taken off yet.
I pray to god that the supreme court winds up striking it down, or someone does the right thing and gets it off the books.
Whats funny is right now I have no health insurance so this directly affects me - Im in school and my wife is pregnant. And I still would rather have no insurance than have the government force me into buying health insurance against my will.
The worst part is that they are mandating wildly expensive insurance no one is going to be able to afford anyway. Do you think it ends w Birth Control?
-
The worst part is that they are mandating wildly expensive insurance no one is going to be able to afford anyway. Do you think it ends w Birth Control?
Its funny, people actually believe that with their outrageous choices, that they will suddenly make a sensible decision.
Why would their choices on what coverage is mandated be any less outrageous or expensive than the idea itself?
You let people start deciding what to stick into mandatory coverage like this, and every tom, dick, and harry that has a politicians ear is going to get something mandated that makes them money. Sandra Fluke is a perfect examply.
This whole thing was a huge can of worms, now youre going to have everyone that wants something for free out there testifying why it needs to be mandatorily covered, and as long as someone stands to profit from it, were going to have to pay for it.
-
Its funny, people actually believe that with their outrageous choices, that they will suddenly make a sensible decision.
Why would their choices on what coverage is mandated be any less outrageous or expensive than the idea itself?
You let people start deciding what to stick into mandatory coverage like this, and every tom, dick, and harry that has a politicians ear is going to get something mandated that makes them money. Sandra Fluke is a perfect examply.
This whole thing was a huge can of worms, now youre going to have everyone that wants something for free out there testifying why it needs to be mandatorily covered, and as long as someone stands to profit from it, were going to have to pay for it.
If they had a very limited low cost catastrophic plan of some sort that covered rare shit - thats one thing - but what they came up with is a leviathon that is going to bankrupt the middle class as well as astate medicade budgets.
-
Yep, well, gotta make sure everyone has their fair share, even if that means everyone but the elite have nothing.
After all, its unfair for people who make more to have more, so we need to take it and redistribute it amongst the middle and lower class, even though it will have little to no effect on the upper-upper class.
To me, it seems like his idea's on giving people their "fair share" will wind up exactly like Soviet Russia... everyone on the lower class in broke and the upper classes are kings. But maybe thats what theyre after?
-
Yep, well, gotta make sure everyone has their fair share, even if that means everyone but the elite have nothing.
After all, its unfair for people who make more to have more, so we need to take it and redistribute it amongst the middle and lower class, even though it will have little to no effect on the upper-upper class.
To me, it seems like his idea's on giving people their "fair share" will wind up exactly like Soviet Russia... everyone on the lower class in broke and the upper classes are kings. But maybe thats what theyre after?
Shock - if i paid you ten million dollars and told you to design the worst possible health care law you could conjure up - you could not have possibly done worse than what obama reid and pelosi came up with.
-
HEHEHEHEH!!
I still can't believe people voted for this.
-
If the Supreme Court does it's job of interpreting the law, instead of making its own laws, ObamaCare will be stricken.
-
Bump.
Cowards.
-
Hopefully it is 6-3 by the Supreme Court to trash the entire law.
-
HEHEHEHEH!!
I still can't believe people voted for this.
There are tons of clips just like that on the mandate. He lied his ass off and his incompetent delusional base still support him.
-
Obamacare's Flawed Economic Foundations
WSJ ^ | March 19, 2012 | Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Vernon Smith
Posted on Tuesday, March 20, 2012 2:16:58 AM by trappedincanuckistan
ObamaCare will be argued next week in the Supreme Court. While the justices will consider the intricacies of constitutional law, at their heart the arguments in favor of the legislation have to do with the economics of health care.
Consider the individual mandate to purchase health insurance. The Obama administration defends the mandate on the ground that a person's decision to not buy health insurance affects commerce by materially increasing the costs of others' health insurance. The government adds that health care is unique and therefore can be regulated constitutionally in ways other markets cannot.
In reality, the mandate has almost nothing to do with cost-shifting. The targeted population—the young, healthy and not poor who choose to forgo coverage—has a minimal role in the $43 billion of uncompensated health-care costs. In 2008, for example (the latest figures available), the Department of Health and Human Service's Medical Expenditure Panel Survey showed that the uncompensated care of the mandate's targeted population was no more than $12.8 billion—a tiny one-half of 1% of the nation's $2.4 trillion in overall health-care costs. The insurance mandate cannot reasonably be justified on the ground that it remedies costs imposed on the system by the voluntarily uninsured.
The government's other defense is that the health-care market does not exhibit textbook competition. No market does. The economic features relied upon by the government—externalities, imperfect information, geographically distinct markets, etc.—are characteristic of many markets.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Obamacare should have never been... it is as simple as that.
-
Check this out - I sent this info to my congresscunt and this is what she sent back:
______________________
Dear 333386:
Thank you for contacting me to express your thoughts on repealing the Affordable Care Act. I appreciate the benefit of your views and welcome the opportunity to respond.
I voted against H.R. 2 because it would end important consumer protections for Americans with private insurance, weaken Medicare, and take away coverage options for those without insurance. Instead of identifying specific improvements, those opposed to health reform proposed to eliminate the entire reform bill. If such an irresponsible measure were to become law:
· Consumer protections for 445,000 constituents who have private insurance would be rescinded, resulting in higher health care costs and reduced coverage;
· 9,200 residents in Westchester and Rockland Counties with pre-existing conditions would lose access to insurance;
· Insurers could reinstate devastating annual and lifetime benefit caps;
· Pregnant women and breast and prostate cancer survivors could be denied coverage when they most need it;
· Seniors would have to pay higher prescription drug costs; and
· 4.4 million families in the New York area would not be able to access tax credits to purchase better and more affordable coverage.
I am more than happy to work with my colleagues to improve flawed portions of the law. For instance, I have voted to repeal to so-called 1099 provision impacting small businesses and joined my Republican colleagues in supporting a proposal to delay the controversial Independent Payment Advisory Council. However, I cannot support proposals to nullify important consumer protections that help New Yorkers.
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. If you would like more information on this or other issues, or to sign up for my regular e-newsletter, visit my website at www.lowey.house.gov. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can help you in any way.
Sincerely,
Nita Lowey
Member of Congress
-
She is an idiot.
She is saying is that it is impossible to repeal just because it's in effect. No. It can and SHOULD be repealed and if some are adversely affected, SO WHAT!!! The long term consequences of this "law" is a lot worse than the temporary setbacks.
Congress needs to go back to the drawing board and come up with something MUCH better.
We don't have to settle for crap just because Congress is filled with lazy morons.
-
It's time forrrrrrrrr the daily bump.
-
It's time forrrrrrrrr the daily bump.
notice how all the typial leftists like straw licker blackass 240 andre et al want to tak about is birth control palin and fluke?
-
Like Jason, this thread can't be killed.
-
Like Jason, this thread can't be killed.
Just get a discussion on gays, fluke, palin, condoms, or some other idiotc thing and the left goes wild.
Notice how blackass and andre have gone silent?
-
Just get a discussion on gays, fluke, palin, condoms, or some other idiotc thing and the left goes wild.
Notice how blackass and andre have gone silent?
The only comment he has made in the past few days was a timid "no" when you asked about Obama's hypocrisy.
-
The only comment he has made in the past few days was a timid "no" when you asked about Obama's hypocrisy.
And he refused to answer why.
Without petty insults and infatuation with meaningless issues, they have nothing at all.
-
crash and burn