• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits'

Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Of course I "get it" from what I've heard. And read, and seen and experienced. My son in law, daughter and three of my grandkids lost their health insurance because of this disaster. They are not rich, they are not poor.

Why did they lose their health insurance? Do you mean that now they have to get better insurance, and since they're middle of the road people, they qualify for subsidies? I don't know, I speak from my own experience, but right now I'm going to pay about half as much for better insurance because of this. What am I missing?
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Why did they lose their health insurance? Do you mean that now they have to get better insurance, and since they're middle of the road people, they qualify for subsidies? I don't know, I speak from my own experience, but right now I'm going to pay about half as much for better insurance because of this. What am I missing?

Maybe the fact that someone else is going to subsidize that cost to you? You think it is the responsibility of someone else to fund your healthcare insurance?
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Health care is a right, not a privilege.

Healthcare is a service provided by the labor and resources of others. What makes you think you have a right to make others provide you service?
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

What if we're right?
What if the greatest country in the world can do universal healthcare better and cheaper than everybody else?

What if your system is based on violating the rights of people?
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

What if your system is based on violating the rights of people?

The right not to have health care? That's a new one.

Here's a concept: if you don't want universal health care, don't use it. Just stay home when you get deathly ill. Or travel to Somalia. They have the system you want.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

The right not to have health care? That's a new one.

Here's a concept: if you don't want universal health care, don't use it. Just stay home when you get deathly ill. Or travel to Somalia. They have the system you want.

"Try to imagine a regulation of labor imposed by force that is not a violation of liberty; a transfer of wealth imposed by force that is not a violation of property. If you cannot reconcile these contradictions, then you must conclude that the law cannot organize labor and industry without organizing injustice." - Frédéric Bastiat
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Why did they lose their health insurance? Do you mean that now they have to get better insurance, and since they're middle of the road people, they qualify for subsidies? I don't know, I speak from my own experience, but right now I'm going to pay about half as much for better insurance because of this. What am I missing?

They lost their insurance because Obamadon'tcare forced the price up that his employer had to pay to continue his insurance. A sound business decision on his employers part I might add based on the added expense the government has placed on the employer. Plus maybe he will be lucky and get to keep his job at least a little longer, unlike so many others that Obamadon'tcare has placed in the out of work line. It's been happening all around the country but of course, the deniers don't know anything about it. Better insurance? Get real. If it's not affordable in both monthly expenditures and what his out of pocket expenses would be, it's impossible to be better than what his employer provided to him. Besides, it's also impossible to be better insurance if the government has to foot part of the tab to get people to buy it. They have inflated the price by requiring people to purchase non needed coverage. Not a good deal for most anybody, taxpayers included.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

We have had a "free market" WITHIN STATES for decades, the premise you hold to SO TIGHTLY.....and it has NOT produced cheaper care, greater coverage or better outcomes for consumers. It does not produce competition within states and certainly will not if expanded since nearly all consumption is local, without knowledge of prices. Beyond this, the concept of profiting from human misery and affliction is immoral.

What state would a "free market" for health insurance be? I'm not aware of one as wishful thinkers have caused the price of insurance to increase by the legislative process for years. They always seem to think they know better than the customer.

I love this line, LOL. "Beyond this, the concept of profiting from human misery and affliction is immoral." Yep. There is no misery in third world countries that offer little profit for anyone. LOL. Nothing but the finest of care. LOL.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Just thought of something about this hack article in the OP written by a former Romney advisor whose quoting anonymous insurance industry guys...

How the hell would they know how many signed up for the exchange?

Here's predominantly why... signing up for the exchange doesn't sign you up for insurance from an insurance company. It's like a mall with stores... just because you stepped into the mall (signing up for the exchange) doesn't mean you bought insurance already. Signing you up means you just stepped through the mall's door and NOW you can shop these different insurance companies.

Another debunked piece of crap hit piece.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Healthcare is a service provided by the labor and resources of others. What makes you think you have a right to make others provide you service?
The right to health means that governments must generate conditions in which everyone can be as healthy as possible. Such conditions range from ensuring availability of health services, healthy and safe working conditions, adequate housing and nutritious food. The right to health does not mean the right to be healthy.

The right to health has been enshrined in international and regional human rights treaties as well as national constitutions all over the world.

Examples of UN human rights treaties:

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966;
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), 1979;
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989.
Examples of regional human rights treaties:

European Social Charter, 1961;
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981; Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the Protocol of San Salvador), 1988.
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) in Article 12 states that steps for the realization of the right to health include those that:

reduce infant mortality and ensure the healthy development of the child;
improve environmental and industrial hygiene;
prevent, treat and control epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases; and
create conditions to ensure access to health care for all.
General Comment on the Right to Health

To clarify and operationalize the above provisions, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which monitors compliance with the ICESCR, adopted a General Comment on the Right to Health in 2000.

The General Comment states that the right to health extends not only to timely and appropriate health care but also to the underlying determinants of health, such as access to safe and potable water and adequate sanitation, an adequate supply of safe food, nutrition and housing, healthy occupational and environmental conditions, and access to health-related education and information, including on sexual and reproductive health.

WHO | The right to health
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Yes, you shop around, compare options, and stew on it till the last minute. Maryland is the only exchange to actually offer statistics on sign ups.

The real question is how many young, healthy people, did they get to sign up. They need 4 out of every 10 signups to be young a healthy, or it collapses under its own weight.
I was asking because right now is nearly the Annual Enrollment Period for many Medicare plans. Prescriptions, Medicare Advantage, and Medicare supplemental insurance plans. It's early on and we're sending people home early because the calls aren't there and the field agents aren't getting interest. I assure you medicare and associated health insurance plans have much higher demand than these health exchanges and people are doing a crap ton of shopping around, if they're interested at all.

However near the end of the annual enrollment period we're going to have mandatory overtime, with some of our more determined employees working 20 hr shifts and everyone working at least 12. It's going to be a madhouse during the end of the enrollment period. I expect a similar situation for the health exchanges. It happens every year with people waiting until the last minute.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

The right to health means that governments must generate conditions in which everyone can be as healthy as possible. Such conditions range from ensuring availability of health services, healthy and safe working conditions, adequate housing and nutritious food. The right to health does not mean the right to be healthy.

The right to health has been enshrined in international and regional human rights treaties as well as national constitutions all over the world.

Examples of UN human rights treaties:

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966;
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), 1979;
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989.
Examples of regional human rights treaties:

European Social Charter, 1961;
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981; Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the Protocol of San Salvador), 1988.
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) in Article 12 states that steps for the realization of the right to health include those that:

reduce infant mortality and ensure the healthy development of the child;
improve environmental and industrial hygiene;
prevent, treat and control epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases; and
create conditions to ensure access to health care for all.
General Comment on the Right to Health

To clarify and operationalize the above provisions, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which monitors compliance with the ICESCR, adopted a General Comment on the Right to Health in 2000.

The General Comment states that the right to health extends not only to timely and appropriate health care but also to the underlying determinants of health, such as access to safe and potable water and adequate sanitation, an adequate supply of safe food, nutrition and housing, healthy occupational and environmental conditions, and access to health-related education and information, including on sexual and reproductive health.

WHO | The right to health


Looks like you have a long list of irreverence and items proving my point. Such as these:

The right to health means that governments must generate conditions in which everyone can be as healthy as possible. Such conditions range from ensuring availability of health services, healthy and safe working conditions, adequate housing and nutritious food. The right to health does not mean the right to be healthy.

You want to know how they do that? Try by violating the rights of people. Be that their liberty, or their property.


European Social Charter, 1961;
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981; Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the Protocol of San Salvador), 1988.
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) in Article 12 states that steps for the realization of the right to health include those that:

reduce infant mortality and ensure the healthy development of the child;
prevent, treat and control epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases; and
create conditions to ensure access to health care for all.
General Comment on the Right to Health

So how do you think they do any of those? Hint: It's the same as above.

The General Comment states that the right to health extends not only to timely and appropriate health care but also to the underlying determinants of health, such as access to safe and potable water and adequate sanitation, an adequate supply of safe food, nutrition and housing, healthy occupational and environmental conditions, and access to health-related education and information, including on sexual and reproductive health.

Again, how do think they do any of those? This is getting kind of funny.

---
These are kind of interesting to the discussion:

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), 1979;
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989.

Why are those listed? Are you listing those because you wish to argue that denying these two groups healthcare services is a right violation somehow? Trying that sexist/ hating children angle perhaps? Don't worry you can play the game if you want.

None of this stuff really matters. We have the right to our labor and property and declaring healthcare a right violates both. It's that simple.
 
Last edited:
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

They lost their insurance because Obamadon'tcare forced the price up that his employer had to pay to continue his insurance. A sound business decision on his employers part I might add based on the added expense the government has placed on the employer. Plus maybe he will be lucky and get to keep his job at least a little longer, unlike so many others that Obamadon'tcare has placed in the out of work line. It's been happening all around the country but of course, the deniers don't know anything about it. Better insurance? Get real. If it's not affordable in both monthly expenditures and what his out of pocket expenses would be, it's impossible to be better than what his employer provided to him. Besides, it's also impossible to be better insurance if the government has to foot part of the tab to get people to buy it. They have inflated the price by requiring people to purchase non needed coverage. Not a good deal for most anybody, taxpayers included.

I'm sorry that your family is employed by people who don't care about their employees. That's my take on it. But it may be good news for your family. A study by the Stanford School of Medicine projects that 37 million people will choose plans through the government rather than continue with plans through their employer. The CBO projects that there could be 20 million people who lose coverage through their employer by 2019.... or there could be a net gain of 3 million people who are covered by their employer. We don't really know what will happen actually, but the company I work for isn't cutting anybody's hours or eliminating anybody's coverage. Neither is the company my girlfriend works for, or the company my only not-yet-retired parent works for. I don't have friends who have said they are losing coverage, but I have friends who are happy to be getting insured for the first time in their life.

Maybe it's just that we live in different parts of the country. My state is really embracing the ACA, maybe yours isn't. But I'd be surprised if there weren't at least a few people you know who are celebrating the fact that on January 1st, their premium will cost half as much for better coverage. That's how it is for me. And AGAIN, we're comparing the health care law to nothing, because Republicans never allowed any changes to our flawed system. Pre-existing conditions denied, the medicare donut hole still open, no quality assurance for consumers, all that jazz.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

I'm sorry that your family is employed by people who don't care about their employees. That's my take on it. But it may be good news for your family. A study by the Stanford School of Medicine projects that 37 million people will choose plans through the government rather than continue with plans through their employer. The CBO projects that there could be 20 million people who lose coverage through their employer by 2019.... or there could be a net gain of 3 million people who are covered by their employer. We don't really know what will happen actually, but the company I work for isn't cutting anybody's hours or eliminating anybody's coverage. Neither is the company my girlfriend works for, or the company my only not-yet-retired parent works for. I don't have friends who have said they are losing coverage, but I have friends who are happy to be getting insured for the first time in their life.

Maybe it's just that we live in different parts of the country. My state is really embracing the ACA, maybe yours isn't. But I'd be surprised if there weren't at least a few people you know who are celebrating the fact that on January 1st, their premium will cost half as much for better coverage. That's how it is for me. And AGAIN, we're comparing the health care law to nothing, because Republicans never allowed any changes to our flawed system. Pre-existing conditions denied, the medicare donut hole still open, no quality assurance for consumers, all that jazz.

Wow, how can someone be so poorly informed but at least you are showing that you have no problem taking from someone else and making paying for your healthcare someone else's responsibility. Where does it stop? where do you draw the line on what the govt. is able to force you to do? Where do you draw the line and say this is my responsibility and no one else's?

Why is it always Republicans fault or someone else's for your own poor choices and mistakes? Why is it that liberals believe that what they want is a priority but what they are against is to be fought?
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Wow, how can someone be so poorly informed but at least you are showing that you have no problem taking from someone else and making paying for your healthcare someone else's responsibility. Where does it stop? where do you draw the line on what the govt. is able to force you to do? Where do you draw the line and say this is my responsibility and no one else's?

Why is it always Republicans fault or someone else's for your own poor choices and mistakes? Why is it that liberals believe that what they want is a priority but what they are against is to be fought?

Are you referring to my poor choice to have an auto-immune disease which was entirely due to my genetics? Is that what you're talking about? I have no idea what you're talking about.

If your house was on fire, and the fire department comes to put it out, would you portray that as being selfish? You want me to pay for your house to be saved? Selfish, right? Or if a terrorist comes to your town and tries to kill everybody with chemical weapons, it would really make me sick if the FBI tried to stop them. My tax dollars paying for your town to be saved? Did you receive an education? I hope not. It would make me sick to think that you would learn on my tax dollars. Where does it end? Are you so selfish that you would put your own kids through school? Hold on a second I just literally vomited thinking about paying for your kids to go to school.

Now, insurance should be illegal. Because I paid into insurance for years and never got sick. So basically they were stealing my money to pay for other people who made poor choices like choosing to have cancer or choosing to need a leg amputated. All marxists, of course. Nothing makes me as sick as the thought of helping somebody with cancer! Who would allow such madness? I guess some people think it's a good idea to have a system where people pay a fair amount for health insurance and the amount you pay is partially based on how much you earn. Idiots, these people. Some people think it's a good idea to use the government to help others. Nothing is so evil as that idea. The only ethical thing to do is let sick people die and only use the government for things like making sure corporations keep increasing their profits and killing people in foreign countries.

I love America, and I thank god America isn't anything like you want it to be. If it was the way you wanted it to be, there wouldn't be anything left to love.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Are you referring to my poor choice to have an auto-immune disease which was entirely due to my genetics? Is that what you're talking about? I have no idea what you're talking about.

If your house was on fire, and the fire department comes to put it out, would you portray that as being selfish? You want me to pay for your house to be saved? Selfish, right? Or if a terrorist comes to your town and tries to kill everybody with chemical weapons, it would really make me sick if the FBI tried to stop them. My tax dollars paying for your town to be saved? Did you receive an education? I hope not. It would make me sick to think that you would learn on my tax dollars. Where does it end? Are you so selfish that you would put your own kids through school? Hold on a second I just literally vomited thinking about paying for your kids to go to school.

Now, insurance should be illegal. Because I paid into insurance for years and never got sick. So basically they were stealing my money to pay for other people who made poor choices like choosing to have cancer or choosing to need a leg amputated. All marxists, of course. Nothing makes me as sick as the thought of helping somebody with cancer! Who would allow such madness? I guess some people think it's a good idea to have a system where people pay a fair amount for health insurance and the amount you pay is partially based on how much you earn. Idiots, these people. Some people think it's a good idea to use the government to help others. Nothing is so evil as that idea. The only ethical thing to do is let sick people die and only use the government for things like making sure corporations keep increasing their profits and killing people in foreign countries.

I love America, and I thank god America isn't anything like you want it to be. If it was the way you wanted it to be, there wouldn't be anything left to love.

I call your post total liberal ignorance as you have no idea what funds the various services you seem to want, Fire Departments aren't a Federal Expense. Terrorists attacks are the responsibility of the Federal Govt. thus your Federal Taxes. National disasters are an example of where a neighbor helps another neighbor, healthcare isn't such a federal expense. Don't worry though, liberals are creating that utopia you want by creating massive entitlements which create permanent dependence on liberalism. Why not just eliminate the states and have all the money funneled to the Federal bureaucrats so they can distribute it the way they deem necessary. That the utopia you want?

I don't think you have a clue what our Founders created in this country and show up as a typical brainwashed individual who buys what our street thug from Chicago says. He is making a fool out of you.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

I'm sorry that your family is employed by people who don't care about their employees. That's my take on it. But it may be good news for your family. A study by the Stanford School of Medicine projects that 37 million people will choose plans through the government rather than continue with plans through their employer. The CBO projects that there could be 20 million people who lose coverage through their employer by 2019.... or there could be a net gain of 3 million people who are covered by their employer. We don't really know what will happen actually, but the company I work for isn't cutting anybody's hours or eliminating anybody's coverage. Neither is the company my girlfriend works for, or the company my only not-yet-retired parent works for. I don't have friends who have said they are losing coverage, but I have friends who are happy to be getting insured for the first time in their life.

Maybe it's just that we live in different parts of the country. My state is really embracing the ACA, maybe yours isn't. But I'd be surprised if there weren't at least a few people you know who are celebrating the fact that on January 1st, their premium will cost half as much for better coverage. That's how it is for me. And AGAIN, we're comparing the health care law to nothing, because Republicans never allowed any changes to our flawed system. Pre-existing conditions denied, the medicare donut hole still open, no quality assurance for consumers, all that jazz.

Don't be sorry for my family. Fortunately my son in law works for a company that practiced good business sense so they have a shot at staying in business despite the best efforts of Obama and the Dems. He still has a job unlike so many millions of victims of the Obama Presidency. And that study by the Stanford School of medicine really does nothing more than reinforce what happened to my son in law. If an employer wants to stay in business, they very well may have to quit covering their employees just to stay in business.

This line of yours is hogwash: "because Republicans never allowed any changes to our flawed system." The democrats had a lot more time at the controls in congress than the GOP. And lets not forget, the American people have not wanted Obamadon'tcare from the start. Some democracy, uh?
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Are you referring to my poor choice to have an auto-immune disease which was entirely due to my genetics? Is that what you're talking about? I have no idea what you're talking about.

If your house was on fire, and the fire department comes to put it out, would you portray that as being selfish? You want me to pay for your house to be saved? Selfish, right? Or if a terrorist comes to your town and tries to kill everybody with chemical weapons, it would really make me sick if the FBI tried to stop them. My tax dollars paying for your town to be saved? Did you receive an education? I hope not. It would make me sick to think that you would learn on my tax dollars. Where does it end? Are you so selfish that you would put your own kids through school? Hold on a second I just literally vomited thinking about paying for your kids to go to school.

Now, insurance should be illegal. Because I paid into insurance for years and never got sick. So basically they were stealing my money to pay for other people who made poor choices like choosing to have cancer or choosing to need a leg amputated. All marxists, of course. Nothing makes me as sick as the thought of helping somebody with cancer! Who would allow such madness? I guess some people think it's a good idea to have a system where people pay a fair amount for health insurance and the amount you pay is partially based on how much you earn. Idiots, these people. Some people think it's a good idea to use the government to help others. Nothing is so evil as that idea. The only ethical thing to do is let sick people die and only use the government for things like making sure corporations keep increasing their profits and killing people in foreign countries.

I love America, and I thank god America isn't anything like you want it to be. If it was the way you wanted it to be, there wouldn't be anything left to love.

You are great at misrepresenting things.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

Are you referring to my poor choice to have an auto-immune disease which was entirely due to my genetics? Is that what you're talking about? I have no idea what you're talking about.

If your house was on fire, and the fire department comes to put it out, would you portray that as being selfish? You want me to pay for your house to be saved? Selfish, right? Or if a terrorist comes to your town and tries to kill everybody with chemical weapons, it would really make me sick if the FBI tried to stop them. My tax dollars paying for your town to be saved? Did you receive an education? I hope not. It would make me sick to think that you would learn on my tax dollars. Where does it end? Are you so selfish that you would put your own kids through school? Hold on a second I just literally vomited thinking about paying for your kids to go to school.

Now, insurance should be illegal. Because I paid into insurance for years and never got sick. So basically they were stealing my money to pay for other people who made poor choices like choosing to have cancer or choosing to need a leg amputated. All marxists, of course. Nothing makes me as sick as the thought of helping somebody with cancer! Who would allow such madness? I guess some people think it's a good idea to have a system where people pay a fair amount for health insurance and the amount you pay is partially based on how much you earn. Idiots, these people. Some people think it's a good idea to use the government to help others. Nothing is so evil as that idea. The only ethical thing to do is let sick people die and only use the government for things like making sure corporations keep increasing their profits and killing people in foreign countries.

I love America, and I thank god America isn't anything like you want it to be. If it was the way you wanted it to be, there wouldn't be anything left to love.

"The socialists declare that the State owes subsistence, well-being, and education to all its citizens; that it should be generous, charitable, involved in everything, devoted to everybody; ...that it should intervene directly to relieve all suffering, satisfy and anticipate all wants, furnish capital to all enterprises, enlightenment to all minds, balm for all wounds, asylums for all the unfortunate, and even aid to the point of shedding French (American) blood, for all oppressed people on the face of the earth.

Who would not like to see all these benefits flow forth upon the world from the law, as from an inexhaustible source? ... But is it possible? ... Whence does the State draw those resources that it is urged to dispense by way of benefits to individuals? Is it not from the individuals themselves? How, then, can these resources be increased by passing through the hands of a parasitic and voracious intermediary?

...Finally...we shall see the entire people transformed into petitioners. Landed property, agriculture, industry, commerce, shipping, industrial companies, all will bestir themselves to claim favors from the State. The public treasury will be literally pillaged. Everyone will have good reasons to prove that legal fraternity should be interpreted in this sense: "Let me have the benefits, and let others pay the costs." Everyone's effort will be directed toward snatching a scrap of fraternal privilege from the legislature. The suffering classes, although having the greatest claim, will not always have the greatest success."

That quote is from the early 19th century. Interestingly, the amount of people that think the government should be the caregivers has done nothing but grow.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

"Try to imagine a regulation of labor imposed by force that is not a violation of liberty; a transfer of wealth imposed by force that is not a violation of property. If you cannot reconcile these contradictions, then you must conclude that the law cannot organize labor and industry without organizing injustice." - Frédéric Bastiat

Whoosh, right over his head.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

I heard they didn't anticipate a large number of enrollees in the first month or so because:

1. The insurance wouldn't take effect until Jan. 1

2. People are still learning and weighing their options

3. A lot of people wait until the last minute

Good thing huh? Since the software is screwed up.
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

you expect perfection from software designed by the government?

No, but the liberals did. Oh wait, that's you. You know how many millions were wasted on this?
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

No, but the liberals did. Oh wait, that's you. You know how many millions were wasted on this?

what government program has been implemented without glitch's of some kind?
 
Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

what government program has been implemented without glitch's of some kind?

And you want more government programs. :lamo
 
Back
Top Bottom