• 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!

Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263:617]

re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

sangha said:
You're going to criticize me for not caring about the uninsured after you have shown that you don't care about the uninsured?

That's pretty ironic
Click to expand...

What really is ironic is the liberal rhetoric that trumps the very poor results. You see, I do care about the uninsured in TX because I pay for those people. People are always going to make the wrong choices in life and if they choose not to participate in an insurance program that is their right. Liberals need to stop trying to be parents to everyone else when all they do is spend someone else's money
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Ockham said:
I'll assume for the sake of time we're talking about the ACA. It can only be sustainable if enough people who won't use healthcare pay for healthcare. I don't believe enough will sign up and pay in the near future, no, and I think intervention (ie., subsidies) will be needed to keep our healthcare system treading water.
Click to expand...

No, I meant the system before ACA, was it sustainable? And what makes the new one so much worse that can't be fixed?
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

sangha said:
I am not surprised to see you describe a decline in the uninsured rate as "very poor results"
Click to expand...


For the costs and we don't know the actual results that is a very poor result. You believe Gallup? Wow, says a lot about you
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Conservative said:
For the costs and we don't know the actual results that is a very poor result. You believe Gallup? Wow, says a lot about you
Click to expand...

And I think the fact that you consider a decrease in the uninsured rate to be a bad thing says a lot about your position
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

sangha said:
I am not surprised to see you describe a decline in the uninsured rate as "very poor results"
Click to expand...

A very small decline in the uninsured rates in exchange for an across the board cost increase is what makes the PPACA unpopular.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

ttwtt78640 said:
A very small decline in the uninsured rates in exchange for an across the board cost increase is what makes the PPACA unpopular.
Click to expand...

There is no across the board increase and a small decline is better than an increase, which was the trend before ACA.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

grip said:
No, I meant the system before ACA, was it sustainable? And what makes the new one so much worse that can't be fixed?
Click to expand...

Probably. The ACA was predicated on three primary things: 1.) Covering 48 million uninsured 2.) Reducing the cost of health insurance 3.) The individual mandate
Minor selling points were: Creation of jobs, reduction in family cost for insurance, no refusal for pre-existing conditions

If 48 million needed insurance, a plan to cover them should have been put together and funded. Instead, the ACA created a plan where those who didn't need health insurance and who primarily wouldn't use it much or at all, would pay for those who did need it.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Ockham said:
Probably. The ACA was predicated on three primary things: 1.) Covering 48 million uninsured 2.) Reducing the cost of health insurance 3.) The individual mandate
Minor selling points were: Creation of jobs, reduction in family cost for insurance, no refusal for pre-existing conditions

If 48 million needed insurance, a plan to cover them should have been put together and funded. Instead, the ACA created a plan where those who didn't need health insurance and who primarily wouldn't use it much or at all, would pay for those who did need it.
Click to expand...

Then why didn't all those opposing voices come up with a better plan? If it's as easy as you have indicated, surely those Congress People have access to experts with recommendations? It's not like these rising costs and uncovered people haven't been around for awhile.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

grip said:
Then why didn't all those opposing voices come up with a better plan?
Click to expand...
Not sure if you recall but Democrats did not allow opposing voices. The ACA was passed with no Republican votes for a reason.

grip said:
If it's as easy as you have indicated, surely those Congress People have access to experts with recommendations? It's not like these rising costs and uncovered people haven't been around for awhile.
Click to expand...
That's a strawman, no where have I indicated it was or could be easy.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Ockham said:
Probably. The ACA was predicated on three primary things: 1.) Covering 48 million uninsured 2.) Reducing the cost of health insurance 3.) The individual mandate
Minor selling points were: Creation of jobs, reduction in family cost for insurance, no refusal for pre-existing conditions

If 48 million needed insurance, a plan to cover them should have been put together and funded. Instead, the ACA created a plan where those who didn't need health insurance and who primarily wouldn't use it much or at all, would pay for those who did need it.
Click to expand...

Your entire post is inaccurate, and ACA was never expected to result in 100% coverage. Even in many nations with UHC, there isn't 100% coverage
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

sangha said:
Your entire post is inaccurate, and ACA was never expected to result in 100% coverage. Even in many nations with UHC, there isn't 100% coverage
Click to expand...

No where have I stated 100% was the expected coverage. You assume that - however, enough people have to sign up and pay, to cover those who do not or cannot pay. Do you deny this was how the ACA was financially structured?
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Ockham said:
Not sure if you recall but Democrats did not allow opposing voices. The ACA was passed with no Republican votes for a reason.
Click to expand...

Were there a bunch of plans by the Republicans providing alternatives to the issues being addressed by the ACA?



That's a strawman, no where have I indicated it was or could be easy.
Click to expand...

Is this not your previous claim below?


Ockham said:
If 48 million needed insurance, a plan to cover them should have been put together and funded.
Click to expand...
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Ockham said:
No where have I stated 100% was the expected coverage. You assume that - however, enough people have to sign up and pay, to cover those who do not or cannot pay. Do you deny this was how the ACA was financially structured?
Click to expand...

Obamacare is a left wing ponzi scheme.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

grip said:
Were there a bunch of plans by the Republicans providing alternatives to the issues being addressed by the ACA?
Click to expand...
Define: "bunch"

At the time, Democrats controlled both House and Senate. Republicans did not have a viable alternative plan nor did they want to provide a full take over of healthcare. They did want to amend the bill but were prevented from doing so.


grip said:
Is this not your previous claim below?
Click to expand...
No where in that claim do you see me stating it would be "easy", which was your allegation. That allegation is false. :shrug:
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Ockham said:
Define: "bunch"

At the time, Democrats controlled both House and Senate. Republicans did not have a viable alternative plan nor did they want to provide a full take over of healthcare. They did want to amend the bill but were prevented from doing so.
Click to expand...

Oh, they didn't have a viable plan, I see.

What full takeover? Are not there still private providers and insurers? Mandates and regs have always been existent.

They wanted to amend the Bill back then but don't want any adjustments to it NOW? Interesting how that works out.


No where in that claim do you see me stating it would be "easy", which was your allegation. That allegation is false. :shrug:
Click to expand...

My mistake, you just made it sound easy.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Ockham said:
Probably. The ACA was predicated on three primary things: 1.) Covering 48 million uninsured 2.) Reducing the cost of health insurance 3.) The individual mandate
Minor selling points were: Creation of jobs, reduction in family cost for insurance, no refusal for pre-existing conditions

If 48 million needed insurance, a plan to cover them should have been put together and funded. Instead, the ACA created a plan where those who didn't need health insurance and who primarily wouldn't use it much or at all, would pay for those who did need it.
Click to expand...

The Affordable Care Act Helps America

According to the White House, there were 50.7 million uninsured Americans on the 6 month anniversary of the ACA (according to the 2009 Census).

And according to them:

When fully implemented the Affordable Care Act will reduce the number of uninsured by 32 million

and...

The Affordable Care Act sets up competitive private health insurance exchanges, where uninsured individuals and small businesses can pool together to buy coverage. Health exchanges are estimated to cover 24 million people, when fully implemented.


and...

The Affordable Care Act expands Medicaid for individuals and families with up to 133 percent of household income. 16 million people are estimated to gain coverage because of the Medicaid expansion.


Not the constant use of "when fully implemented".
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

grip said:
Oh, they didn't have a viable plan, I see.
Click to expand...
You want yet MORE bad ideas from politicians? Not me... less the better.

grip said:
What full takeover? Are not there still private providers and insurers? Mandates and regs have always been existent.
Click to expand...
The ACA affected every citizen of the U.S., there were 2000+ pages of requirements in the law, for hospitals, insurance providers.... you were unaware of this?

grip said:
They wanted to amend the Bill back then but don't want any adjustments to it NOW? Interesting how that works out.
Click to expand...
They wanted to amend the bill before it passed yes - amending a bill is easier than amending a law. You can't be new to the political process at the federal level so I must assume your post is either obtuse or just kidding.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

sangha said:
And I think the fact that you consider a decrease in the uninsured rate to be a bad thing says a lot about your position
Click to expand...

What doesn't surprise me is the very low standards that you and other liberals have. You obviously ignore the 250 billion a year that we pay in debt service on the current 17.3 trillion dollar debt. Wonder how many people we could insure for that 250 billion by just giving them that money? Instead you support creation of a huge federal bureaucracy and entitlement program that you now claim has insured an additional 6 million people. Nothing surprises me with you people any more
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Erod said:
Assuming this is correct, which I'd bet my house it's a made-up number.....

How many of these people actually paid? How old are they?

This stat alone means nothing, especially if it pulled out of thin air.
Click to expand...

"We have no idea how many people paid their premiums, or the demographics of the enrollees, or the split between Medicaid and Private insurance.... BUT WE GOT 6 MILLION SOMETHING! WOO HOO!"
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

jmotivator said:
"We have no idea how many people paid their premiums, or the demographics of the enrollees, or the split between Medicaid and Private insurance.... BUT WE GOT 6 MILLION SOMETHING! WOO HOO!"
Click to expand...

They have no clue as to how many ineligibles, duplicates or unpaid. Not exactly confidence inspiring is it.
 
re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Navy Pride said:
The question is how many of that 6 million have paid their premiums? Its easy to sign up. Paying for it is a different matter.
Click to expand...

Right wing radio talking points. Such a good little soldier you are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom