• 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]

You prove yourself wrong with every post and to take a victory lap over a reported 6 million signing up for ACA without knowing the breakdown supports my contention about you

16.5 million have been insured under ACA
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Isn't it amazing how far we have come ....

When did it become the government's responsibility for you or your family to get health insurance paid for by someone else?

We have always paid for our health insurance and my husband's privately owned company has always paid for his employees insurance.

My relatives are paying to keep their adult children on their family policies and my friend is paying for her insurance.

We have come far.

It used to be that people who had pre existing conditions could not pay to get health insurance.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

The reality is you said the federal govt doesn't pay for the uninsured, and like every other claim you've made in this thread, you are wrong


Yes, we all know that Whitehouse.gov was wrong and as usual you believe you are right on every issue.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]


Let's see, when exactly did Obamacare go into full effect? All I see are projections and when was the last Obama projection to be accurate? Amazing how willingly you continue to buy Obama Administration data and CBO data generated by the Democrat Senate projections. Guess this is another issue you don't understand, where does CBO get the information to create projections?
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

We have always paid for our health insurance and my husband's privately owned company has always paid for his employees insurance.

My relatives are paying to keep their adult children on their family policies and my friend is paying for her insurance.

We have come far.

It used to be that people who had pre existing conditions could not pay to get health insurance.

Did you watch the video? How in the world did we ever survive without the nanny state? You think a kid should be on your healthcare until 26? Why didn't these kids sign up for ACA? How does a child remaining on your plan impact ACA?
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

This is the biggest government failure I have seen..... 2% have signed up for this nonsense.

It really goes to show the support for this bull*****....

Democrats are going to get voted out of this falls election. Progressives just affected 50 million sleeping bears with this individual mandate nonsense and compliance with government regulations in which they lost their healthcare or it was "NACA" (not affordable) and are NOT signing up due to protest...

These people now hate Obama and Congress...
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Let's see, when exactly did Obamacare go into full effect? All I see are projections and when was the last Obama projection to be accurate? Amazing how willingly you continue to buy Obama Administration data and CBO data generated by the Democrat Senate projections. Guess this is another issue you don't understand, where does CBO get the information to create projections?

Do you know what the "C" in CBO stands for?
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Do you know what the "C" in CBO stands for?

That would answer the question as to where the assumptions come from for their projections which then call into question the accuracy of those projections, something you don't seem to understand. The "C" was controlled by the Democrats when ACA was passed and signed and the projections made. You still believe what they tell you and that is why you have no credibility
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Do you know what the "C" in CBO stands for?

Congressional. The term includes both the senate and the house of representatives.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Not if you ask me....Personally, my insurance coverage levels stayed the same, but my deductible rose from $1000 per individual to $2500. My wife was dropped from my plan forcing her to pick up insurance through her employer doubling out weekly premium cost. So, my costs more than doubled.
I can't say I'm surprised you missed my point, which is using anecdotal evidence is a waste of time. I thought the rolling eyes would be a giveaway, but I guess not.

They had over three years to get it right and it was a huge failure from day one. That they have seemingly patched it enough to work through, we still don't know if the payment part is up, nor do we have any independent overview of how things are going. All we are getting is what the administration wants to put out there....That you trust that blindly is not what I do.
Nothing you said has any relevance to comparing the ability to report number of sign-ups from the first month of a very bad website and the ability to report sign-ups after six months of a website continually being fixed.

Is it really so hard to understand what you are responding to before you do it?
NO, the government has never given number like this before.
Yes, they have. See below.

They have always said, even earlier this month, that theyre were no number as to how many signed up. So why all of a sudden a couple of days before the end of the month, do they know.

The answer is that they don't know just as before and the number is made up. Who is going to be able to verify the number given?
They most certainly have given numbers, every month in fact.

November: http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2013pres/11/20131113a.html
December: http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2013pres/12/20131211a.html
January: Milestone: 3 Million in Marketplaces | HHS.gov/healthcare
February: http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/facts/blog/2014/02/marketplace-enrollment-hits-4-million.html

The government has released the numbers every month since October. The only one I see making anything up is you. I don't know if it's because you were too lazy to research before you posted or if because you simply weren't concerned with the truth, but the fact is you are 100% wrong.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

LOL, what an unmitigated disaster.

4 out of 5 require subsidies?

Healthcare.gov website application and enrollment system down on deadline day

In other words, old people who were sick signed up, people who lost their insurance because of Obamacare signed up, and a bunch of people who couldn't pay signed up. Yeah, that's HUGE success; this is why only 26 percent of people like this puke, and why people are 2-to-1 saying it's hurt them.

Meanwhile, many cancer centers and children's hospitals are running from it altogether. Insurance companies will require massive bailouts from the government soon.

Sorry, libs, it's not financially viable, and it never will be. It's perhaps the worst run Ponzi scheme in the history of Ponzi schemes.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

I can't say I'm surprised you missed my point, which is using anecdotal evidence is a waste of time. I thought the rolling eyes would be a giveaway, but I guess not.

Nothing you said has any relevance to comparing the ability to report number of sign-ups from the first month of a very bad website and the ability to report sign-ups after six months of a website continually being fixed.

Is it really so hard to understand what you are responding to before you do it?
Yes, they have. See below.

They most certainly have given numbers, every month in fact.

November: Obamacare rollout numbers much worse than expected
December: Nearly 365,000 Americans selected plans in the Health Insurance Marketplace in October and November
January: Milestone: 3 Million in Marketplaces | HHS.gov/healthcare
February: Another Significant Milestone: Marketplace Enrollment Hits 4 Million | HHS.gov/healthcare

They've been released every month. The only one I see making anything up is you. I don't know if it's because you were too lazy to research before you posted or if because you simply weren't concerned with the truth, but the fact is you are 100% wrong.

The point is, the government has the exact numbers on the breakdown of signees, and they won't release them because they are painfully embarrassing.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

The point is, the government has the exact numbers on the breakdown of signees, and they won't release them because they are painfully embarrassing.
That wasn't the point at all. Simply reading the thread would have allowed you to know that. It never ceases to amaze me how many people will ignore reality to launch partisan attacks.

I have no idea how many people have paid their first premium. It seems I remember it was roughly 80% have paid or would pay. I know that has been a prediction from several different entities. And I would be very surprised if the administration really does have the numbers of who have paid, because that is a completely separate deal than those who simply enroll in the federal website.

But at the end of the day, the administration HAS released the number of people who enrolled and have done so every month since October, which proves Mason's argument false.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

That wasn't the point at all. Simply reading the thread would have allowed you to know that. It never ceases to amaze me how many people will ignore reality to launch partisan attacks.

I have no idea how many people have paid their first premium. It seems I remember it was roughly 80% have paid or would pay. I know that has been a prediction from several different entities. And I would be very surprised if the administration really does have the numbers of who have paid, because that is a completely separate deal than those who simply enroll in the federal website.

But at the end of the day, the administration HAS released the number of people who enrolled and have done so every month since October, which proves Mason's argument false.

If 80 percent had paid or would pay, you would KNOW for sure. It'd be all over every piece of media in every nook and cranny, even with the shortfall in sign-ups.

The link I provided says that 4 out of 5 sign-ups require subsidies, so in fact, that means only 20 percent will pay, many of whom require expensive medical care immediately.

It's an absolute disaster.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

The link I provided says that 4 out of 5 sign-ups require subsidies, so in fact, that means only 20 percent will pay

Untrue. Receiving a subsidy does not mean that the insured pays nothing.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

If 80 percent had paid or would pay, you would KNOW for sure. It'd be all over every piece of media in every nook and cranny, even with the shortfall in sign-ups.
Not if they didn't have the ability to know. Running a query against a database to see how many people have registered on the federal exchange is a much different process than knowing how many people have written a check to an insurance company.

The link I provided says that 4 out of 5 sign-ups require subsidies, so in fact, that means only 20 percent will pay, many of whom require expensive medical care immediately.
A subsidy doesn't mean the people are not paying as well. And if someone is so poor 100% of their insurance is being paid, then they probably were already getting covered by Medicaid.

It's an absolute disaster.
You've already made it clear you're not interested in whether it's a success or not, only in finding ways to call it a disaster. You have very little credibility on the subject, quite honestly.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Untrue. Receiving a subsidy does not mean that the insured pays nothing.

Getting a subsidy means that the taxpayers did pay towards someone else's health insurance and that is the fact that you want to ignore. Why is it your responsibility to pay for the uninsured in TX or mine to pay for the uninsured in your state? All I see from people like you is promotion of the nanny state where where never are any consequences for failure or poor choices. Why is that?

By the way how are you coming on telling Whitehouse.gov they are wrong in their projections and that you are the one right? Keep running
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Not if they didn't have the ability to know. Running a query against a database to see how many people have registered on the federal exchange is a much different process than knowing how many people have written a check to an insurance company.

A subsidy doesn't mean the people are not paying as well. And if someone is so poor 100% of their insurance is being paid, then they probably were already getting covered by Medicaid.

You've already made it clear you're not interested in whether it's a success or not, only in finding ways to call it a disaster. You have very little credibility on the subject, quite honestly.

It is a disaster, many who are signing up are doing so on Medicaid which they were eligible for prior to Obamacare but didn't sign up. why do we need Obamacare and the 1.8 trillion dollar cost? Is there anything about liberalism that is a success?
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

It is a disaster, many who are signing up are doing so on Medicaid which they were eligible for prior to Obamacare but didn't sign up.
If they were eligible for Medicaid and weren't aware of it, but needed healthcare, then Obamacare is a good thing. I'm not a heartless person, I'm willing to pay a little more to make sure people can get the care they need.
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

If they were eligible for Medicaid and weren't aware of it, but needed healthcare, then Obamacare is a good thing. I'm not a heartless person, I'm willing to pay a little more to make sure people can get the care they need.

It's funny watching how the right started complaining about how there weren't enough people signing up, and now that the programs are reporting greater participation, they are complaining that too many people are signing up
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

If they were eligible for Medicaid and weren't aware of it, but needed healthcare, then Obamacare is a good thing. I'm not a heartless person, I'm willing to pay a little more to make sure people can get the care they need.

LOL, so the fact that people were unaware they were eligible for Medicare is a reason to enact ACA at a cost of billions added to the debt each year? Wow, that liberal logic is scary.

If you are willing to pay more for someone else's healthcare why not contribute directly? Why do you need a bureaucrat that helped create the 17.3 trillion dollar debt to do it for you?
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

Still hoping for a 'symbolic victory'?

The actual desperation lies with those Democrats up for re-election who don't want Barrack Obama's name mentioned during their campaign.

Senate Democrats Distance Themselves From Obama as Midterms Approach

As Senate campaigns begin, some Democrats flee Obama | Reuters

They can't even tell you who paid, and they were counting people who merely entered the website as people who signed up. And what's more, 6 million is far far below there original projections. And why are Democrats distancing themselves from such a huge and unprecedented success?
 
Re: Obamacare tops 6 million signups [W:263]

It's funny watching how the right started complaining about how there weren't enough people signing up, and now that the programs are reporting greater participation, they are complaining that too many people are signing up

Right, 6 million signing up without a breakdown is a victor for a program that is going to add over 180 billion a year to the deficit and still leave over 30 million people uninsured? such low standards you have when it comes to this administration. Wonder if you have such low standards in your personal life?
 
Back
Top Bottom