• 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 enrollment hits 7 million

The big question is; will anyone hold the talking heads who guaranteed that the exchanges would not hit the 7 million number to account?

Also.. How good was the CBO prediction. Half a percent error? That's pretty insane.
Also, will anyone hold the "talking heads" to account that guaranteed we could keep the affordable insurance we had that included the benefits "we" needed and keep the doctors who we chose to provide our treatment? It was predictable that the Gov would meet the "number" some way or another. Naturally, they can't provide any information regarding new insured's versus those who were forced to get a new plan. And they can't tell us how many are receiving a subsidy, how many were forced to apply for Medicaid including how many actually were approved for Medicaid.

The formula for determining eligibility for a subsidy didn't take into account an individual or families monthly income minus expenses; such as, mortgage payment or rent, loan payments(car, credit card, school)electric, gas, food, medical and so on. Therefore, regardless of ones income, one may not be able to afford premiums offered through the exchange and not be eligible for Medicaid. What about these ind/fams?

So, it has never meant much to me whether X number of people sign up, but whether those that need insurance can afford it. And, whether premiums "for all" whether subsidized or not were reduced as promised. Thus far nothing has been done to actually lower the cost of providing health care. The costs of providing care that doctors, hospitals and other types of providers pay monthly have continued to increase(especially given the new regulations PPACA created); yet reimbursements by Medicare, Medicaid and Private Insurance have not increased but have remained stagnant for the last 15 years or more.

What really screwed things up was the PPAC giving HHS the authority to determine the "minimal essential coverage". HHS pulled a fast one, mandating all plans provide maternity and newborn benefits regardless whether the insured person would ever need these benefits. Knowing full well that including coverage of these benefits would significantly increase premiums unnecessarily. What a crock!
 
Ahhh, watching the right-wingers in tears, flailing about blurting out random Obama attacks in a fit of rage is wonderful.

You all said it wouldn't work, couldn't work, the whole thing needed to be scrapped, you were wrong.
 
the only reason this dumpster fire of a bill has stayed afloat is because the president keeps pushing back ALL parts of the law that PUNISH citizens with insurance terminations and monetary penalties. When Obama starts reaching into the average joe's wallet then we'll see how many liberals are still doing the happy dance. :cool:
 
The only option left for the GOP is to repeal AND replace at the EXACT same time.
If this were 50 years ago, we could get er done.
Ahhh, watching the right-wingers in tears, flailing about blurting out random Obama attacks in a fit of rage is wonderful.
You all said it wouldn't work, couldn't work, the whole thing needed to be scrapped, you were wrong.
Ryan's budget released today, flying under the radar, assumes 2 trillion in savings over ten years from just repealing Obamacare . :lamo
 
The only option left for the GOP is to repeal AND replace at the EXACT same time.
If this were 50 years ago, we could get er done.

Ryan's budget released today, flying under the radar, assumes 2 trillion in savings over ten years from just repealing Obamacare . :lamo

November is going to hit you like a ton of bricks.
 
The numbers game went out the window the minute it was learned that the president lied about people keeping their own insurance plans. Shocking isnt it that the fed killed 6 million already responsible peoples insurance and that those people then bought more insurance. Hell...kill another 40 million insurance plans and you should get another good 30-35 million enrollees...from people that were already previously insured. Imagine how good that number would look.

Want to see the real fun...wait til after the November elections and they stop delaying full enforcement of the law. There is a reason why they keep putting it off and its NOT because they expect things to get better.
 
November is going to hit you like a ton of bricks.
Not to burst your bubble... but I doubt it will. They will keep delaying things, people keep voting mindlessly, and dems will likely hold the senate. Shortly after that full implementation will occur, unemployment will go up and more people will lose policies. Medicare enrollment will increase and the stage for 2016 will be set with the dems claiming what we REALLY need is Universal healthcare and MORE free government cheese. And I would lay money today on them winning in 2016 as well.
 
Not to burst your bubble... but I doubt it will. They will keep delaying things, people keep voting mindlessly, and dems will likely hold the senate. Shortly after that full implementation will occur, unemployment will go up and more people will lose policies. Medicare enrollment will increase and the stage for 2016 will be set with the dems claiming what we REALLY need is Universal healthcare and MORE free government cheese. And I would lay money today on them winning in 2016 as well.

You might be right, but I wont stop fighting even if that's the case. Maybe its the Churchill Ive been reading-but weve been here before.
 
the only reason this dumpster fire of a bill has stayed afloat is because the president keeps pushing back ALL parts of the law that PUNISH citizens with insurance terminations and monetary penalties. When Obama starts reaching into the average joe's wallet then we'll see how many liberals are still doing the happy dance. :cool:

'Cause you know it's just coming. Always does with the government. What it gives with one hand, it has to take away from others with the other hand.

Those other people also vote. And every year they'll have to go through the healthcare selection in October, just weeks before November elections. So every year ObamaCare and the Democrats are going to have to do a high wire act, as the people who actually pay into the system see their money evaporate into higher preimums and higher deductibles. Just a few weeks before the November elections.

And since the Democrats own 100% of ObamaCare, including the the bills that are going to be charged, well, the November elections are only a few weeks after healthcare selections start.

The only thing that ObamaCare might try to do is to shift the start of healthcare selection until after the November elections, but how much luck are they going to have trying to shift long standing timelines of an entire industry, just for political advantage? Guess we'll see.
 
Those other people also vote. And every year they'll have to go through the healthcare selection in October, just weeks before November elections. So every year ObamaCare and the Democrats are going to have to do a high wire act, as the people who actually pay into the system see their money evaporate into higher preimums and higher deductibles. Just a few weeks before the November elections.

Yes, every year they will compare the prices and deductibles of plans both on and off the exchange and as they see how the plans on the exchange are cheaper, they will vote for the people who made those cheaper plans available to them.
 
It's a huge success. A hugely successful gigantic entitlement program.

Now what about affordable healthcare for everyone else? This bill will not lower costs. Doesn't Obama care about the 150 million working Americans who get insurance through our employers?

There are lower drug costs, insurer "take" is limited to 15% of premiums, no more pre-existing conditions or phony policies that don't pay and more but guess what? Your policy might still go up because it HAS been going up every year. Yours might go up less though and at least you know you are covered. You never really know how good your old policy was either.
 
Yes, every year they will compare the prices and deductibles of plans both on and off the exchange and as they see how the plans on the exchange are cheaper, they will vote for the people who made those cheaper plans available to them.

If that's the way it works out, sure, and who could blame them? If it doesn't work out that way, they'll vote for the other side in ever increasing numbers, for a great long time.

If it doesn't, anything that would increase costs to health insurance would then have to come from the already over strained general fund (buried and obscured), just to ensure the Democrats political survival. That'll require an equally unpopular action: raising taxes even higher.

Democrats now 'own' US healthcare. Any dissatisfaction with any part off the insurance side or any part of the medical treatment side is going land in the Democrat's lap, rightly or wrongly. Part of the function of managing healthcare is that you inevitably are going to have to deny coverage of somethings to some people, it's unreasonable to believe that everything can be covered fro everyone. Witness the UK NHS, short on money, they are now not covering some procedures that they used to, and the people don't like. Why should they? Government takes their money and delivers less of poorer quality. What's to like? Likely same will occur here after a number of years.

It's one hell of a bet to make with the future of your entire party, that government can actually deliver a satisfactory, one size fits all solution for everyone. Not a bet that I'd have made.
 
There are lower drug costs, insurer "take" is limited to 15% of premiums, no more pre-existing conditions or phony policies that don't pay and more but guess what? Your policy might still go up because it HAS been going up every year. Yours might go up less though and at least you know you are covered. You never really know how good your old policy was either.

And that inevitable yearly cost increase is now going to be 'owned' by the Democrats, rightly or wrongly, it still will be. And will make itself known when the health care selection forms are handed out, middle of October or so, every year. Just ahead of the November elections. Timing couldn't be better.
 
If that's the way it works out, sure, and who could blame them? If it doesn't work out that way, they'll vote for the other side in ever increasing numbers, for a great long time.

Given the results, which have exceeded projections, it appears to be working out

If it doesn't, anything that would increase costs to health insurance would then have to come from the already over strained general fund (buried and obscured), just to ensure the Democrats political survival. That'll require an equally unpopular action: raising taxes even higher.

ACA is funded with specific taxes and not from the general fund.

Democrats now 'own' US healthcare. Any dissatisfaction with any part off the insurance side or any part of the medical treatment side is going land in the Democrat's lap, rightly or wrongly. Part of the function of managing healthcare is that you inevitably are going to have to deny coverage of somethings to some people, it's unreasonable to believe that everything can be covered fro everyone. Witness the UK NHS, short on money, they are now not covering some procedures that they used to, and the people don't like. Why should they? Government takes their money and delivers less of poorer quality. What's to like? Likely same will occur here after a number of years.

And satisfaction will land in the Democrats lap, which is the GOP's worst nightmare. That's why they have been constantly lying about ACA - in order to "poison the well"

They failed


It's one hell of a bet to make with the future of your entire party, that government can actually deliver a satisfactory, one size fits all solution for everyone. Not a bet that I'd have made.

Yeah, because Medicare and SS was such a fail. People hate those programs
 
What a completely doctored statistical lump of BS. Everybody knows this is an absurd lie.

And let's pretend for a make-believe moment it is true.

These are people who had insurance, had it taken away, and had to sign up again. These are young people who haven't/won't pay. These are people already in supreme need of costly healthcare. These are God knows how many liberals who gladly cancelled what they had to help the numbers. And these are curious and invested media types and others wanting to see if the website will work.

But wallow in fantasy world if it makes you feel good.

This is an infinitesimally small fraction of the 48 million uninsured that it was targeted for.

It seems that first year of Obamacare has reduced the number of uninsured by more than 20%.... I would say that isn't bad, especially given all those that were working to ensure failure by denying the expansion of medicaid or not having state specific websites. Despite the best efforts to the Cons to undermine the law of the land, the Cons, in their typical inept fashion, have failed to kill the law..... if they were smart (which they are not), they would focus on fixing the law, as their continued efforts to sabotage it will backfire on them.....

Obamacare has led to health coverage for millions more people - latimes.com
 
Last edited:
Given the results, which have exceeded projections, it appears to be working out

I'm not certain that such early projects are a good indicator of how this is going to perform over the long haul.

ACA is funded with specific taxes and not from the general fund.

True at present, however, easily changed if and when it is becomes fiscally non-viable.

And satisfaction will land in the Democrats lap, which is the GOP's worst nightmare. That's why they have been constantly lying about ACA - in order to "poison the well"

They failed

Guess we'll see.


Yeah, because Medicare and SS was such a fail. People hate those programs

It's a completely different thing, and is most certainly not like Medicare and SS, other than yet another entitlement program.
 
I'm not certain that such early projects are a good indicator of how this is going to perform over the long haul.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts

So far, the fact is that the projections have proven themselves to be nearly spot on. In fact, the results have exceeded projections.

True at present, however, easily changed if and when it is becomes fiscally non-viable.

The #'s suggest that any changes will be in a more positive direction. So far, the costs have had to be revised downwards


Guess we'll see.

It's already been seen. The GOP's pitiful attempt to convince people to not enroll in exchange plans has failed.

It's a completely different thing, and is most certainly not like Medicare and SS, other than yet another entitlement program.

You said something about the dems making a bet " that government can actually deliver a satisfactory, one size fits all solution for everyone. Not a bet that I'd have made."

That description applies to ACA as much as it applies to Medicare and SS. In a few years, your side will be marching with signs that say "Keep your govt hands off my Obamacare"
 
You are certainly entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts

So far, the fact is that the projections have proven themselves to be nearly spot on. In fact, the results have exceeded projections.

No, I'm not proffering any false facts here. There is much more to ObamaCare left yet to implement. Isn't the last of it supposed to kick in, barring any further delays, all the way out to 2017? If so, then doesn't this still qualify are early? It's 3 more years until 2017.

The #'s suggest that any changes will be in a more positive direction. So far, the costs have had to be revised downwards




It's already been seen. The GOP's pitiful attempt to convince people to not enroll in exchange plans has failed.



You said something about the dems making a bet " that government can actually deliver a satisfactory, one size fits all solution for everyone. Not a bet that I'd have made."

That description applies to ACA as much as it applies to Medicare and SS. In a few years, your side will be marching with signs that say "Keep your govt hands off my Obamacare"

Meh. Plenty of bills are going to have to be paid, and those who are going to have to pay them for all the others, the increasing others, are bound not to happy about it, and may end up needing subsidies themselves.
 
No, I'm not proffering any false facts here. There is much more to ObamaCare left yet to implement. Isn't the last of it supposed to kick in, barring any further delays, all the way out to 2017? If so, then doesn't this still qualify are early? It's 3 more years until 2017.

I did not say that you have proferred any false facts. I implied that you are ignoring true facts

Meh. Plenty of bills are going to have to be paid, and those who are going to have to pay them for all the others, the increasing others, are bound not to happy about it, and may end up needing subsidies themselves.

In which case, they will favor those who made the subsidies available to them.
 
I did not say that you have proferred any false facts. I implied that you are ignoring true facts



In which case, they will favor those who made the subsidies available to them.

Right into fiscal insolvency.
 
Back
Top Bottom