• 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!

Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

I'm not talking projected. Actual costs. No excuses. The sky has not fallen.

Then post the actual costs because no one else has, I posted the 2014 numbers and both health costs and Medicare are higher so where are the savings?
 
Then post the actual costs because no one else has, I posted the 2014 numbers and both health costs and Medicare are higher so where are the savings?

Not my claim, but OK:

U.S. Experiences Unprecedented Slowdown In Health Care Spending

The amount the United States spent on health care went up last year by the smallest amount since federal scorekeepers started tracking these dollars half a century ago, according to an audit issued Wednesday.

U.S. Experiences Unprecedented Slowdown In Health Care Spending

So, instead of growing faster and nightmare, we've at least seen a slow down.
 
Not my claim, but OK:

U.S. Experiences Unprecedented Slowdown In Health Care Spending

The amount the United States spent on health care went up last year by the smallest amount since federal scorekeepers started tracking these dollars half a century ago, according to an audit issued Wednesday.

U.S. Experiences Unprecedented Slowdown In Health Care Spending

So, instead of growing faster and nightmare, we've at least seen a slow down.

Now the rest of the story and a true non partisan evaluation of our healthcare system and costs

Here’s How Obamacare Is (and Isn’t) Lowering Health Care Spending

There are a lot of reasons costs were down last year but you give the credit to ACA, this article paints a truly non partisan picture
 
Whoa, I keep reading about how wonderful SCOTUScare is (in this thread, not real life) and the gobs and gobs of money we are saving because of it. Waaaaay under budget!

Okay, so where is my $2500 savings for the last 5 years? That's $12,500 I was promised by Obama. I mean, it's saving so much, right?

I answered that in an earlier post

The $2500 savings for a family of 4 was only if a public option was offered.
Senator Obama described his plan on his Senator website before he was elected President.

Every American has the right to affordable, comprehensive and portable health coverage.My plan will ensure that all Americans have health care coverage through their employers, private health plans, the federal government, or the states. My plan builds on and improves our current insurance system, which most Americans continue to rely upon, and creates a new public health plan for those currently without coverage. Under my plan, Americans will be able to choose to maintain their current coverage if they choose to. For those without health insurance I will establish a new public insurance program, and provide subsides to afford care for those who need them. My plan includes a mandate that all children have health care coverage and I will expand eligibility for the Medicaid and SCHIP programs to help ensure we cover all kids. My plan requires all employers to contribute towards health coverage for their employees or towards the cost of the public plan. Under my plan a typical family will save $2,500 each year. We will realize tremendous savings within the health care system from improving efficiency and quality and reducing wasted expenditures system-wide. Specifically, these savings will result from investments in health information technology, improvements in prevention and management of chronic conditions, increased insurance industry competition and reduced industry overhead, the provision of federal reinsurance for catastrophic coverage, and reduced spending on uncompensated care.



A public option would have provided competition and would have helped to bring costs down.

Once the public option was scraped so was our savings.

The public health insurance option, also known as the public insurance option or the public option, was a proposal to create a government-run health insurance agency which would compete with other health insurance companies within the United States. The public option is not the same as publicly funded health care, but was proposed as an alternative health insurance plan offered by the government. The proposal was initially part of the debates surrounding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, but was not passed in the final reconciled bill.


The public option was featured in three bills considered by the United States House of Representatives in 2009: the proposed Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962), which was passed by the House in 2009, its predecessor, the proposed America's Affordable Health Choices Act (H.R. 3200), and a third bill, the Public Option Act, also referred to as the "Medicare You Can Buy Into Act", (H.R. 4789). ...

President Barack Obama promoted the idea of the public option while running for election in 2008.[3]
 
Last edited:
Now the rest of the story and a true non partisan evaluation of our healthcare system and costs

Here’s How Obamacare Is (and Isn’t) Lowering Health Care Spending

There are a lot of reasons costs were down last year but you give the credit to ACA, this article paints a truly non partisan picture

So, it says we need more data. I'm fine with that. But you guys claimed defeat before it even started. Go back, I said that was no better than claiming victory. Focus.
 
So, it says we need more data. I'm fine with that. But you guys claimed defeat before it even started. Go back, I said that was no better than claiming victory. Focus.

"us guys" are citing history and the current debt created by the same organization that created this program? It is like most liberal programs sounds great but never generates the results promised. It is "you guys" claiming all these great savings and ignoring history. Why would anyone support another Federal entitlement program created by the Congress that gave us the current debt?
 
"us guys" are citing history and the current debt created by the same organization that created this program? It is like most liberal programs sounds great but never generates the results promised. It is "you guys" claiming all these great savings and ignoring history. Why would anyone support another Federal entitlement program created by the Congress that gave us the current debt?

According to you, market-based entitlement programs (ala Medicare Part D) save money. So I'm not sure why this concept is seemingly so foreign to you. This is point you've already made.
 
According to you, market-based entitlement programs (ala Medicare Part D) save money. So I'm not sure why this concept is seemingly so foreign to you. This is point you've already made.

You want to compare ACA to Medicare Part D? Wow, you are getting desperate. Medicare is a program for retirees, ACA is supposedly for all Americans.
 
You want to compare ACA to Medicare Part D? Wow, you are getting desperate. Medicare is a program for retirees, ACA is supposedly for all Americans.

That totally affects how markets work! You definitely get what's going on.
 
"us guys" are citing history and the current debt created by the same organization that created this program? It is like most liberal programs sounds great but never generates the results promised. It is "you guys" claiming all these great savings and ignoring history. Why would anyone support another Federal entitlement program created by the Congress that gave us the current debt?

No, you're not. You're just hating and trying to derail any idea that comes down the pike. You even misrepresent what's being claimed.
 
That totally affects how markets work! You definitely get what's going on.

What totally affects how the market works is incentive and although you believe people will focus on saving money because of lower premiums, most people have no clue as to what they want or need thus see no benefit from what you perceive as lower premiums. Does it really matter if you save money on premiums and pay higher deductibles? Why do you believe a govt. that has created an 18.2 trillion dollar debt is going to run a program like this professionally? Do you have any clue as to how irresponsible some people are with personal responsibility issues? What kind of business do you run? Do you have any employees? Are they all responsible?
 
What totally affects how the market works is incentive and although you believe people will focus on saving money because of lower premiums, most people have no clue as to what they want or need thus see no benefit from what you perceive as lower premiums. Does it really matter if you save money on premiums and pay higher deductibles?

Yes.

Consumer price sensitivity is the holy grail of market-based health reform. That's the purpose deductibles serve and, yeah, they're a big deal. Change your handle, you're a disgrace to it.
 
No, you're not. You're just hating and trying to derail any idea that comes down the pike. You even misrepresent what's being claimed.

Hey, you guys own the program and it is too late to turn back and it will be too late to say I told you so, so I will tell you I told you so right now. Your belief that the Federal Govt. gives a damn about quality is misguided and naïve. Liberal arrogance is showing as is liberal insanity where you do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

You and I along with all the other ACA supporters have absolutely nothing in common yet you try to judge me and everyone else by your own standards. I accept personal responsibility. I don't expect you to pay any subsidies to me. I don't believe giving someone a subsidy makes them more responsible whereas spending their own money by buying their own insurance does. I believe this is a country of freedom and that means freedom to make stupid decisions. Apparently you don't. Sure wish you would take on my share of the debt you are going to create
 
. I don't believe giving someone a subsidy makes them more responsible whereas spending their own money by buying their own insurance does. I believe this is a country of freedom and that means freedom to make stupid decisions. Apparently you don't.

Didn't you say your employees paid 20% of their premium (vs 28% for the average ACA marketplace shopper)? Sounds like shoppers under Obamacare are taking more personal responsibility than those under your paternalistic good graces.

And ACA marketplace shoppers choose from all plans being sold in the marketplace--scores of plans. How many options did your employees have to choose from?
 
Hey, you guys own the program and it is too late to turn back and it will be too late to say I told you so, so I will tell you I told you so right now. Your belief that the Federal Govt. gives a damn about quality is misguided and naïve. Liberal arrogance is showing as is liberal insanity where you do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

You and I along with all the other ACA supporters have absolutely nothing in common yet you try to judge me and everyone else by your own standards. I accept personal responsibility. I don't expect you to pay any subsidies to me. I don't believe giving someone a subsidy makes them more responsible whereas spending their own money by buying their own insurance does. I believe this is a country of freedom and that means freedom to make stupid decisions. Apparently you don't. Sure wish you would take on my share of the debt you are going to create
Exhibt Z:123

Nowhere do I suggest that I'm backing away from anything. And I'm not linking you with supporters. I'm linking those of you who went not only against it but said the sky would fall, declaring it failed before the verdict was in. You're still doing that.
 
Didn't you say your employees paid 20% of their premium (vs 28% for the average ACA marketplace shopper)? Sounds like shoppers under Obamacare are taking more personal responsibility than those under your paternalistic good graces.

And ACA marketplace shoppers choose from all plans being sold in the marketplace--scores of plans. How many options did your employees have to choose from?

Your opinion noted as well as your lack of understanding of human behavior
 
Exhibt Z:123

Nowhere do I suggest that I'm backing away from anything. And I'm not linking you with supporters. I'm linking those of you who went not only against it but said the sky would fall, declaring it failed before the verdict was in. You're still doing that.

History says the sky will fall as it does with every social program implemented with good intentions. Human nature and reality are ignored. It is way too early to claim victory but not too early to look at history which you refuse to do.
 
History says the sky will fall as it does with every social program implemented with good intentions. Human nature and reality are ignored. It is way too early to claim victory but not too early to look at history which you refuse to do.

History says our system was falling before ACA. And this country has had collective solutions to problems since day one.
 
History says our system was falling before ACA. And this country has had collective solutions to problems since day one.

Well, that is your opinion but you still haven't identified and solved the problems that created what you say is a flawed system. Until you address the causes of the high cost of healthcare in this country including govt. regulations nothing is going to change and all you have done is give the bureaucrats a bigger slush fund to waste, I mean spend.
 
Well, that is your opinion but you still haven't identified and solved the problems that created what you say is a flawed system. Until you address the causes of the high cost of healthcare in this country including govt. regulations nothing is going to change and all you have done is give the bureaucrats a bigger slush fund to waste, I mean spend.

I don't call it the best solution, but it has been an improvement. More people are insured.
 
Didn't you say your employees paid 20% of their premium (vs 28% for the average ACA marketplace shopper)? Sounds like shoppers under Obamacare are taking more personal responsibility than those under your paternalistic good graces.

And ACA marketplace shoppers choose from all plans being sold in the marketplace--scores of plans. How many options did your employees have to choose from?

My employees had a choice and if they chose wisely there are bad consequences for that choice. You want to force insurance on people who choose not to purchase when offered. I find it disturbing that you don't have a problem with that
 
I don't call it the best solution, but it has been an improvement. More people are insured.

We shall see, all the taxes are front loaded and the costs are back loaded. I can make any govt. program look good doing that. Any idea what SS cost those first few years? Life expectancy was 62 and collections began at 65. Now it is not what it was supposed to be, a retirement supplement but now is sole retirement for far too many. Much of the SS money was spent on everything other than SS and that is what you are going to see with ACA
 
We shall see, all the taxes are front loaded and the costs are back loaded. I can make any govt. program look good doing that. Any idea what SS cost those first few years? Life expectancy was 62 and collections began at 65. Now it is not what it was supposed to be, a retirement supplement but now is sole retirement for far too many. Much of the SS money was spent on everything other than SS and that is what you are going to see with ACA

That's the point. We will see. And proclamations of success or failure has been premature.
 
I answered that in an earlier post

The $2500 savings for a family of 4 was only if a public option was offered.
Senator Obama described his plan on his Senator website before he was elected President.

Wait a second, that's not the plan that he presented and hawked as president. I don't remember hearing anything about it only happening with a public option. He was pretty clear as president about the $2500 savings, I even remember him upping that to $2800 one time, with no mention of a public option.


A public option would have provided competition and would have helped to bring costs down.

Once the public option was scraped so was our savings.

You are going to have to explain how the "public option" was going to provide competition and bring costs down, or I am thinking of something else.
 
Wait a second, that's not the plan that he presented and hawked as president. I don't remember hearing anything about it only happening with a public option. He was pretty clear as president about the $2500 savings, I even remember him upping that to $2800 one time, with no mention of a public option.




You are going to have to explain how the "public option" was going to provide competition and bring costs down, or I am thinking of something else.

I posted the link of the health care plan in which than Senator Obama was promoting as saving a family about $2500 and included a public option which was buy in to a medicare type plan.

One the public option was toast so was savings...at least until we reach medicare age.

The public option would have brought costs down.

Medicare is a big savings over regular for profit health care plans.
 
Back
Top Bottom