US Healthcare debate discussion

State law can't trump federal law, especially when the highest court already said the law was Constitutional.

 

All the more reason to end it before it becomes entrenched in our governments ever increasing deficit budgeting.

 

So, Obamacare adds about 1.8 billion a year to the deficit, according to the Investor's Business Daily.

That is much less than the cost of weapons systems Congress has forced the Pentagon to buy even though the Pentagon says they are unneeded.

Just saying.

 

Does that make obyscare a good idea? Just askin.

 

It only seems fair domestic policy gets emphasized for once rather than just military budget proposals.

It also made changes in Medicare Advantage in terms of how insurance companies compete for those subsidies, rather than pre-Obamacare, where those subsides were just handed to them.

If it's repealed you go back to the latter you also open up the donut-hole budget gap created by Medicare Part D (the Medicare extension Bush signed).

--

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/sep/24/top-16-myths-about-health-care-law/

 

I know. That just makes what SC is doing even more ridiculous.

Nikki Haley, the governor of SC, also refused to expand Medicaid in this state in protest of Obamacare. The funding for it has already been appropriated for it and she refused it. Even though this is one of the poorest states in the nation and a good percentage of children probably need Medicaid.

 

I'm not sure for single people or for a family of 4, but I pay $130 every two weeks for myself and my son.

 

So that's dumb, the funding is there, and it's gonna just sit there locked into that appropriated purpose, and it can't be taken back right?

Not spending that money makes no sense, yet SC votes Republican almost every time.


I blame the gerrymandering.

Someone's gotta publically say that this government gridlock also addresses redistricting and bars gerrymandering from here on out.

The Founders would be appalled at how Party Politics have disregarded their warnings about political factions.
---

How are your deductables Mel?

 

Hasn't the window for "ending it" come and gone? Votes were taken, the thing passed, it is now law.

Why are the republicans allowed to hold the nation hostage like this? I feel they should be charged with terrorism and arrested. They are standing in the way of constitutional law.

 

..now everyone can stop paying for healthcare, and you automatically have it. its just taken out of your taxes, right? a fee at the end of the year?

 

And for those who are not required to file taxes?

 

Which IBD article are you referring to?

The last I read, from 3 Oct. 2013, showed 54% opposing the law, up from 47% in July, and also related some of negative side effects which have occurred even before Obamacare has gone into effect, as a result of its pending application.

 

Sun seems to pull this stuff from his rectum. 56% opposed as of this AM. O% enrollment still exsists for many states. The worst is yet to come.

 

I purposely chose a recent conservative news source so I wouldn't get blasted for being liberal.

http://news.investors.com/071213-663449-obamacare-boosts-deficit-in-first-decade.htm

 

Having been a subscriber to IBD long ago, I never thought of it as a conservative or liberal source, but an excellent source if you are investing in the stock market.
That said, the article seems to be commenting on an updated forcast produced by the CBO, which is supposed to be an unbiased source, but then they can only work with the data provided them. Their forcasts might be more trusted if the facts, figures, and formulae they are working with was available for others to see. Have they got all the facts and figures necessary, and are they without error or possibility of changing, and are their formulae without error?

A Greek friend once came to me after winning the bid to re-gold leaf the dome of the Georgia State capitol in Atlanta asking me to check the figures provided the bidders of the surface area to be re-leafed. They were not even close, and showing them my work his bid offer was increased proportionately. So government calculations may be correct, but still I prefer to check them before accepting them as correct.

Trust but verify.

In addition: How should that report be taken? Initially the CBO forcast a cumulative spending 'reduction' of $124 billion at the period ending in 2019, and now a cumulative spending 'increase' of $18.4 billion ending in the same year. A difference of $142.4 billion between their previous and current forcasts. What might their forcast be next year? or the year after?

 

Well, OK, but you didn't find any errors and the CBO is widely regarded as THE source of analysis of the deficit.

 

That's like me telling you the answer to the problem I just solved is 467.125.
Can you find any errors proving me wrong?

As I said, the CBO can only work with the information provided them. Can you guarantee that they have been provided everything necessary to provide an accurate forecast years in advance, AND that nothing will happen to change any of that data in a following year between now and 2019?

How many persons now uninsured will become insured under Obamacare?
Of that number how many of them will be paying, and how much in total?
Of that number how many will receive care and at what total cost?
How many persons with pre-existing conditions will be added?
How many of them will be paying and how much in total?
How much will the total cost of caring for them be?
Will the cost to those who currently are insured go up or down and how much?
Will Doctors and hospitals raise or lower their charges?
Will new and expensive drugs be discovered and covered under the plan?
Will the Fed allow our currency to devalue at a rate greater than the desired annual 1.5%-2.0% ?

And there are probably a great many other questions that depending on the answers, will have a great effect on the cost of Obamacare.

While I can neither confirm their (CBO) figure to be correct nor prove it wrong, I tend to err on the side of caution.

 

Well, it's easy to be righteous about one's extreme opinions if you dismiss for no real reason the best source of information.

 

I'm NOT trying to be righteous, only rational.
I did not say the CBO intentionally produced/produces inaccurate information and I do feel that they try to provide the most accurate information possible, but have to work with what data is given them.
Did you dismiss or accept their original $124 billion savings figure? Admittedly, I did not. And now they are claiming an $18.4 billion spending increase. Can we be certain of that figures accuracy? I just don't know. Perhaps it could be greater or even less. I tend to feel it will likely be much greater spending, but I cannot produce a figure as I can not find adequate information to calculate an answer. You find that inadequate as a reason and an extreme opinion?

 

Best answer to obyscare is to stay healthy. I went through and answered Individual's questions. Sad. Once again. Revenue sharing. I sure wish this sun dude would take Rand's sound advice to heart on this one.