Obamacare

[pkt77242]

Bush's arrangement was Wide Receiver. Worked with the Mexican government, tracked guns, no one died.

Fast and Furious was meant to change the 2nd amendment. No one in the Mexican government knew any of it's details. No one in the US tracked the assault weapons. American and Mexicans died because of it. Worse than Watergate because American residents died.

Really. Do you just read crazy *** blogs. How about you learn what the "fast and the furious" was really about and what happened.

The truth about the Fast and Furious scandal - Fortune Features

 

[BobD]

Get real folks. No care, Obamacare or make up a name, it doesn't really matter, in the end, we all pay.

I'm betting with more people having access to regular healthcare, it will cost less in the end. (My source for that is common sense.) I'm also betting someone here will try to convince me otherwise.

I'm so sick of this Democratic vs Republican cr@p. The mountains of petty bullcrap along with all the fear mongering is just stupid.

 

[k1ssme1m1r1sh]

I'd also like to point out that most people who think the government is running their lives with Obama Care, are usually the same people who are in favor of amendments to ban gay marriage and abortion. So you hate big government if it effects YOU, but if it effects your neighbor you can't wait to show your support. That's just an observation I've made over the last 4 years. People hate Obama, and most of it is unwarranted so you're going to pick aman who hates gays, women, and keeping jobs in America. Smart. I hear the phrase "lesser of 2 evils" all the time. Hello dummies, less evil is STILL evil.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

The posts over the last two pages have been of much better quality that at the beginning and everyone deserves credit. (They don't particularly agree with my perspective more than they did at the beginning so no one has to demean me or anyone else for partisanship.) Some good points have been made. Does anyone have a feel for any other football forums that can have a conversation like this? I think everyone deserves reps!

This is what it comes down to, all the time. Our understanding of what is happening. Fast and Furious was painted by a specific Fox reporter, a person I knew as a school friend and neighbor from the time we were 4, as a government conspiracy that went to the top, like Watergate. I heard it over and over. There was no doubt about what was being said. And everyone knew that it wasn't true then. Now when you see the story today, you see that the NRA may be more directly responsible than the President. Do I want to see the NRA go away? No. I am a member. Do I want to see politicians act more responsible? Yes. But it is interesting that the State that was just before the Supreme Court with immigration legislation has some of the weakest gun control laws anywhere. Cut down on the viability of drug gangs, immigration smugglers, make it a felony to sell a purchased gun within one year, in Arizona. Make it a more serious felony to sell two or more guns at the same time to the same unregistered person, a more severe penalty. How does this apply to a health care conversation?

Find out what makes people sick (controllable) and stop it. What is the boon from the anti-smoking campaign? The point is there have been comments from both sides of the argument, ACamp and KissMe, just to name two, that have one thing in common, a call to responsibility. And just how far toward solving some of these problems and differences will that go?

 

[In Lou I Trust]

Man, I sure am sick of all these political threads on a football site. I'm tired of having to sift through all this political garbage to find info on recruits. Can't we just have a debate about Tim Tebow vs Mark Sanchez???
Obama blows.
/thread

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Let's see your source for that.

 

[Rhode Irish]

Bush's arrangement was Wide Receiver. Worked with the Mexican government, tracked guns, no one died.

Fast and Furious was meant to change the 2nd amendment. No one in the Mexican government knew any of it's details. No one in the US tracked the assault weapons. American and Mexicans died because of it. Worse than Watergate because American residents died.

If you believe this you are automatically disqualified as a person with a serious opinion. That is a batshit crazy thing to think.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Not only is this statement batshiit crazy, but it is so wrong and fueled by the kind of vitriol that causes more problems than it solves. In fact this statement is exactly the kind that I was commenting on when I made my statement that early posts were 97% bull shiit. I was wrong every part of the statement related to Fast and Furious is wrong, and further every part is crafted to incite a specific visceral reaction.

 

[GoIrish41]

So for the last decade they go up 5% each year, and then it's just simply a coincidence that the number jumps to 16.5% once the bill is signed? Of course rates go up. So does inflation. So do salaries, gas prices, the price of homes, etc. They don't just make a hike like that one unless something sets them off.

If anyone wants a new car or a good home, buy it now. If Obama gets re-elected, interest rates will go way up and never return. It's all been predicted by economists, and so far it's all come true.. The guy is a crook, and you're a fool if you think he has America's interests in mind.


Countries are liquidating the American dollor. Our debt is skyrocketing. Now we're forcing those who bust their balls to support those who don't. Pretty soon 70% of our paychecks will belong to the government and the rest won't be worth anything anyway.

We put the gun to our heads by even letting it get here...

In the decade between 1999 and 2009, insurance rates for health care rose 131% (an average of about 13% a year). In that same period, inflation rose just over 28%. Don't take my word for it, look here: Chart shows staggering rise in health insurance costs. You should probably do a little research before you start spewing numbers you heard on the Rush's radio program.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Oh, wait a minute. Do people that are quoting opinions or statistics on this thread listen to Rush, or Glen. Because that explains a lot.

 

[NDFan4Life]

Oh, wait a minute. Do people that are quoting opinions or statistics on this thread listen to Rush, or Glen. Because that explains a lot.

I don't. Everything I've posted came from a little research I've done online. Besides, the two you mentioned are far right-wing nut jobs. I'd much rather do my own research than depend on someone who talks out of their a$$ on a consistant basis.

 

[ab2cmiller]

In the decade between 1999 and 2009, insurance rates for health care rose 131% (an average of about 13% a year). In that same period, inflation rose just over 28%. Don't take my word for it, look here: Chart shows staggering rise in health insurance costs. You should probably do a little research before you start spewing numbers you heard on the Rush's radio program.

I agree, the use of exaggerated claims makes it difficult to have a reasonable discussion. I have no clue where Classic is getting his numbers, but they distract from the main points of contention. As GoIrish has indicated, health insurance costs were growing much faster then inflation and something needed to be done, I just disagree that Obamacare was the best choice.

To be fair, you can't really take the 131% and divide it by 10 and come up with an average rate of increase, since the increases are compounded on top of each other. I tried to figure it out on my own, but I think it's closer to an average annual increase of closer to 9% compounded over 10 years.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Funny, I remember this, the 12 and 8 rule. At 12% it takes 8 years, at 8% it takes 12 years, for 100 percent, So we are increasing our target to 131% and we have 10 years. Someone with a calculator help us out, please!

 

[GoIrish41]

To be fair, you can't really take the 131% and divide it by 10 and come up with an average rate of increase, since the increases are compounded on top of each other. I tried to figure it out on my own, but I think it's closer to an average annual increase of closer to 9% compounded over 10 years.

Fair enough. I am by no stretch of the imagination a math guy. I know when I look at that chart it is staggering no matter the average per year. And, despite the impressions that anybody may have formed about my fervor to defend Obamacare, I absolutely agree that it is not the best plan for this country (my desire would be be far less palletable to right, as I said in previous posts). But, politics is all about compromise. To me it is simply obstuctionist and openly hostile for the right speak so negatively about a plan that was developed by the them just because the left adopted it. Heck, they should be high-fiving one another because they won the argument. Doing nothing and keeping things as they are is simply foolish. Last night, and really for the past few years, I've heard a bunch of people talking about repealing Obamacare, but I've heard precious little about what to replace it with. The influence of the insurance companies on the politics of healthcare could not be more obvious. The status quo would continue to benefit to mega rich at the expense of the poor and the middle class. While that is inherently distasteful to me in general, when it comes to healthcare -- life and death -- it is simply unpalletable.

 

[ab2cmiller]

I found a different chart which breaks it down by year over the same ten year period. It looks like from about 2006 to 2010 was around 5% a year. So that is where Classic was getting his numbers. If so, his argument appears to be valid. It's not a 10 year period, but a 5 year period of that rate of growth is a fairly significant amount of time.
FactCheck.org : premium growth

 

[GoIrish41]

I found a different chart which breaks it down by year over the same ten year period
FactCheck.org : premium growth

Thanks ab2cmiller.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I found a different chart which breaks it down by year over the same ten year period. It looks like from about 2006 to 2010 was around 5% a year. So that is where Classic was getting his numbers. If so, his argument appears to be valid. It's not a 10 year period, but a 5 year period of that rate of growth is a fairly significant amount of time.
FactCheck.org : premium growth

Different chart, says the same thing, double digit in almost every year.

2011 9%
2010 4%
2009 5%
2008 5%
2007 5.5%
2006 6%
2005 10%
2004 10%
2003 10%
2002 14%
2001 10%
2000 12%

And please not these are Employer based premiums only.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Fair enough. I am by no stretch of the imagination a math guy. I know when I look at that chart it is staggering no matter the average per year. And, despite the impressions that anybody may have formed about my fervor to defend Obamacare, I absolutely agree that it is not the best plan for this country (my desire would be be far less palletable to right, as I said in previous posts). But, politics is all about compromise. To me it is simply obstuctionist and openly hostile for the right speak so negatively about a plan that was developed by the them just because the left adopted in. Heck, they should be high-fiving one another because they won the argument. Doing nothing and keeping things as they are is simply foolish. Last night, and really for the past few years, I've heard a bunch of people talking about repealing Obamacare, but I've heard precious little about what to replace it with. The influence of the insurance companies on the politics of healthcare could not be more obvious. The status quo would continue to benefit to mega rich at the expense of the poor and the middle class. While that is inherently distasteful to me in general, when it comes to healthcare -- life and death -- it is simply unpalletable.

That isn't quite true either, and you can say it's semantics, but the individual mandate that was proposed back in the day, was a mandate for catastrophic coverage only which would be far less expensive and a far less potential burden on the federal government if things go wrong.

Here is the link to the article that I previously mentioned that explained a lot about the history of the individual mandate. Again, I thought it was a fairly balanced article as it does criticize the Republicans, Heritage Foundation, and liberals for various things. It's long, but I learned a lot that I didn't know.
The Tortuous History of Conservatives and the Individual Mandate - Forbes

 

[Rhode Irish]

I found a different chart which breaks it down by year over the same ten year period. It looks like from about 2006 to 2010 was around 5% a year. So that is where Classic was getting his numbers. If so, his argument appears to be valid. It's not a 10 year period, but a 5 year period of that rate of growth is a fairly significant amount of time.
FactCheck.org : premium growth

But you don't think that a 5-year period is a bit of a small sample? Especially considering that the numbers on either side of that period appear to be pretty consistent, I'd say that qualifies as cherry-picking.

 

[ab2cmiller]

But you don't think that a 5-year period is a bit of a small sample? Especially considering that the numbers on either side of that period appear to be pretty consistent, I'd say that qualifies as cherry-picking.

If your asking my personal opinion, I would say that a 5 yr period would be the minimum sample size you would want to look at. Is a 5yr window reasonable, I would say yes. If it was 2 or 3 years, I would then call it cherry-picking. The higher number in 2011 was effected to some degree (see below) by Obamacare.

As it relates to the large increase this past year that is being blamed on Obamacare, here is the article from factcheck.org that basically says it's disengenious to say the 9% increase was all due to Obamacare, but did an estimate where they believe 1% to 3% of that increase was related to that.
FactCheck.org : FactChecking Health Insurance Premiums

 

[GoIrish41]

That isn't quite true either, and you can say it's semantics, but the individual mandate that was proposed back in the day, was a mandate for catastrophic coverage only which would be far less expensive and a far less potential burden on the federal government if things go wrong.

Here is the link to the article that I previously mentioned that explained a lot about the history of the individual mandate. Again, I thought it was a fairly balanced article as it does criticize the Republicans, Heritage Foundation, and liberals for various things. It's long, but I learned a lot that I didn't know.
The Tortuous History of Conservatives and the Individual Mandate - Forbes

Perhaps Obamacare took it a step further, but it still was a conservative idea. Romneycare was pretty close to an identical plan -- it didn't only require catestrophic coverage. I just read this article (it is balanced, you are right) and it seems clear to me that the proposal from the republican had very different goals than Obamacare. Seems like the GOP was looking for a way to get the employers out from under the burden of providing healthcare to its employees, and to inject individual responsibility. Probably felt that universal healthcare was inevitable and were seeking the best possible outcome for their constituencies. Obama's goal, on the other hand, was to provide universal healthcare to all Americans. He used the mechanism devised by the right to further that goal. And while I see your point, it does not diminish the fact that the right came up with the idea and they are now trying to sh*t all over it. They may have been trying to apply it to achieve different goals (or to avoid unfavorable inevitabilities), but they still advocated the idea for years.

 

[GoIrish41]

I found a different chart which breaks it down by year over the same ten year period. It looks like from about 2006 to 2010 was around 5% a year. So that is where Classic was getting his numbers. If so, his argument appears to be valid. It's not a 10 year period, but a 5 year period of that rate of growth is a fairly significant amount of time.
FactCheck.org : premium growth

if that is where he was getting his numbers, where did the 13.5% jump he described come from when Obamacare was established? I think you are giving Classic too much credit and I also agree that chosing those five years is a bit of cherry-picking.

 

[ab2cmiller]

if that is where he was getting his numbers, where did the 13.5% jump he described come from when Obamacare was established? I think you are giving Classic too much credit and I also agree that chosing those five years is a bit of cherry-picking.

I have zero clue where the 13.5% is coming from.

You are entitled to your opinion about the cherry picking. I would still suggest that it isn't.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Good discussion guys, it got a little crazy for a little while, but I appreciated everyone's input. I think I'm retiring. LOL

 

[GoIrish41]

Take it easy.

 

[JadeBrecks]

I'd also like to point out that most people who think the government is running their lives with Obama Care, are usually the same people who are in favor of amendments to ban gay marriage and abortion.

I believe that abortion is murder. That is a big difference. Mandatory healthcare or preventing murder. Not the same thing.

People hate Obama, and most of it is unwarranted so you're going to pick aman who hates gays, women, and keeping jobs in America. Smart. I hear the phrase "lesser of 2 evils" all the time. Hello dummies, less evil is STILL evil

So because there are two evils we should vote for the more evil? That makes less sense than voting for the less evil. Also you discredit some of our belief because you claim they have no ground yet you believe Romney hates women and gays?

 

[DILLON63]

Bend over and be sure to bring plenty of vaseline, because the prez, congress and federal courts are basically saying that you are going to need it!!!

This really hurts because Roberts actually legislated the tax theory...What happened to the separation of powers????

 

[GoIrish41]

This really hurts because Roberts actually legislated the tax theory...What happened to the separation of powers????

Where were you in 2010 when he and the right wing supreme court ruled on Citizens United? Don't recall your objection then.

 

[k1ssme1m1r1sh]

I believe that abortion is murder. That is a big difference. Mandatory healthcare or preventing murder. Not the same thing.

So because there are two evils we should vote for the more evil? That makes less sense than voting for the less evil. Also you discredit some of our belief because you claim they have no ground yet you believe Romney hates women and gays?

No, what I am saying is most people who hate Obama can't really get down with Romney either, so they say he's the lesser of the 2 evils. Evil is evil, if you hate Obama, but can't be behind Romney 100% you shouldn't vote for either one. How does that not make sense to conservatives? Voting for an idiot just to oust Obama is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Have you ever heard Romney talk? He does hate gays and women. If he didn't, he'd let them live their lives. Abortion is legal. You may think it's murder, and that's ok for you to believe that, but are you also against welfare? A lot of conservatives in Washington believe abortion is murder, yet they don't give a flip what happens to those kids once they are born. It just makes no sense to me. People hate big government, yet they want to regulate a woman's body and that's ok. They want to ban gay marriage and that's ok. But the government says enough is enough with insurance company gouging prices, people not being covered for pre-existing conditions, and children not being covered, etc etc etc, and people think their heads are going to explode.

If someone gets into an accident and goes to the ER to get their bodies put back together and can't pay, and doesn't have any insurance, who do you think pays for that? YOU AND ME. You just think you don't, because it's not a tax, and it's not medicaid and medicare, but the facility must write off that money as a loss, which makes insurance premiums go up, costs go up, and then the employees take pay cuts to cover the losses. It happens all the time. All those people who frivolously use the ER and never pay a dime, are contributing to why people have $10,000 deductibles.

 

[GoIrish41]

Pretty good article here U.S. Last in Health Care Among 7 Industrialized Countries | LiveScience that sums up the state of American healthcare as compared to other industrialized countries. Summary, for those who don't want to read it, is the while we are paying twice as much per capita in this country on health care, we are at the bottom when it comes to quality of that care.

If Obamacare isn't the answer to start correcting this problem, I'd like to hear alternatives. The status quo should be unacceptable no matter what your party affiliation.