RE: H.R. 3350 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


SadistDave -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 2:57:56 AM)

-DELETED-

Double posted.

-SD-




SadistDave -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 3:26:21 AM)

You wouldn't know a peer viewed paper if it bit you in the ass.

It might be in your own self interest to do a little actual research into the effects of ACA. It's so bad that even Obummer is starting to realize it's a non-starter. He's been making speeches about how it needs to be rebranded and remarketed, because he believes people are stupid enough to go for it if he just calls it something else. Even the lamestream media is starting to report on how this is devastating millions of Americans. When Politicostops kissing The Annointed Ones ass, you know there's something seriously wrong.

Stories roll in daily daily about low enrollment, high insurance cancellations. Tens of millions lose coverage vs. 106K who get an exchange policy. One fellow managed to get his dog enrolled, but couldn't get himself an exchange policy... The woman Obummer used as an example of how wonderful Obamacare is??? Turns out she can't afford the policy, so she isn't going to buy it after all.

You don't need a peer viewed paper. You need a reality check.

-SD-




DaddySatyr -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 3:32:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SadistDave

Stories roll in daily daily about low enrollment, high insurance cancellations. Tens of millions lose coverage vs. 106K who get an exchange policy. One fellow managed to get his dog enrolled, but couldn't get himself an exchange policy... The woman Obummer used as an example of how wonderful Obamacare is??? Turns out she can't afford the policy, so she isn't going to buy it after all.

You don't need a peer viewed paper. You need a reality check.

-SD-



I posted about that fact, here







Phydeaux -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 5:23:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:

That's also why conservatives have accurately predicted the lost jobs, lost insurance policies, doctors leaving the medical industry, and higher insurance costs, etc., etc..


I **EAGERLY** await your citations of peer-reviewed scientific studies to support this outlandish claim!


months before the ACA hit - I predicted the net effect would be less people had insurance. It doesn't take a rocket scientist.
And the net affect if the democrats continue this crap will be tens of millions of people losing insurance in 2014.





mnottertail -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 5:42:24 AM)

and gaining it again.  thanks for playing, and the CBO predicted it years before you. 




Phydeaux -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 5:48:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

and gaining it again.  thanks for playing, and the CBO predicted it years before you. 


The losses are occuring. The gains are pipedreams. The fact they predicted it means they got it wrong.
What was their prediction.. 30 million--- oops 7 million the first year.

Yeah. Not happening.

Reality's calling - american's are rejecting this democratic idiocy.




servantforuse -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 5:51:10 AM)

And these 'new' customers will once again lose their current plan after one year.




mnottertail -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 6:01:04 AM)

and gain another.

That has been that way since insurance was in america.




DomKen -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 12:59:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SadistDave

quote:


So? What does what happened in 2012 have to do with the fact that the ACA is a republican plan proposed by, amongst others, the Heritage Foundation, Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole? What does that have to do with whether Republicans abandoned the plan before W took office? Why do you think it is at all relevant to anything under discussion? Or are you throwing shit out there hoping to change the subject because you got busted making shit up yet again?


Try to keep up here...

I write a bill.
I propose the bill become law.
After my friends look at the bill, they point out fatal flaws in it. Realizing that the bill will not work, I withdraw my proposal.

DomKen comes along and sees the stupid bill I proposed and abandoned because it won't work
DomKen proposes the dumb bill to all of his friends who then start adding things to it and make it even dumber.
DomKen gets all his friends to vote for and pass a stupider bill that is rooted in the bill that I and my friends already know will not work.

That's pretty much what the ACA has in common with the bill the Republicans proposed and abandoned. That's also why conservatives have accurately predicted the lost jobs, lost insurance policies, doctors leaving the medical industry, and higher insurance costs, etc., etc..

Yes, Republicans wrote the foundation of ACA. Then they did the research and realized it was a stupid fucking idea. That's why they abandoned the idea. It was fucking stupid. I'm probably giving them too much credit here, but if Reid and Pelosi had bothered to actually bothered to read the bill before passing it without a single Republican vote; they might have known it was a stupid fucking idea too...

-SD-

Bullshit!

Romney signed the bill and bragged about it for years afterwards. So did the Heritage Foundation.

You're just spreading lies you cannot even attempt to back up. Quite simply Romney and other Republicans are on record supporting the law until Obama used is as the model for the ACA (6 years after it was implemented and after Romney ran on it in his 2008 campaign). Romney even occasionally flirted with taking credit for the ACA during the 2012 campaign.

Also once again what does action taken by the Democratically controlled Mass. government have to do with whether any Republicans supported the idea after 2000? Why don't you stop just making shit up at every turn?




papassion -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 2:58:20 PM)

How many pages were in Romney's healthcare bill? How many pages are in Obama's healthcare bill? Why such a difference is they are so similar? Answer, Romney's is a healthcare bill. Obama's is a CONTROL of everything bill.




DomKen -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 3:27:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion

How many pages were in Romney's healthcare bill? How many pages are in Obama's healthcare bill? Why such a difference is they are so similar? Answer, Romney's is a healthcare bill. Obama's is a CONTROL of everything bill.

There is no functional difference between the law. Both are primarily a bunch of insurance regulations. The Medicaid expansion and the Medicare cost savings takes up quite a few pages.

And finally the ACA controls very little. These "OMGWTFBBQ socialism fascism!!!!!" ravings are tired and so long debunked its starting to make cons look stupid.




mnottertail -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/20/2013 5:12:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion

How many pages were in Romney's healthcare bill? How many pages are in Obama's healthcare bill? Why such a difference is they are so similar? Answer, Romney's is a healthcare bill. Obama's is a CONTROL of everything bill.


We did that, per state the pages are about half of Romneys single state plan.




Phydeaux -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/21/2013 12:07:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion


And finally the ACA controls very little. These "OMGWTFBBQ socialism fascism!!!!!" ravings are tired and so long debunked its starting to make cons look stupid.


Utter bullshit.

The law mandates that people must get coverage.
The law mandates that the IRS will verify both coverage, subsidies and penalties.
The law mandates the equal treatment for mental disease.
The law mandates maternity must be covered.
The law mandates hundreds of other coverage requirements.
It mandates that catholics and others must fund abortions and birthcontrol.

Unlike romney care, the law instead of providing incentives uses a carrot and stick approach.

Unlike romney care, it is a federal not a state program.
Unlike romney care, it cancelled existing employer health plans, and had strict grandfather clauses.


Yeah. It doesn't attempt to control anything. Do you ever get tired of the BS?




DomKen -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/21/2013 12:46:38 PM)

<incompetent quoting fixed>

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

And finally the ACA controls very little. These "OMGWTFBBQ socialism fascism!!!!!" ravings are tired and so long debunked its starting to make cons look stupid.


Utter bullshit.

The law mandates that people must get coverage.

So does Romneycare
quote:

The law mandates that the IRS will verify both coverage, subsidies and penalties.

Same thing here except its the state that does it.
quote:

The law mandates the equal treatment for mental disease.

Actually that is a very newly issued regulation
quote:

The law mandates maternity must be covered.

So did Romneycare
quote:

The law mandates hundreds of other coverage requirements.

Most of which are in Romney care as well.
quote:

It mandates that catholics and others must fund abortions and birthcontrol.

So did Romneycare

Why do you continue this nonsense?




Phydeaux -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/21/2013 2:36:14 PM)

70 pgs versus 2000

Sure. They're the same.




mnottertail -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/21/2013 3:06:14 PM)

I dont know it is 2000 pages.  You dont know it is 2000 pages.  same size pages, set in the same type same margins?

And that means what?  how many pages were the 42 repeals all totaled of it?







Phydeaux -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/21/2013 4:14:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

<incompetent quoting fixed>

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

And finally the ACA controls very little. These "OMGWTFBBQ socialism fascism!!!!!" ravings are tired and so long debunked its starting to make cons look stupid.


Utter bullshit.

The law mandates that people must get coverage.

So does Romneycare
quote:

The law mandates that the IRS will verify both coverage, subsidies and penalties.

Same thing here except its the state that does it.
quote:

The law mandates the equal treatment for mental disease.

Actually that is a very newly issued regulation
quote:

The law mandates maternity must be covered.

So did Romneycare
quote:

The law mandates hundreds of other coverage requirements.

Most of which are in Romney care as well.
quote:

It mandates that catholics and others must fund abortions and birthcontrol.

So did Romneycare

Why do you continue this nonsense?


Everything you said is uncited. Most is not true.
Cites please, for this shit.

Obama care sucks so we're going to say its the same as romneycare.
When A). Its not true
B). Even if it were true - it won't make obamacare any less a pig.

I repeat. the differences enumerated above are real.
Romney care with its emphasis on HSA had outs for people of conscience.
Ditto it allowed true catastrophic coverage.




Finally,




DomKen -> RE: H.R. 3350 (11/21/2013 4:46:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


Everything you said is uncited. Most is not true.
Cites please, for this shit.

individual mandate and income verification
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform#Individual_taxes
http://www.massresources.org/health-reform.html

mandated maternity and mental health coverage
http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/01/pf/massachusetts-health-care.moneymag/

birth control mandate
http://www.examiner.com/article/did-you-know-romneycare-also-had-a-birth-control-mandate

Are you ever going to get tired of just making shit up all the time?




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.198242E-02