FUCK...OBAMA CARE...AND THE MOTHER THAT GAVE BIRTH TO IT

[rkymtnman]

Yep, watched that same situation on local news last night. Interview was of a black student at U. of Texas who has opted to pay the $695 fine cause she can't afford Obamacare. This free stuff is bullshit. It's NOT free. That's what folks get when they voted this facist pig in. What a racket it's been from start to finish. First the under the table software issue where $600,000 went to some software firm that couldn't even get a simple registration website up, then people lost their doctors as The Messiah spewed one of his usual lies, "you can keep your doctor". Now Obamacare costs are rising...... some of finally getting it but unlike The Who's band famous line, "we won't get fooled again"....they taking it in the hiney hole and still believing.

I'm on Medicare and even though you and me spent a life time paying into the system it's still not cheap. I'm paying something like $115/mo. then there's supplemental insurance policy I pay for to the tune of $132/mo. and drug coverage of $18/mo. for low cost Tier I and II drugs. If I go to Tier III or IV, I pay big time. How's $80 for a colonoscopy prep kit that probably cost $5.00 to make?

We live near a small town where the hospital district is constantly rated in the top 100 of the nation and the care is incredible, first class. So I really can't complain.

i just looked up Academic Blue health plan offered by U of T and its' monthly premiums are only $181.75. so she pays $57 a month to not have healthcare??

If she can't afford that, she probably falls under Medicaid and gets it free. sounds like anti-ACA bullshit to me

 

[rkymtnman]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/03/09/obamacares-cost-is-falling-as-fewer-receive-coverage-under-health-care-law-cbo-says/

let me guess. washington post is liberal media?

 

[thepenofareadywriter]

Wait, so you said you don't have healthcare and are going to get fined, but now you're saying you're on medicare? Which one is it?

Go back and read that again

 

[Padawanbater2]

looks like I will be getting a big fine come tax time...this next tax season will be my second year of no health insurance

So why don't you just pay your taxes, then?

Seems like an easy way to avoid a fine..

You could even sign up and receive health insurance

 

[MistrBurrberry]

So glad I don't have to worry about this. I agree the ACA isn't nearly far enough, UHC is where it's at. I pay my taxes, and I get world class healthcare. So much nicer than having to keep my health and healthcare in mind when considering my job options.

 

[Uncle Ben]

i just looked up Academic Blue health plan offered by U of T and its' monthly premiums are only $181.75. so she pays $57 a month to not have healthcare??

If she can't afford that, she probably falls under Medicaid and gets it free. sounds like anti-ACA bullshit to me

Good for you. That's like saying I just paid $4,000 for a car and it turns out to a be a smoking rust bucket.

I'm repeating what she said during the interview regarding enrolling in Obamacare for 2016. And since you're so anal and confrontational, do the research. It was on KVUE news like I said. http://www.kvue.com/

 

[Not GOP]

According to the Washington Times, half of Obamacare co-ops have failed. This has sent lawmakers spinning into panic mode.

More than half of Obamacare co-ops go belly up - Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/3/more-half-obamacare-co-ops-go-belly/

 

[nitro harley]

This whole democratic dream is crashing. BarryO's supporters didn't back up the machine very well. I guess most of them really didn't care about healthcare.

 

[MistrBurrberry]

This whole democratic dream is crashing. BarryO's supporters didn't back up the machine very well. I guess most of them really didn't care about healthcare.

This is a silly quote that presumes everyone is either a republican or a democrat. Plenty of people who are democrats wanted universal healthcare. Plenty of people who are left wing like myself (and for whom Obama is not nearly left enough, he's a centrist imo) thought the ACA was a clusterfuck from the get go, designed as a handout to the giant healthcare insurance companies who poured money into the political machine while all the healthcare reform was being debated.

One can be against the ACA, AND be for a more efficient and effective solution like the rest of the developed world enjoys. Myself, I've had premo private tech company insurance in Cali and Icelandic UHC, and I vastly prefer Iceland's solution. It has been better for me on every single metric.

 

[MistrBurrberry]

According to the Washington Times, half of Obamacare co-ops have failed. This has sent lawmakers spinning into panic mode.

More than half of Obamacare co-ops go belly up - Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/3/more-half-obamacare-co-ops-go-belly/

Keep in mind that the Washington Times is owned by a right wing billionaire who's never made it profitable, and funnels a fortune into polluting the political debate in the US with conservative tripe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Times#Political_leanings

"The political views of The Washington Times are often described as extremely conservative.[48][49][50]The Washington Post reported: "the Times was established by Moon to combat communism and be a conservative alternative to what he perceived as the liberal bias of The Washington Post."[5]"

 

[Not GOP]

Keep in mind that the Washington Times is owned by a right wing billionaire who's never made it profitable, and funnels a fortune into polluting the political debate in the US with conservative tripe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Times#Political_leanings

"The political views of The Washington Times are often described as extremely conservative.[48][49][50]The Washington Post reported: "the Times was established by Moon to combat communism and be a conservative alternative to what he perceived as the liberal bias of The Washington Post."[5]"

bro. unless you can point out something false, or have a different source that says otherwise, it really doesn't contribute anything to the conversation. Let me guess, you prefer the Washington Post instead?

 

[MistrBurrberry]

bro. unless you can point out something false, or have a different source that says otherwise, it really doesn't contribute anything to the conversation. Let me guess, you prefer the Washington Post instead?

The point is that you can establish very clear political biases. Of course a right wing owned newspaper will do whatever it can to paint a program like the ACA as a failure, and for all the wrong reasons. Here is some further information

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/nearly-half-obamacare-co-ops-folded/

From the article: "They had basically had solvency issues, financial solvency issues.

But, of course, as we mentioned earlier, there was a change and their funding was cut early on in inception of the co-ops. And then, secondly, there was another legislative change that adjusted the amount of money that the federal government could pay them.

It’s a program that says, if you have a lot of healthier beneficiaries, you pay in, and that is the insurers pay in and that money is distributed to the insurance plans that take care of the sicker folks.

The insurers, including many of these co-ops, expected a much more generous payment from the administration than they’re receiving. And that has hurt their bottom line."

Three guesses which party lead that change. That's the right wing's mantra: Defund something til it stops working, then try to point to it as a failed enterprise from the beginning so you can privatize it to the benefit of yourself or your friends.

Funny how the universal healthcare in every other nation is able to cover the entire citizenship at a lower cost per head. But no, it's small scale co-ops failing through regulatory changes that prove privatized healthcare insurance is great.

 

[pnwmystery]

bro. unless you can point out something false, or have a different source that says otherwise, it really doesn't contribute anything to the conversation. Let me guess, you prefer the Washington Post instead?

Washington Post is a little more center-conservative leaning. Washington Times is conservative leaning. I already know your preference.

 

[Not GOP]

Washington Post is a little more center-conservative leaning. Washington Times is conservative leaning. I already know your preference.

Washington Post is liberal. No more "center-conservative" leaning than the New York Times

 

[Not GOP]

The point is that you can establish very clear political biases. Of course a right wing owned newspaper will do whatever it can to paint a program like the ACA as a failure, and for all the wrong reasons. Here is some further information

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/nearly-half-obamacare-co-ops-folded/

From the article: "They had basically had solvency issues, financial solvency issues.

But, of course, as we mentioned earlier, there was a change and their funding was cut early on in inception of the co-ops. And then, secondly, there was another legislative change that adjusted the amount of money that the federal government could pay them.

It’s a program that says, if you have a lot of healthier beneficiaries, you pay in, and that is the insurers pay in and that money is distributed to the insurance plans that take care of the sicker folks.

The insurers, including many of these co-ops, expected a much more generous payment from the administration than they’re receiving. And that has hurt their bottom line."

Three guesses which party lead that change. That's the right wing's mantra: Defund something til it stops working, then try to point to it as a failed enterprise from the beginning so you can privatize it to the benefit of yourself or your friends.

Funny how the universal healthcare in every other nation is able to cover the entire citizenship at a lower cost per head. But no, it's small scale co-ops failing through regulatory changes that prove privatized healthcare insurance is great.

PBS, really? Doesn't the "non-profit" get over 400 million dollars a year from the government? The Republican party has funded Obamacare 100%. Obama has gotten every budget he has ever wanted. Even now with a new speaker in the house. So I'm not really sure what you are stating with "defund something until it stops working"

 

[pnwmystery]

Washington Post is liberal. No more "center-conservative" leaning than the New York Times

The members of the editorial board are more center-conservative. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make it "liberal propaganda." Grow up.

 

[Not GOP]

The members of the editorial board are more center-conservative. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make it "liberal propaganda." Grow up.

you posted an opinion. Which you're entitled to, and so am I. When are you going to grow up?

 

[MuyLocoNC]

The Washington Post is a liberal rag, they may not be as batshit crazy as the NY Times, but to include the word Conservative anywhere in a description of the WaPo is the work of a halfwit.

 

[pnwmystery]

you posted an opinion. Which you're entitled to, and so am I. When are you going to grow up?

Any news source that contradicts you, you just say "It's liberal bias!" Immediately dismissing it. Unfortunately the same thing can be said about some of the liberal members with conservative things, but the other caveat to this is that the more often quoted conservative sources are actually sometimes the least factually correct (I've seen other things though that contradict my point). If that's your opinion, alright, but just because opinions are like noses and everyone has to have one doesn't necessarily make every opinion worthy of holding onto dearly at the expense of having a more informed opinion (unless you want to have less informed opinions).

The unfortunate fact of the matter is that the Washington Post is a very good newspaper with great journalism. Their Opinion articles can lean more liberal (and recently yes, I'll concede that their Op-Eds have had more of a left lean to them, but they are opinion pieces) their editorial board is more center-conservative, but at least they're scrupulous about it, and this isn't really an opinion but a very widely held view.

 

[pnwmystery]

The Washington Post is a liberal rag, they may not be as batshit crazy as the NY Times, but to include the word Conservative anywhere in a description of the WaPo is the work of a halfwit.

Your username is great, Very Crazy, completely true. Maybe you should change it though to CompletamenteLoco.