Twenty Million Covered Under Obamacare

According to the New England Journal Of Medicine!      

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/nejm-obamacare-progress-report

"...The authors admit the 20 million figure does not distinguish between those who were previously insured and those who were not – even though the previously insured would not be “gaining” coverage but merely replacing one form of coverage with another.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/64428

There will still be the nincompoops with no healthcare—and they'll speak English, and not Spanish.




.

The Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday said that the Affordable Care Act will contribute to the equivalent of 2 million workers out of the labor market by 2017, as employees work fewer hours or decide to drop out of the labor force entirely. The CBO revised much of its outlook on the Affordable Care Act in a new report released Tuesday. From the report: CBO estimates that the ACA will reduce the total number of hours worked, on net, by about 1.5 percent to 2.0 percent.
Yahoo Finance via Business Insider

  


.

I'm sure the stock market will have as much to do with people leaving the labor force as Obamacare will. People don't have to feel that they are chained to their jobs anymore! That will open up more jobs for young folks. Obamacare will only get better as more states cave in to the Medicaid expansion.  

News Buzzard wrote:I'm sure the stock market will have as much to do with people leaving the labor force as Obamacare will. People don't have to feel that they are chained to their jobs anymore! That will open up more jobs for young folks. Obamacare will only get better as more states cave in to the Medicaid expansion.  

Your assigned doctor may not speak your language...




.

News Hawk wrote:Your assigned doctor may not speak your language...

I don't have any assigned doctors. I don't know what your problem is, other than the fact that you are miserable.

Nice way to try to rationalize what Obamacare has done to many families. Reduced their income by reducing their hours to under 30 (that's not part time; that's the new "full time").

Lets not forget...47 Million Americans still don't have "insurance."

ObamaCare has become a ruthless job-killer as was widely predicted by those who know better, much to the chagrin of the Obamaphiles who worship him and his intellectually bankrupt administration. I Hope they like this dead-in-the-water economy which is 100% theirs to have to defend this November as well as in 2016 thanks to their incompetence.

Why is so hard to understand that government can't run anything?

Look at the VA system; notice how it is corrupt, dishonest, ineffective, and wasteful it is. What makes anyone think that adding 50 times more people and money would not result in an even bigger debacle?

I would really like these Obamaphiles to start providing some REALLY good arguments that what they want isn't just completely insane.

Even without free stuff?
http://www.boston.com/business/news/2014/07/22/federal-appeals-court-deals-blow-health-law/p4ne0J7FbYFWXbRgrdaRhN/story.html?p1=Topopage:Test_B:Main_headline

You're wrong on all counts, Outerlimits, and this economy is far from dead in the water. By the way you're talking you would think that there was no one visiting the Lakes Region this summer !   

Obamacare is here to stay! That's all you need to know, and you don't want to listen anyway.

Hmm, I didn't hear much talk about that Red.

I heard last night that the VA has the biggest budget of all except the DOD. So I think that tells you that throwing more money at anything the gov. does isn't going to help.

Right NB, nobody should have to be chained to their job. They should feel free to pursue their happiness 24 hours a day. Their every need should be taken care of so they don't have to work.

Great article Red.

Aside from the obvious conclusions in the ruling, this also illustrates how incompetent and/or careless Democrats were in drafting ACA legislation.

Explicitly outlining subsidies for state exchanges while omitting language for subsidies for the federal exchange was a colossal oversight on Democrats' part. So egregious that the entire Obamacare is at risk of being completely dismantled if upheld in the Supreme Court. They passed a gray, blank slated bill then let the agencies define the rules. Maybe that was done on purpose.

One walks a fine line when they force something on their citizens and penalize them if they don't go along. Glad to see people bucking this and going to court and glad to see the court actually doing its job to ensure our liberties and freedoms don't get trampled on.

WHL wrote:Right NB, nobody should have to be chained to their job.  They should feel free to pursue their happiness 24 hours a day.  Their every need should be taken care of so they don't have to work.

Actually, what I meant was that people wouldn't have to wait until age 65 to retire because of health insurance issues. Now that the markets have come back there are folks who may have the means to retire at age 60, with a flush IRA and Social Security at 62, then they can purchase health insurance through Obamacare until they go on Medicare at age 65. There are millions of folks in this country who are deserving of an early retirement, and Obamacare can allow them to do that. That will open up jobs for younger folks to work.

Social Security and Medicare are 2 wonderful government programs that have been around for decades, and, despite the conservative obstructionists, will be around for decades to come. In the end Americans get the final vote, no matter how much money the Koch brothers spend, and Americans will never do away with Social Security and Medicare. That decision that came out today on Obamacare means nothing in the short term, and will probably wind up in the Supreme Court, and even still won't be the end of Obamacare if the Supreme Court goes against Obama. There are too many states that have already set up exchanges to do away with it.

Obamacare is here to stay! Get over it!

NB, I don't think that the SS system can handle many more people retiring at that age, given the actuarial tables. I think we need to look at changing the retirement age (I am 50, so this statement is not in my best interest!)

red_hill wrote:NB, I don't think that the SS system can handle many more people retiring at that age, given the actuarial tables. I think we need to look at changing the retirement age (I am 50, so this statement is not in my best interest!)

The Social Security system is solvent until the year 2035, and then after that it would only be able to cover 75% of what it's now paying out (for another 75 years). The fix is easy; lift the cap and possibly go with a slightly higher percentage. Problem solved.

If I were age 50 I would be extremely concerned about the Koch brothers and the Paul Ryan budgets. I shudder at the idea of the Medicare system turning into a voucher program. That voucher won't be worth the paper it's printed on when you get to age 70. No American deserves not to have health insurance when they reach the retirement age of 65, and I'm not buying the notion that this country is broke. That's what Paul Ryan and the conservatives are telling you, and it's baloney!

I already pay $16K a year into what I used to call FICA Medicare (SS)

red_hill wrote:I already pay $16K a year into what I used to call FICA Medicare (SS)

And for a little more you can keep both programs solvent. Cancers and heart disease are conditions that require hundreds of thousands of dollars in healthcare, and possibly over a million dollars easily. You should never want to give up Medicare! It could save your assets some day!

News Buzzard wrote:

red_hill wrote:I already pay $16K a year into what I used to call FICA Medicare (SS)

And for a little more you can keep both programs solvent. Cancers and heart disease are conditions that require hundreds of thousands of dollars in healthcare, and possibly over a million dollars easily. You should never want to give up Medicare! It could save your assets some day!

I would rather not, I pay more than my share of taxes and am no 1%er. I make a decent living, but am not rich by any means. It annoys me to no end that there are many that walk among us that pay zero in taxes of any type.

News Buzzard wrote:Actually, what I meant was that people wouldn't have to wait until age 65 to retire because of health insurance issues. Now that the markets have come back there are folks who may have the means to retire at age 60, with a flush IRA and Social Security at 62, then they can purchase health insurance through Obamacare until they go on Medicare at age 65. There are millions of folks in this country who are deserving of an early retirement, and Obamacare can allow them to do that. That will open up jobs for younger folks to work.

People could buy directly from the insurance companies/brokers before Obamacare.

Having subsidies (somebody else paying your insurance) is the ONLY thing that has changed. As we know Obamacare does nothing to address the cost of healthcare, it just redistributes the premiums and co-pays.

Obamacare was exactly what the insurance companies wanted. With all the subsidies pouring into their coffers it was the perfect scheme to move a massive amount of wealth from the populous to themselves; and btw, they were the architects of ACA in the first place.


If you believe “There are too many states that have already set up exchanges to do away with it.” is an acceptable reason not to obey our laws; then you don’t know our history and you don’t understand our legal system. It is the word of law that matters and you appear to be pulling for corruption. The only way to enforce the law is to enforce the law as it is written. If that proves to be unpopular then maybe the law was a bad idea to begin with and ought to be repealed.

After-all, 85% of us were satisfied with the healthcare we had before Obamacare, half the remainder were qualified for Medicaid or Medicare and simply hadn't applied for it and most of the rest were out of work and would have insurance as soon as they found a job.

I think you should worry more about yourself and not what the other guy is getting, Red Hill. Social Security is a retirement/disability/death benefits program, and there are no guarantees. When it was implemented the spouse was usually the homemaker, and one of the purposes of the program was to provide some income for a surviving spouse. I have $20 thousand a year coming in from Social Security, but I don't know how long I'm going to live. If I live another 20 years that's $400 thousand.

Medicare was implemented back in 1965, largely because senior citizens couldn't get health insurance, and it is now a single payer system designed to cover our senior citizens during that part of their life when they have the most medical bills. My wife and I have run up over $400 thousand in medical bills over the last 6 months, and we're not done yet. I won't get into details, but it's suffice to say that we both have serious illnesses.

You're paying a boat load of money into these programs and I suspect you're self employed, Red Hill, but you have to think about your future and what may happen to you, and what the consequences could be if these programs go belly-up. My wife and I would be out on the street if we didn't have coverage!

Outerlimits, you are so full of crap it isn't funny. First of all healthcare inflation has most definitely slowed down since the implementation of Obamacare. That's a fact! Secondly, you say that people could buy directly from their insurance companies before Obamacare, but they can't afford the insurance. Thirdly, the 4th Circuit in Virginia just ruled in favor of Obamacare, and if the full court in DC votes on it they will surely reverse their decision. Lastly, we have 14 states that set up their own exchanges and about half the states have accepted the Medicaid expansion. On what planet do you think that will be reversed? It's very possible that the Supreme Court won't even hear this case, but if Obama loses in the Supreme Court, Obamacare isn't going anywhere.

You always harp on people getting free stuff.
If you're deducting your mortgage interest from your income on your taxes, you're getting free stuff!
If you're deducting charitable contributions from your income taxes, you're getting free stuff!
If you deduct your property taxes from your income taxes, you're getting free stuff!
If you take the standard deduction off your taxable income, you're getting free stuff!

So how come you can get free stuff and someone else can't?

Please check back for updates. In a potentially crippling blow to Obamacare, a top federal appeals court Tuesday said that billions of dollars worth of government subsidies that helped 4.7 million people buy insurance on HealthCare.gov are not legal under the Affordable Care Act.
Read more at cnbc.com ...

Just wait until Obama sees this on TV !

  


.

Get up to speed! That decision was neutralized by the 4th Circuit Court in Virginia. Obamacare isn't going anywhere!

News Buzzard wrote:Get up to speed! That decision was neutralized by the 4th Circuit Court in Virginia. Obamacare isn't going anywhere!

"Neutralized"?

This is headed back to the Supreme Court?

  


.

It may go back to the Supreme Court, but first it may go to the full 11 members of the DC court who will probably overturn the 3 member panel. If that happens then the Supreme Court may refuse to hear the case, which will ensure that the states which operate under the federal exchange will continue with the tax credits. The 3 member panel in DC made a mistake by not taking into account the intent of the law, which was to provide tax credits to citizens in all of the states. In a worse case scenario, where Obama loses, it already appears that many of those 36 states would be willing to adopt the federal exchange as their own for the purpose of continuing with the tax credits. There are 6 Republican governors on the ropes in November and there will be enormous pressure on all of the governors in the 36 states without their own exchanges to continue with the tax credits, otherwise they will be forcing millions of people to give up their health insurance.

News Buzzard wrote:
Outerlimits, you are so full of crap it isn't funny. First of all healthcare inflation has most definitely slowed down since the implementation of Obamacare. That's a fact!

 
Better check your facts.
 
Obamacare promised to reverse rising health costs, saving the average family of four $2,500 a year.
 
This was a lie and everybody knows it.
 
Admittedly, there has been a slowdown in health spending, but this slowdown began in the mid-2000′s, well before Obama even took office.
 
Obama can’t be held responsible for anything that happened before (or after) he took office.  How can you give him credit for this?
 
Obamacare is just another slam on the working middle-class.  "Not one thin dime!" Remember that whopper? The rich can afford premium health insurance, the idle will get it for "free", and working families in the middle-class will struggle to pay for yet-another program. The government has no money, they have to take it from the ever shrinking pool of income tax payers, that also have to pay for their own insurance.
 

News Buzzard wrote:
You always harp on people getting free stuff.
If you're deducting your mortgage interest from your income on your taxes, you're getting free stuff!
If you're deducting charitable contributions from your income taxes, you're getting free stuff!
If you deduct your property taxes from your income taxes, you're getting free stuff!
If you take the standard deduction off your taxable income, you're getting free stuff!

So how come you can get free stuff and someone else can't?

 
Actually I harp on paying for "free stuff".
 
But if you want to make it personal…
 
I take the standard deduction only and every tax payer can take that.  So exactly how am I getting a free stuff unavailable to others?  Like clockwork over the past 20 years my wife and I have paid  28.5% of our income in federal income tax. I would be all for a flat tax rate so everyone would have skin in the game and hairbrained scams like Obamacare wouldn't stand a chance.
 
Only a progressive would call tax deductions freebies.  Reductions on the amount of income that can be taxed is not the same as receiving  free health insurance, free food, free education, and free housing,