Defunding Obamacare - Can it happen?

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by Blart

Also, I've already checked the estimates. I'd save about 20% on my plan alone.

http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/heal...cy/calculator/

https://www.healthcare.gov/marketpla...ate=california

Overall Americans will save billions in premiums, and that's before rebates.

Oooh, young family of 4. $1k a month. $12,000 a year.

House or Obamacare.... House or Obamacare....

It's clear you don't understand how this is really going to shake out.

[TonyR]

Perspective from Jonathan Gruber, the guy behind Romneycare:

The number of people covered by employer-based health-care plans is dropping by a percentage point a year. The system is falling apart. So you put in a new safety net. That means a few more people are going to come in. If you’re not willing to risk making some things worse, you’re never going to make anything better. My estimate is that 80 percent of the people are not going to feel any change at all, and that 17 percent or so are going to find that things are better, and that about two or three percent will be worse off, and those are the people who benefit from the discriminatory nature of health-insurance at the present time. If health-insurance companies can’t discriminate any more, those people will have to pay a little more. When we decided that people couldn’t discriminate in what they paid black people or women any more, people had to pay more because employers couldn’t discriminate in what they paid black people and women. Was that a bad thing?

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politic...Expert_Opinion

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by TonyR

Perspective from Jonathan Gruber, the guy behind Romneycare:

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politic...Expert_Opinion

I'm going to call up State Farm and tell them they're discriminating against me because my house is on fire.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by Blart

Also, I've already checked the estimates. I'd save about 20% on my plan alone.

http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/heal...cy/calculator/

https://www.healthcare.gov/marketpla...ate=california

Overall Americans will save billions in premiums, and that's before rebates.


And the penalty everyone was worried about, for those who refuse to get insured? Between $0 and $95 per year, depending on income. The tyranny!

Oh schweet.

According to the Berkely calculator, if that family of 4 makes $94,200 per year, they get a $700 per month credit ($8,400 per year).

If they make $94,250, they get zero.

God help them if that's accurate.

[TonyR]

Originally Posted by pricejj

...The federal deficit...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/20...g_deficit.html

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...alling-falling

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...rss_ezra-klein

[TonyR]

Originally Posted by BBII

Just curious. When every single Democrat in the Senate voted against raising the debt ceiling in 2006, were those 'extreme tactics?'

What's changed? I guess other than annual deficits probably being 3-4 times higher now?

An Andrew Sullivan reader gives his opinion on this:

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/...age-party-ctd/

[Pony Boy]

The penality for not signing up for Obamacare for the remainder of this year is $29.00.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by TonyR

An Andrew Sullivan reader gives his opinion on this:

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/...age-party-ctd/

He doesn't seem to touch on Democrats' (and Obama's) 2006 Grandstanding at all.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by Taco John

The Democrats are already starting to blink on a one year delay of the individual mandate. This is all playing out perfectly for Cruz. If he walks away with this trophy, he'll have accomplished killing several birds with one stone - showing up the Republican leadership and DC punditry class, and making 2014 a referendum on Obamacare, not to mention providing much needed relief for the American people.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...te_757177.html

This is playing out brilliantly for Cruz.

YEAs ---54
Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
Markey (D-MA)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

You're welcome.

[DenverBrit]

Originally Posted by BBII

He doesn't seem to touch on Democrats' (and Obama's) 2006 Grandstanding at all.

If people can't keep blaming Bush for his past, the same must apply to Dems past. Right?

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by DenverBrit

If people can't keep blaming Bush for past mistakes, the same must apply to Dems past mistakes. Right?

That game changes a bit when it involves the same actual people now doing exactly what they used to cry about.

“Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

-President (Senator) Obama in 2006

[Bronco Yoda]

Originally Posted by Meck77

Is the real issue the insurance we carry or perhaps the health problems of our nation?

Is more drug availability to the masses really the answer?

The real underlying problem is that Medicine has become too much of an insanely profit-driven industry. It's NEARLY ONE FIFTH OF OUR GDP! That's 50% more than any other developed nation!

It's gotten so over bloated now that we couldn't just change things immediately even if we did had a magic answer book with all the answers in it. We'd tank the economy if we changed things too quickly now. We in essence traded our Manufacturing industry in for a Medical Services Industry. And that's how many want it. All that waste and corruption is now factored in as 'trickle-down' for our economy.

American Medicine Morphed from a humanitarian discipline that paid well into a ravenous revenue stream for health care professionals, drug and medical device companies, hospitals, and insurance companies. Then we went one step further (because as Americans we gotta super size everything... go big or go home) by feeding the greedy malpractice lawyers, drug companies, health care insurance companies and doctors who over treat patients by practicing defensive or wasteful medicine ordering unnecessary tests and unneeded operations.

I've know dumb blonds with great push-up bra's and zero education raking in good six figures pushing pharma drugs from office to office. Now how crazy is that. Forget about pushing on the street corner when you can buy a nice suite and do it legally with a big-pharma name badge.

My wife use to own and operate a small medical billing service in Southern California. She sold to her partner. You couldn't stay in business & keep clients unless you over billed for everything and worse. She refused to do it.

There are countries that spend on tenth (as a percentage) what we do here in the states and still manage to have the same if not better outcomes.

We no longer make anything to sell so we're now left to eat each other for profit.

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by Bronco Yoda

The real underlying problem is that Medicine has become too much of an insanely profit-driven industry. It's NEARLY ONE FIFTH OF OUR GDP! That's 50% more than any other developed nation!

It's gotten so over bloated now that we couldn't just change things immediately even if we did had a magic answer book with all the answers in it. We'd tank the economy if we changed things too quickly now. We in essence traded our Manufacturing industry in for a Medical Services Industry. And that's how many want it. All that waste and corruption is now factored in as 'trickle-down' for our economy.

American Medicine Morphed from a humanitarian discipline that paid well into a ravenous revenue stream for health care professionals, drug and medical device companies, hospitals, and insurance companies. Then we went one step further (because as Americans we gotta super size everything... go big or go home) by feeding the greedy malpractice lawyers, drug companies, health care insurance companies and doctors who over treat patients by practicing defensive or wasteful medicine ordering unnecessary tests and unneeded operations.

I've know dumb blonds with great push-up bra's and zero education raking in good six figures pushing pharma drugs from office to office. Now how crazy is that. Forget about pushing on the street corner when you can buy a nice suite and do it legally with a big-pharma name badge.

My wife use to own and operate a small medical billing service in Southern California. She sold to her partner. You couldn't stay in business & keep clients unless you over billed for everything and worse. She refused to do it.

There are countries that spend on tenth (as a percentage) what we do here in the states and still manage to have the same if not better outcomes.

We no longer make anything to sell so we're now left to eat each other for profit.

Pretty nice post and a great summary of the meat of the issue.

But I'll disagree on the outcomes. They're pretty good for people who can afford the bill. Maybe not so good for those who can't. Or who don't have access because of Medicare/Medicaid/HMO related access restrictions.

And the other thing is that the upside to all that profit-taking is that the US drives the bulk of the world's medical innovation. If we ever enact any kind of price controls, it should be to enforce international pricing parity to take the rest of the socialized industrialized world off of their free-innovation ride.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by houghtam

YEAs ---54
Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
Markey (D-MA)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

You're welcome.

I don't understand why you just posted that. You're always a vote behind. The bill Manchin is saying he'd vote for hasn't even cleared the House yet.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by Taco John

I don't understand why you just posted that. You're always a vote behind. The bill Manchin is saying he'd vote for hasn't even cleared the House yet.

Won't. Happen.

[DenverBrit]

Originally Posted by BBII

That game changes a bit when it involves the same actual people now doing exactly what they used to cry about.



-President (Senator) Obama in 2006

So that was the same as the current fight? One where a bill has already passed through both houses and upheld by the Supreme Court?

Not even close.

Sullivan is exactly right when he wrote:

"Instead, what we have here today is a new concept that a rump minority – using pure obstruction alone – can force enactment of its own agenda through a threat of catastrophic economic retaliation. Also, with a $16 trillion debt, this would be an annual extortion threat that far surpasses the value of majority electoral success. As Matt Yglesias aptly puts it: “Republicans are essentially asking for an end to constitutional government in the United States and its replacement by a wholly novel system."

”We have never before seen a minority party openly and aggressively threatening to destroy the full faith and credit of the U.S. unless its agenda was enacted – much less right after that specific agenda was defeated in a national election."

[pricejj]

Originally Posted by TonyR

...

Your "projections" aren't even close.

"The CBO reported that in addition to a $146 billion deficit in August, the Treasury also ran a $98 billion deficit in July, and that in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013 (October through August) the federal government has run a cumulative $753 billion deficit (through 11 months of FY2013)."

Like I said, Obama is on pace for the 8 largest deficits in American history, and he's on pace to add more debt than all the other Presidents combined.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/tere...ficit-was-146b


Once again, please do some research before you post.

[pricejj]

Originally Posted by Blart

If it's not a savings, I'll stick with my current insurance. No big deal to me.

You obviously don't know how to do math.

It's not cheaper for people who are forced to purchase insurance, nor is it cheaper for taxpayers who are forced to subsidize your insurance.

[peacepipe]

this is no better than the tebow threads. at the end of the day obamacare isn't getting defunded.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by pricejj

You obviously don't know how to do math.

It's not cheaper for people who are forced to purchase insurance, nor is it cheaper for taxpayers who are forced to subsidize your insurance.

I guess I should thank you in advance for paying into those subsidies.

Good news is you can make up to 400% of poverty level in my state and still receive decent money, so...

Cha-ching!

[pricejj]

Originally Posted by houghtam

I guess I should thank you in advance for paying into those subsidies.

Good news is you can make up to 400% of poverty level in my state and still receive decent money, so...

Cha-ching!

Unfortunately for you, you won't be stealing ANY of my money!

[Breaker]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

^^

Like I've said a billion times, trying to treat health care as a for profit, insurable thing is idiotic.

Everyone gets sick, and it's not monetarily profitable to actually take care of sick people.

First off, healthcare is both private and non-profit, look up how many non-profit hospitals there are in the country. Secondly, if non-profit hospitals were held accountable and they were actually forced to give a significant percentage of their profits to "charity care" costs of healthcare for the poor would decrease drastically.

"California hospitals–including Cedars Sinai, Kaiser Permanente and Stanford University--dwarf the level of charity care provided. Overall, the 196 hospitals surveyed received $3.3 billion in 2010 state and federal tax exemptions and spent only $1.4 billion on charity care--a gap of $1.8 billion. Three-quarters of the hospitals got more dollars in tax breaks than they spent on charity care. Half spent less than 2.46 percent of their operating expenses on charity care."

Healthcare for the poor becomes pretty damn reasonable when the $13,000 MRI is given as charity care by an institution receiving massive tax breaks, and not charging Medicare for it, or hounding the poor guy who cant pay it. People that can afford to pay for things are not going to go to the nearest, competent hospital for care, and they will pay a pretty penny for it. I find it laughable that "progressives" rail all day against corporations getting tax breaks, but don't say a single damn word about non-profits robbing people blind. BTW, a non-profit only means that they don't have investors, but they can still pay employees as much as they want.

[Bronco Yoda]

A healthy country is a more productive country.

This could really be a good thing for small businesses. It separates health care from employer like the Repubs have pushed for before. Now small businesses can dump their employee's into the open exchanges thus leveling the playing field.

Older workers over 55 (who have a wealth of knowledge but are sicker) will now become more attractive to employers because their employer won't be penalized.

I can totally see where the very young would have trepidation. But don't worry, you'll get old and sickly like everyone else sooner than you may think. THEN you'll understand.

[Bronco Yoda]

[Meck77]

Originally Posted by Bronco Yoda

A healthy country is a more productive country.

This could really be a good thing for small businesses. It separates health care from employer like the Repubs have pushed for before. Now small businesses can dump their employee's into the open exchanges thus leveling the playing field.

Older workers over 55 (who have a wealth of knowledge but are sicker) will now become more attractive to employers because their employer won't be penalized.

I can totally see where the very young would have trepidation. But don't worry, you'll get old and sickly like everyone else sooner than you may think. THEN you'll understand.

Oh I agree but my point earlier was is our health tied to the government or perhaps to our own actions? The government is getting involved to regulate insurance but why not a multi prong approach?

We are printing $85 billion a month. Hell why not just cut a deal with all the YMCA's in the country and make it free to the public? Or at least make it almost free. Why not really make a dent in school nutrition? Offer programs or incentives for back yard gardens? Most people have no clue on how to garden. I know because I've been researching it. The government will hand you a block of cheese or food stamps but why not give people the ability to raise a little bit of organic fresh food? Even poor people are within walking distances of urban gardens popping up everywhere.

Let's face it obesity is a huge problem in the country. Health insurance will certainly help but does it really nip the real problem. People just don't eat healthy foods and or work out enough.

The current admin has nearly doubled the national debt and what has been the result? A sluggish economy and their plan to help people become healthy is cheaper drugs?

The reality is I think the government should stay out of people's personal lives but if they are going to tinker and play GOD why not really solve the underlying issues of American health. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. I'm not sure people would take advantage of free recreation opportunities and free garden space/free healthy food if it involved work. *shrug*

Does our government really want us healthy/and to be independent or do they really want us to be reliant on the welfare system?

In simple terms. If we want a healthier America and to help those who cannot afford a healthy lifestyle why not help those that can't afford it. Afford it?