Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 139
  1. #26
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    Of course it was an improvement vis a vis the previous system: mandatory coverage for pre-existing conditions, much wider access through government subsidies, etc.

    That doesn't mean it's a good law. It's a bad law because despite the good intentions, it doesn't address the main problem with healthcare in America: spiraling, out of control costs for services and drugs.

  2. #27
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    it doesn't address the main problem with healthcare in America: spiraling, out of control costs for services and drugs.
    That was, and still is, IMPOSSIBLE, due to the $Bs for-profit health care has to defend its profits.

    Dems had to write ACA, which written by a healthcare exec, so that for-profit health would not "Harry and Louise" ACA to death

    iow, just another example of how the oligarchy always gets what it wants as it owns and operates the country for profit.

  3. #28
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    That's the point boutons... it was a missed opportunity to pass comprehensive reform that does address that issue.

    It's not impossible, it's just going to happen once the pressure on the population is unbearable, which is probably the worst part.

  4. #29
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    It's not impossible
    it's impossible. BigInsuance/healthcare OWNS too many Congress people, and The Squad plus crumbs isn't enough.

    the only solution is to follow the example of the French and the Russians

  5. #30
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    it's impossible. BigInsuance/healthcare OWNS too many Congress people, and The Squad plus crumbs isn't enough.

    the only solution is to follow the example of the French and the Russians
    Have a salad dressing named after the US?

  6. #31
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Have a salad dressing named after the US?
    no, violent revolution, because the extreme power the oligarchy has now will not be yielded voluntarily, never has been.

    The American Revolution against England was also a violent revolution against an oppressive, exploitative, corrupt power.

  7. #32
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    no, violent revolution, because the extreme power the oligarchy has now will not be yielded voluntarily, never has been.

    The American Revolution against England was also a violent revolution against an oppressive, exploitative, corrupt power.
    So, which revolutionary cadre so you belong to?

  8. #33
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,091
    It contributed to a decreased rate of growth of healthcare costs and got more people insured.

    By those two metrics it was a modest improvement over the status quo ante.
    "Decreased rate growth" as rates went up.

    Also, that you believe that, anyways.

  9. #34
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,091
    It was good for those that had preexisting conditions and would otherwise be denied coverage but for the not so sick or the ones who didn't want insurance they got screwed with higher costs
    Sure, but it's a great lie that healthcare needed to be co-opted further to add that "more fair" option to the law. That was the propaganda point they needed; so, that anyone that argues against the scam can be demonized.

  10. #35
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,091
    It was good for those that had preexisting conditions and would otherwise be denied coverage but for the not so sick or the ones who didn't want insurance they got screwed with higher costs
    Charging people exorbitant prices for services they don't need and use is much worse than the problems they purported to be solving. Scam is not strong language; scam is the technically correct language.

  11. #36
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,091
    Of course it was an improvement vis a vis the previous system: mandatory coverage for pre-existing conditions, much wider access through government subsidies, etc.

    That doesn't mean it's a good law. It's a bad law because despite the good intentions, it doesn't address the main problem with healthcare in America: spiraling, out of control costs for services and drugs.
    You can cherry pick stuff all you want; but it's overall a net negative while driving up prices. This was always its design. It didn't fail; it did what it set out to do, to make its benefactors much richer. The American people failed in allowing scammers to control them.

  12. #37
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    "Decreased rate growth" as rates went up.

    Also, that you believe that, anyways.
    We went over this in another thread, I can link the support for the claim, which, translated into plain English, is that health care costs grew at a modestly lower rate after the passage of the ACA.

  13. #38
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,091
    We went over this in another thread, I can link the support for the claim, which, translated into plain English, is that health care costs grew at a modestly lower rate after the passage of the ACA.
    I'm sure you got a bull source to post. You are clueless though.

  14. #39
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    I'm sure you got a bull source to post.
    You're standing on a bare assertion.

    I'm no fan of the ACA, have spoken against it as an ineffective POS from the beginning, but it would be willful blindness to assert it wasn't a marginal improvement over what we had before.

  15. #40
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    You're standing on a bare assertion.

    I'm no fan of the ACA, have spoken against it as an ineffective POS from the beginning, but it would be willful blindness to assert it wasn't a marginal improvement over what we had before.
    ACA had LOTS of positive effects.

    Ms got health care saving 1000s? of lives,

    hospitals required to publish prices,

    junk plans were junked, etc, etc.

    and yes, the rate of increase of health care did moderate somewhat.

  16. #41
    Enemy of the System Millennial_Messiah's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Post Count
    24,579
    US healthcare sucks.

    Republican idea is just to privatize everything, get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare mktplace plans, etc

    Why not just ditch federal healthcare and get a group plan? Almost every adult job has them; those that don't are like retail and restaurant jobs, and those are jobs for kids under 26 anyway who can be on their parents' plans.

  17. #42
    Enemy of the System Millennial_Messiah's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Post Count
    24,579
    We went over this in another thread, I can link the support for the claim, which, translated into plain English, is that health care costs grew at a modestly lower rate after the passage of the ACA.
    no, they grew dramatically after the ACA implementation in 2013... doubled and even tripled and now quadrupled. Mainly because of the "pre existing conditions" clause meaning that EVERYONE, including young people with no health issues, had to foot the bill of already-sick people looking for new health insurance (which should be and used to be, fraud). I.e., socialism.

  18. #43
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    It's not contested that health care costs continued to grow after the passage of the ACA, but the rate of growth moderated.

  19. #44
    notthewordsofonewhokneels Thread's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Post Count
    81,174
    It's not contested that health care costs continued to grow after the passage of the ACA, but the rate of growth moderated.
    Please. The profession just fanned the increases further throughout their system. "Here's what we'll do..."

  20. #45
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,013
    "Decreased rate growth" as rates went up.

    Also, that you believe that, anyways.
    why is that so unbelievable to you?

    rates increased. the rate at which they increased was lower than the it was pre ACA

  21. #46
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    Please. The profession just fanned the increases further throughout their system. "Here's what we'll do..."
    Pure handwaving.

    Me and El Nono are critics of the ACA, but that doesn't mean we just get to make stuff up, like one does to suit one's political indoctrination.

  22. #47
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,091
    You're standing on a bare assertion.

    I'm no fan of the ACA, have spoken against it as an ineffective POS from the beginning, but it would be willful blindness to assert it wasn't a marginal improvement over what we had before.
    My rates shot way up. I know whatever info you think you have is bull .

  23. #48
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,091
    why is that so unbelievable to you?

    rates increased. the rate at which they increased was lower than the it was pre ACA
    Because my rates astronomically shot up; and I know propaganda when I see it.

  24. #49
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,013
    Because my rates astronomically shot up; and I know propaganda when I see it.
    a) and your rates were perfectly constant in the years before ACA?

    b) even if your post is taken at face value, you need to learn what statistics are

  25. #50
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,091
    a) and your rates were perfectly constant in the years before ACA?

    b) even if your post is taken at face value, you need to learn what statistics are
    I know what statistics are. And that's why I highly doubt that my situation was some grand anomaly. I called newspapers at the time, but none of your Democrat rags had any interest in reporting on the great scam.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •