Obama, Sebelius compare Apple's iOS 7 launch to Healthcare.gov rollout issues

12345679»

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 179
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by ned bulous View Post

    Did you know that some states FORCE all drivers to carry auto insurance?!?



    Totalitarian!

     

    Since when does “drivers” equal “every man, woman, and child in the country”? I can choose not to have a car, and therefore not pay for auto insurance.



    “Nebulous”, indeed. I make no comment as to the ACA, but please use analogies that actually make sense.

  • Reply 162 of 179
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bottleworks View Post

     

     



    It's too bad that you haven't had the opportunity to understand how this system works.  All money that a business pays to employees are not double taxed, as you claim.  The salary paid to employees are a tax deduction!  If the owner also takes a salary, it's also a tax deduction for the company.  It's part of the operating costs.  Business are get taxed on the profit, not revenue.  Those salaries then have income taxes.  Maybe when you start your own business, you will get to learn more about this instead of sitting in front of your TV all day long watch Fox "News" and getting mad at the world.  Sales taxes are completely different and are typically local taxes. 


     

    Well, I don't watch just one news cast. I try and get information (I won't call it facts, because both sides taint things) and make my own decisions.

     

    And, perhaps you are right on all of that, and I wasn't trying to imply double taxes, etc. I was trying to make a point. Fact is, we all benefit from the services, which is how it should be. But to pull the "fair share" argument and because someone disagrees with that statement (as I do) doesn't make me right-wing. Stop being so black and white, and admit that our government, on both sides, is to blame for the mess we are in. They are too concerned with getting re-elected, or protecting their party, and not helping the people they are supposed to work for, us.

     

    Also, I don't sit home all day watching the news getting mad at the world. 

     

    Yes, sales taxes are different. I was presenting a counter point. One that, if people really cared about fairness, more would be on board with. 

  • Reply 164 of 179

    To top it off, no one is forced to purchase an iPad or iPhone... not so much the case with the ACA.

  • Reply 165 of 179
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    apple ][ wrote: »
    Well, I got news for you.

    Plenty of different kinds of people use Macs and Apple products. George Bush used Macs too.

    Meanwhile, Obama has trouble operating an iPhone.


    So? What's your point? I don't recall being able to use an iPhone as being one of the Constitutional requirements for holding that office. He was elected by the US populace via the Constitutional rules.
    starbird73 wrote: »
    And the fact that health care is not in the constitution and is a state right is exactly the point the media never let Romney make. He was not against the idea of the ACA, he was against the idea that it was a federal issue. Huge difference that no one seemed to care about. .

    Of course people care about it. They care enough that the issue was already taken to the Supreme Court which decided that it's Constitutional.

    You keep forgetting - there is a system for creating laws. The US Congress passed ACA in 2010. It was signed into law. The Supreme Court says it's Constitutional. Congress has the right to repeal it at any time they wish. So what's the problem?

    And I love the meme going around that Obama is at fault for the shut down. Under the Constitution, The House has to create spending bills and the budget. They have not done that.
    starbird73 wrote: »
    Oh, I found that article I mentioned earlier.  

    <h1 style="border:0px;color:rgb(0,0,0);margin-bottom:0px;margin-top:9px;padding-bottom:0px;text-align:left;vertical-align:baseline;">Obamacare Will Increase Health Spending By $7,450 For A Typical Family of Four</h1>

    So we have a magazine with an enormous right wing bias making up numbers that look bad for ACA. Big deal.

    The only actual number I have is my own case. My insurance premium is dropping 30% under ACA - and I have much better coverage (60% reduction in deductible, elimination of lifetime cap, and a lot of preventative services will be paid at 100% under ACA). So I'm somewhat skeptical of the numbers that someone pulls out of thin air.

    Let's see some actual data.
  • Reply 166 of 179
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    To top it off, no one is forced to purchase an iPad or iPhone... not so much the case with the ACA.

    To be accurate, no one is forced to buy insurance under the ACA, either.

    Essentially, the government says "we want you to buy insurance. If you don't, you pay a penalty to cover the societal costs that you're not picking up". Think of it as a new tax if you wish, with a 100% tax credit if you have insurance.
  • Reply 167 of 179
    jragosta wrote: »
    So? What's your point? I don't recall being able to use an iPhone as being one of the Constitutional requirements for holding that office. He was elected by the US populace via the Constitutional rules.
    Of course people care about it. They care enough that the issue was already taken to the Supreme Court which decided that it's Constitutional.

    You keep forgetting - there is a system for creating laws. The US Congress passed ACA in 2010. It was signed into law. The Supreme Court says it's Constitutional. Congress has the right to repeal it at any time they wish. So what's the problem?

    And I love the meme going around that Obama is at fault for the shut down. Under the Constitution, The House has to create spending bills and the budget. They have not done that.
    So we have a magazine with an enormous right wing bias making up numbers that look bad for ACA. Big deal.

    The only actual number I have is my own case. My insurance premium is dropping 30% under ACA - and I have much better coverage (60% reduction in deductible, elimination of lifetime cap, and a lot of preventative services will be paid at 100% under ACA). So I'm somewhat skeptical of the numbers that someone pulls out of thin air.

    Let's see some actual data.

    Not sure about you, but I don't claim to know what you think, just as you shouldn't about me.

    I was against he structure of this bill/law, but it passed. In the 2012 election cycle, I said to folks it should be a non issue. It is the law and if if sucks? There is always a process to change it. Fact is, no one knows exactly what it is going to look like for them yet. We are starting to get a better idea (though I remain unable to even create an account, so I have no clearer picture than I did on Monday, but I know that will change). In all reality, I won't have that much of a clearer picture until the end of the month when I have all the facts on what my current coverage will be like, what ACA will do for me, and time to compare.

    I disagreed with the law as it was written. I disagreed with the "we have to pass it to know what's in it" approach (and do in every law that Congress plays around with). I still disagree with the law, but it is the law if the land, so I will get over it. They beauty if being American is I don't have to agree with every law. I just have to obey them.

    A little more about me, since you (and others strongly in support of ACA) seem compelled to paint me into the "right-wing, Faux-news (not clever in any way, just as the MSNBC and Samsung nicknames aren't, by the way) watcher" corner.

    I am not left and I am not right. I am in the middle. I agree with both sides at times, depending on the issue. I do not now, ever have, nor ever will, vote for someone because of the (R) or (D) after their name. I educate myself from a multitude of sources and form my own opinions.

    Spending - Our politicians have a spending problem. We need to go through and cut programs. No one wants to, so we end up with the battle to raise the debt limit. Enough. When will we actually start cutting? It is always campaign season, so the answer is never. I am fine with the general idea of the entitlement programs. I think they all need a massive overhaul that will be painful. We have allowed too many people to become dependent on these programs that should be, in most instances, not need them long term. We correct these programs, it will help our spending problem. Then, once we have what is already in place under control, we can begin to discuss new opportunities. (This is another of my issues with ACA).

    So that is me. Opposition is not always as clear as "you don't like A so you must be for B"
  • Reply 168 of 179
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post

     

     

    Death Panels: Yes, there will be people making medical decisions for you outside of you and your doctor that may deny you care. Sure, your options is to pay for it yourself, and I recommend that, however, that does not remove the fact. 

     

    Pulling the plug on GranMa: Yes, there will be those that will make decisions based on quality of life that you may not agree with, thus pulling the plug. Sure, your options is to pay for it yourself, and I recommend that, however, that does not remove the fact. 

     

    Death squads: same as above

     

    Socialized Medicine: socialized medicine |?so????la?zd ?m?d?s?n|

    noun

    the provision of medical and hospital care for all by means of public funds.

    Yep, that is what the ACA is. And I'm sure you read every page of the what, 3' stack of law and regulations? 

     

    ....


     

    The actual law specifically bans that (interference in medical decisions between a doctor and their patient ) so hanging those spins off the PPACA is rather misleading.. The "End of life" counseling reimbursement was a REPUBLICAN amendment, and one that didn't survive the cut. But hey don't let reality get in the way of a good bumpersticker repeat. The exchanges list PRIVATE insurance with some subsidy available for certain means tested otherwise eligible applicants. NO "medical care" is provided (as it is in the socialized medicine nations of Great Britain, Canada and others or the Veteran's Administration health system), simply aid in accessing medical insurance for approximately 15% of the American population, perhaps 7% of which might be eligible for some level of subsidy.  Hardly "All" by any stretch. Though the United States HAS done "public health" since 1798, one would expect The Founders to know what they were doing eh?

     

    "3" stack"?  How quaint, it's two PDF files online and with wide margins at that. Easily searchable for keywords of interest.

  • Reply 169 of 179
    Oh, and one more thing [B]jragosta[/B]. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean it is made up. Do yourself a favor. Challenge yourself. Question everything. Dive in head first to the views of those you disagree with. You might be surprised what you learn
  • Reply 170 of 179
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post

     

    Except that no one forces you to buy and iPad or iPhone or Mac.  You have no choice with obamacare you will own it or be insured or be fined on your income taxes.


     

    Mitt Romney and The Heritage Foundation refer to that as "personal responsibility".

  • Reply 171 of 179
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post

     

     

    Mitt Romney and The Heritage Foundation refer to that as "personal responsibility".


     

    There is one simple reason for the requirement. If people wait until they are sick, and the pre-existing condition wait time is eliminated (which the ACA does), then everyone will have much higher premiums. You need low risk participants in order to offset the cost for those high risk folks. That is how insurance, all insurance, works. So if we have the ACA? Then the requirement is needed. Can't have one without the other.

  • Reply 172 of 179

    @jrogosta - honest question for you. How have you been able to get your ACA information? Each time I try, once I get in, I get as far as the 3 security questions. They are always (save exactly one time) blank. That one time they weren't? It told me I couldn't duplicate questions, which I didn't. So 2 full business days later, and I still can't register. 

  • Reply 173 of 179
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    starbird73 wrote: »
    @jrogosta - honest question for you. How have you been able to get your ACA information? Each time I try, once I get in, I get as far as the 3 security questions. They are always (save exactly one time) blank. That one time they weren't? It told me I couldn't duplicate questions, which I didn't. So 2 full business days later, and I still can't register. 

    I got it on a third party site:
    https://www.ehealthinsurance.com
  • Reply 174 of 179
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    To be accurate, no one is forced to buy insurance under the ACA, either.



    Essentially, the government says "we want you to buy insurance. If you don't, you pay a penalty to cover the societal costs that you're not picking up". Think of it as a new tax if you wish, with a 100% tax credit if you have insurance.

     

    Only a liberal could see it that way lol 

  • Reply 175 of 179
    Imagine if Apple never vetted a project idea, they just built a first draft device & put it out there to see if it worked.
  • Reply 176 of 179
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    starbird73 wrote: »
    There is one simple reason for the requirement. If people wait until they are sick, and the pre-existing condition wait time is eliminated (which the ACA does), then everyone will have much higher premiums. You need low risk participants in order to offset the cost for those high risk folks. That is how insurance, all insurance, works. So if we have the ACA? Then the requirement is needed. Can't have one without the other.
    Yes, I expect that's why the president shifted from opposing a mandate during the primaries that Clinton was proposing. The money just works better with that component.
  • Reply 177 of 179
    jfc1138 wrote: »
    Yes, I expect that's why the president shifted from opposing a mandate during the primaries that Clinton was proposing. The money just works better with that component.

    Agreed. Clinton's plan, which seemed too far reaching at the time, would likely have been be better in the long run. Still think she was the better choice in 2008
  • Reply 178 of 179
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    I got it on a third party site:

    https://www.ehealthinsurance.com

     

    Thanks. Sadly, 0 plans found for me...

     

    :)

  • Reply 179 of 179
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by starbird73 View Post





    Not sure about you, but I don't claim to know what you think, just as you shouldn't about me.



    I was against he structure of this bill/law, but it passed. In the 2012 election cycle, I said to folks it should be a non issue. It is the law and if if sucks? There is always a process to change it. Fact is, no one knows exactly what it is going to look like for them yet. We are starting to get a better idea (though I remain unable to even create an account, so I have no clearer picture than I did on Monday, but I know that will change). In all reality, I won't have that much of a clearer picture until the end of the month when I have all the facts on what my current coverage will be like, what ACA will do for me, and time to compare.



    I disagreed with the law as it was written. I disagreed with the "we have to pass it to know what's in it" approach (and do in every law that Congress plays around with). I still disagree with the law, but it is the law if the land, so I will get over it. They beauty if being American is I don't have to agree with every law. I just have to obey them.



    A little more about me, since you (and others strongly in support of ACA) seem compelled to paint me into the "right-wing, Faux-news (not clever in any way, just as the MSNBC and Samsung nicknames aren't, by the way) watcher" corner.



    I am not left and I am not right. I am in the middle. I agree with both sides at times, depending on the issue. I do not now, ever have, nor ever will, vote for someone because of the (R) or (D) after their name. I educate myself from a multitude of sources and form my own opinions.



    I could care less about hearing the following every election cycle:

    Abortion - it has been the law of the land since right before I was born. Sick of hearing about it. Not a choice I would make, but I am not in any position to tell anyone how to live their life. To the deeply religious that fight this (and other) issues in the name of God? My message to them is this. Let it go. It impacts your life in precisely zero ways. Do not hate these people for their choices. You are in no position to judge. Let your God do that.

    Gay rights/equality - I don't see how gay people getting married has any impact on my life. Why people push to prevent others from living their lives the way they see fit, I will never understand. See abortion above for the message I have for those deeply religious.

    Legalizing pot - another thing I feel I have been hearing about all my life. I don't smoke it, but see no reason for it to be treated any differently than alcohol. Legalize it, regulate it, tax it. Done

    Spending - Our politicians have a spending problem. We need to go through and cut programs. No one wants to, so we end up with the battle to raise the debt limit. Enough. When will we actually start cutting? It is always campaign season, so the answer is never. I am fine with the general idea of the entitlement programs. I think they all need a massive overhaul that will be painful. We have allowed too many people to become dependent on these programs that should be, in most instances, not need them long term. We correct these programs, it will help our spending problem. Then, once we have what is already in place under control, we can begin to discuss new opportunities. (This is another of my issues with ACA).



    So that is me. Opposition is not always as clear as "you don't like A so you must be for B"

     

    Sorry, can't let the Abortion thing go by.     The state "It impacts your life in precisely zero ways" is absurd.      Shall we all turn around and let two people battle to the death since it impacts my life precisely zero ways?   Should we have left Hitler continue?  It impacts our life in precisely zero ways...   Should we let crack addicts keep it up since it affects our life in precisely zero ways?    Should we do nothing about 9/11.  It affect most Americans in precisely zero ways.     Let children drink at any age?   It affects our life in precisely zero ways.    

     

    Abortion is killing children, PERIOD.   It is the modern day holocaust.      Without getting into all the facts about abortion.  In summary, it is all about personal responsibility.    In almost ALL abortion cases it is an irresponsible sexual act is resolved through murder.   In almost no cases is it at all related to the physical health of the mother.      This is the platform of the democratic party in the US.   They are anti-personal responsibility in almost all of their platform stances.

     

    With respect to Gay Rights.    If you are not about religious morals, then I see your point although in order to not be hypocritical, you would also be totally ok with incest of every format.    Of  course I stand on the fact that all of this, including homosexual relationships is absolutely NOT normal.   I don't think it should be illegal but it can't be called "Marriage" without re-writing the definition.  That is just a fact.     Just FYI....   The gay rights movement is not about equal rights.   It is about affirmation for the gay community that it is normal.   Of course they will never say that, but ask any straight psychologist :-)

     

    On an additional note, I agree with you on spending....  :-)

Sign In or Register to comment.