C.A.R.E. The Republican Shell Game

[bobabode]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-cut-and-pasted-their-new-obamacare-alternative/2015/02/06/def0d0a0-ae57-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html?hpid=z2

Once again the 'pubbies have no new ideas. Just more of the same old, same old. :rolleyes:

[finnbow]

You expected original thought out of Washington? There are no original ideas here. They're all recycled. Obamacare itself was recycled.

[Boreas]

The Republicans truly are just one great big sick running gag.

John

[bobabode]

The Republicans truly are just one great big sick running gag.

John

Yup. This same crapola position paper was run up the flag pole last year and was roundly panned. Sick feckers.

Gotta love how these other 'news' outlets touted it.

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/231812-republicans-unveil-new-obamacare-alternative-with-tax-credits-for-poor

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/02/05/the-impressive-new-obamacare-replace-plan-from-republicans-burr-hatch-and-upton/

[whell]

Well, Obamacare is coming up on its 5th birthday. The jury is still out on whether the law has truly put a dent in the number of "uninsured". According to CBS News:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-americans-still-lack-health-insurance/

It's worth noting that the U.S. Census Bureau normally does a good analysis of changes in insurance coverage from year-to-year, but the government recently changed its survey methodology, which made year-to-year comparisons impossible. The government data, which was released in August, found that 86.6 percent of the population had health insurance during 2013 and just 13.4 percent had no coverage.

However, the government uses a narrow definition of what constitutes an insured person. If you had insurance at any time during the year, the Census Bureau now considers you insured. Someone who was covered for a month or two, but lost a job and is no longer covered, would still appear insured via the Census formula. The government's methodology only considers people to be uninsured if they had no coverage at any point during the year.

So we have no true baseline to compare before and after the individual mandate took effect. I suspect the yardstick had to change because the gov't has to determine who and who not to assess a tax penalty to, and if you carry coverage for at least 3 months out of the tax year, you get to avoid the tax penalty (another reason that the budget numbers on Obamacare were bogus, BTW).

But, we do have billions in new tax revenue, a stalled economy because employers are still concerned about incurring the additional costs of a new hire, and continued upward pressure on health insurance premiums due to new government coverage mandates and mandated changes to how health insurance premium costs are calculated in the small group market.

Huh, seems like we're not making much progress here.

[Tom Joad]

Well, Obamacare is coming up on its 5th birthday. The jury is still out on whether the law has truly put a dent in the number of "uninsured". According to CBS News:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-americans-still-lack-health-insurance/
[I]


Tell you what whell, if your Republicans in Congress will send HR 676 to Obama's desk, I'll switch my allegiance to them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Health_Care_Act

The United States National Health Care Act, or the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act (H.R. 676), is a bill introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Representative John Conyers (D-MI).[1] The bill had 88 cosponsors in 2009. The act would establish a universal single-payer health care system in the United States, the rough equivalent of Canada's Medicare, the United Kingdom's National Health Service, and Taiwan's Bureau of National Health Insurance, among other examples.

That's right.

All they have to do is ONE THING, deliver Universal Single Payer Healthcare.

That's it!

Just that one thing, and I will pledge to go ahead and hold my nose and ignore all the other stupid crap that they stand for and vote for their them.

[merrylander]

So Mike how many times during the year are they to check? So far no one has asked us if we are covered beyond Medicare or not. That CBS article does not get a passing grade.

[VanishingPoi]

You expected original thought out of Washington? There are no original ideas here. They're all recycled. Obamacare itself was recycled.

That is because in reality, there is no such thing as an original thought.

[d-ray657]

But, we do have billions in new tax revenue, a stalled economy because employers are still concerned about incurring the additional costs of a new hire, and continued upward pressure on health insurance premiums due to new government coverage mandates and mandated changes to how health insurance premium costs are calculated in the small group market.

Huh, seems like we're not making much progress here.

If we had just had 257K new jobs in the last month, a 5.7% unemployment rate, record highs in the Dow and a Republican president, you would be crowing about the booming economy. The only difference between the above equation and your description of the economy is the party of the president.

Regards,

D-Ray

[Tom Joad]

I did a little cursory reading of the Republican plan and it looks like it would benefit me some, where Obamacare does nothing for me.

But I'm sure they would find a way to fuck me in the ass some other way so it wouldn't be worth it. Like Bush did with that $600 a year tax cut right after 9/11. After which he proceeded to run up a couple of trillion in debt fighting the Iraq War. Debt that is now being used as an excuse to come after my Social Security.

[Boreas]

I did a little cursory reading of the Republican plan and it looks like it would benefit me some, where Obamacare does nothing for me.

There is no plan. The press release is just a PR document that describes in broad terms the sort of plan that the Republicans claim they'll cobble together to replace the ACA. It's total bullshit.

John

[bobabode]

This is an attempt to give the Robert's court coverage to strike down the ACA. Two pages of bullet points is not a plan of any sort.

[bobabode]

Well, Obamacare is coming up on its 5th birthday. The jury is still out on whether the law has truly put a dent in the number of "uninsured". According to CBS News:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-americans-still-lack-health-insurance/

It's worth noting that the U.S. Census Bureau normally does a good analysis of changes in insurance coverage from year-to-year, but the government recently changed its survey methodology, which made year-to-year comparisons impossible. The government data, which was released in August, found that 86.6 percent of the population had health insurance during 2013 and just 13.4 percent had no coverage.

However, the government uses a narrow definition of what constitutes an insured person. If you had insurance at any time during the year, the Census Bureau now considers you insured. Someone who was covered for a month or two, but lost a job and is no longer covered, would still appear insured via the Census formula. The government's methodology only considers people to be uninsured if they had no coverage at any point during the year.

So we have no true baseline to compare before and after the individual mandate took effect. I suspect the yardstick had to change because the gov't has to determine who and who not to assess a tax penalty to, and if you carry coverage for at least 3 months out of the tax year, you get to avoid the tax penalty (another reason that the budget numbers on Obamacare were bogus, BTW).

But, we do have billions in new tax revenue, a stalled economy because employers are still concerned about incurring the additional costs of a new hire, and continued upward pressure on health insurance premiums due to new government coverage mandates and mandated changes to how health insurance premium costs are calculated in the small group market.

Huh, seems like we're not making much progress here.

"The really good news: Concerns about companies being reluctant to hire because they'd have to shoulder some of the cost of health coverage appear to have been overblown (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-obamacare-causing-a-surge-in-part-time-work/). Some 33 percent of surveyed employers said they intend to hire more workers over the next two years, compared to just 20 percent in 2013."

Missed this part? :rolleyes:

[Tom Joad]

There is no plan. The press release is just a PR document that describes on broad terms the sort of plan that the Republicans claim they'll cobble together to replace the ACA. It's total bullshit.

John

This is what I was referring to.

http://rsc.flores.house.gov/solutions/rsc-betterway.htm

http://rsc.flores.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rsc_health_tax_treatment.pdf

Creates a standard deduction for health insurance (SDHI) of $7,500 for individuals and $20,000 for families, indexed annually for inflation

[whell]

If we had just had 257K new jobs in the last month, a 5.7% unemployment rate, record highs in the Dow and a Republican president, you would be crowing about the booming economy. The only difference between the above equation and your description of the economy is the party of the president.

Regards,

D-Ray

I'm sure it makes you feel better to think that, and that you've won some sort of rhetorical victory with the above post. Frankly, I'm glad the economy is creating jobs. However, the performance of the Dow is not relevant to a discussion of job creation. There's zero correlation between the two. The rise of the Dow is better correlated to the Fed's seemingly endless bond buyback program. The unemployment rate is falling, but a chunk of that rate is driven by the shrinking denominator: the labor participation rate is at all time lows.

Facts are facts, even when partisanship is removed.

[bobabode]

I'm sure it makes you feel better to think that, and that you've won some sort of rhetorical victory with the above post. Frankly, I'm glad the economy is creating jobs. However, the performance of the Dow is not relevant to a discussion of job creation. There's zero correlation between the two. The rise of the Dow is better correlated to the Fed's seemingly endless bond buyback program. The unemployment rate is falling, but a chunk of that rate is driven by the shrinking denominator: the labor participation rate is at all time lows.

Facts are facts, even when partisanship is removed.

Labor participation is a factor of demographics, i.e. the 'Boomer generation' is retiring now. It's a common red herring from the right leaning bloviators in the media as they have nothing left to complain about in regards to 'Obama Economy'.

[Tom Joad]

Facts are facts, even when partisanship is removed.

That's right Whelly boy, facts are facts.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-burnett/republican-job-creators_b_6442774.html

During the time Present Obama has been in office, the economy has created 10.9 million jobs. That's more than those created by George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush combined.

[whell]

"The really good news: Concerns about companies being reluctant to hire because they'd have to shoulder some of the cost of health coverage appear to have been overblown (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-obamacare-causing-a-surge-in-part-time-work/). Some 33 percent of surveyed employers said they intend to hire more workers over the next two years, compared to just 20 percent in 2013."

Missed this part? :rolleyes:

YOU miss slot when only have 1/2 the facts. Check out page 11 for example.

http://www.nsba.biz/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Health-Care-Survey-2014.pdf

The other way to look at your CBS report of course is the almost 70 of employers are have low or no expectations about adding staff.

[whell]

Labor participation is a factor of demographics, i.e. the 'Boomer generation' is retiring now. It's a common red herring from the right leaning bloviators in the media as they have nothing left to complain about in regards to 'Obama Economy'.

No doubt that's a factor, but is sure isn't the only factor.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/06/the-incredible-shrinking-labor-force-again/

Again, you need to have all the facts before you bloviate, Bob.

[Boreas]

This is what I was referring to.

http://rsc.flores.house.gov/solutions/rsc-betterway.htm

http://rsc.flores.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rsc_health_tax_treatment.pdf

Seems to be all about giving people a tax cut to offset some of what they pay for insurance. This still leaves low income people hung out to dry because they don't earn enough to pay the premiums or pay enough in taxes to use the deduction.

Likewise for Health Savings Accounts. People who live paycheck to paycheck (or can't even quite manage that) can't afford to pay into HSAs.

Oh! And there's "tort reform" too! Wowie zowie! Whadda plan!

And don't even think about getting an abortion! For any reason whatsoever!

This is complete bullshit! It was introduced a year and a half ago and was referred to committee over a year ago. How many times has it come up for a vote? Meanwhile, how many times in the same period has the House voted to repeal the ACA?

John

http://rsc.flores.house.gov/uploadedfiles/bill_american_health_care_reform_act.pdf

[whell]

That's right Whelly boy, facts are facts.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-burnett/republican-job-creators_b_6442774.html

A blog ain't fact. It's opinion.

There's no question that jobs have been added. That's no really the point. The point is that economic growth is low, so the unemployment rate is falling much slower than hoped for or predicted. Since demand for other than highly skilled labor remains low, wage growth is also stagnant.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/business/economy/jobs-unemployment-figures-december.html?_r=0

There is hope on the horizon, but it has been a slow train coming.

[Boreas]

The unemployment rate is falling, but a chunk of that rate is driven by the shrinking denominator: the labor participation rate is at all time lows.

Facts are facts, even when partisanship is removed.

Yes, they are and it's a fact that the reason that, even though we picked up over a quarter of a million jobs last month, the unemployment rate ticked up a bit is because "discouraged workers" are getting back in the game. The "denominator" stopped shrinking a long, long time ago and is now growing.

Sorry to deprive you of your little schadenfreude party for one. Try again.

John

[Boreas]

A blog ain't fact. It's opinion.

"During the time Present Obama has been in office, the economy has created 10.9 million jobs. That's more than those created by George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush combined."

That looks like a fact to me, whell.

John

[whell]

Yes, they are and it's a fact that the reason that, even though we picked up over a quarter of a million jobs last month, the unemployment rate ticked up a bit is because "discouraged workers" are getting back in the game. The "denominator" stopped shrinking a long, long time ago and is now growing.

Sorry to deprive you of your little schadenfreude part for one. Try again.

John

I'm calling bullshit on the above post. Care to post your source for your observation about the denominator stopping shrinking long ago? My source - the Bureau of Labor Statistics - disagrees with you.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/labor-force-participation-increases-unemployment-rate-ticks-0

[whell]

"During the time Present Obama has been in office, the economy has created 10.9 million jobs. That's more than those created by George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush combined."

That looks like a fact to me, whell.

John

Looks like a blog to me John.

EDIT - so here's a blog to see Tom's blog. I suspect this ones a bit more balanced.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/09/09/so-which-president-was-best-at-creating-jobs-anyway/

[Boreas]

I'm calling bullshit on the above post. Care to post your source for your observation about the denominator stopping shrinking long ago? My source - the Bureau of Labor Statistics - disagrees with you.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/labor-force-participation-increases-unemployment-rate-ticks-0

No, they don't. I never said that the participation has recovered to Clinton Era highs or even that it has been increasing for a while. It has been pretty flat for about a year and is now seemingly beginning an upward trend.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

So, you know, fuck you, whell.

[Boreas]

Looks like a blog to me, John.

A blog can contain facts. As I noted, the one in question does.

[bobabode]

No doubt that's a factor, but is sure isn't the only factor.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/06/the-incredible-shrinking-labor-force-again/

Again, you need to have all the facts before you bloviate, Bob.

Cling on baby.

BTW Whelly, blow yourself. :rolleyes:

[nailer]

No, they don't. I never said that the participation has recovered to Clinton Era highs or even that it has been increasing for a while. It has been pretty flat for about a year and is now seemingly beginning an upward trend.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

So, you know, fuck you, whell.

One year is a long, long time ago?

[whell]

So, you know, fuck you, whell.



BTW Whelly, blow yourself.

Classy. :rolleyes: I guess posts like those above are what happens when someone runs out of anything intelligent to say.

Nothing new to see here folks. Lets move along...

[whell]

It has been pretty flat for about a year and is now seemingly beginning an upward trend.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
.

One year is a long, long time ago?

Apparently John has difficulty understanding the graphs that he posts. The graph he posted shows a labor participation rate that is still trending downward, and is still below where is was a year ago. However, it's higher than it was last month, so in John's world that's an "upward trend". :rolleyes:

[donquixote99]

Whell quotes others insults at him. His insults toward others? Hush!

Whell claims people are 'out of arguments' when he has been plastered with arguments. Whell lies a lot.

[Boreas]

Apparently John has difficulty understanding the graphs that he posts. The graph he posted shows a labor participation rate that is still trending downward, and is still below where is was a year ago. However, it's higher than it was last month, so in John's world that's an "upward trend". :rolleyes:

Who can't understand graphs? That graph is by the year, from January of 2005 through January of 2015.

Jan '14 63.0%
Feb '14 63.0%
Mar '14 63.2%
Apr '14 62.8%
May '14 62.8%
Jun '14 62.8%
Jul '14 62.9%
Aug '14 62.9%
Sep '14 62.7%
Oct '14 62.8%
Nov '14 62.9%
Dec '14 62.7%
Jan '15 62.9%

So, for the 13 months shown above, there's a 0.5% variation. That seems pretty flat to me so, like I said, fuck you, whell.

[whell]

So, for the 13 months shown above, there's a 0.5% variation. That seems pretty flat to me so, like I said, fuck you, whell.

Yeah, I guess it looked "flat" between 1/2011 and 1/2012 before it dropped more than another point. :rolleyes:

And, no thanks John. You're REALLY not my type.

[whell]

Whell quotes others insults at him. His insults toward others? Hush!

Whell claims people are 'out of arguments' when he has been plastered with arguments. Whell lies a lot.

Of course. Everyone who disagrees with you is a liar. :rolleyes:

[bobabode]

Classy. :rolleyes: I guess posts like those above are what happens when someone runs out of anything intelligent to say.

Nothing new to see here folks. Lets move along...

Typical cheese from Whelly, he whines about insults after casting the first stone. Poor dear.

[whell]

Typical cheese from Whelly, he whines about insults after casting the first stone. Poor dear.

Please point me to where I "cast the first stone" in this thread.

Stay classy Bobby...

[bobabode]

Please point me to where I "cast the first stone" in this thread.

Stay classy Bobby...

Grow up son.

[BlueStreak]

If we had just had 257K new jobs in the last month, a 5.7% unemployment rate, record highs in the Dow and a Republican president, you would be crowing about the booming economy. The only difference between the above equation and your description of the economy is the party of the president.

Regards,

D-Ray

Precisely. The cognitive dissonance has become staggering.

Hey Mike! Where is the apocalyptic "double dip" you've had me waiting six years for?

It seems to be as elusive as the mass graves and door to door gun seizures rightwing fearmongers predicted in days of yore..............

Dave

[Ike Bana]

Of course. Everyone who disagrees with you is a liar. :rolleyes:

Blah...blah...straight out of the EIB.

The facts are that every month increasing numbers of Americans are being hired, and every month those already working are working increased hours.

Particularly in small American businesses, where the right insists that there aren't any job creators anymore due to "Obama taxes.":rolleyes:

Numbers from last summer...which have improved since:
Small businesses added 35,000 jobs, which brings total jobs added to 575,000 since March 2010, the beginning of the recovery in small business employment.

Employees' average monthly compensation grew 0.6 percent, an increase of $17 from April's revised figure.

Average monthly hours worked by hourly employees increased from April to May by 0.8 percent, which equates to 48 minutes.


http://www.intuit.com/company/press-room/press-releases/2014/SmallBusinessEmploymentShowsLargestIncreaseInMoret hanaYear/

[BlueStreak]

Of course. Everyone who disagrees with you is a liar. :rolleyes:

A "liar"? No, not necessarily. A "tool", maybe, but not a liar.:p

Dave

[Ike Bana]

A "liar"? No, not necessarily. A "tool", maybe, but not a liar.:p

Dave

Whelly is the great tool and liar of this forum in my book. Watch FOX for 5 minutes for your 2-1/2 minutes of lies. Listen to the EIB for 5 minutes for your 5 minutes of lies. Whether whell watches and listens to either...one way or another these are whell's two primary sources of 'information'. Particularly since the GOP has decided that what they see on FOX and hear on the EIB are their primary talking points as well.

And whell is not the least hesitant to spew the lies he hears from the right-wingjob media or right-wingjob politicians from his festering piehole.

[whell]

Grow up son.

Couldn't find one, huh? :rolleyes:

[whell]

Whelly is the great tool and liar of this forum in my book. Watch FOX for 5 minutes for your 2-1/2 minutes of lies. Listen to the EIB for 5 minutes for your 5 minutes of lies. Whether whell watches and listens to either...one way or another these are whell's two primary sources of 'information'. Particularly since the GOP has decided that what they see on FOX and hear on the EIB are their primary talking points as well.

And whell is not the least hesitant to spew the lies he hears from the right-wingjob media or right-wingjob politicians from his festering piehole.

Don't have cable here so no Fox News in the house. I actually work during the day so not a lot of time for talk radio.

So how many other misconceptions inform your posts, Ike?

[BlueStreak]

Don't have cable here so no Fox News in the house. I actually work during the day so not a lot of time for talk radio.

So how many other misconceptions inform your posts, Ike?

The wingers where I work listen to the radio AT work. Well, of course they can do that considering that they don't really "work" at work, unless you consider sitting on your fat ass and bitching about what others do "work". Personally, I don't. I think people who do nothing but listen to EIB all day and criticize others are pretty much worthless.....parasites, really. But, that's me, I'm crazy that way.

Dave

[donquixote99]

Of course. Everyone who disagrees with you is a liar. :rolleyes:

You could be a robot. Just sending word strings without knowing what anything means. Previous post contains 'liar?' OK, send [word string seen above].

Were you a human being who cared about truth, you'd know that I don't call people liars except when they lie. As you OBVIOUSLY were when you sent that other word string, the one that said something about 'someone running out of arguments.' Hell, one of the posts you quoted an insult from contained an excellent argument in the very same post--but you ignored that.

Actually, if you were a robot, you wouldn't be lying, because you wouldn't even know the meaning of the word strings you were programmed to spew. So the question is, are you a 'bot--or a human being imitating one?

[whell]

You could be a robot. Just sending word strings without knowing what anything means. Previous post contains 'liar?' OK, send [word string seen above].

Were you a human being who cared about truth, you'd know that I don't call people liars except when they lie. As you OBVIOUSLY were when you sent that other word string, the one that said something about 'someone running out of arguments.' Hell, one of the posts you quoted an insult from contained an excellent argument in the very same post--but you ignored that.

Actually, if you were a robot, you wouldn't be lying, because you wouldn't even know the meaning of the word strings you were programmed to spew. So the question is, are you a 'bot--or a human being imitating one?

Wow. I've never seen such an intricately crafted straw man. Nicely done.

[Ike Bana]

Don't have cable here so no Fox News in the house. I actually work during the day so not a lot of time for talk radio.

So how many other misconceptions inform your posts, Ike?

Your blubbering, whether you get it straight from FOX and the EIB or not, is blubbering that comes straight from FOX and the EIB. It's what I said already...so your reading comprehension isn't any better than your propaganda choices.

[whell]

Your blubbering, whether you get it straight from FOX and the EIB or not, is blubbering that comes straight from FOX and the EIB. It's what I said already...so your reading comprehension isn't any better than your propaganda choices.

Right, Ike, because in your really, really, really tiny little world, people can't think for themselves. In fact, you prove that point almost every day.

[donquixote99]

Wow. I've never seen such an intricately crafted straw man. Nicely done.

Sigh. If it were a straw man, we'd actually be able to converse with you, instead of just getting one-liner responses to our intricately-crafted arguments.

[Boreas]

Yeah, I guess it looked "flat" between 1/2011 and 1/2012 before it dropped more than another point. :rolleyes:

Finding it hard to avoid admitting the fact that your source made my point, are we? Pathetic little troll.

And, no thanks John. You're REALLY not my type.

Yeah, being nearly 70, I suppose I'm probably about 58 years too old for you.

But maybe if I dressed up in an altar boy's cassock.............

John

[Boreas]

Sigh. If it were a straw man, you'd actually be able to converse with us, instead of just getting one-liner responses to our intricately-crafted arguments.

A little closer to the mark, I think.

John

[VanishingPoi]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-cut-and-pasted-their-new-obamacare-alternative/2015/02/06/def0d0a0-ae57-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html?hpid=z2

Once again the 'pubbies have no new ideas. Just more of the same old, same old. :rolleyes:

I could hardly get through all the rhetoric of repealing Obamacare and to the meat of the proposal. When I did, it was exactly as you implied "same shit, different day". What a joke?

[whell]

Finding it hard to avoid admitting the fact that your source made my point, are we? Pathetic little troll.

Finding it easy to dance on the head of a pin, and can't substantiate the point you made about the "denominator now growing"?

Yeah, being nearly 70, I suppose I'm probably about 58 years too old for you.

But maybe if I dressed up in an altar boy's cassock.............

John

You don't need to dress up at all. You're the perfect poster boy for the "useful idiot".

[Boreas]

Finding it easy to dance on the head of a pin, and can't substantiate the point you made about the "denominator now growing"?

It's all over the fucking news, whell. What do you want me to do, conduct a forensic examination of the BLS data?

You don't need to dress up at all. You're the perfect poster boy for the "useful idiot".

Not much for self-awareness, are you?

[bobabode]

Couldn't find one, huh? :rolleyes:


Was there a real question that you asked? :confused: I must've missed that one.:rolleyes:

The strengthening economic outlook and jobs gains seem to be a very bitter pill for the flailing right to swallow. Frankly, I'm enjoying a bit of schadenfreude at the moment. :)

Every day the Republicrap controlled congress petulantly nails their feet to floor is one day closer to losing the Senate and 'Dingy' Harry or his successor regaining the majority leader's gavel. The whining from the right grows daily as they harvest the fruit of obstructionism that they've sown these last six years.

[Ike Bana]

Right, Ike, because in your really, really, really tiny little world, people can't think for themselves. In fact, you prove that point almost every day.

Let's see who can think for themselves and who can't whelly. Tell me what you think were the 4 major causes were for the 2008 meltdown. Then I'll tell you what I think the 4 major causes were.

I think we'll see pretty fast who's regurgitating propaganda and who thinks for himself.

This is a serious challenge, man. Although I already know what you think the major causes were...I heard Rush regurgitating them again last week. You know...the Community Reinvestment Act...the government forcing lenders to give mortgages to deadbeats...that sort of inane shit.

[merrylander]

I'm sure it makes you feel better to think that, and that you've won some sort of rhetorical victory with the above post. Frankly, I'm glad the economy is creating jobs. However, the performance of the Dow is not relevant to a discussion of job creation. There's zero correlation between the two. The rise of the Dow is better correlated to the Fed's seemingly endless bond buyback program. The unemployment rate is falling, but a chunk of that rate is driven by the shrinking denominator: the labor participation rate is at all time lows.

Facts are facts, even when partisanship is removed.

In fact the unemployment rate ticked up a notch because people who had stopped looking are now coming back into the market.

As for the Dow the only thing that scares those gamblers in lower Manhatten is fear that the Fed will start raising the interest rate and spoil their casino games.

[Boreas]

In fact the unemployment rate ticked up a notch because people who had stopped looking are now coming back into the market.

Boy, are you ever late to the party!:D

John

[whell]

It's all over the fucking news, whell.


Well, seems you get all your news from Hustler and Penthouse. No wonder you've got a rather unique world view.

[Boreas]

Well, seems you get all your news from Hustler and Penthouse. No wonder you've got a rather unique world view.

click.... click.... click.... click.... click....

[merrylander]

Boy, are you ever late to the party!:D

John

Blame Concast I have been off the net for two days, only just came back this morning

[merrylander]

Mike the only news we watch in this house is PBS Newshour and BBC America and it was on both of them. Sorry to piss in your cornflakes.

[Rajoo]

Well, seems you get all your news from Hustler and Penthouse. No wonder you've got a rather unique world view.

If your intent was to insult, I would have picked National Enquirer. ;)

[Tom Joad]

Details are starting to come out now.

The following was written by Wendell Potter.

Wendell Potter left his position as head of communications for CIGNA, one of the nation’s largest health insurers, to show the world the dark inner workings of the insurance industry. He has testified before congressional committees, briefed several members of Congress and their staffs, appeared with lawmakers at several press conferences, spoken at more than 100 public forums, and has been the subject of numerous articles in the US and foreign media. He wrote Deadly Spin: An Insurance Company Insider Speaks Out on How Corporate PR Is Killing Health Care and Deceiving Americans.

As always, though, the devil is in the details. The reality is that the GOP plan would take us back to the days when insurers could sell junk policies, charge older folks more than they can today and calculate premiums based on a person’s health status. This means that a breast cancer survivor or a diabetic or someone recovering from a heart attack — or even a young person born with a disability or congenital disease — would have to pay a fortune for decent coverage if, God forbid, they let their existing policy lapse for two months or longer.

The Republican sponsors say their plan would restore freedom of choice they claim was taken away by Obamacare. There is some truth to that. The Affordable Care Act requires health insurance policies to cover 10 essential benefits, ranging from preventive care to prescription drugs and a stay in the hospital. People no longer have the freedom to buy policies so skimpy they have to pay almost all of their medical bills out of their own pockets. The Patient CARE Act would restore that freedom. And it would also restore to insurance companies the freedom to set annual limits on coverage.

The health insurance exchanges would disappear in most if not all states because the federal funding to help run them would evaporate under the GOP plan. One of the benefits of the exchanges is the ability it gives us to shop online for coverage and compare features and costs of one plan versus another. Health insurance agents and brokers would probably love to see those features disappear, but their gain would be our loss.

To increase competition, the GOP lawmakers say they would allow insurers to sell coverage across state lines. They made no mention of the fact that health insurance is regulated largely at the state level and that federal law doesn’t bar insurers from crossing state lines today.

The Medicaid expansion under Obamacare would also go away, as would the federal subsidies available to help low-income families and individuals pay their premiums and cover some of their out-of-pocket expenses. Under the GOP plan, the states would receive block grants from the federal government to help finance their Medicaid programs, meaning the feds would have far less say as to how the states provide coverage to the poor.

The GOP plan would also provide aid only to people making up to three times the federal poverty level — and in the form of refundable tax credits — as opposed to four times the poverty level via federal subsidies under Obamacare.

As a result, many — probably millions — of low- to moderate-income people who were able to buy coverage as a result of Obamacare would once again find the cost of health insurance prohibitively expensive.

Many folks in their 40s, 50s and early 60s would also be dumped back into the ranks of the uninsured or underinsured. Against the wishes of insurance industry lobbyists, Congress restricted insurers’ ability to charge older folks more than three times as much as younger people for the exact same coverage when it passed Obamacare. The industry wanted to be able to charge them at least five times as much. The GOP plan would grant that wish.


continue (http://billmoyers.com/2015/02/12/republican-alternative-obamacare-really-alternative/)