Obama’s Healthcare Plan

Created by Mr Logic in Jax on Feb 23, 2010

67 votes

Click on an option to vote

A Great Plan

A Good Compromise

Have yet to Read It

Not told what to think Yet

OH Crap!

We are screwed

“Don't let em take ur liberties”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#123 Sep 17, 2013
If I owed you money, would you take part of it or starve? If I payed you paid of what I owed you, Would you buy food and basic needs?
Or
Would you go out and buy some new clothes?

So what does congress do if only part of the budget is passed?

“Don't let em take ur liberties”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#124 Sep 17, 2013
Substitute part for paid in first paragraph. Substitute paid for payed.
"If I paid you part of what I owed you, Would you buy food and basic needs?"
Muddy

Wise, VA

#125 Sep 17, 2013
Mr Logic in Jax wrote:
<quoted text>
Socialism, NO!
Bigger Government, NO!
Bastardizing the healthcare system even More, NO!
Massive Deficits, NO!
Higher Taxes for ALL, NO!
Higher Unemployment, NO!
More Government Workers, NO!
More Government Dependants, NO!
Legalization of illegal Aliens, NO!
Where’s that Party sign me UP! YES!
Letting poor starve and die, YES!
Letting our healthcare be controoled by for-profit insurance, YES!
Massive deicits like under Reagan and Bush 43, YES!
Econocic Destruction, like Bush 43, YES!

“Just Add Obama ”

Since: Mar 08

Jacksonville Florida

#126 Sep 20, 2013
Muddy wrote:
<quoted text>
Letting poor starve and die, YES!
Letting our healthcare be controoled by for-profit insurance, YES!
Massive deicits like under Reagan and Bush 43, YES!
Econocic Destruction, like Bush 43, YES!
WOW, what an insult to the poor, Muddy you don’t have any respect for the poor do you. You must have one serious superiority complex.
I refuse to accept the premise of your agreement based on the following; if by being poor meant starving to death then we would have NO poor, by definition. All poor would starve to death thus their numbers worldwide would be low. I also refuse to accept the premise of your agreement since you are making the poor out as lazy and unable to provide for themselves which again shows the utter lack of respect for them.

The last time I checked you and I can go to the hospital and pay cash for services, maybe if the consumer would just cut out the middle men (i.e. business and insurance companies) then you might see some changes.

Then again I am left to wonder what you truly understand about economics.
noshellswill

Jacksonville, FL

#127 Sep 20, 2013
"... hospital... pay cash for services ..."
Hahahaha what a kidder you are LIJ. Funny as a blocked artery.

Let's see, without a doctors oversight XXX hospital would **not** have given me an $11-K stress-test. So not only can noone but the **insured** and the **1%** afford that test, but w/o the gatekeepers OK you can't get the test at all! Of-course there's the radio-isotope issue, for imaging afterward but you get my drift.

You make an offhand, fantasyland argument about unreachable, unaffordable medical services. Might as well plump for a Canuk-style single-payer plan, and pay for it by ruthlessly high and rigid tarrifs, screwing globalist investors while re-employing 15,000,000 American workers.
Then -- working Americans could afford well structured fascist medical care with an initially **gifted** premium equal to the current trade-deficit! If I must say clever as a jelly-coated baseball bat rahmed-up a fatkats *zzwhole.
Mr Logic in Jax wrote:
<quoted text>
WOW, what an insult to the poor, Muddy you don’t have any respect for the poor do you. You must have one serious superiority complex.
I refuse to accept the premise of your agreement based on the following; if by being poor meant starving to death then we would have NO poor, by definition. All poor would starve to death thus their numbers worldwide would be low. I also refuse to accept the premise of your agreement since you are making the poor out as lazy and unable to provide for themselves which again shows the utter lack of respect for them.
The last time I checked you and I can go to the hospital and pay cash for services, maybe if the consumer would just cut out the middle men (i.e. business and insurance companies) then you might see some changes.
Then again I am left to wonder what you truly understand about economics.

“Just Add Obama ”

Since: Mar 08

Jacksonville Florida

#129 Sep 23, 2013
noshellswill wrote:
"... hospital... pay cash for services ..."
Hahahaha what a kidder you are LIJ. Funny as a blocked artery.
Let's see, without a doctors oversight XXX hospital would **not** have given me an $11-K stress-test. So not only can noone but the **insured** and the **1%** afford that test, but w/o the gatekeepers OK you can't get the test at all! Of-course there's the radio-isotope issue, for imaging afterward but you get my drift.
You make an offhand, fantasyland argument about unreachable, unaffordable medical services. Might as well plump for a Canuk-style single-payer plan, and pay for it by ruthlessly high and rigid tarrifs, screwing globalist investors while re-employing 15,000,000 American workers.
Then -- working Americans could afford well structured fascist medical care with an initially **gifted** premium equal to the current trade-deficit! If I must say clever as a jelly-coated baseball bat rahmed-up a fatkats *zzwhole.
<quoted text>
When the computer was first developed the majority could not afford. When mobile phones (cell) first hit the market the majority could not afford. The car, air travel, plastic surgery, Botox, etc…. Need I keep going noshellswill? What do all of these have in common noshellswill, that’s right for the most part there is no middle man. Just look at the Plastic Surgery market noshellswill, people in every wage scale can afford to have work done and it dam sure has nothing to do with a well-structured fascist medical system. DO I need to go own, do we need to discuss the world of cosmetic dentistry or custom dental work. Again these are not your well-structured fascist medical systems, they are very simple the customer has a need and the provider has figured out how to provide that service to the masses. Why you ASK? The greater number customers the better opportunity at profit.
So noshellswill a couple of questions;
Did you think the $11k test was worth it?
What do you think the test should have cost?
Muddy

Wise, VA

#130 Sep 23, 2013
Mr Logic in Jax wrote:
<quoted text>
WOW, what an insult to the poor, Muddy you don’t have any respect for the poor do you. You must have one serious superiority complex.
I refuse to accept the premise of your agreement based on the following; if by being poor meant starving to death then we would have NO poor, by definition. All poor would starve to death thus their numbers worldwide would be low. I also refuse to accept the premise of your agreement since you are making the poor out as lazy and unable to provide for themselves which again shows the utter lack of respect for them.
The last time I checked you and I can go to the hospital and pay cash for services, maybe if the consumer would just cut out the middle men (i.e. business and insurance companies) then you might see some changes.
Then again I am left to wonder what you truly understand about economics.
I was reiterating "Mr. Logic's" points, but without the bull****! It's called satire...look it up, "Hannity."

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#131 Sep 26, 2013
Muddy wrote:
<quoted text>Letting poor starve and die, YES!
Letting our healthcare be controoled by for-profit insurance, YES!
Massive deicits like under Reagan and Bush 43, YES!
Econocic Destruction, like Bush 43, YES!
...You are an insult to the intelligent, among the GOP.....
noshellswill

Jacksonville, FL

#132 Sep 26, 2013
Surely I have **no idea** how much a radio-isotope leveraged stress-test ought to cost. My point was I could **not** have obtained (in USA) such test at-any-price had my cardio-guy not signed-off for the procedure. Your concept of eliminating the middle-man is often not even legal. And since stress-tests carry significant risk it's very proper to have a **gatekeeper**.

As for the affordability of (even semi) cosmetic skin/dental surgery ... or generic dental surgery you had better prepare for a rapidly growing nose! For shame such arglebargle !! What planet do you live on ??? No non-union working man can afford that stuff!

The five-figure-cost ($15K-$40K) of such procedures is VERY VERY LARGE! My quoted numbers are all solid current rate "1st-hand" values! So of-course a well-maintained fascist med/dent system is to the great benefit of a large majority of citizens. As a side benefit you also get to shoot-dead docs & their *ussy med-school profs who do not perform well.
Mr Logic in Jax wrote:
<quoted text>
When the computer was first developed the majority could not afford. When mobile phones (cell) first hit the market the majority could not afford. The car, air travel, plastic surgery, Botox, etc…. Need I keep going noshellswill? What do all of these have in common noshellswill, that’s right for the most part there is no middle man. Just look at the Plastic Surgery market noshellswill, people in every wage scale can afford to have work done and it dam sure has nothing to do with a well-structured fascist medical system. DO I need to go own, do we need to discuss the world of cosmetic dentistry or custom dental work. Again these are not your well-structured fascist medical systems, they are very simple the customer has a need and the provider has figured out how to provide that service to the masses. Why you ASK? The greater number customers the better opportunity at profit.
So noshellswill a couple of questions;
Did you think the $11k test was worth it?
What do you think the test should have cost?
Toaster

Pomona Park, FL

#133 Oct 5, 2013
Mr Logic in Jax wrote:
Obama has final come out with HIS healthcare plan, what do you think.
The same as I feel about obummer,and the idiots that voted for him -- dog sh-t

“Just Add Obama ”

Since: Mar 08

Jacksonville Florida

#134 Nov 15, 2013
Saw this comment or ones similar, in several news stories today:
“PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SOLUTION to the wave of insurance cancellation notices that has caused millions of Americans to lose their coverage under ObamaCare is creating mass confusion for state insurance commissioners, insurance companies — and consumers.”

Is there anyone that has yet to understand that, there is NO way this Healthcare rollout was not planned to be a means to an end, crisis. Now Obama has decided to change the rules, which States and Insurers have been told to work under for 3 years. Not to worry, so at the last minute Obama decides to change the rules he carefully helped write. Sorry, but I believe this was part of the plan all along.

Everything that is happening during this rollout has been carefully planned after it passed into law and perfectly implemented to create a crisis. Obama’s move yesterday is to get insurance away from the state level by having the majority of voters so up in arms that they go crawling on hands and knees begging Government and Obama to take over Healthcare 100%.

“Just Add Obama ”

Since: Mar 08

Jacksonville Florida

#135 Nov 26, 2013
President Barack Obama
"If you like your plan, you can keep it."
BA HAAAAAAAA!!!!!

Almost 80 million people with employer health plans could find their coverage canceled because they are not compliant with ObamaCare, several experts predicted.

Their losses would be in addition to the millions who found their individual coverage cancelled for the same reason.

Stan Veuger of the American Enterprise Institute said that in addition to the individual cancellations, "at least half the people on employer plans would by 2014 start losing plans as well." There are approximately 157 million employer health care policy holders.

Avik Roy of the Manhattan Institute added, "the administration estimated that approximately 78 million Americans with employer sponsored insurance would lose their existing coverage due to the Affordable Care Act."

Last week, an analysis by the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, showed the administration anticipates half to two-thirds of small businesses would have policies canceled or be compelled to send workers onto the ObamaCare exchanges. They predicted up to 100 million small and large business policies could be canceled next year.

According to projections the administration itself issued back in July 2010, it was clear officials knew the impact of ObamaCare three years ago.

In fact, according to the Federal Register, its mid-range estimate was that by the end of 2014, 76 percent of small group plans would be cancelled, along with 55 percent of large employer plans.
The reason behind the losses is that current plans don't meet the requirements of ObamaCare, which dictate that each plan must cover a list of essential benefits, whether people want them or not.

"Things like maternity care or acupuncture or extensive drug coverage," said Veuger. "And so now the law is going to force them to buy policies that they could have gotten in the past if they wanted to but they chose not to."

Some plans already have been canceled and employers are getting sticker shock at the new, higher prices under ObamaCare.

One of them is David Allen, president of a company bearing his name in Boulder, Colorado. He told a Congressional hearing recently that his carrier discontinued his company policy because it wasn't compliant with ObamaCare.

"It does not meet the minimum standards as stipulated under the law. Due to this one change," he said, "our premiums are now scheduled to increase by 52.3 percent in January 2014."

Roy said that is not unusual. "The old plans that are being cancelled are meaningfully cheaper than the new plans that are ObamaCare compliant."
A new wave of cancellations and sticker shock will emerge just before next year's elections.

"They're going to start doing that in the summer or early fall but certainly before the midterm elections," said Veuger.

“Just Add Obama ”

Since: Mar 08

Jacksonville Florida

#136 Nov 26, 2013
Just remember some of the other quotes from President Barack Obama
"If you like your plan, you can keep it."

"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."

“Government Health care will be cheaper”

“Government Health care will be better”

“There are no Death panels”

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!
noshellswill

Jacksonville, FL

#137 Nov 26, 2013
What do you expect from a Chicago hustler pimping Jane-da-krak-hoe, bath-house bimboz and babaymomaz cellfone? The real question is why can't the RepubliFat$ find a 21st Century industrialist to carry their standard? Not another Saudi blo-jobbing Bush-baby. If offshoring Romney's the best they can do then ... we can say lose...lose...lose... and kiss goodbye to the republic.
Mr Logic in Jax wrote:
Just remember some of the other quotes from President Barack Obama
"If you like your plan, you can keep it."
"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."
“Government Health care will be cheaper”
“Government Health care will be better”
“There are no Death panels”
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#138 Nov 26, 2013
I expected more outta this forum, than rehashed Fox talking points and fear mongering.....
Skrewd Workingman

Murray, KY

#140 Dec 8, 2013
Obamacare was intended to do 2 things and it is doing both very well.

It was intended to provide free health care to Obama's political base, the professional welfare recipient class. It is doing that. They get Medicaid. Absolutely FREE.
It was also intended to punish the working class who are the rank and file voters of the Republican Party. It is doing that just fine too. They are being stuck with huge premium increases that they must pay or be fined.

Obamacare also has 2 built in mechanisms that will hurt workers even more than the individual mandate. First, by exempting employers with under 50 employees (and adding greatly to the cost of the premiums that they must pay if they do cover their employees) it encourages employers with just a few workers over 50, say 54, to lay off workers to get under the 50 limit. Many will do that. The employer will have no choice since they cannot afford the higher premiums that they must now pay. The loophole that allows big employers with hundreds or thousands of low wage employees to not cover part time workers is an incentive for those employers to cut people's hours.

The aim was to force low wage workers onto the expanded Medicaid. However, there is a Catch-22 in that too.

Take this example:

A 55 year old factory worker who worked for good wages for many years and is laid off. He owns a house that is paid for, two or more vehicles, and maybe a boat or an RV. He has some savings. After he is laid off, he takes a full time job at low wages. It is all that he can get. It pays the bills and he figures he can last until age 62 and Social Security and retirement kick in. Then Obamacare hits his employer. If he works for an employer with 50 workers and he's no. 50, he will be the one fired. Last hired; first fired. He has to pay his own Obamacare, but he can't afford it. "But," the Obamanites say, "He can get expanded Medicaid!" Well, yes, he can. But - and here's the Catch-22 - he's not eligible for Medicaid because he has too much in the way of assets - that house and everything that he has worked all his life for. He has to liquidate those assets and spend the money before he can get Medicaid. It will impoverish him. And that is just what Obama intended for it to do.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#141 Dec 9, 2013
..."professional welfare recipient class"?.....Are you for REAL???
Screwd Workingman

Marion, KY

#142 Dec 22, 2013
Yes, there exists in America a class of people who are best described as "Professional welfare recipients." They are able bodied non-working people whose only occupation is to play the system for maximum benefits. This group has no intention of ever getting off welfare.
Screwd Workingman

Marion, KY

#143 Dec 22, 2013
An article worth reading (and follow links):

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/10/do-welf...
DTJ

Paducah, KY

#144 Dec 23, 2013
Karl Marx hated the middle class of his time – who were mostly shopkeepers, small businessmen, and professionals who were small property owners – because they tended to side with the rich capitalists and landed aristocrats in order to protect their own personal property. European workers in Marx’s time usually owned no property and were paid so little that they lived from payday to payday. Marx never contemplated an economy and social structure like the one that developed in the United States in which workers earned wages high enough and had working conditions good enough to allow them to live middle class lifestyles. According to Marx, the communist ‘proletarian’ revolution was to happen in the most highly developed economy when the lower middle class had been impoverished and driven down into the ranks of the proletariat. Since England, Germany, and the United States were the most advanced economies, that is where the communist revolution should have happened. But it did not because the process (which Marx believed was pre-determined by economics) was short circuited when workers were raised into the middle class. Marx also never conceived of a welfare dependent class like the one that we have in the United States in which productive taxpayers wealth is transferred to a parasitic non-working welfare class whose only occupation is drawing government benefits.

Obama believes in the basic tentes of Marxism. He hates the working middle class. His base of support is the welfare class. Obamacare is designed to destroy the working middle class and force its members down into the welfare class. Its exemption of large employers having to carry insurance on part time employees is a deliberate incentive for those employers to cut hours to less than half time. Workers will have to work two jobs to earn the same money – and they will still have to buy their own insurance. Most will not be able to afford it. They will be forced into the expanded Medicaid. And there is the trap. Because when they go on Medicaid, they have to remain impoverished. Just like any other welfare program, an attempt to rise out of it will be met with financial penalties. It will cost someone more to work and pay their own way than they get from welfare. Thus Obama is seeking to destroy the working middle class and recreate the impoverished proletariat that Marx said was necessary for a communist revolution to happen.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Macclenny Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Local News - Happy Anniversary Channel 12! (May '07) 1 hr lhart423 83
Fool Austrailians let-in the Muzzi-wogs ... 3 hr Toaster 17
Cops are pigs that will eat their own... 9 hr King of wisdom 2
Marco Rubio 10 hr King of wisdom 9
Georgia - Inmates Complain of Treatment at Clay... (Jan '08) 19 hr Straighttalk 82
Review: Redeemer Anglican Church Sat Observer 2
The interview Sat King of wisdom 4
Macclenny Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Macclenny People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Macclenny News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Macclenny

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 2:41 pm PST

Bleacher Report 2:41PM
Saints vs. Buccaneers: Full Report Card Grades for Tampa Bay
Yahoo! Sports 3:46 PM
Bittersweet feelings for 'sack master' Watt
Bleacher Report 4:02 PM
Grading Houston's Positional Units in Week 17
NBC Sports 4:21 PM
Jaguars overpowered by Watt, Texans in 23-17 loss - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report 4:25 PM
Who Should Bucs Draft No. 1 Overall?