• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

ACA Running Thread

A big shock there that the New Republic would come to such a conclusion.

There are two issues there. First, the idea that the money is free. It's an enormous amount of payoff money that the feds are using to get the states to come into the fold. That in itself could be viewed as objectionable from a federal funding standpoint. Second, their analysis encompasses a ten year time frame and doesn't look beyond that. Third, it also doesn't consider individuals who sign up under the expansion who were actually eligible pre-expansion and didn't know it. Those folks will not be covered by the feds but rather by the states.

I think when you look at the totality of the circumstances, and particularly consider factors such as immigration and the current administration's desire to legalize everybody, it is easy to see why a place like Texas said thanks but no thanks. I can't speak for the other states.
 
Yeah I mean TNR is so reflexively liberal and for programs that help the poor.

$T2eC16JHJGEFFmuJs6oLBRz-KRNCw!~~60_57.JPG







Oh
 
The New Republic is citing a non-partisan organization that did the study and writing an article on it.

Tillis' major rationale for not expanding Medicaid in North Carolina was that the money was mismanaged in the first place. No mention of the expansion helping insure hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of North Carolinians who didn't have health care. No mention of the federal dollars the state would receive. No mention of the reimbursements the state would receive. Lengthy discussions about administrative bloat with a blatant disregard or lack of care for what the program was actually going to be doing.

Of course he reversed course 10 days ago shortly before the election to save face after realizing that he was wrong on the matter. No reason was given other than now he feels like money management has improved in the agency over the past 12 to 18 months. What an absolute disingenuous crock of shit. I'm sure the fact that only 28% of people in North Carolina opposed the expansion played NO ROLE WHATSOEVER on the issue.
 
Last edited:
:cool: Seriously, the plans that were deemed substandard that are no longer for sale. Isn't this what you are frightened of, being forced to choose a health plan that meets the mandated level of coverage instead of the ability to buy a bad one or no plan at all?

It even includes the passive voice....tremendous! Did you learn that from Ph?

That an #undefeated professor thinks he knows best for other people isn't news. If Obamacare was such a great idea, why not just run on the truth of it? That's a fairly far reaching policy (who does it not impact?), and its the signature promise of this Administration. It was also an enormous lie. Doesn't scare you?
 
22890, It is a little worse than that, there was no mismanagement of funds once all the data was revealed and the e-mails discovered. It was actually a republican solution in search of a problem that they could easily manufacture to their story line.
 
It even includes the passive voice....tremendous! Did you learn that from Ph?

That an #undefeated professor thinks he knows best for other people isn't news. If Obamacare was such a great idea, why not just run on the truth of it? That's a fairly far reaching policy (who does it not impact?), and its the signature promise of this Administration. It was also an enormous lie. Doesn't scare you?

sigh. I asked what frightens you. Does not being able to choose a low quality health care plan frighten you? And what specifically about that frightens you?

Edit: You allow the government to choose all kinds of things that "are best for you" all the time. Spare me the incredulity.
 
sigh. I asked what frightens you. Does not being able to choose a low quality health care plan frighten you? And what specifically about that frightens you?

Edit: You allow the government to choose all kinds of things that "are best for you" all the time. Spare me the incredulity.

This is America god damnit. There are rules WakeandBake.
 
22890, It is a little worse than that, there was no mismanagement of funds once all the data was revealed and the e-mails discovered. It was actually a republican solution in search of a problem that they could easily manufacture to their story line.

Oooooooppppsssss. Of course any intelligent person knew that from the outset.

I'm still interested in hearing ELC's response to why states haven't expanded Medicaid if it was so "well known" (which I take to mean generally accepted and that most people would agree it was a correct policy) that this would help the uninsured. Sounds like the answer so far is they cared more about getting a smaller government than helping people who needed help.
 
sigh. I asked what frightens you. Does not being able to choose a low quality health care plan frighten you? And what specifically about that frightens you?

Edit: You allow the government to choose all kinds of things that "are best for you" all the time. Spare me the incredulity.

You're okay with an administration's signature promise---which will directly impact every single American---being a known fabrication because the ends justify the means?

Can I change my answer? People who aren't scared by that fact scare me.
 
You're okay with an administration's signature promise---which will directly impact every single American---being a known fabrication because the ends justify the means?

Can I change my answer? People who aren't scared by that fact scare me.

We are talking about your fright. Thanks for changing your answer.

I think you are talking about the 'keep your plan' fabrication. Is that right?
 
You're okay with an administration's signature promise---which will directly impact every single American---being a known fabrication because the ends justify the means?

Can I change my answer? People who aren't scared by that fact scare me.

Of course you're scared by these things. You're firmly entrenched in the party that seeks to get voters out in droves by terrifying the shit out of them about anything they possibly can: ebola, ISIS, terrorism, Muslims, the attack on Christianity, gay people taking over the world, etc.

The fact that you're scared of things is probably just an indication that it's a pretty normal course of action.
 
We are talking about your fright. Thanks for changing your answer.

I think you are talking about the 'keep your plan' fabrication. Is that right?

The signature promise of this Administration? yet, that minor detail. Bake, I like you too much to think that you're a kneepad-wearing, some-of-the-sheeple-all-of-the-time dupe like our friend numbers. Don't tell me you'll bend over for Team Dem that pliably. Right or wrong, you struck me as a person with a modicum of self respect. Et tu, Bakus? Say it ain't so.
 
I think WnB is probably with me when I say that we're not overly impressed by Obama but we also don't think he's the anti-Christ. There are nuanced positions between being a "kneepad-wearing, some-of-the-sheeple-all-of-the-time dupe" and being vehemently opposed to every aspect of the "community organizer's" presidency.
 
I think WnB is probably with me when I say that we're not overly impressed by Obama but we also don't think he's the anti-Christ. There are nuanced positions between being a "kneepad-wearing, some-of-the-sheeple-all-of-the-time dupe" and being vehemently opposed to every aspect of the "community organizer's" presidency.

I'm bummed because I voted for a Socialist and got a Republican instead.
 
I think Obama is an average to slightly above average president. I don't think any Democrat in office the past 4 years could have done anything at all.

Can someone explain to me how this came to pass? Didn't Obama take office with complete control of the House and Senate? What had happened?
 
People who voted for Obama didn't show up to vote in 2010 because Obama wasn't on the ticket

But to be honest I don't remember the exact implications leading to a 2010 Republican House takeover. I do believe that Obama not being on the ticket hurt since that was why the Dems gained so many seats in 2008 (on his coattails), the sitting president's party generally performs poorly at midterms, and some people who voted for Obama expected instant change and gratification and it didn't happen. Mix that in with the fact that a lot of voters and Americans were displeased with the ACA and you have a pretty perfect storm for a GOP House landslide.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top