• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Obamacare Layoffs, Hiring Freezes Begin

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
OT, do your self a favor and do a search for "A Comparison of Cost-of-War Estimates"

The study that was done by Linda Bilmes and Joseph Stiglitz contains quite a few errors, when estimating the costs of the wars.

That's the study that most left-leaning articles have used to convince you that Bush spent more than he did.


One example:

Increases in the Regular Defense Budget

Bilmes and Stiglitz estimated that, because of the war, the regular defense budget—
the portion not funded through emergency appropriations—increased by a
total of $104 billion to $139 billion between 2002 and 2006. However, CBO’s
analysis suggests that most of the budget increases that occurred during that period
reflect factors not related to the war, such as inflation, real (inflation-adjusted) pay
increases for military and civilian personnel, enhanced personnel benefits that
were either enacted before the war or not requested by the Administration as part
of its war-funding request, and DoD’s efforts to modernize and reconfigure military
forces (efforts that were initiated before the onset of the war in Iraq).
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
gmacbeef said:
Oltimer wrote:The mandate did not become evil or a pariah- until the Dems and moderate Repubs accepted it- and it became evident the Obama might do something positive..... Sad Then many of the things put out about the law were flat out falsehoods- and fearmongering...


Would that include the dozens of flat out LIES that Oblamea stated over & over ??? The most famous being "if you like your health care you can keep it " ! BULLSHYTE !

I still have the healthcare we've had for years...Why would you not be allowed to keep your current health care- unless you didn't have any? The same 3-4 parent multinational corporate entities that offer all insurance in the country will still be offering it... The only addition I see is that each state (or the fed if the state refuses to act) will have to offer a pool you have the option of joining....

You apparently chose to ignore this post......

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62071&highlight=
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
okfarmer said:
Oldtimer said:
I still have the healthcare we've had for years...Why would you not be allowed to keep your current health care- unless you didn't have any? The same 3-4 parent multinational corporate entities that offer all insurance in the country will still be offering it... The only addition I see is that each state (or the fed if the state refuses to act) will have to offer a pool you have the option of joining....

You apparently chose to ignore this post......

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62071&highlight=




Private insurance companies push for 'individual mandate'

Healthcare: Road to Reforms


As momentum gains for reforms, insurers hope to turn it to their advantage by supporting a proposal that everyone buy coverage. It would be a boost for the industry, which has seen enrollment decline.

June 07, 2009|Lisa Girion


Some may find it hard to believe that the U.S. health insurance industry supports making major changes to the nation's healthcare system.

The industry, after all, scuttled President Clinton's healthcare overhaul bid with ads featuring "Harry and Louise" fretting about change.

But this time, it turns out, the health insurance industry has good reason to support at least some change: It needs it.



Private health insurance faces a bleak future if the proposal they champion most vigorously -- a requirement that everyone buy medical coverage -- is not adopted.

The customer base for private insurance has slipped since 2000, when soaring premiums began driving people out. The recession has accelerated the problem. But even after the economy recovers, the downward spiral is expected to continue for years as baby boomers become eligible for Medicare -- and stop buying private insurance.


Insurers do not embrace all of the healthcare restructuring proposals. But they are fighting hard for a purchase requirement, sweetened with taxpayer-funded subsidies for customers who can't afford it, and enforced with fines.

Such a so-called individual mandate amounts to a huge booster shot for health insurers, which would serve up millions of new customers almost overnight.

"I think that's why we've seen the industry basically trying to play the administration's game," said Jane DuBose, an analyst with industry tracking firm HealthLeaders-InterStudy. "They really could be licking their chops over the potential here."

The industry says its interest in change flows not from narrow self-interest but from broader concerns.

"What's driving this is we have 47 million people who don't have access to the system, who get help through emergency rooms, and that results in higher costs and inefficient care," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for industry trade group America's Health Insurance Plans. "There's both a social and economic reason to get everybody in the healthcare system."

Jay Gellert, chief executive of Woodland Hills-based Health Net, said industry support for certain changes is driven by "a recognition that public frustration with many of the problems in the system [is] increasing pretty significantly. So I think there's as much of a commitment to this because we've seen other industries where they haven't dealt with issues early enough, like financial services and auto, and that's not a happy place."

Still, industry observers say, private insurers need the government's help to transform some of the nation's 45 million uninsured residents into paying customers.

Private insurers lost an estimated 9 million customers between 2000 and 2007. In many cases, people lost coverage because they or their employers could no longer afford it as premium increases outpaced wage growth and inflation.

Recession job losses are adding to the toll. Some economists estimate that every percentage-point increase in the jobless rate adds 1 million people to the ranks of the uninsured.


The industry's real trouble begins in 2011, when 79 million baby boomers begin turning 65. Health insurers stand to lose a huge slice of their commercially insured enrollment (estimated at 162 million to 172 million people) over the next two decades to Medicare, the government-funded health insurance program for seniors.

"The rate of aging far and away exceeds the birth rate," said Sheryl Skolnick, a CRT Capital Group healthcare investment analyst. "That's got to be very scary. . . . This is the biggest fight for survival managed care has ever faced, at least since they went bankrupt in the late '80s."

With Democrats in power and public sentiment in favor of change, the industry can't afford to flatly oppose it, said Julius Hobson, a Washington lobbyist for hospitals and insurers with the law firm Bryan Cave.

"This time, you get the sense something is going to happen," he said. "So to stand up and just say no is probably not wise, because politically you could get run over."

For insurers, getting "run over" would be the adoption of a so-called single-payer plan, in which the government pays all medical bills. Such a plan, though widely viewed as politically unfeasible this year, would wreak havoc on the private insurance market.

The best way for the industry to preserve the private insurance market -- and derail the campaign for a single-payer system -- may be to go along with more palatable proposals on the table now, said Jeffrey Miles, a healthcare analyst and president of the Miles Organization, a Los Angeles insurance brokerage firm.

"If healthcare goes down this year, you are going to end up with single-payer care much sooner than anyone expected," he said.

But there is a limit to how much change the industry will abide. It draws the line at proposals, supported by President Obama and others, to offer consumers a public insurance alternative to private coverage.



Premiums have been going up at huge rates and pricing folks out of the ability to afford insurance for years and years... Which just rises the cost to those still buying insurance or paying for healthcare thru the Catch 22...

That is the reason that for years the number one issue voters said needed to be taken up was health care reform (prior to GW making the Iraq War or Bush Bust number one :roll: )... It is the reason for years and years Repubs/Conservative supported the mandate as an answer... Its the reason the Insurance Industry testified in the Congressional Hearings that their preferred answer- and the way they believed they could best lower insurance costs- was thru a mandate requiring everyone to be covered....

I didn't ignore it- maybe you didn't see the post because the bro's tried to change the subject away from health care ...
Insurance companies have been struggling for years- and having to raise rates at exceptionally fast paces to keep up with all the costs of the irresponsible folks we are already paying for... That is why the insurance carriers have for years supported "a Mandate"...
 

Steve

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
I was calling the original creator of the thread snotty and childish and the rest of you for jumping in on it, like a pack of dogs.


Hey, there is an old sayin, " a hit dog always hollers"...so if you think I was callin' YOU childish and snotty.....so be it!!

Why was the OP childish and snotty? Looked like she asked a reasonable question.

Normally when posters leave a site, they've got the option to back and delete their posts manually if they wish....except that they'd not be able to do so when their post was quoted by others.

What the mod did (striking all her posts/name, etc) was sort of odd and as Buckeye (one of Hypo's alts noted) sort of disrupts the flow of the threads.

Anyway, I wish Reader would have stuck around. She, Alice and OT really were a dynamic duo (and yes, I meant duo). :lol:

BTW, was OT childish and snotty for immediately repeating all the same old unproven accusations of stalking?
 

Steve

Well-known member
Mike said:
So we give those "Irresponsible" folks scott free healthcare and solve the problem? SHEEEEEEEESH!!!!!!

it is like obama phones...

they would have the phones anyways.. just scrimp a bit to get one...

now with Obamaphones.. everyone can have one... no saving no scrimping.. just a free phone to use whenever you want...

But unbeknownst to OT and the Obama phone folk.. someone has to pay for it... (hint the taxpayer)

same will happen when the same folk are given "free Obamacare"
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Over the weekend, The New York Times published a report noting that health insurers across the nation are both “seeking and winning double-digit increases in premiums” — this despite the fact that “one of the biggest objectives of the Obama administration’s health care law was to stem the rapid rise in insurance costs for consumers.”

http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/08/is-obamacare-causing-health-insurance-pr

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/06/business/despite-new-health-law-some-see-sharp-rise-in-premiums.html
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I didn't ignore it- maybe you didn't see the post because the bro's tried to change the subject away from health care ...
Insurance companies have been struggling for years- and having to raise rates at exceptionally fast paces to keep up with all the costs of the irresponsible folks we are already paying for... That is why the insurance carriers have for years supported "a Mandate"...

Then why are they going out of business with the mandate and specifically stated that as such? If it is such a great thing?

The reason they are stopping my insurance, is because it is designed as a government take over. You already stated that you are a supporter of nationalism. I hope you live long enough to feel the pain of what you have supported. Too bad you children and grand children will as well.

I spent some time with my grand dad this past weekend. At 90, he has more sense about what is happening in this country than you. Of course, he also fought against the nationalism of Hitler and had more invested than a handout. I feel sorry for any of them that are still alive and see what is happening. It has to be hard for them to have lived through the cost of the war and know what was sacrificed, to see it all voted away by scum without a moral backbone.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Steve said:
kolanuraven said:
I was calling the original creator of the thread snotty and childish and the rest of you for jumping in on it, like a pack of dogs.


Hey, there is an old sayin, " a hit dog always hollers"...so if you think I was callin' YOU childish and snotty.....so be it!!

Why was the OP childish and snotty? Looked like she asked a reasonable question.

Normally when posters leave a site, they've got the option to back and delete their posts manually if they wish....except that they'd not be able to do so when their post was quoted by others.

What the mod did (striking all her posts/name, etc) was sort of odd and as Buckeye (one of Hypo's alts noted) sort of disrupts the flow of the threads.

Anyway, I wish Reader would have stuck around. She, Alice and OT really were a dynamic duo (and yes, I meant duo). :lol:

BTW, was OT childish and snotty for immediately repeating all the same old unproven accusations of stalking?

for the record.. I did not make the above post... not sure who did.. but I didn't.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
okfarmer said:
Oldtimer said:
I didn't ignore it- maybe you didn't see the post because the bro's tried to change the subject away from health care ...
Insurance companies have been struggling for years- and having to raise rates at exceptionally fast paces to keep up with all the costs of the irresponsible folks we are already paying for... That is why the insurance carriers have for years supported "a Mandate"...

Then why are they going out of business with the mandate and specifically stated that as such? If it is such a great thing?

Much of the law hasn't gone into effect yet... And some of the full law won't take effect for years...

While some of the requirements- like for requiring coverage for children with preexisting conditions, not dropping folks because they get a disease, and requiring insurance to carry young people on their parents insurance until into their 20's, etc., etc.- which are raising costs have gone into effect....

The mandate hasn't even gone into effect and won't go into effect under the law until 2014-- and the full penalties for not having insurance won't go into place until 2016....
Most of the law does not go into effect until next year- 2014...

January 1, 2014
Health insurance exchanges will be implemented across the country to provide consumers an easy way to find health insurance coverage.

The individual health insurance mandate will require Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a fine.

Tax credits will be given to those who cannot afford health insurance.

Individuals who participate in clinical trials cannot be dropped or limited by their insurance policy.

Individuals guaranteed health insurance coverage regardless of health status. Insurance companies will not be allowed to charge more for gender or health status.


This is definitely not an overnite solve all problems law... Rather it is a long term plan looking at improving both the countries physical and economical health 10-20-30 years and for future generations down the line....


The reason they are stopping my insurance, is because it is designed as a government take over. You already stated that you are a supporter of nationalism. I hope you live long enough to feel the pain of what you have supported. Too bad you children and grand children will as well.

I don't know where I ever said I am a supporter of nationalism- as I am not...
But do you really think the entire insurance industry would be supporting the mandate if it was a government takeover :???: ...Actually they support it and this law as a way of opposing a government take over- and the alternative of Universal/National Health Care as is seen in Canada, the UK, and much of Europe....That was also the reason for years it was promoted by so many conservatives and Republicans...
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
okfarmer said:
Oldtimer said:
I didn't ignore it- maybe you didn't see the post because the bro's tried to change the subject away from health care ...
Insurance companies have been struggling for years- and having to raise rates at exceptionally fast paces to keep up with all the costs of the irresponsible folks we are already paying for... That is why the insurance carriers have for years supported "a Mandate"...

Then why are they going out of business with the mandate and specifically stated that as such? If it is such a great thing?

Much of the law hasn't gone into effect yet... And some of the full law won't take effect for years...

While some of the requirements- like for requiring coverage for children with preexisting conditions, not dropping folks because they get a disease, and requiring insurance to carry young people on their parents insurance until into their 20's, etc., etc.- which are raising costs have gone into effect....

The mandate hasn't even gone into effect and won't go into effect under the law until 2014-- and the full penalties for not having insurance won't go into place until 2016....
Most of the law does not go into effect until next year- 2014...

January 1, 2014
Health insurance exchanges will be implemented across the country to provide consumers an easy way to find health insurance coverage.

The individual health insurance mandate will require Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a fine.

Tax credits will be given to those who cannot afford health insurance.

Individuals who participate in clinical trials cannot be dropped or limited by their insurance policy.

Individuals guaranteed health insurance coverage regardless of health status. Insurance companies will not be allowed to charge more for gender or health status.


This is definitely not an overnite solve all problems law... Rather it is a long term plan looking at improving both the countries physical and economical health 10-20-30 years and for future generations down the line....


The reason they are stopping my insurance, is because it is designed as a government take over. You already stated that you are a supporter of nationalism. I hope you live long enough to feel the pain of what you have supported. Too bad you children and grand children will as well.

I don't know where I ever said I am a supporter of nationalism- as I am not...
But do you really think the entire insurance industry would be supporting the mandate if it was a government takeover :???: ...Actually they support it and this law as a way of opposing a government take over- and the alternative of Universal/National Health Care as is seen in Canada, the UK, and much of Europe....That was also the reason for years it was promoted by so many conservatives and Republicans...

Wonder why they stop coverage on 12/31/2013? Because it starts on Jan of 2014...... Come on. If they loved it so much, why are they blaming it for going out of business just prior to it starting?

If individuals can't decide, then they don't have freedom. If the government can mandate something- doesn't that mean it has control? They have taken over the decision for the individual and they already have been regulating the health care industry. Therefor, it is a government take over- yes.

I LOST MY HIGH QUALITY, FULL COVERAGE HEALTH INSURANCE FOR ME AND MY DAUGHTERS BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT TAKE OVER OF THE INDUSTRY- YES. Now when I end up with cancer that I am absolutely 100% going to get in the next 10 to 15 years, I don't have the coverage I paid for for the last 10 years. I will be put at the back of the line, past the people who haven't paid a thing.

My insurance didn't start climbing astronomically until Obama and it has significantly worsened in the last 2 years.

Most people are completely ignorant on this. Spoke with a county Judge last week and a few attorney's that had no idea you can't get insurance for children by themselves anymore. When did that happen?

Gotta love all the new options. :roll:

Like I said, hope you live long enough to see what you support.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Steve said:
kolanuraven said:
I was calling the original creator of the thread snotty and childish and the rest of you for jumping in on it, like a pack of dogs.


Hey, there is an old sayin, " a hit dog always hollers"...so if you think I was callin' YOU childish and snotty.....so be it!!

Why was the OP childish and snotty? Looked like she asked a reasonable question.

Normally when posters leave a site, they've got the option to back and delete their posts manually if they wish....except that they'd not be able to do so when their post was quoted by others.

What the mod did (striking all her posts/name, etc) was sort of odd and as Buckeye (one of Hypo's alts noted) sort of disrupts the flow of the threads.

Anyway, I wish Reader would have stuck around. She, Alice and OT really were a dynamic duo (and yes, I meant duo). :lol:

BTW, was OT childish and snotty for immediately repeating all the same old unproven accusations of stalking?

Now THAT is really odd. I wrote the above words but they're posted under Steve's handle. :shock:

Does that mean I'm Steve's alt, Steve's my alt, or sumtin else? :???:
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
This is definitely not an overnite solve all problems law... Rather it is a long term plan looking at improving both the countries physical and economical health 10-20-30 years and for future generations down the line....

Can we take that to the bank and then WHEN it fails are we allowed to blame BHO for 10-20-30 years or will it still be Bush's fault??
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
TexasBred said:
Oldtimer said:
This is definitely not an overnite solve all problems law... Rather it is a long term plan looking at improving both the countries physical and economical health 10-20-30 years and for future generations down the line....

Can we take that to the bank and then WHEN it fails are we allowed to blame BHO for 10-20-30 years or will it still be Bush's fault??

OT's already set the foundation for blaming everything bad about the US economy through the end of Obama's second term and into the next president's term, on Bush.

Of course, if the next prez were to be pub, he'd suddenly be to blame for whatever bad happened under his watch.

:roll:
 

Mike

Well-known member
We also heard that the "Stimulus" was gonna jumpstart the economy 2-3 years after it passed. We know that didn't happen................... :roll:

Come to find out, it was $Billions$ in the pockets of campaign donors. :mad:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Mike said:
We also heard that the "Stimulus" was gonna jumpstart the economy 2-3 years after it passed. We know that didn't happen................... :roll:

Come to find out, it was $Billions$ in the pockets of campaign donors. :mad:


That cost as much as the 2 wars. :wink:
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Mike said:
We also heard that the "Stimulus" was gonna jumpstart the economy 2-3 years after it passed. We know that didn't happen................... :roll:

Come to find out, it was $Billions$ in the pockets of campaign donors. :mad:

OldMakeItUpAsIGoAlong said:
17 July 2009 The Jobs/Stimulus bill is not even 6 months into what is a 2 year plan...Many of the local jobs just started because of weather- others are held up because the factories can't get geared up fast enough to make the steel needed....

You don't just go from a country on the brink of oblivion (where Bush had taken us) to a full blown booming economy overnight.....

Talk to me about it 2 years down the line...

:???: :???: :???: :roll:
 

Latest posts

Top