Polling Shows That On Health Costs, ObamaCare Was A Massive Failure

Truth Detector said:
giphy.gif
Click to expand...

Truth Detector said:
:lolup: PRICELESS!

giphy.gif
Click to expand...


Only three pages and once again Truth Rejector is reduced to posting infantile gifs and memes.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And it was the fault of the INSURANCE COMPANY for changing the specifics of your policy.

THAT is what I referred to a few posts back.
Click to expand...

You are correct, but most of these Trump people don't know anything about healthcare.. Trump doesn't either.. that's why he said "Who knew healthcare would be so hard?".. Sad really .. Americans could have better healthcare for less money.. Like Australia and the rest of the civilized world if not for these dopes.
 
Oneuli said:
Do you imagine that I argued that costs were declining? If so, reread.

Let's say, for example, that for years leading up to Obamacare becoming law, per capita health expenditures in the US were rising by 5.5% per year -- a pace well above the average for wealthy nations generally, causing us to pull away from the pack in our healthcare spending. And say that since Obamacare became law, per capita health expenditures here have been rising at 3.25% -- a pace below the average for wealthy nations generally, causing the gap between the US and its international peers to narrow. Wouldn't that be a success, at least on the cost front?
Click to expand...

Dear dishonest dunce; you claimed what would be more relevant. The debate is increasing health care costs. Now stop being your typical dishonest whiny cunt self and show us the road to relevancy. I am waiting.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And it was the fault of the INSURANCE COMPANY for changing the specifics of your policy.

THAT is what I referred to a few posts back.
Click to expand...

No that isn't what you claimed you dishonest hack; you stated that the insurance companies changed the rules and that is what caused costs to skyrocket. I am asking for proof.

Why can't you find it? Instead you lie and whine like a little bitch.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
BECAUSE the Trump administration continues to narrow the enrollment window each year.
Click to expand...

Really? How is Trump doing this? I mean, if Obamacare is so fucking great, you would think that enrollment would be going through the roof!! Why isn't it?

ZappasGuitar said:
Each year the GOP finds news ways to restrict enrollment, so NATURALLY enrollment is going to go down.
Click to expand...

List the ways the GOP has prevented people from enrolling into such a fantastic thing as Obamacare. I mean, if it is so fucking great, why aren't people beating down a path to its doors?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Only three pages and once again Truth Rejector is reduced to posting infantile gifs and memes.
Click to expand...

Does that make you wanna cry snowflake? It illustrates you inability to have an honest, intelligent and coherent debate. I am still waiting for you to prove your claims. Yet all we get is more lies and whining like a little bitch.
 
Cypress said:
Actually, my greatest fear about Obamacare is getting marched in front of those Death Panels when I turn 67.

I am surprised actually that the holocaust undoubtedly being implemented by the Death Panels is not receiving more widespread news coverage by the lame stream media!
Click to expand...

Kill 'em in the womb, and kill 'em when they are old enough to collect on the Social Security Ponzi scheme that they were forced to contribute to their entire working lives.
 
Truth Detector said:
Dear dishonest dunce; you claimed what would be more relevant. The debate is increasing health care costs. Now stop being your typical dishonest whiny cunt self and show us the road to relevancy. I am waiting.
Click to expand...

Try thinking, little one. The issue raised was whether Obamacare was a failure on health costs. Now, if you define success or failure by where health costs rank in a poll of political priorities (what the idiotic article linked in the top post did), Obamacare would be a failure. But, obviously, that's a stupid way to define success or failure.

Likewise, if you define success or failure of a cost-control mechanism in terms of whether the cost falls, then that, too, would define Obamacare as a failure. But, again, that would be a stupid way to define it.

Presumably you have no experience in the business world, but if you did, you'd understand that. I do financial analysis for a living. It's rare for a business to define the success of a cost-control measure in terms of an absolute decline in the cost, as opposed to a desirable move in the rate of change. For example, if a business's payroll cost has been rising 3% per year and changes result in it rising 1% per year thereafter, that is generally going to be seen as a success. It's understood that if the business is growing and inflation happens, payroll costs are going to keep rising, so the realistic goal will be to control them so they're at least rising slower than before the change (and slower than competing companies are seeing), and preferably at a pace where they aren't rising in real per capita terms.

Now, I'm not claiming Obamacare succeeded when it comes to health costs. I'd need to see good data comparing the pace of cost increasing leading up to Obamacare to the pace since then, to take a stance on that. But I can at least see what the relevant analysis would entail, and it's not asking people where healthcare costs rank in their political priorities.
 
Arminius said:
Every single thing we were told about Obama's illegal, trillion-dollar health care takeover was a lie.

On Health Costs, ObamaCare Was A Massive Failure



GetAttachmentThumbnail
Click to expand...

The bridge to universal health care has been crossed. Obama may not get to have his name on it when it comes but nobody will be mistaken about his name belonging on the results.

If Americans don't understand yet that they can have equal or better quality health care for close to half the cost, with everybody covered, then it's not going to be long until they do.

The current stumbling block that's preventing the people from demanding the necessary changes is the American way nonsense they have implanted in their heads. It appears to them that it's the opposite of socially responsible capitalism, which they equate to socialism. It's not, it's simply the way of the rest of the world.

No American should ever get him/herself involved in a health care debate. They won't come out in one piece!
 
Oneuli said:
Try thinking, little one. The issue raised was whether Obamacare was a failure on health costs. Now, if you define success or failure by where health costs rank in a poll of political priorities (what the idiotic article linked in the top post did), Obamacare would be a failure. But, obviously, that's a stupid way to define success or failure.

Likewise, if you define success or failure of a cost-control mechanism in terms of whether the cost falls, then that, too, would define Obamacare as a failure. But, again, that would be a stupid way to define it.

Presumably you have no experience in the business world, but if you did, you'd understand that. I do financial analysis for a living. It's rare for a business to define the success of a cost-control measure in terms of an absolute decline in the cost, as opposed to a desirable move in the rate of change. For example, if a business's payroll cost has been rising 3% per year and changes result in it rising 1% per year thereafter, that is generally going to be seen as a success. It's understood that if the business is growing and inflation happens, payroll costs are going to keep rising, so the realistic goal will be to control them so they're at least rising slower than before the change (and slower than competing companies are seeing), and preferably at a pace where they aren't rising in real per capita terms.

Now, I'm not claiming Obamacare succeeded when it comes to health costs. I'd need to see good data comparing the pace of cost increasing leading up to Obamacare to the pace since then, to take a stance on that. But I can at least see what the relevant analysis would entail, and it's not asking people where healthcare costs rank in their political priorities.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you are also smart enough to understand that the power of the big for profit insurance companies devoted huge amounts of money into destroying and discrediting Obamacare. That's an issue that has been framed in your country as whining but it's not to those who are already experiencing low cost and high quality health care in the rest of the civilized world.

Canada's is a little more than half the cost per capita, and it's rated as better. Where's the room for a debate?
 
Oneuli said:
Try thinking, little one. The issue raised was whether Obamacare was a failure on health costs. Now, if you define success or failure by where health costs rank in a poll of political priorities (what the idiotic article linked in the top post did), Obamacare would be a failure. But, obviously, that's a stupid way to define success or failure.

Likewise, if you define success or failure of a cost-control mechanism in terms of whether the cost falls, then that, too, would define Obamacare as a failure. But, again, that would be a stupid way to define it.

Presumably you have no experience in the business world, but if you did, you'd understand that. I do financial analysis for a living. It's rare for a business to define the success of a cost-control measure in terms of an absolute decline in the cost, as opposed to a desirable move in the rate of change. For example, if a business's payroll cost has been rising 3% per year and changes result in it rising 1% per year thereafter, that is generally going to be seen as a success. It's understood that if the business is growing and inflation happens, payroll costs are going to keep rising, so the realistic goal will be to control them so they're at least rising slower than before the change (and slower than competing companies are seeing), and preferably at a pace where they aren't rising in real per capita terms.

Now, I'm not claiming Obamacare succeeded when it comes to health costs. I'd need to see good data comparing the pace of cost increasing leading up to Obamacare to the pace since then, to take a stance on that. But I can at least see what the relevant analysis would entail, and it's not asking people where healthcare costs rank in their political priorities.
Click to expand...

Once again, instead of bloviating and taking up bandwidth, show us this relevant data. You keep saying you are claiming nothing. If you have nothing to fucking add, STFU.
 
montgomery said:
If Americans don't understand yet that they can have equal or better quality health care for close to half the cost, with everybody covered, then it's not going to be long until they do.
Click to expand...

This is an outright lie; what data do you have that suggests that universal health care plans are better and cheaper other than the propaganda we constantly see from vested interests.

Canada's program sucks. Ask anyone who has dealt with it. It is cheaper to drive down to the US from border cities and buy products than in their own country thanks to their high taxation.

The idea that Government can manage anything this size effectively and better is the talking point of idiots who have forgotten all history.
 
montgomery said:
I'm sure you are also smart enough to understand that the power of the big for profit insurance companies devoted huge amounts of money into destroying and discrediting Obamacare. That's an issue that has been framed in your country as whining but it's not to those who are already experiencing low cost and high quality health care in the rest of the civilized world.
Click to expand...

There are contrary arguments that suggest these huge insurance companies promoted it. After all, they are making more money than ever are they not?

montgomery said:
Canada's is a little more than half the cost per capita, and it's rated as better. Where's the room for a debate?
Click to expand...

Let's see the source of this lie. Of course, one also must ignore the cost of waiting a year for hip replacements or bypass surgery. Or the added costs to circumvent the cumbersome provincial clinics.
 
Truth Detector said:
Really? How is Trump doing this? I mean, if Obamacare is so fucking great, you would think that enrollment would be going through the roof!! Why isn't it?

List the ways the GOP has prevented people from enrolling into such a fantastic thing as Obamacare. I mean, if it is so fucking great, why aren't people beating down a path to its doors?
Click to expand...

I know you'll never admit the truths the article I cite states, but it's always fun watching you winding yourself up and pitching a hissy fit.

https://www.healthinsurance.org/blog/2017/05/17/10-ways-the-gop-sabotaged-obamacare/
 
Obamacare is a massive failure may just be understatement of the decade.

It had no chance from the beginning, Obama chose to, as he did in most things hide the financial impossibility until he was back in Kenya safely raising lions or whatever it is he is doing over there.

Obamacare was a ruse

Oneuli said:
Now, I'm not claiming Obamacare succeeded when it comes to health costs.
Click to expand...

glad you said it, now that wasn't so hard was it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top