Why is this good?

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
ObamaCare Waivers Further Prove Health Law Doesn’t Work

Still holding your breath, waiting for affordable health insurance? You’re not alone. A year and a half in, and many Americans still don’t understand ObamaCare. And the ones that do generally don’t like it. That’s especially evident in the waivers being granted to businesses and associations who can’t stay afloat if they adhere to the legislation.

But the granting of waivers is basically an admission that the health reforms are inherently flawed. The monumental health care overhaul, touted by the administration as a positive and necessary change, is so ineffective that its proponents are allowing certain entities to bypass it entirely. That’s not exactly a vote of confidence for the legislation.

Forbes.com reports that “by mid-June the administration had approved 1,433 waivers to companies, unions, associations, and states covering 3.2 million people.” These waivers are being granted because ObamaCare threatens to harm consumers rather than help them. Things were looking so dire that the entire state of Maine filed for a waiver. The Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight noted that Maine’s waiver was granted because the healthcare law has a “reasonable likelihood of destabilizing the Maine individual health insurance market.” Kentucky, Nevada, and New Hampshire have requested similar waivers.

Of course, as most waivers are going to unions, big companies and states, individuals are left shouldering the burdens of our new health care system. As Forbes notes, “Congress should create a permanent waiver for all of us — by repealing ObamaCare.”

http://customhealthplans.com/blog/2011/06/obamacare-waivers-further-prove-health-law-doesn’t-work/
 
Right, because we wouldn't want people with pre-existing conditions but otherwise healthy to be able to buy health insurance.
 
why are waivers necessary? once again losertroll fails to address the thread.

or didn't losertroll get that talking point from his lefty wacko sites?

the burden would be the penalty if you don't have insurance. i suggest you stop reading only far lefty sites and educate yourself to the real world.
 
Nice non response. Without ObamaCare, people with pre-existing conitions cannot get health insurance. You are O.K. with that I guess?
 
why are waivers necessary? once again losertroll fails to address the thread.

or didn't losertroll get that talking point from his lefty wacko sites?

the burden would be the penalty if you don't have insurance. i suggest you stop reading only far lefty sites and educate yourself to the real world.


Jesus Christ in a china shop. I have explained this several times. If you don't know by now, you just don't want to know.
 
why are waivers necessary? once again losertroll fails to address the thread.

or didn't losertroll get that talking point from his lefty wacko sites?

the burden would be the penalty if you don't have insurance. i suggest you stop reading only far lefty sites and educate yourself to the real world.

lmao....\\\losertroll/// deletes his post after i post this in response.

why are you so ashamed of your posts?
 
The ObamaCare Bad News Continues

A kerfuffle was stirred up last week by a devastating McKinsey & Company study that concluded up to 78 million Americans would lose their current health coverage as employers stopped offering insurance because of President Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The report contradicted Mr. Obama's frequent pledge that under his reform, "if you like your health-care plan, you can keep your health-care plan." And McKinsey's was at least the fourth such analysis calling the president's promise into question.

Pulitzer Prize-winner Joseph Rago tracks the White House effort to prevent the impact of its policies.

In May 2010, former Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin concluded that employers would drop coverage for about 35 million Americans because of ObamaCare. A month later, in June 2010, the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) pegged the number between 87 million to 117 million. And last November, Allisa Meade, a McKinsey analyst, told health-insurance company executives that 80 million to 100 million people might lose their employer-provided health insurance.

Simple economics is the reason. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation's Employer Health Benefits 2010 Annual Survey, the annual premium for an average policy last year was $5,049 for a single worker, with the company picking up roughly $4,150 and the employee the rest. For a family of four, the total cost was $13,770, with the company picking up $9,773.

Yet under ObamaCare, businesses can stop providing health-care coverage, paying a $2,000 per-worker fine instead. For small businesses, the trade-off is even more attractive: They are given a pass on the first 50 workers.

Workers losing coverage will be moved into the "exchange," a government-run marketplace to buy health plans. Those whose insurance costs were more than a specified share of their income (9.5% in 2014) could get subsidies. The exchange starts in 2014 and is fully operational by 2016.

Perversely, ObamaCare both drives up the cost of insurance with mandates and rules while making it attractive for companies to dump the increasingly more expensive coverage and pay a lesser fine. There will be huge ramifications for the country's finances if more workers lose coverage than was estimated.

http://www.rove.com/articles/322
 
The ObamaCare Bad News Continues

A kerfuffle was stirred up last week b
y a devastating McKinsey & Company study that concluded up to 78 million Americans would lose their current health coverage as employers stopped offering insurance because of President Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The report contradicted Mr. Obama's frequent pledge that under his reform, "if you like your health-care plan, you can keep your health-care plan." And McKinsey's was at least the fourth such analysis calling the president's promise into question.

Pulitzer Prize-winner Joseph Rago tracks the White House effort to prevent the impact of its policies.

In May 2010, former Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin concluded that employers would drop coverage for about 35 million Americans because of ObamaCare. A month later, in June 2010, the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) pegged the number between 87 million to 117 million. And last November, Allisa Meade, a McKinsey analyst, told health-insurance company executives that 80 million to 100 million people might lose their employer-provided health insurance.

Simple economics is the reason. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation's Employer Health Benefits 2010 Annual Survey, the annual premium for an average policy last year was $5,049 for a single worker, with the company picking up roughly $4,150 and the employee the rest. For a family of four, the total cost was $13,770, with the company picking up $9,773.

Yet under ObamaCare, businesses can stop providing health-care coverage, paying a $2,000 per-worker fine instead. For small businesses, the trade-off is even more attractive: They are given a pass on the first 50 workers.

Workers losing coverage will be moved into the "exchange," a government-run marketplace to buy health plans. Those whose insurance costs were more than a specified share of their income (9.5% in 2014) could get subsidies. The exchange starts in 2014 and is fully operational by 2016.

Perversely, ObamaCare both drives up the cost of insurance with mandates and rules while making it attractive for companies to dump the increasingly more expensive coverage and pay a lesser fine. There will be huge ramifications for the country's finances if more workers lose coverage than was estimated.

http://www.rove.com/articles/322


Yeah, it's not like this one wasn't debunked months ago. Nice work, Yurt! And let me guess, attacking Turd Blossom as a biased source would be "ad hom," right?
 
The ObamaCare Bad News Continues

A kerfuffle was stirred up last week by a devastating McKinsey & Company study that concluded up to 78 million Americans would lose their current health coverage as employers stopped offering insurance because of President Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The report contradicted Mr. Obama's frequent pledge that under his reform, "if you like your health-care plan, you can keep your health-care plan." And McKinsey's was at least the fourth such analysis calling the president's promise into question.

Pulitzer Prize-winner Joseph Rago tracks the White House effort to prevent the impact of its policies.

In May 2010, former Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin concluded that employers would drop coverage for about 35 million Americans because of ObamaCare. A month later, in June 2010, the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) pegged the number between 87 million to 117 million. And last November, Allisa Meade, a McKinsey analyst, told health-insurance company executives that 80 million to 100 million people might lose their employer-provided health insurance.

Simple economics is the reason. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation's Employer Health Benefits 2010 Annual Survey, the annual premium for an average policy last year was $5,049 for a single worker, with the company picking up roughly $4,150 and the employee the rest. For a family of four, the total cost was $13,770, with the company picking up $9,773.

Yet under ObamaCare, businesses can stop providing health-care coverage, paying a $2,000 per-worker fine instead. For small businesses, the trade-off is even more attractive: They are given a pass on the first 50 workers.

Workers losing coverage will be moved into the "exchange," a government-run marketplace to buy health plans. Those whose insurance costs were more than a specified share of their income (9.5% in 2014) could get subsidies. The exchange starts in 2014 and is fully operational by 2016.

Perversely, ObamaCare both drives up the cost of insurance with mandates and rules while making it attractive for companies to dump the increasingly more expensive coverage and pay a lesser fine. There will be huge ramifications for the country's finances if more workers lose coverage than was estimated.

http://www.rove.com/articles/322

"Rove.com"?
 
It's not facts, it's his opinion. You just snarked about Dune reading some phantom lefty sites and you don't see the same thing about your article.

there are no facts in the OP?

Forbes.com reports that “by mid-June the administration had approved 1,433 waivers to companies, unions, associations, and states covering 3.2 million people.”

care to try again?
 
The ObamaCare Bad News Continues

A kerfuffle was stirred up last week by a devastating McKinsey & Company study that concluded up to 78 million Americans would lose their current health coverage as employers stopped offering insurance because of President Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The report contradicted Mr. Obama's frequent pledge that under his reform, "if you like your health-care plan, you can keep your health-care plan." And McKinsey's was at least the fourth such analysis calling the president's promise into question.

Pulitzer Prize-winner Joseph Rago tracks the White House effort to prevent the impact of its policies.

In May 2010, former Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin concluded that employers would drop coverage for about 35 million Americans because of ObamaCare. A month later, in June 2010, the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) pegged the number between 87 million to 117 million. And last November, Allisa Meade, a McKinsey analyst, told health-insurance company executives that 80 million to 100 million people might lose their employer-provided health insurance.

Simple economics is the reason. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation's Employer Health Benefits 2010 Annual Survey, the annual premium for an average policy last year was $5,049 for a single worker, with the company picking up roughly $4,150 and the employee the rest. For a family of four, the total cost was $13,770, with the company picking up $9,773.

Yet under ObamaCare, businesses can stop providing health-care coverage, paying a $2,000 per-worker fine instead. For small businesses, the trade-off is even more attractive: They are given a pass on the first 50 workers.

Workers losing coverage will be moved into the "exchange," a government-run marketplace to buy health plans. Those whose insurance costs were more than a specified share of their income (9.5% in 2014) could get subsidies. The exchange starts in 2014 and is fully operational by 2016.

Perversely, ObamaCare both drives up the cost of insurance with mandates and rules while making it attractive for companies to dump the increasingly more expensive coverage and pay a lesser fine. There will be huge ramifications for the country's finances if more workers lose coverage than was estimated.

http://www.rove.com/articles/322


Karl Rove. There's a credible source.

Trouble is, he's just guessing, as is his 'expert', Joe Rago.
 
Back
Top