Why Obama was elected....

[Bob]

The ACA is a huge cost shift without addressing an industry totally out of control regarding it's pricing structure. The 22-40 crowd isn't going to sign up for this terrible deal.

 

[Bob]

Think about the simplicity of this bad law. No one solved the issue of cost. The lazy solution: force everyone to take more expensive coverage whether it is feasible or not. We will take from those earning wages a tax should they find themselves without affordable coverage. We will screw the youngest and the working poor to carry our sick asses to the hospital. So how long do you think a downtrodden generation will put up with this con job? I am ashamed of my generation as being the poorest stewards in the history of this country.

 

[Bob]

There are more than a few reasons for the high cost. One is that the uninsured eventually go into the emergency room, may even end up in intensive care, and don't pay a dime of their medical bill. We the insured end up subsidizing them. Another is the simple fact that being insured causes costs to go up because people are willing to get expensive treatment without bargaining as long as out of pocket expenses are low.

What percentage of the uninsured would you guess choose their fate? What logical reason would the feds lay down with the insurers and let them charge pre tax premiums. Why not let the corporations wait for their money the way they make the insurered/providers wait for their health care payments/pharmecutical and treatment decisions. It's so effing corrupt it makes me want to heave.

 

[Bob]

So you blame the ACA for Trader Joes acting like assholes? They could still cover their employees but simply choose not to. It's like blaming the govt. because a company that was paying $10.00 per hour suddenly pays $7.25 because that's minimum wage law.

Sorry I didn't answer your question. Trader Joes was among the better employers in that they provided health care to their sub 30 hour employees because they could afford it and were willing to do that. I would wager my life in front of a Tasmanian firing squad the reason they are not providing health care this year is not because they suddenly turned evil. It's the ACA and the geometric premium increases. The unintended consequences have just begun. Just wait until we figure out the majority signing up is either older, significantly ill, or are medicaid qualified.

 

[Leader of the Banned]

What percentage of the uninsured would you guess choose their fate? What logical reason would the feds lay down with the insurers and let them charge pre tax premiums. Why not let the corporations wait for their money the way they make the insurered/providers wait for their health care payments/pharmecutical and treatment decisions. It's so effing corrupt it makes me want to heave.

A lot would choose that fate. I've known people who could get affordable insurance through their employer but don't bother because they insist they don't need it and would rather spend their money on cigarettes, booze, partying whatever. They're idiots. Then they get injured and their friends pull a fund raiser to bail out their sorry ass. A lot of people have no sense of responsibility or maybe just no sense period.

 

[Bob]

A lot would choose that fate. I've known people who could get affordable insurance through their employer but don't bother because they insist they don't need it and would rather spend their money on cigarettes, booze, partying whatever. They're idiots. Then they get injured and their friends pull a fund raiser to bail out their sorry ass. A lot of people have no sense of responsibility or maybe just no sense period.

There's no denying that dynamic, but then there's that huge gorilla in the room called affordability. I will be watching as I sure you will how this plays out, but healthcare has been politicized like public education, and the lobbyists, politicians,providers, insurers are the one's in control here. We have been mandated 2 bad choices here much like most presidential elections.

 

[Leader of the Banned]

There's no denying that dynamic, but then there's that huge gorilla in the room called affordability. I will be watching as I sure you will how this plays out, but healthcare has been politicized like public education, and the lobbyists, politicians,providers, insurers are the one's in control here. We have been mandated 2 bad choices here much like most presidential elections.

I just hope you're not under the impression that both political parties are identical and that it makes no difference who you vote for in the presidential election. Both candidates may be undesirable, but they're undesirable in much different ways. You also have to think about what sort of people get behind the man who is in office. That alone makes my decision really easy at the moment. Particularly in a swing state like Florida, it's the height of irrationality to vote for some third party candidate who has absolutely no chance of winning.

 

[Bob]

I just hope you're not under the impression that both political parties are identical and that it makes no difference who you vote for in the presidential election. Both candidates may be undesirable, but they're undesirable in much different ways. You also have to think about what sort of people get behind the man who is in office. That alone makes my decision really easy at the moment. Particularly in a swing state like Florida, it's the height of irrationality to vote for some third party candidate who has absolutely no chance of winning.

i never vote third party. I truly believe there is very little difference between parties in that they are, for the most part corrupt, pander to their bases to the detriment of the public, acting in isolation with little threat of being voted out. There is very little virtue on either side of the aisle. It is which type of stratified worldview do you sell yourself to rationalize another poor choice at the polls. The ACA is a prime example. No ACA, insurers/health complex wins, with ACA, insurers/health complex wins. In my mind, there is no difference. The difference is how you justify the BS in your mind. If you end up voting for a candidate as a defensive tactic to ward off a hated constituency, that's not focusing on the issue if your guy is also corrupt or inept. DC is a gameshow, and we kick to the cable company every month for the priveledge to watch it

 

[Leader of the Banned]

i never vote third party. I truly believe there is very little difference between parties in that they are, for the most part corrupt, pander to their bases to the detriment of the public, acting in isolation with little threat of being voted out. There is very little virtue on either side of the aisle. It is which type of stratified worldview do you sell yourself to rationalize another poor choice at the polls. The ACA is a prime example. No ACA, insurers/health complex wins, with ACA, insurers/health complex wins. In my mind, there is no difference. The difference is how you justify the BS in your mind. If you end up voting for a candidate as a defensive tactic to ward off a hated constituency, that's not focusing on the issue if your guy is also corrupt or inept. DC is a gameshow, and we kick to the cable company every month for the priveledge to watch it

You do what you have to do. You have to vote. If it has to be a calculated move, so be it. During the primaries it's one thing, but in the end, you have to pick one of two candidates or don't vote at all. I don't see where the rationalization comes in. If you're voting against someone rather than for someone, that's as sane and rational as it gets. When I'm in the voting booth, that is not the time for me to think about the way things ought to be. I may vote for the so-called lesser of two evils. On the other hand, I see no benefit in giving unconditional support to everything that comes out of this lame duck administration. In fact I think the best thing the democrats (lesser evil) could do is be candid about our current situation, particularly with regard to ACA. Unconditional support of Obama is not going to help their chances in the 2014 elections, and of course we don't have to worry about his reelection. So I do think we would be better off with more Dems, particularly in governorship positions. ACA runs a lot smoother in states that have exchanges. Say what you want, but right now Republicans clearly are the villains. Even Obama with some of his screw ups can't make them look good.

 

[Bob]

You do what you have to do. You have to vote. If it has to be a calculated move, so be it. During the primaries it's one thing, but in the end, you have to pick one of two candidates or don't vote at all. I don't see where the rationalization comes in. If you're voting against someone rather than for someone, that's as sane and rational as it gets. When I'm in the voting booth, that is not the time for me to think about the way things ought to be. I may vote for the so-called lesser of two evils. On the other hand, I see no benefit in giving unconditional support to everything that comes out of this lame duck administration. In fact I think the best thing the democrats (lesser evil) could do is be candid about our current situation, particularly with regard to ACA. Unconditional support of Obama is not going to help their chances in the 2014 elections, and of course we don't have to worry about his reelection. So I do think we would be better off with more Dems, particularly in governorship positions. ACA runs a lot smoother in states that have exchanges. Say what you want, but right now Republicans clearly are the villains. Even Obama with some of his screw ups can't make them look good.

That's the gameshow in a nutshell. The other guys are villains. Clinton runs from Obama for the distance she needed to grab the brass ring. Obama will be the paranoid object with ACA. Obama has never really had to ever fight for anything in his life. Watch the slow motion meltdown on ACA. My guess is the reveal on his true virtue will be as ugly as the first Romney debate.