But you're basing that unpopularity on what you appear to concede are deeply misinformed people(and the argument was always that those people would become less misinformed AFTER IMPLEMENTATION, which was a month ago, not 4 years).

So was this argument about how effective Republican lies are? In other words, ikes, are you crowing about "winning" an argument because your opponents underestimated the self-deluded ignorance of the American populace?

Quite the feather in your cap, sir.

Note that once again, it's all about baby ikesy showing those fancy egghead libruls that he is too a smart boy. Who gives a **** about policy or politics or anything? ikes is winning an argument on the internet*, guys.


*Note 2: Well, no, he's not, because he is deliberately misinterpreting what his opponents are saying, but let's grant him that.

Deeply misinformed people are the only type of people on any type of issue. Democracy bro, love it or leave it.

"Obamacare sucks because its unpopular, and its unpopular because republicans are good at lying to and manipulating stupid people. GOP '16!"

You're perfectly fine with lying when Obama is talking about women making 77c for every dollar men make. Funny how that works.

lol.. so why aren't these Governors turning away Federal funding for school and roads? Couldn't the law change one day and the states have to pay more? That is a terrible reason to refuse the expansion. If the law changed, the states could just opt-out anyway.

There's a decent argument to be made that refusing the Medicaid expansion will cost more than taking it, when you consider the reduction of uncompensated care costs, spending on some state programs that wouldn't be needed any more, increase in revenue for local health providers, etc. States that don't take the expansion will just be funneling billions of dollars of their taxpayers money into the states that do take it.

People in these states should be irate. They are footing the bill for 90% of the expansion no matter what, but will get absolutely no benefit from it because their state won't kick in the other 10%.

Err, why would anyone want a healthcare system as good as the average of 18 countries even if all those 18 countries have awesome healthcare?

Everyone else would assume looking at the best and then learning what they are doing right is the logical solution to fix your own failing system.

Pretty sure even in 2014 the biggest difference between America and Germany (or whoever) in life expectancy is how America has an insanely high infant mortality rate. Because genetics or something, which has led to other first world nations lowering infant mortality at a much faster rate than America has over the last three decades.

Then again poors dying from preventable illness and fixable injury because of only two states having anything like UHC until the ACA probably doesnt help either.

I think you misunderstood the big talking point. The idea was to end federal preferences for employer-based insurance built into the tax code and allow individuals to purchase their own insurance with the same tax advantages given corporations. This would allow people to take insurance with them from job to job. People would not be tied to a specific employer just to keep their health insurance.

The CBO report says that Obamacare will pay people to work less (or not at all) through health care subsidies resulting in fewer hours worked.

I don't see how these two ideas are similar in any way, unless you believe decoupling insurance from employment = decoupling the employee from employment.

"Guys, don't you see? Saying that women make 77 cents on the dollar is just like saying Obamacare contains death panels!"

"When we said we'd decouple insurance from employment we didn't mean you'd then be able to choose the job you wanted based on something other than insurance advantages"

Yeah. Not to mention, I never said that and haven't posted even once in that thread.

Yup

this
and this.

So you're merely trying to trumpet how right you are that people are ignorant, while conceding that people will probably be less ignorant when things take effect and, *surprise* are better than they were before.

All,

Thoughts on 90% of WA exchange members buying bronze and silver plans?

First lets see if Ike even knows why thats good.

I really would like to get a synthesis from ikes on what he thinks the law does and why it was necessary (or unnecessary), as well as whether he supports it as a whole or not, and what he feels is good about it and what needs to be improved.

Actually, I'd like to get such a synthesis from basically every voter, just for the lulz.

But ikes is likely to spit out something like "la la la doctor shortages" and "Ive posted everything before, just go read the entirety of this 10,000 post thread again."

90% of people don't have chronic problems?

Completely expected since subsidies only count towards silver plans? Nationwide it's like 80% as of January I think, so I guess if these numbers are new it could imply more young people signing up.

The subsidies count towards any plan, but they are granted based on the price of the silver plans. If you qualify for a $100/mon subsidy you can use that on a bronze plan and save some money or spend more and apply it toward a gold plan. I imagine most are not applying it to a gold plan since that is more OOP and cash is probably tight if you qualify for a subsidy. There could be a few rich old people who have a lot of money in the bank account, but no income who would use a subsidy for a gold plan. I doubt its very many.

yea I was gonna edit my post further heh to point out it was the out of pocket subsidy

You only get the cost sharing reduction for silver plans IIRC.

That's the only reason anything is popular.

How much of America's overspending is on salaries? If you cut an average of 10% from everyone, how much would America save?

lol I don't know how you could possibly read what I've written itt and miss what's a rather large set of positions on obamacare. The irony of doing that while not being able to synthesize a response you're supposedly responding to is delicious. I guess it's easier for you though. Going the fly route and just making up whatever position for your opponent that you can beat is easy, even if lazy and obvious.

For your attention span: Obamacare is an improvement over the status quo. It's far from acceptable. There are many more problems in health care that it does not address that need to be addressed. Obamacare is a commitment to a technocratic health care system that needs constant updating and productive legislative and executive input. I'm not exactly hopeful for that in the long term.