What is the Best Lie You’ve Heard about Obamacare?

1. 90

   Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years ago

   For me, U.S. House majority leader Eric Cantor made the best lie on Morning Joe (6/29/2012). Cantor said that the law takes away your healthcare policy and replaces it with one dictated by Washington. NBC’s Tom Brokaw immediately challenged that. Brokaw said that the law states that you can keep your policy, and that it cannot be canceled if you get sick. Canton kept with it, saying that’s not true, because you’ll lose your policy when costs go up—you won’t be able to afford it. The Congressional Budget Office sees it differently, as a cost cutter.
   
   Obamacare takes away your health policy. Such a lie. Heard a better one?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Heard several, "this will save money on health care rates"  Rates have gone up on average $2400 per year.. " it is not a tax" Supreme court said it is a tax." We will insure 34 million more people" Over 3 million less insured since Obamacare started. I could go on.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         The Affordable Health Care Act has not yet been fully implemented. It contains a number of features which will help reduce the rate of increase in health care costs.

         replyreport
         1. 81

            mperrottetposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            The only tax is the penalty that you will have to pay if you don't get insurance.  So most people will not have to pay this tax, since most people are (or hopefully will be) insured.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Repairguy47posted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Its a tax! SCOTUS said it is a tax, therefore it is a tax! Obama said it wasn't a tax then sent his solicitor general to argue that it was a tax! Now they want to call it a penalty so the liar in chief can claim he hasn't added a tax.

               replyreport
               1. 66

                  Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Who cares what it's called? The effect is the same--the deadbeats will have to contribute their fair share.

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Unless the deadbeats become homeless at which time they will no longer be considered or recorded.

                     replyreport
                  2. 60

                     American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     How will the deadbeats contribute? If they are already on welfare how will they afford it?

                     replyreport
                     1. 66

                        Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        By "deadbeats" I meant the people who for reasons best known to themselves who, without the mandate or tax/penalty/fee would not get insurance and either pay for their care themselves or continue getting care in emergency rooms. One good effect of the Act should be a reduction in expensive emergency room care.

                        replyreport
                     2. 66

                        Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        The poor will get care through Medicaid, I guess. And the young people, middle income and 1 percenter skeptics will have to go along with the program or pay their share in the form of a tax or penalty whatever you want to call it.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Exactly, Obamacare does nothing to help them and noone wants to fix the medicaid program, so Medicaid will go broke and the taxpayers will continue to pay just like they are now.

                           replyreport
                           1. 66

                              Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Substantial savings will result from the reform program, and medicaid will be extended. In the end this will reduce the health care cost by encouraging more preventive care and less emergency room care.

                              replyreport
                           2. 60

                              Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Obamacare extends insurance to every American, if they are very low earners the insurance will be free with costs concentrated on higher earners.

                              replyreport
               2. 66

                  Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  This is a pointless infantile argument over words. Call it whatever you want--a tax, a penalty, a fee and the reality is the same. It is a device to overcome "adverse selection," i.e., freeloaders not buying insurance until they get old and sick.

                  replyreport
            2. 66

               Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               True.

               replyreport
      2. 90

         Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         American Way, I don't know if it's a political giimmick or not, but the law say an insurance company has to spend 85% of what it collects on providing healthcare. What I'm hearing is that some didn't meet that requirement anad are going to be sending out something like $2 in refunds to policy holders--and you guessed it--in September, before the election.

         replyreport
         1. 66

            Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            It's not a gimmick. It's a way to encourage the health care insurance companies to become more efficient by eliminating excessive administrative costs and executive compensation. Four or five Michigan insurance companies are going to be required to make refunds to their policy holders.

            replyreport
            1. 90

               Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Ralfp Deeds, that is truely amazing, 4 out of 5 companies refund health insurance preiums. I guess Obamacare has brought some positive results for some people. In a way, it's also a cap on expenses, if the money has to be spend on treatment, not on jet planes and mettings in Las Vegas.

               replyreport
2. 75

   Reality Bytesposted 11 years ago

   President Obama insists that requiring Americans to get health insurance does not amount to a tax increase.
   
   CNN, September 20, 2009

   replyreport
   1. 91

      Jean Bakulaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The one from Sarah Palin, saying sick people's need for care will rest upon "death panels."

      replyreport
      1. 75

         Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Liverpool Care Pathway, a method of looking after terminally ill patients that is used in hospitals across the country.
         It is designed to come into force when doctors believe it is impossible for a patient to recover and death is imminent.
         It can include withdrawal of treatment – including the provision of water and nourishment by tube – and on average brings a patient to death in 33 hours.
         
         
         Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … 1zDWmL8Xi,
         
         Family is not making the decision, doctors are!

         replyreport
         1. 66

            Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            As far as I know there is nothing like that in the Affordable Health Care Act. However, it's true that health care costs in the final days or months of life are a quite high percentage of total health care costs. My recollection is that the reform act merely provides for a consultation with the patient, his family about their wishes wrt end-of-life care. How do you think this should be handled.

            replyreport
            1. 75

               Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                
               
               The family should be part of the decision.

               replyreport
            2. 90

               Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Most insurance companies did no pay for Advance Health Care Directives. Those take place in the context of the family and the patient discussing how he or she would like to be treated after losing consciousness or sanity or being totally infirm.
               
               So this wasn't encouraged and the doctor was left out. So families did not know the consequences of certain procedures that kept brain-dead people alive. This allows the patient to decide, get it in writing, and have his or her wishes fulfilled.
               
               Obama haters reversed the whole thing with another big lie, saying the family was left out and that death panels took over and made all end of life decisions. No, this merely allows a doctor to be paid when such a conference takes place.

               replyreport
               1. 66

                  Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Correct.

                  replyreport
         2. 60

            Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            That is not in Obamacare and it is also greatly exaggerated, what happens is if the patient is deemed totally terminal the health system has the right to turn off their machines because they are needed for other people, you can purchase additional care to cover them but that is separate.

            replyreport
            1. 90

               Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Your private insurace policy does not state that they have the right to turn off the life support machines. State law sets up the circumstance where by a family can decide to termainate a brain dead person. It's illegal for an insurance copmany to do so. The family has to decide.
               
               Actually, Obamacare made it so there were no lifetime limits on expenses so the machines and treatment are paid for longer. And the family doesn't go bankrupt.

               replyreport
      2. 61

         phionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Let’s talk again in five years about "death panels" if Obama gets re-elected. That is five years after insurance companies hold the power over all aspects of health care.

         replyreport
   2. 66

      Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Is requiring people to buy license plates for their car a tax? What about requiring them to carry liability and medical coverage on their cars?  When that requirement was imposed was it a tax increase? You are quibbling about words. The effect is the same whether you call it a penalty or a tax. As I'm sure you have read, the success of the plan depends on universal coverage. Otherwise people would wait until they were sick before applying for insurance. This was Romney's approach in Massachusetts and the recommendation of several conservative business organizations. Have you heard of the term "adverse selection?"

      replyreport
      1. 78

         TheBadJuJuposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Those things only apply to people who choose to own and drive cars.  Yes, there are license plate fees that include excise tax if you want to own and drive a car.  Yes, you have to have liability insurance on your car if you own one and want to drive it legally.  Buying and driving a car is a choice, but it has not been made mandatory by the US Government that everyone in the United States own and drive a car.  There is no tax penalty for anyone who chooses not to own a car so how does that compare to Obama Care?

         replyreport
3. 65

   innersmiffposted 11 years ago

   That it will help the sick

   replyreport
4. 59

   Friendlywordposted 11 years ago

   Too many Republicans and Right Wingnuts are coming up fast and furious with the lies about the "Affordable Health Care Act" but, I guess the best lie would be that it is called OBAMACARE. A cheap lie geared at discrediting the Affordable Health Care Act with sickos that won't accept it because it's another great thing PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA did to make this a better Country.
   
   OH OH! Don't forget the lie about CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS being a trader, on drugs, and out of his mind.
   
   WINGNUTS! Can we all just get alo...healthcare?

   replyreport
5. 59

   paradigmsearchposted 11 years ago

   "What is the Best Lie You’ve Heard about Obamacare?"
   
   1. "Obamacare is the worst thing that has happened to this country."
   
   And
   
   2. "Obamacare is the best thing that has happened to this country."
   
   
   There, now both sides hate me.
   
   With any luck, there will be some tweaking in the next few years...

   replyreport
   1. 90

      Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      That was great: Both sides are lying--that Obamacare is the worst and Obamacare is the best thing to happen to the country! I might sound like I take a side, but rather, I see facts.
      
      The law does not compell a business with under 50 employees to do anything. But it offers small businesses up to a 35% tax credit on their health insurance policies. That I like.
      
      Thanks, again, everyone for offering your opinions. I really value seeing what people think, even the guy who said he was waiting to kill me last week. Now I know what he thinks about the US intervening in Iran.

      replyreport
6. 61

   SomewayOuttaHereposted 11 years ago

   'scuse me for the interruption.  what is obamacare?  health care for everyone?  i don't know....

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Friendlywordposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Some people won't be covered by the Affordable Health Care Act. And nobody has said who these people are.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         SomewayOuttaHereposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         like a 2-tiered system?...public and private system?...one for the richer and one for the rest of the folks?...with the thinking that the private system will ease the load/stress on the public system - wait times etc.?

         replyreport
      2. 76

         Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         They are Sparkling Jewel, JSChams and a few other diehards here.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            SomewayOuttaHereposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            ha ha ha....guess i better pay attention!...i haven't really read the forums on american health care

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Friendlywordposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Read the Supreme Court Decision on Affordable Health Care Act and get the real story on the bill before you read any forums about it.  You'll be amazed by the difference between the stories and facts about how the health care bill can benefit you.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  SomewayOuttaHereposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  okay...so i  took a brief scan of the decision...so....all folks will have health care coverage...those that do not and don't want it for whatever reason will pay through their income tax assessment anyway...folks that have not been eligible for public health care (medicare) and/or could not pay privately? will automatically have it because of the assessment on income tax for those who have not elected to purchase or be covered in some way.  i have understood that a population equivalent to that of Canada where I am from have not had any health care coverage.....1/10th or so of the US population...not sure if i`m right on that info...but maybe you can expand on that info or mis info.  So it`s not really a 2-tiered system...but a system to ensure all americans at least have basic health coverage...am i on the right track

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Friendlywordposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     You're right on except for when you cannot afford to pay for your health care; you are covered by medicaid.  People that are unwilling to pay a 40 of 50 dollar health care premium will have to pay a penalty verified by the income you make on your tax return.
                     
                     Of course, there might be an exception to the tax penalty if you chase after goats and chickens to barter for your health care coverage but, I didn't read that anywhere in the judgement.

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        SomewayOuttaHereposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        ha ha ha...i read the other forum `bout the bartering system...maybe offering up a chicken would work in india....a cow would be get ya the exec. suite for sure.................................................thanks for replying...i have better insight after taking a look at the decision...

                        replyreport
                        1. 90

                           Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           My friend Dr Unthank bartered up to the 40s. Took chicken, pigs, anything, and felt it was his duty.

                           replyreport
                           1. 59

                              Friendlywordposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              The barter system is a great and honorable way of trading. I was responding to a ridiculous claim that it's an option to replace the Affordable Health Care Act.

                              replyreport
                  2. 60

                     American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Of course the interesting part will be how they collect that tax on those who do not work, who do not file a tax return, and have no property to seize. Sounds like th system that is already in place before Obamacare.
                     
                     He is a fun fact most do not know, Medicaid is not free, your taxes pay for it. Not to mention those who receive it have to pay it back, that is if they are able to.

                     replyreport
                     1. 94

                        wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Tanstafl.  The idea that this is "free" or "affordable" is completely false.  Either someone pays the cost now or our kids pay it later - no matter when it is paid there is a cost.

                        replyreport
      3. 61

         phionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         My wife showed me some fun facts of how RN's, the backbone of health care look at Obamacare.
         
         -27 million people will still have no health coverage
         -No real limits on what insurance companies, hospitals, and drug companies can charge – or on insurers denying treatment or referrals they don’t want to pay for
         -Expands the private insurance system by forcing the uninsured to buy private insurance – using taxpayer funded subsidies to increase private insurance profits
         -Promotes wasteful hospital spending on IT systems and bogus “patient satisfaction” goals that undermine RN professional judgment and quality patient care

         replyreport
         1. 90

            Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            That sound like your opinion. I look at all that from a positive perspective. That 17 million children will not have to go to school sick, and they do where I live. And that 85% of the premiuns have to be spent on the patient healthcare (there's actually refunds of $3 billion coming in Sept., back to policy holders who were over charged, their insurer took the money and ran). And please tell me if nurses think that people should be forced to go to the ER when they could be treated before they got gravely ill. I know it's all opinion, but I think people are going to like Obamacare when they understant it. It's surely not 9/11, as some describe it. I like the tax break for small businesses who insure their employees.

            replyreport
         2. 66

            Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            You got it all wrong. Where do you get your misinformation?

            replyreport
7. 61

   phionposted 11 years ago

   That it wasn't a tax...dang he got me again!

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Friendlywordposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It's only a tax on deadbeats.  If you're a deadbeat or a freeloader;  You really don't want to pay your own way for anything.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         SomewayOuttaHereposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         hello FW...see  my post above...i didn`t look at that way....

         replyreport
      2. 90

         Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I wanted to be a freeloader but I was offered a policy despite my precondition of being a reprobate.

         replyreport
8. 61

   phionposted 11 years ago

   That it wasn't a tax...dang he got me again!

   replyreport
9. 90

   Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years ago

   Best lie of the day award goes to Marco Rubio, Senator from Florida. Rubio said that Obamacare with have the IRS tracking down millions of Americans and taking them to court.
   
   Ha! Fact is that in the first year it's expected that 2% of the population will pay the $95 tax rather than bother to sign up of health insurance. I'm sure, though, Rubio must be right. What if those people don't file their taxes? Obamacare must have provision to handle them, like prison camps or sending these terrorist to Guantanmo, right? Mybe firing squads. I mean, that missing $95 could bankrupt America.

   replyreport
10. 71

    Cagsilposted 11 years ago

    The best lie is that government actually thinks it knows what's best for society as a whole. These pathetic morons wouldn't know what is in the best interest of a dog, much less a human being.

    replyreport
    1. 91

       Jean Bakulaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I still think everyone should pay into it. It works in other countries. We're the richest country in the world, and we need to take care of our own instead of spending so much to help other countries. Charity begins at home. The richest people who can afford to pay any amount to have a private doctor or nurse come to their home don't want it, because they can buy anything their heart desires. So I guess if everyone was cheap and only cared about themselves, we would all be rich? The people who know the facts (and I admit they are murky, Obama's doing a horrible job getting it right) are OK with it, and mostly people I talk to are happy about the Supreme Court decision. They would have completely lost any shred of credibility they have left if they deserted people who need health services.

       replyreport
       1. 71

          Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Are you actually talking to me? And, if so, what does your post have to do with what I said?
          
          If you pushed the wrong reply button, then okay too.

          replyreport
          1. 91

             Jean Bakulaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

             Hi Cagsil,
             No, I wasn't talking to you. I do have problems on these threads and sometimes answer the wrong person .

             replyreport
             1. 71

                Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Hey Jean, make sure when you're viewing a thread that it's on chronological and not the other option. It will look a lot better and make it easier to reply to posts or threads.

                replyreport
11. 66

    Ralph Deedsposted 11 years ago

    Here's a fair and objective assessment of the Affordable Health Care Act by Robert Frank, noted economist at Cornell's business school:
    
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/busin … wanted=all

    replyreport
12. 61

    Cody Hodgeposted 11 years ago

    Best lie...
    
    Everyone who said they were going to Canada to avoid the new law LMAO.
    
    So, to get this straight...
    
    This new law extends Medicare/Medicaid in the states.
    
    The government pays the states to establish insurance exchanges
    
    Those who don't get it pay a tax. However, they are still covered...
    
    The tax is cheaper than paying for insurance.
    
    Why wouldn't they just go with a single-payer system? It would be cheaper and easier for everyone it would seem.

    replyreport
    1. 66

       Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       "Why wouldn't they just go with a single-payer system? It would be cheaper and easier for everyone it would seem."
       
       Because it was politically impossible thanks to the insurance lobby and others with a financial interest in perpetuating their financial positions. Simply extending Medicare in stages over a period of years to cover everyone would be a much more rational solution. This would have eliminated the parasitic health insurance industry.

       replyreport
13. 61

    Wizard Of Whimsyposted 11 years ago

    It’s no great surprise that the Tea Party includes Christians possessing extreme right-wing political beliefs. Within the Tea Party, there are “soldiers for God” who are going out and attempting to overthrow government as representatives of God. One such individual is Bryan Jonathan Fischer, the Director of Issues for the American Family Association, regular contributor to their blog, Rightly Concerned, and host on their radio talk program Focal Point.
    
    Last week Fischer proclaimed that Satan was behind everything from the environment to gay rights to Planned Parenthood and this week took it a step further insisting that “Liberals have been Duped by Satan” and have become completely irrational as a result.
    
    http://youtu.be/XcBMs_qdVKI

    replyreport
    1. 90

       Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Well, I always thought I'd been duped by satan, but that sure explains Justice Roberts' change of heart and his vote in favor of the Affordable Care Act.

       replyreport