Obamacare Deception Revealed??? Does it matter to you?

Jump to Last Post 1-1 of 1 discussions (37 posts)
  1. GA Anderson profile image81
    GA Andersonposted 3 years ago

    MIT professor Jonathan Gruber, a paid technical consultant, (claims have been made he was paid $400,000.00 for his work on the Obamacare bill),  and a major architect of the Affordable Care Act is recorded at a recent conference making these statements;

    He says the bill was purposely worded so the CBO, (Congressional Budget Office), would not score the Individual Mandate as a tax - because it would not pass if the public knew.

    He says the plan was for the healthy folks to pay in to cover the sick folks, but the bill was purposely worded to obfuscate this fact  - because it would not pass if the public knew.

    He essentially says the Democrats purposely played to the "stupidity of the American voter" because they knew better than us what is good for us.



    Of course the Right is calling this purposeful deception, as would be expected. Are they wrong?

    It seems hard to deny the Right's accusations of deception, so the next question is "Does it matter to Obamacare supporters?"

    It matters to me. And I bet we will hear from a lot of other like-minded folks, but what about Obama supporters... is this apparent purposeful deception a problem for you?

    Doesn't this complete the circle back to Pelosi and her “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.” quote? It appears she was right, there was a fog around the bill - just not the one she implied.

    What say you?

    GA

    1. rhamson profile image75
      rhamsonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I always love the Lewis Black quote about how congress does things. You can reverse the roles and it plays the same way.

      "The Republicans in Congress say we have a really s#!ty idea for a bill. The Democrats counter with, Oh yeah, we can make it s#!tier".

      As you said Pelosi and the slime on the hill knew how bad this thing was and sold us the compromise including the health insurance industry inclusion. It should have always of been single payer as a payroll check deduction.

      1. GA Anderson profile image81
        GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Right! That's the ticket! Another payroll check tax.

        GA

        1. rhamson profile image75
          rhamsonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          People should be responsible for their own healthcare.  Without insurance the taxpayer pays the bill.  How else could you aleviate that expence?

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Have the taxpayer pay for the insurance PLUS profit to insurance companies.  That WAS the solution given, wasn't it?

            1. rhamson profile image75
              rhamsonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              You are correct. And that is where the costs were overlooked in favor of the insurance companies. The middle man is where we went wrong.

              1. profile image0
                Old Poolmanposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                If I remember correctly, the insurance companies were guaranteed they would not lose even a penny.  If the consumers didn't pay, or if they actually had to pay some claims, they would be fully reimbursed by the Federal Government with taxpayer dollars.
                I would call this a sweet deal for the insurance companies.

              2. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                Which is a primary reason for not having a 1 payer system.  Don't include those companies in the riches, shutting them down instead, and Obama loses a major part of his support.  I don't think for a minute he could have pushed it through that way;  even Pelosi would have dug in, having read the plan or not.

                1. profile image0
                  Old Poolmanposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Completely agree......

                2. rhamson profile image75
                  rhamsonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Your logic escapes me. Single payer is the only fair solution combined with whatever other supplementary coverage the purchaser (payroll tax contributor) should wish to add. This would cover any other payouts required for office visits and the like.

                  1. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                    I disagree - the only "fair" system is for everyone to pay for their own health care.  Should they wish to do so by purchasing an insurance policy, spreading the cost of care over a large number that all pay the "average" cost that is up to them.

                    But the logic is that if government picks up all the costs of health care it will shut down the insurance companies, or if they pick up the majority and leave only crumbs for the companies those companies will not support the bill.  BUT, if government mandates that everyone pay for insurance, even if government pays the insurance companies on the insured's behalf, the companies are happy.  Very happy, in fact, as they just picked up another 10 million (or whatever) customers, and every customer is additional profit.

          2. GA Anderson profile image81
            GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            I agree that people should be responsible for their own healthcare. If the cost of that healthcare was bearable. Unfortunately the current cost structure of our healthcare system makes that a very financially unbearable option.

            I think we need two major reforms. One being the reform of the  unrealistic expectations of too many people; life saving care - sure, care to make life livable, (pain management) - sure, Viagra and $3000 scooters - forget you. Then of course there is the slippery consideration of "quality of life" care. Hmm...

            The other reform needed is our healthcare system cost structure - and that is a huge issue that is above my pay grade. And a topic worthy of its own thread.

            GA

            1. rhamson profile image75
              rhamsonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              ....The other reform needed is our healthcare system cost structure ...

              Are you talking tier structures or reducing costs? The litigious nature of our society also has to be looked at as not a gold mine for the lawyers and their clients. That is a whole other industry in addition to the medical insurance companies that suck the affordability out of it.

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                And an industry that is bleeding the country for every dime it can get.  It is a major part of what is wrong with American health care.

                1. GA Anderson profile image81
                  GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  And here is an example of your point recently in the news - generic drug prices skyrocket.

                  "In their separate letter to the HHS secretary, Cummings and Sanders cited examples of dramatic price increases for generic drugs like the asthma medication, Albuterol Sulfate, which went from $11 to $424 in less than a year. The price for a bottle of antibiotic pills, Doxycycline Hyclate, shot up to $1,849 from only $20 last fall, they added. “These huge price increases are affecting the pocketbooks and health of millions of Americans,” they wrote."

                  In some cases the number of generic drug makers decreased, but not to the point of making lack of supply a reason for the increase, more likely it is just the seizing of opportunity provided by reduced competition.

                  GA

                  1. profile image0
                    Old Poolmanposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                    They can do this because many of these outrageously priced drugs are the last hope for many seriously ill patients.  They took the stance that if people want to live a little longer they will pay however much we decide they should cost.  So it is take it or leave it in their book.  This is so greedy it is pure evil.  The people who are deciding on these prices should be publicly whipped and then hung.  I'll bet we could get donations to buy the ropes.

    2. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Although never a supporter of Obamacare (and less of one after seeing what I am forced to purchase), I can find no fault with Gruber's statements or with your conclusion.

      There is zero doubt that the people on the hill didn't understand this, particularly about well people paying for the sick.  That was actually well shown to be true as soon as it became apparent that everyone (including young healthy adults) were forced to pay premiums.  While the popular idea was always that everyone would have health care it was never true - just that they would have health insurance

      And now we're seeing more and more people, (with official recognition of their problem) that have insurance but still can't pay for the care they need.  Just the premiums (with help from the government) to pad the pockets of the insurance companies.

      1. GA Anderson profile image81
        GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Say it ain't so. I thought it was the Repubs that favored Big Business?

        Your point should have been obvious to all when the Healthcare industry added its support to promoting and passing Obamacare.

        GA

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          Of course it should have.  I refer you to your own quote:
          "He essentially says the Democrats purposely played to the "stupidity of the American voter" ..."

    3. profile image0
      Old Poolmanposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Typical trick of used car salesmen.  Promise them a race horse and deliver a plow horse.  But based on some of the man-in-the-street interviews I have seen many of our voters really do qualify as low information types.
      It is just too bad that if Obamacare is such a wonderful program they had to use lies to sell it to the people.

      1. GA Anderson profile image81
        GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, I have seen some of those "man in street" interviews too. And you are right, except I think "low information" is a generous descriptor.

        Ga

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)