jump to last post 1-1 of 1 discussions (37 posts)

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

  1. GA Anderson profile image83
    GA Andersonposted 2 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 image78
      rhamsonposted 2 years ago in 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 image83
        GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

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

        GA

        1. rhamson profile image78
          rhamsonposted 2 years ago in 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 image94
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in 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 image78
              rhamsonposted 2 years ago in 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 2 years ago in 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 image94
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in 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 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Completely agree......

                2. rhamson profile image78
                  rhamsonposted 2 years ago in 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 image94
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in 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 image83
            GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in 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 image78
              rhamsonposted 2 years ago in 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 image94
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in 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 image83
                  GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in 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 2 years ago in 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 image94
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in 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 image83
        GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in 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 image94
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in 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 2 years ago in 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 image83
        GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in 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