jump to last post 1-13 of 13 discussions (66 posts)

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

  1. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
    Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 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?

    1. American View profile image55
      American Viewposted 5 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.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image75
        Ralph Deedsposted 5 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.

        1. mperrottet profile image96
          mperrottetposted 5 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.

          1. Repairguy47 profile image59
            Repairguy47posted 5 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.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image75
              Ralph Deedsposted 5 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.

              1. Cagsil profile image61
                Cagsilposted 5 years agoin reply to this

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

              2. American View profile image55
                American Viewposted 5 years agoin reply to this

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

                1. Ralph Deeds profile image75
                  Ralph Deedsposted 5 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.

                2. Ralph Deeds profile image75
                  Ralph Deedsposted 5 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.

                  1. American View profile image55
                    American Viewposted 5 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.

            2. Ralph Deeds profile image75
              Ralph Deedsposted 5 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.

          2. Ralph Deeds profile image75
            Ralph Deedsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            True.

      2. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
        Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 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.

        1. Ralph Deeds profile image75
          Ralph Deedsposted 5 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.

          1. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
            Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 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.

  2. Reality Bytes profile image91
    Reality Bytesposted 5 years ago

    President Obama insists that requiring Americans to get health insurance does not amount to a tax increase.

    CNN, September 20, 2009

    1. Jean Bakula profile image93
      Jean Bakulaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

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

      1. Reality Bytes profile image91
        Reality Bytesposted 5 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!

        1. Ralph Deeds profile image75
          Ralph Deedsposted 5 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.

          1. Reality Bytes profile image91
            Reality Bytesposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             

            The family should be part of the decision.

          2. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
            Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 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.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image75
              Ralph Deedsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Correct.

        2. Josak profile image59
          Josakposted 5 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.

          1. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
            Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 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.

      2. phion profile image60
        phionposted 5 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.

    2. Ralph Deeds profile image75
      Ralph Deedsposted 5 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?"

      1. TheBadJuJu profile image91
        TheBadJuJuposted 5 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?

  3. innersmiff profile image71
    innersmiffposted 5 years ago

    That it will help the sick lol

  4. Friendlyword profile image60
    Friendlywordposted 5 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?

  5. paradigmsearch profile image86
    paradigmsearchposted 5 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. big_smile

    With any luck, there will be some tweaking in the next few years...

    1. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
      Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 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.

  6. SomewayOuttaHere profile image61
    SomewayOuttaHereposted 5 years ago

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

    1. Friendlyword profile image60
      Friendlywordposted 5 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.

      1. SomewayOuttaHere profile image61
        SomewayOuttaHereposted 5 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.?

      2. Mighty Mom profile image87
        Mighty Momposted 5 years agoin reply to this

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

        1. SomewayOuttaHere profile image61
          SomewayOuttaHereposted 5 years agoin reply to this

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

          1. Friendlyword profile image60
            Friendlywordposted 5 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.

            1. SomewayOuttaHere profile image61
              SomewayOuttaHereposted 5 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

              1. Friendlyword profile image60
                Friendlywordposted 5 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.

                1. SomewayOuttaHere profile image61
                  SomewayOuttaHereposted 5 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...

                  1. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
                    Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 years agoin reply to this

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

              2. American View profile image55
                American Viewposted 5 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.

                1. wilderness profile image93
                  wildernessposted 5 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.

      3. phion profile image60
        phionposted 5 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

        1. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
          Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 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.

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image75
          Ralph Deedsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

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

  7. phion profile image60
    phionposted 5 years ago

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

    1. Friendlyword profile image60
      Friendlywordposted 5 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.

      1. SomewayOuttaHere profile image61
        SomewayOuttaHereposted 5 years agoin reply to this

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

      2. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
        Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 years agoin reply to this

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

  8. phion profile image60
    phionposted 5 years ago

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

  9. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
    Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 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.

  10. Cagsil profile image61
    Cagsilposted 5 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.

    1. Jean Bakula profile image93
      Jean Bakulaposted 5 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.

      1. Cagsil profile image61
        Cagsilposted 5 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.

        1. Jean Bakula profile image93
          Jean Bakulaposted 5 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 smile.

          1. Cagsil profile image61
            Cagsilposted 5 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. smile

  11. Ralph Deeds profile image75
    Ralph Deedsposted 5 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

  12. Cody Hodge profile image70
    Cody Hodgeposted 5 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.

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image75
      Ralph Deedsposted 5 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.

  13. Wizard Of Whimsy profile image60
    Wizard Of Whimsyposted 5 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

    1. Dr Billy Kidd profile image90
      Dr Billy Kiddposted 5 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.

 
working