Site Search:
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Obamacare upheld
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 09 Nov 2013

PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sirius black wrote:
I could match you link or link that obmacare is working ( overall it means jack squat.

The FACT is that even Republicans have said its here to stay and they have the majority. The FACT is Republican governors who were aganst it have stopped holding out because their own constituents have demanded it.
Its also intellectually dishonest not to mention that the bill proposed is far short of the one that passed having been stripped of many things in it.

So far, its generallly deemed a far. Time will tell but for now it is. End of story really.

Here is a connecting link provided by your second article, and that second article explains how the Affordable Care Act creates higher costs than before.

Your first article identifies plenty of problems too.

Obamacare toothache! Enrollment numbers were juiced up

The Obama administration wanted sweeter numbers for Obamacare, so it got some help from dentists.

A new report Thursday revealed the administration pulled a fast-one with enrollment numbers for Obamacare, boosting a tally by including up to 400,000 dental plans—without publicly disclosing that fact at the time...

...The disclosure of the juiced enrollment numbers comes a week after HHS chief Burwell had bragged about how transparent HHS has been about Obamacare data.

It also comes just five days into Obamacare's second enrollment period. At the same time, Obamacare critics have seized on a series of videos showing Jonathan Gruber, an MIT economist who acted as a consultant in the designing of Obamacare, describing how the law was written to avoid drawing attention to costs that might have made it unpalatable to the public or to a majority of Congress.

"Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the 'stupidity of the American voter' or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass," Gruber said in one video.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sector7G wrote:
Zackback wrote:
I don't know all the details but....

1. I was surprised Robert's sided with it.
2. Health insurance in the USA is a mess. Way too many people are uninsured. This is awful. And too many that have insurance get lousy coverage anyway.
3. At least this issue is put more in the voters hands come election day.

My sentiments exactly-especially number 3.

But to paraphrase what one blogger wrote, "Republicans felt that the court was the best way to over turn the Affordable Care Act .....and they were right."

It will now be hard to over turn it regardless of the election outcome.

Obamacare survives.

“Regretfully, it is now apparent that the effort to repeal and immediately replace the failure of Obamacare will not be successful," McConnell said.

. . .

McConnell's announcement followed the news that GOP Sens. Mike Lee of Utah and Jerry Moran of Kansas said they could not support the current bill. They joined Maine Sen. Susan Collins and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul in opposition, denying GOP leaders the support to even bring the bill to the floor and upending Republicans' seven-year goal of repealing Obamacare. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who is recovering from surgery, also issued a statement advising the party to start over with a bipartisan approach.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address

Joined: 22 May 2013

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 9:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For now. Trump wants them to keep trying. They may fail again next week, and the week after that, but they have 1.5 years, possibly more, to get this done. I see no reason to assume repeal±replace is "dead" unless/until they lose their majority, and if/when that happens is anyone's guess. All we can say is it's delayed, for now. They've been promising this for 7 years, Trump promised it would happen on day one, and failing to deliver on their #1 campaign promise despite controlling all branches of government would be just about the most humiliating thing imaginable. As I'm sure they don't want that, they will keep trying, and presumably "eventually [they]'re going to get something done."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Sun Jul 23, 2017 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the major blow to the PPACA has already been delivered; 19 states have still refused to pass a Medicaid extension. Some states look like they may roll theirs back (Kentucky).

Fox was right about that.

As for Trump, his unpopular personality carries blame for the weakness of the Republican agenda. Which is less popular? The Trump Presidency or the McConnell-Ryan agenda? I would argue the latter.

It is a crap show. The GOP Senate could not even unite to rollback methane regulations (and then Pruitt tried to halt it, and the DC Circuit told him he had to go through process).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quoted not simply for posterity:

Fox wrote:
Kuros wrote:
I wouldn't characterize either the Medicare carrot (constitutional) or the stick (unconstitutional) as a tough choice. With just the carrot, every State faces an easy choice: accept the Medicaid expansion.

In a rational world filled with state-governments who actually cared first and foremost about their people's welfare, this would definitely be correct; the terms of what you call the "carrot" are simply too beneficial to be rationally turned down if such is your goal. In the real world, however, team-sport politics evidently turn such "easy choices" into tough ones:

Fifteen governors reject or leaning against expanded Medicaid program

At least 15 governors have indicated they will not participate in the expansion of Medicaid under the healthcare law, striking a blow to President Obama�s promise of broader insurance coverage.

Before Thursday�s Supreme Court ruling, states had the option of either increasing their Medicaid rolls or being penalized by the federal government. The high court struck down that offer as unconstitutional.

Governors still have a financial incentive to participate in the expansion of coverage for low-income people, since the government will foot most of the bill through 2016. But the decision is also loaded with politics, particularly for Republican governors who are adamantly opposed to �ObamaCare.�

�You can make the political call real quick, but the actual decision is a complicated one,� said Matt Salo of the National Association of Medicaid Directors. �Governors are going to be looking at the numbers and asking: Does this make sense for us?�

Seven states with Republican governors have given a flat �no� to the Medicaid expansion since the Supreme Court ruling, according to reports and press statements (see list below).

States that will decline to participate include Florida, where Gov. Rick Scott (R) turned his opposition to the law into a political career, and Louisiana, where Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) has vowed to help elect Mitt Romney as president in order to repeal it.

In eight other states � seven with GOP governors � the Medicaid expansion seems unlikely, given comments from governors and their offices.


And the states most vehemently against it are often the ones who are most desparately in need of it. In an era where state governments are literally willing to see their people go without health care rather than give the Obama Administration the perceived victory of paying for health care for them, what should be an easy choice evidently becomes a quite difficult one for certain parties!

Kuros wrote:
With just the stick, every State also had an easy choice: accept the Medicaid expansion.

Again, in a world of rational, compassionate governance, this would definitely be correct, and in such a world the "stick" wouldn't even be needed, because it would be the rawest of raw stupidity to turn down the "carrot." But once again, back in the real world, where denying the Obama Administration any sort of perceived victory is an end in itself for certain parties, it becomes a tougher choice. Plenty of governors have outright said they'll turn down the Medicaid expansion for their citizens in service of their ideological interests, and although I think even they would balk at throwing away 100% of Medicaid funding in their little political game, I suspect there would be quite a bit of agonizing over it, since for these people the choice in a certain sense becomes a question of which is more important: remaining in office, or telling Obama to go to Hell.

Give the people less, and make them thank you for it. It’s an odd electoral strategy, but a new study suggests it’s one way to explain the outcome of the 2016 election.

The paper argues that “intentional efforts by Republicans to sabotage the implementation of the health-care law” caused real dissatisfaction among voters. But according to polls, faced with constant media coverage of rising prices, voters responded by supporting Republican politicians who promised to repeal and replace Obamacare. That dynamic, it suggests, could very well have given Donald Trump the presidency. And the same mechanisms could be at play in 2018 and beyond.

The headline and byline of the article overstates it; possibly because the main thrust of the study supports the idea that the media overhyped PPACA premium hikes. Those rather more modest than reported premium hikes took place in October, 2016.

The hypothesis put forward by Kogan and Wood is that overzealous and inaccurate coverage of premium increases by media outlets was largely responsible for boosting support for Trump. “Our results suggest that consumers were influenced not by the individual premiums they would have seen when logging in to renew their coverage,” they wrote, “but rather the coverage of the issue in the local press, which focused largely on the non-discounted rates.” The study doesn’t cite specific instances of such coverage. But when Aetna announced it would exit exchanges in 11 states in August of 2016, for example, much of the coverage focused on rising costs, often without specifying just whose premiums were increasing and how that actually affected costs for individual consumers.

Nonetheless, the Republican strategy of blocking Medicaid expansion may have paid off.

The second piece of Kogan and Wood’s argument is that premium increases would likely have been smaller without what they term Republican “sabotage,” and that the sabotage also affected the election independent of information gaps. The first part is almost certainly right. A campaign by Republican legislators to block market-stabilizing provisions and payments to insurers, block all legislation designed to tweak the health-care law, and promise a full repeal of the bill in 2016 almost certainly contributed to market instability in the exchanges and rising premiums.

Additionally, Republican governors have mostly been slow to expand Medicaid coverage to low-income residents of their states or have declined to do so at all, decisions that have both decreased the number of potentially satisfied Clinton voters with new coverage and further destabilized markets and prices. The study finds that had Georgia, Florida, North Carolina, and Wisconsin embraced Medicaid expansion or even pursued slightly less-obstructionist policies, it could very well have tipped those states—and the 2016 election—to Clinton.

[emphasis added]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Page 7 of 7

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International