We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

[BatmanUSA 105]

whoosh...

the silence of defeat....

but its still a funny GIF..!!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

yep..... Obama tried to take over the Medicaid system.. (FYI.. Medicaid is run by the individual states).... Obama offered to pay, temporarily, the increased costs to the states for expanding Medicaid to include it in Obamacare.... many states refused...

Medicaid is a federal program that is run by individual states and funded with both state and federal funds. Obamacare did not seek to change any of that. Obamacare merely sought to broaden the eligibility for Medicaid and offered to pay for that expanded eligibility cost entirely with federal funds for a number of years. That's not a "government takeover" of the medicare system (again, it's already government run), much less a "government takeover" of the healthcare system as the stupid and uninformed claim based on tea party propaganda.

I am not going to waste my time discussing the remaining tea party propaganda that you appear to have fallen for and the plain drivel that you "enriched" that post with. Look, the fact that you are incapable of separating fiction from fact is your issue, not mine. You need to work that out. The facts are out there for anyone to look at. Outside of the right wing echo chamber is where it is. You should look for it if you're really interested. But your post makes very clear that you're not really interested at all.

And as much as you like to believe the contrary, rest assured that there's no defeat here. That's just another illusion of yours - an illusion like the attempted government takeover of medicaid.

Was that your sign at the anti-Obamacare rally?

[Protocol417 161]

This country spends $2.5 trillion dollars on health care every year. $650 million spent over several years to built this nationwide online insurance exchange - state by state no less - is not even a drop in the bucket. We're talking about two and half hundreth of one percent. That's right. The online marketplaces all in cost about 0.025% of what we spend on health care each and every year. Whoopity Doo Dah.

Perhaps I should've said "I can understand the desire to look into the cost" instead, which is closer to what I meant.

That said... I have absolutely no idea what it costs create, implement, and maintain something like this, however, I'm guessing "percentage of annual health care costs" isn't the best way to look at it. If someone tried to charge you $50 to copy your front door key, you probably wouldn't agree to that cost just because it's only 0.025% of the price of your house.

[Protocol417 161]

I didn't see you take the time to answer the question about why Obamacare supporters accept the fact the Obama gave waivers to unions and government employees.. If Obamacare is so good, why do you support/accept those waivers....

Batman, this claim has been debunked for ages now.

Anyone (government employee or not) who currently has compliant insurance is ineligible to purchase their policy through the marketplace or receive subsidies.

Regarding Congress and their staff, not only are they not "exempt" from "Obamacare", they're actually kicked out of their current plan and forced to use the exchanges. The problem with this is that they would have had to pay full price for their policies, basically meaning they'd be taking a huge pay cut due to loss of employee benefits. As a solution to this, the government (their employer) will still pay for a portion of their policy (much as many people's employers do). This is the "exemption" people have been complaining about.

Regarding unions, there is a specific reason why they are against Obamacare, and it has to do with leverage. Many unions have spent a massive amount of time and energy negotiating contracts down to the sub-sub-sub-sub bullet point, including health care coverage, and those contracts last for years. The "exemption" regarding them is the "grandfathering in" of their policies (some of which are not compliant)... but only for one year, to give more time for contracts to be negotiated. So basically, they have to throw out all that work and start over, which they're not very happy about.

As a side note, they're also against it because they were denied their request to receive subsidies, which kind of flies in the face of the accusations that Obama is handing out special favors.

Then you have the "exemption" that is the one-year delay for employers with over 50 full-time employees. Who, I'm sure, are huge Obama supporters

(For the record, I don't agree with the delays for either large businesses or unions. They've had 3 years to get their sh*t together. But I hardly see it as some government conspiracy where "friends" come out rosier than "enemies".)

[Not a Tailor 1,370]

That kind of attitude is why we have a 16 trillion dollar debt.

How much of that debt is caused by military spending? Defense spending tops 1 trillion a year.

How much of that debt is caused by the numbers of black men in prison for misdemeanours while white men commit those same crimes in much greater numbers, but are much more likely to get probation? At 60 billion a year in costs to house those prisoners, plus court costs for multiple appeals and public lawyers.

How much of that debt is caused by the insane War on Drugs? Two billion per year spent enforcing laws that don't make sense to have in the so-called Land of the Free. Not counting even MORE legal fees when these people appeal nonsensical convictions.

How much of that debt is caused by having more people in prison, by percentage, not total number, than any other nation? The list, btw, includes Iran, Russia, Cuba and other nations whose governments we criticize as totalitarian. When you have so many people not producing anything and living on a government dime, you're not just losing the money you spend on housing the inmates, you're also losing their potential incomes.

How much of that debt is caused by families defaulting on mortgages and other loans because the US does not have a living minimum wage and because families have to choose between shelter and medical care?

How much of that debt is caused by the fact that the largest growth in jobs since the recession has been in part time work?

How much of that debt is caused by the fact that US companies can take their manufacturing overseas to avoid having to have, you know, health and safety rules, robbing millions of Americans of their jobs?

How much of that debt is caused by the fact that, whenever possible, tax breaks are demanded for the rich who take jobs overseas?

The debt isn't being caused by the budget. The debt is being caused by a set of nonsensical cultural priorities and the fact that the US government has stopped fearing its people.

I would give nearly ANYTHING to be able to bring my fiancée to Canada rather than the other way around, but the one thing we're NOT willing to sacrifice is the PhD that she's partway done. The second she's done, we're doing everything in our power to get out of the US, because frankly? Without a major government procedure overhaul and an examination of cultural priorities, the country is circling the toilet and in 20 years, America being the 'Land of Opportunities' is going to be a legend that people marvel over, that a country so messed up and destroyed could have ever been so great as the movies and television of the day teaches us.

[Karee 4,191]

How much of that debt is caused by military spending? Defense spending tops 1 trillion a year.

Needs to be cut. You'll hear the same people here b!tching about lost jobs though. I find it odd that some here think defense spending is too high, but the same people carry on about all the govt. employees and contractors that are out of work due to this alleged "shut down." What do you think will happen if the govt. cuts defense spending.

How much of that debt is caused by the numbers of black men in prison for misdemeanours while white men commit those same crimes in much greater numbers, but are much more likely to get probation? At 60 billion a year in costs to house those prisoners, plus court costs for multiple appeals and public lawyers.

Don't commit crimes, don't go to jail. One of the conditions of probation is that you maintain gainful employment. Also, probation is usually for first time offenders. As has been posted here many times, black men commit crimes a much higher rate than other races. That's just a simple fact.

How much of that debt is caused by the insane War on Drugs? Two billion per year spent enforcing laws that don't make sense to have in the so-called Land of the Free. Not counting even MORE legal fees when these people appeal nonsensical convictions.

No argument from me there.

How much of that debt is caused by having more people in prison, by percentage, not total number, than any other nation? The list, btw, includes Iran, Russia, Cuba and other nations whose governments we criticize as totalitarian. When you have so many people not producing anything and living on a government dime, you're not just losing the money you spend on housing the inmates, you're also losing their potential incomes.

See #2

How much of that debt is caused by families defaulting on mortgages and other loans because the US does not have a living minimum wage and because families have to choose between shelter and medical care?

A higher minimum wage will result in higher wages, but probably less jobs. It will also result in increased prices. Don't like your pay, go find another job.

How much of that debt is caused by the fact that the largest growth in jobs since the recession has been in part time work?

Look for that number to increase even more once the health care regulations take full effect. There's an exemption for employees that work less than x hours.

How much of that debt is caused by the fact that US companies can take their manufacturing overseas to avoid having to have, you know, health and safety rules, robbing millions of Americans of their jobs?

Now you're contradicting yourself. You want U.S. companies to take on all these new employee associated costs, and yet wonder why jobs are going overseas.

How much of that debt is caused by the fact that, whenever possible, tax breaks are demanded for the rich who take jobs overseas?

That's just the way things work in today's global economy. A corporations main reason for existence is to turn a profit. That's the whole premise of free market enterprise. If they can make more money by shipping jobs overseas, that's what they'll do. Again, you can't put all these costs on companies, and then complain when they move jobs overseas.

The debt isn't being caused by the budget. The debt is being caused by a set of nonsensical cultural priorities and the fact that the US government has stopped fearing its people.

The debt IS caused by the budget. When you spend more than you take in, that results in debt. The govt. spends money on things they have no business even being involved in.

I would give nearly ANYTHING to be able to bring my fiancée to Canada rather than the other way around, but the one thing we're NOT willing to sacrifice is the PhD that she's partway done. The second she's done, we're doing everything in our power to get out of the US, because frankly? Without a major government procedure overhaul and an examination of cultural priorities, the country is circling the toilet and in 20 years, America being the 'Land of Opportunities' is going to be a legend that people marvel over, that a country so messed up and destroyed could have ever been so great as the movies and television of the day teaches us.

I'm outtta here as well first chance I get. Probably for different reasons than you though.

See responses inline.

[BatmanUSA 105]

Batman, this claim has been debunked for ages now.

Anyone (government employee or not) who currently has compliant insurance is ineligible to purchase their policy through the marketplace or receive subsidies.

Regarding Congress and their staff, not only are they not "exempt" from "Obamacare", they're actually kicked out of their current plan and forced to use the exchanges. The problem with this is that they would have had to pay full price for their policies, basically meaning they'd be taking a huge pay cut due to loss of employee benefits. As a solution to this, the government (their employer) will still pay for a portion of their policy (much as many people's employers do). This is the "exemption" people have been complaining about.

Regarding unions, there is a specific reason why they are against Obamacare, and it has to do with leverage. Many unions have spent a massive amount of time and energy negotiating contracts down to the sub-sub-sub-sub bullet point, including health care coverage, and those contracts last for years. The "exemption" regarding them is the "grandfathering in" of their policies (some of which are not compliant)... but only for one year, to give more time for contracts to be negotiated. So basically, they have to throw out all that work and start over, which they're not very happy about.

As a side note, they're also against it because they were denied their request to receive subsidies, which kind of flies in the face of the accusations that Obama is handing out special favors.

Then you have the "exemption" that is the one-year delay for employers with over 50 full-time employees. Who, I'm sure, are huge Obama supporters

(For the record, I don't agree with the delays for either large businesses or unions. They've had 3 years to get their sh*t together. But I hardly see it as some government conspiracy where "friends" come out rosier than "enemies".)

thank you, for explaining this without adding any rhetoric or insults..!!!

[BatmanUSA 105]

Batman, this claim has been debunked for ages now.

Anyone (government employee or not) who currently has compliant insurance is ineligible to purchase their policy through the marketplace or receive subsidies.

Regarding Congress and their staff, not only are they not "exempt" from "Obamacare", they're actually kicked out of their current plan and forced to use the exchanges. The problem with this is that they would have had to pay full price for their policies, basically meaning they'd be taking a huge pay cut due to loss of employee benefits. As a solution to this, the government (their employer) will still pay for a portion of their policy (much as many people's employers do). This is the "exemption" people have been complaining about.

Regarding unions, there is a specific reason why they are against Obamacare, and it has to do with leverage. Many unions have spent a massive amount of time and energy negotiating contracts down to the sub-sub-sub-sub bullet point, including health care coverage, and those contracts last for years. The "exemption" regarding them is the "grandfathering in" of their policies (some of which are not compliant)... but only for one year, to give more time for contracts to be negotiated. So basically, they have to throw out all that work and start over, which they're not very happy about.

As a side note, they're also against it because they were denied their request to receive subsidies, which kind of flies in the face of the accusations that Obama is handing out special favors.

Then you have the "exemption" that is the one-year delay for employers with over 50 full-time employees. Who, I'm sure, are huge Obama supporters

(For the record, I don't agree with the delays for either large businesses or unions. They've had 3 years to get their sh*t together. But I hardly see it as some government conspiracy where "friends" come out rosier than "enemies".)

Thank you for explaining that without adding any liberal rhetoric or insults.. !!

[BatmanUSA 105]

Medicaid is a federal program that is run by individual states and funded with both state and federal funds. Obamacare did not seek to change any of that. Obamacare merely sought to broaden the eligibility for Medicaid and offered to pay for that expanded eligibility cost entirely with federal funds for a number of years. That's not a "government takeover" of the medicare system (again, it's already government run), much less a "government takeover" of the healthcare system as the stupid and uninformed claim based on tea party propaganda.

I am not going to waste my time discussing the remaining tea party propaganda that you appear to have fallen for and the plain drivel that you "enriched" that post with. Look, the fact that you are incapable of separating fiction from fact is your issue, not mine. You need to work that out. The facts are out there for anyone to look at. Outside of the right wing echo chamber is where it is. You should look for it if you're really interested. But your post makes very clear that you're not really interested at all.

And as much as you like to believe the contrary, rest assured that there's no defeat here. That's just another illusion of yours - an illusion like the attempted government takeover of medicaid.

Was that your sign at the anti-Obamacare rally?

That sign was probably from some **....

you contradict yourself, you said obamacare doesn't take over Medicaid... but they will give extra money to the states (for a limited period of time) if they comply with Obamacare... that means changing eligibility criteria, coverage terms, ect..... You may have some issues with seeing both sides of the equation...

and you are correct, the facts are out there, If only you watch MSNBC, you will never get all the facts... but MSNBC sure is good at telling people what their idea of Tea Party propaganda is... but what do you expect from an organization that's gives relevance to someone like Al Sharpton.. (remember Twana Brawley?)

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That sign was probably from some **....

you contradict yourself, you said obamacare doesn't take over Medicaid... but they will give extra money to the states (for a limited period of time) if they comply with Obamacare... that means changing eligibility criteria, coverage terms, ect..... You may have some issues with seeing both sides of the equation...

and you are correct, the facts are out there, If only you watch MSNBC, you will never get all the facts... but MSNBC sure is good at telling people what their idea of Tea Party propaganda is... but what do you expect from an organization that's gives relevance to someone like Al Sharpton.. (remember Twana Brawley?)

I'm contradicting myself because I say that the government cannot take over what is already government run? So Obamacare is a government takeover of Medicaid from the government. Yeah, that is scary as hell. Where will we end up if the government takes over government programs?

I don't know what MSNBC tells its viewers. I'm not one of them. Don't have cable. Don't care to have it either. MSNBC, FOX, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC - all just entertainment. They don't do journalism or news anymore. They do soundbites that I have zero interest in.

You manged to score two fails in one short post. At least you accomplished something, eh?

[BatmanUSA 105]

Obamacare is the federal takeover of state run Medicaid.... one more time. the federal government is taking over the state government's Medicaid program... 2 different governments... states rights???? hello....

you really don't see a difference and again..... whoosh...

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Obamacare is the federal takeover of state run Medicaid.... one more time. the federal government is taking over the state government's Medicaid program... 2 different governments... states rights???? hello....

you really don't see a difference and again..... whoosh...

You need to get one simple fact into your head: Medicaid is a federal program already. It has always been a federal program. It will remain a federal program. Yes, states run it. Yes, states have even received waivers in the 1990's allowing them to try alternate approaches to covering the poor - as long as such approach complies with the federal Medicaid guidelines. But that does not mean that it is a state program. It isn't. It never was. It is, has been and will be a federal program. Hence, there was no federal takeover attempt for Medicaid. The federal government cannot take over a program it already owns and largely funds.

Maybe you should check out medicaid.gov to understand what Medicaid is and isn't.

Edited October 14, 2013 by Mr. Big Dog

[Danno 1,228]

iphones

Hidenburg

Obama-care

A tweak here and there is to be expected.

Edited October 14, 2013 by Danno