Evil Obamacare

[Wneglia]

Obamacare-127.6 million hours of additional paperwork per year

Maybe they can hire minimum wage workers for it. Only $1 billion/year. (How much is that in lawyer hours O'Really?)

[Wneglia]

Of course, we all know how honest, neutral, accurate, patriotic and fair House committees are these days.

"COMPILED by the staff at the Ways and Means, Education and the Workforce, and Energy and Commerce Committees"

"Federal law requires agencies to estimate the paperwork burden created by rules and regulations. Following is a survey of the new
burdens created by the Affordable Care Act derived from the agencies’ own estimates.

[rstrong]

Obamacare-127.6 million hours of additional paperwork per year

Maybe they can hire minimum wage workers for it. Only $1 billion/year. (How much is that in lawyer hours O'Really?)

This reminds me of when the Republicons were crying about how many billions of dollars ObamaCare would cost.... And it turned out that the amount was LESS than if they had kept the old system. Even assuming that the costs of the old system magically stopped rising as they had for decades.

It's a near-certainty that in this case it's a similar situation: We're merely talking about different paperwork than what was in place already. Notice how the report doesn't list any forms from the old system that are no longer required? Seriously?

Especially now that doctors' offices will have more standardized forms, rather than scores of different forms for each insurance company?

The report is pure partisan BS.

[rstrong]

Of course, we all know how honest, neutral, accurate, patriotic and fair House committees are these days.

"COMPILED by the staff at the Ways and Means, Education and the Workforce, and Energy and Commerce Committees"

"Federal law requires agencies to estimate the paperwork burden created by rules and regulations. Following is a survey of the new burdens created by the Affordable Care Act derived from the agencies’ own estimates.

Oh, I'm sure that the federal agencies provide the source material in a non-partisan manner.

And then the House committees cherry-pick what suits their agendas, line item by line item. In this case it's bloody obvious: A list of the costs for each new rule, and no-where a mention of the costs of all the old rules done away with.

C'mon. Be serious.

[rstrong]

...C'mon. Be serious.

I really hope that Wneglia is trying to be a set-up man for us. Otherwise . . .

(Larger)

[bannination]

Obamacare-127.6 million hours of additional paperwork per year

Maybe they can hire minimum wage workers for it. Only $1 billion/year. (How much is that in lawyer hours O'Really?)

Ah, so he *IS* a job creator!

(You gotta remember, it's the republican plan.)

[Stinger]

Yep, Stinger, McCrory will probably "out-stupid" your governor.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott supports Medicaid expansion

We "win".

That's just one issue. Scott has a head start of a couple of years and a whole lot of stupid.

[Wneglia]

One reason healthcare costs are so high

[Ombudsman]

And one more reason.

[Wneglia]

But, the biggest reason of all, one whose fix might begin to address exorbitant executive and MD pay, is that we've chosen to shun single payer universal coverage despite its achieving comparable outcomes everywhere else for 1/2 to 2/3 the per capita cost.

To implement that, all health professionals would have to take drastic cuts in salary Would you work for half of what you currently make?

[Wneglia]

Fucking Hypocrites

[Wneglia]

So much for the "Affordable" Care Act

Not affordable for taxpayers either.

[bannination]

So much for the "Affordable" Care Act

Not affordable for taxpayers either.

From your article:

The CBO’s updated cost projections do not include an updated estimate of the effects of the law on the deficit. Previous CBO analyses have found that the law would reduce the deficit slightly, with curbs to the growth of Medicare spending and higher taxes more than offsetting the costs of expanding coverage.

[Stinger]

It gets even better. The projected deficits are dropping even faster because ... Obamacare seems to be bending healthcare costs downward.

Bad News for Deficit Hawks and Opponents of Obamacare

Facts have a liberal bias.

[Mr.B]

"There are many other alternatives other than Obamacare - a lot of them are better IMNVHO. But that was the one that could get past the Republicans. And it's way better than nothing. Hopefully now that the election is over, we don't have to deal with chicken-little-sh*t about death panels, bureaucrats choosing your doctors, plumbers doing dental work, yada."

NEW YORK - Barbara Heller has an autoimmune disease called PBC. She takes the generic drug Ursodiol to prevent liver damage.
"The last refill that I got for Ursodiol cost $94.50 for three months, Heller said.
In August, she called for her usual three-month renewal, expecting her cost would still be under $100.
Instead, it was $1,212.30.

Seems that after all the hype and paranoia, the so-called death panels didn't materialize. Who needs a panel anyway? In the news the last few months the stories of drug prices skyrocketing, including generics, have caused major concern to those who now can ill-afford to pay for their meds.

For instance, here's links to news stories:
ABC News/Nov 21, 2014
WSJ/Pharmalot/Aug 14, 2014 These are just a couple of the stories, but you get the picture.

In light of these revelations, why aren't our lawmakers really investigating this and taking action? Look at the dates of these news reports and the "outrage" ( ) expressed in Washington.....now, how much have you heard about what is being done?

As I stated above; who needs someone on a death panel to say who will or won't die if you can't afford your meds to stay well/prolong your life?

"High drug prices are harming patients because either you come up with the money, or you die."

[bannination]

As I stated above; who needs someone on a death panel to say who will or won't die if you can't afford your meds to stay well/prolong your life?

They need to be good Republicans and accept the responsibility that it's their fault for not saving up zillions of dollars for outrageously priced drugs, because capitalism.

I mean if they can't afford them then they were probably moochers anyway and don't deserve to prolong their lives. It's like saying hey, if you don't come up with money for food you die. That's the way it should be.



Oh, sorry, wrong forum, I though I was posting at CPF again.

[Mr.B]

As I stated above; who needs someone on a death panel to say who will or won't die if you can't afford your meds to stay well/prolong your life?

They need to be good Republicans and accept the responsibility that it's their fault for not saving up zillions of dollars for outrageously priced drugs, because capitalism.
I mean if they can't afford them then they were probably moochers anyway and don't deserve to prolong their lives. It's like saying hey, if you don't come up with money for food you die. That's the way it should be.

So you're saying the sorry Democrats engineered the price hikes so that only Democrats will be able to afford drugs?

[bannination]

As I stated above; who needs someone on a death panel to say who will or won't die if you can't afford your meds to stay well/prolong your life?

They need to be good Republicans and accept the responsibility that it's their fault for not saving up zillions of dollars for outrageously priced drugs, because capitalism.
I mean if they can't afford them then they were probably moochers anyway and don't deserve to prolong their lives. It's like saying hey, if you don't come up with money for food you die. That's the way it should be.

So you're saying the sorry Democrats engineered the price hikes so that only Democrats will be able to afford drugs?

Not possible, Democraps aren't business owners, they can't raise their prices, they're bottom feeding moochers.

[rstrong]

Passage required an obscene compromise with the party's corporate shills, in particular Baucus, Nelson and Lieberman. Hence, no single payer, no public option, no legal ability for the government to negotiate drug prices.

The public system Obama campaigned on in 2008 and tried to enact in 2009, required a supermajority that the Democrats just didn't have.

The ACA wasn't an obscene compromise; it was the outright adoption of the Republican alternative.

[bannination]

Passage required an obscene compromise with the party's corporate shills, in particular Baucus, Nelson and Lieberman. Hence, no single payer, no public option, no legal ability for the government to negotiate drug prices.

The public system Obama campaigned on in 2008 and tried to enact in 2009, required a supermajority that the Democrats just didn't have.

The ACA wasn't an obscene compromise; it was the outright adoption of the Republican alternative.

It's hard for people to grasp that when Republicans were for it before they were against it.