ACA: Affordable Care Act (better known as OBAMACARE) - Enrollment Starts October 1st - You In?

Today's ruling was a travesty. John Robert's is not to be trusted. He cares more about maintaining the gravitas of the Supreme Court than about what the country needs.

He is waterboarding the finances and health of the country's citizens.
 
I know with him writing the majority position. This is the 2nd time he's supported that ****** law.
 
Last edited:
Being completely honest here, without going back, please truthfully explain to me the negatives of something named the "Affordable Care Act". Emphasis on truthfully, no deflective political ********, just facts. Serious question.
 
Last edited:
Mark Antony said:
Being completely honest here, without going back, please truthfully explain to me the negatives of something named the "Affordable Care Act". Emphasis on truthfully, no deflective political ********, just facts. Serious question.
Click to expand...

+waiting as well+
 
Mark Antony said:
Being completely honest here, without going back, please truthfully explain to me the negatives of something named the "Affordable Care Act". Emphasis on truthfully, no deflective political ********, just facts. Serious question.
Click to expand...
A fact of government is that whatever a bill is named, chances are it's exactly the opposite.

The ACA has been FAR from affordable up to this point with the same number of people uninsured (the deck has just been shuffled). It didn't actually address the real issue of WHY health insurance costs have been going up over so much over the past 20 years.
 
crcballer55 said:
A fact of government is that whatever a bill is named, chances are it's exactly the opposite.

The ACA has been FAR from affordable up to this point with the same number of people uninsured (the deck has just been shuffled). It didn't actually address the real issue of WHY health insurance costs have been going up over so much over the past 20 years.
Click to expand...

Why do you capitalize the word far like it should make it mean more? Use numbers, facts, instead of exaggerated hyperbole. That is my problem with a lot of people that are against the Act. If you are fundamentally against every person having health care that is your right. If you are however for every person, regardless of wealth, having access to medical care then it is worthwhile to look through the numbers to see if it is working. Many (and most) other developed nations are significantly better at health care than we are. Though they may not have the "best of the best" they have a system of care that helps the majority of the people instead of catering only to high wealth individuals.

From my understanding the three goals of the Affordable Health Care Act are:
-Increase the number of people who have health insurance coverage,
-Reduce health care costs and
- Even more broadly – make people healthier.

Before major coverage provisions of the Affordable Care Act were implemented, roughly 47 million Americans did not have health insurance coverage.

When someone does not have insurance the hospital foots the bill. Last year, hospitals saved 7.4 billion due to more people having actual health care now.

Historic Reduction in the Uninsured. We have seen the largest reduction in the uninsured in four decades. Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act five years ago, about 16.4 million uninsured people have gained health coverage. Those gains come primarily from the Marketplace, young adults who can stay on their parents’ plans until they turn 26, and Medicaid expansions.

Health Care Cost Growth Has Slowed Sharply. Since the Affordable Care Act became law, the price of health care has risen at the slowest rate in 50 years. Medicare has paid out nearly $316 billion less through 2013 than it would have had previous trends continued. The average premium for employer-based family coverage rose just 3 percent in nominal terms in 2014. Just more than a decade ago, surveys by the Kaiser Family Foundation frequently registered double-digit premium increases for this type of coverage.

In all honesty, this has helped us (i assume NTers are between 20 and 35 for the most part, and a diverse range of ethnicities) the most. I don't understand how someone that aligns with the principles of NT doesn't align with what this Act has done/is doing/will do for the nation.
 
This is the only time I have ever wished Ninjahood was back on NT.
Dude used to go EXTRA hard fighting against the ACA and swore up and down that it was gonna fail.

He was wrong as usual but boy had he convinced himself.
 
People now have access to a health insurance card tied to a huge deductible. Does that necessarily equal health care?

A bronze plan that costs 1K per month covers no illness until 6K in deductibles is paid. This policy is now cemented in place due to this ruling.

You will have contributed $18,000 on an annualized basis BEFORE your "insurance" kicks in  (cost of premiums for the year plus the $6,000 deductible).

People also ignore the fact that these rates are going to increase over the next few years (more money for them, less for you), so are the IRS penalties.

One day people will open their eyelids and realize that healthcare and health insurance are not the same thing.

Nothing the government crooks and their corporate buddies do is to benefit the people, and if it does then someone fell asleep at the wheel, it is to line their own pockets.

But Yay! We have HEALTH INSURANCE!!.   
 
The US doesn't do good healthcare - it does sickness insurance. There's no money in keeping people healthy...
 
It's not like ACA can't be changed or improved, but to get rid of it with no other alternative is stupid.
 
ModernDarwin said:
crcballer55 said:
A fact of government is that whatever a bill is named, chances are it's exactly the opposite.

The ACA has been FAR from affordable up to this point with the same number of people uninsured (the deck has just been shuffled). It didn't actually address the real issue of WHY health insurance costs have been going up over so much over the past 20 years.
Click to expand...

Why do you capitalize the word far like it should make it mean more? Use numbers, facts, instead of exaggerated hyperbole. That is my problem with a lot of people that are against the Act. If you are fundamentally against every person having health care that is your right. If you are however for every person, regardless of wealth, having access to medical care then it is worthwhile to look through the numbers to see if it is working. Many (and most) other developed nations are significantly better at health care than we are. Though they may not have the "best of the best" they have a system of care that helps the majority of the people instead of catering only to high wealth individuals.

From my understanding the three goals of the Affordable Health Care Act are:
-Increase the number of people who have health insurance coverage,
-Reduce health care costs and
- Even more broadly – make people healthier.

Before major coverage provisions of the Affordable Care Act were implemented, roughly 47 million Americans did not have health insurance coverage.

When someone does not have insurance the hospital foots the bill. Last year, hospitals saved 7.4 billion due to more people having actual health care now.

Historic Reduction in the Uninsured. We have seen the largest reduction in the uninsured in four decades. Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act five years ago, about 16.4 million uninsured people have gained health coverage. Those gains come primarily from the Marketplace, young adults who can stay on their parents’ plans until they turn 26, and Medicaid expansions.

Health Care Cost Growth Has Slowed Sharply. Since the Affordable Care Act became law, the price of health care has risen at the slowest rate in 50 years. Medicare has paid out nearly $316 billion less through 2013 than it would have had previous trends continued. The average premium for employer-based family coverage rose just 3 percent in nominal terms in 2014. Just more than a decade ago, surveys by the Kaiser Family Foundation frequently registered double-digit premium increases for this type of coverage.

In all honesty, this has helped us (i assume NTers are between 20 and 35 for the most part, and a diverse range of ethnicities) the most. I don't understand how someone that aligns with the principles of NT doesn't align with what this Act has done/is doing/will do for the nation.
Click to expand...

So in essence in addition to making it affordable, it also put money back into hospitals that they can use for better health care and infrastructure? Not a perfect plan, but it's a lot better than not doing anything. We should all be looking to improve upon this instead of wanting it ousted due your political leanings. It's so easy to scream "Government and corporations blah blah blah" instead of addressing reality.
 
Last edited:
aziatic77 said:
 
People now have access to a health insurance card tied to a huge deductible. Does that necessarily equal health care?

A bronze plan that costs 1K per month covers no illness until 6K in deductibles is paid. This policy is now cemented in place due to this ruling.

You will have contributed $18,000 on an annualized basis BEFORE your "insurance" kicks in  (cost of premiums for the year plus the $6,000 deductible).

People also ignore the fact that these rates are going to increase over the next few years (more money for them, less for you), so are the IRS penalties.

One day people will open their eyelids and realize that healthcare and health insurance are not the same thing.

Nothing the government crooks and their corporate buddies do is to benefit the people, and if it does then someone fell asleep at the wheel, it is to line their own pockets.

But Yay! We have HEALTH INSURANCE!!.   
Click to expand...
#NTextremes 

Yes, because all bronze plans cost $1000/month.  
laugh.gif
 
You brahs shouldn't even waste time on Rico or Crc. They both in the " I got mines, **** everyone else" camp

Both those dudes have a problem with anything that ask them to give an extra dollar to help the next man.

Rico will just use deflections, and extremes to argue his point

Crc will post a bias Forbes article cause dude got the biggest case of confirmation bias I have ever seen. Just read through this thread and see how ole boy operated. Dude had to pay more for his insurance and he flipped his ****.

The ACA is far from perfect, but America could have had much better. Could have had a public option and price controls. And even if you're conservative and against those things we could have let people buy plans across state lines, import drugs from Canada, companies bundle together to negotiate with insurance companies, insurance companies bundling with Medicare to negotiate reimbursement rates. And they could have been in favor of supporting preventative care.

So many things that could have actually fixed the problem. But instead all they did besides suggest tort reform was to cry, whine, kick and scream and claim this would destroy our country. Which it didn't :lol:

Before the system didn't need reform, now the GOP on the repeal and replace steez. The right is like 0-4 in the Obamacare war. So it might be time to listen to the homegirl Elsa and:


 
Last edited:
^^^ Brah maybe you should read what you wrote.

Cause it reads like you're saying that is what someone can expect with bronze level coverage.

If it was just example, you didn't say or signal that is was. It is not on the reader to guess what is inside your head
 
Last edited:
aziatic77 said:
superblyTRIFE said:
 

#NTextremes 

Yes, because all bronze plans cost $1000/month.  :lol:
Click to expand...


Reading is fundamental. "A plan that costs", not "all plans cost." It depends on factors in each state exchange. Thus it was an example and you know it was.
Click to expand...

Yes, an extreme example. :lol:

Talk about the folks paying reasonable rates and how those will be "cemented" in. Oh wait....that doesn't fit your narrative.
 
aziatic77 said:
superblyTRIFE said:
Yes, an extreme example. :lol:


Talk about the folks paying reasonable rates and how those will be "cemented" in. Oh wait....that doesn't fit your narrative.
Click to expand...

As usual, the non-believers have to do the Obama worshippers homework for them

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/...e-bronze-plans-leave-high-out-pocket-expenses
Click to expand...

From the article you used as "proof":

"It’s hard to know how many people are running into the situation. It’s probably not that many, since only a fraction of the people buying bronze plans have low incomes and only a fraction of those are running up high medical bills. Overall, it's safe to say, both the uninsured and the clinics are better off with the Affordable Care Act than they would be without it."

So yes, there are a number of people who are in the scenario that you initially alluded to. But they aren't the majority, as your article clearly states.

So again, you used an extreme example. Need I go on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom