Vegas Free-for-All - Affordable Care Act NEW TAXES

pjstroh

Feb 1, 2014
7:24am

There's a system of checks and balances, Boiler. I'm not qualified to determine if the president is overstepping his consitituional authority or not. That's why we have a Supreme Court. Incidentally, you spent 3 years preaching how the entire law was unconstitutional....and the Supreme Court ultimately said you were dead wrong.

I'll defer to them once again. Their record is better than yours.

alanleroy

Feb 1, 2014
7:40am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh

Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh

Now lets see if you can stay on topic....is that assertion remotely accurrate of the tax implications on the average American? Do you want to weigh in on that or would you rather declare victory based upon your grammar correction?

I think we can safely say it's at least as accurate as this:

“In an Obama administration, we’ll lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year….. We’ll do it by the end of my first term as President of the United States.”

Actually, the woman cited by Republicans in their official SOTU Response would save over $3500 in premiums. But I'm not one to use anecdotes to make broad points. I'll leave that to our board's resident conservatives.

That's great PJ..because we don't need to use any anecdotes whatsoever on this one. We know the exact methodology Candidate Obama used to develop his $2500 for a typical family per year number. Here's what he did. "Estimated the Annual Savings due to Obamacare to be $220 Billion Per year. The total savings were then divided by the country’s population, multiplied for a family of four, and rounded down to $2,500."

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/23/us/23health.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

We know that the ACA is expected to add 621 Billion Dollars to Health Care Spending by 2022.
https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/Proj2012.pdf

So now we can simply apply the tried and true Obama Estimator Methodolgy and say with great confidence that the 'Typical Family' must bear the burden of $7000 of additional health care spending over the next ten years. (I rounded down from $7056).

I don't know how to respond to someone who accuses the president of lying and then uses the same arithmetic to make an assertion

The bill that passed into law was not the same plan the president campaigned on - that's the price of living in a Democracy instead of a Dictatorship. We've already touched on the way the new law is paid for. Don't you remember? You preached to us about it from your ivory tower when we ignored the links to it after the after the outrageous statement about implications on "average families".

Your new conclusion about "typical families" is no less outrageous. Just ask Bette (the SOTU lady)...but I'm sure she appreciates your efforts. She prefers made up stuff over facts too.

Actually I accused him of lying about 'If you like your plan you can keep your plan' which he most certainly did. I accuse him of being grossly inaccurate about the premium savings.

I offered my new 'facts' into evidence because it uses Obama's calculation methodology. It makes no difference whether the president's original plan was passed or not...I'm calculating family costs the same way he calculated family premium savings.....Add them all up and divide by the number of people and multiply by four. What could possibly be wrong or 'outrageous' with that? If you've got a problem with it, take it up with the President. He taught us all how to calculate using those complex formulas.

Oh...and since you now say "We've already touched on the way the new law is paid for", are you accepting that there are 20 new taxes totaling over $500 billion over 10 years? I though you guys Abramoffed that.

And one more thing. My take is the real problem is medical insurance still costs too damn much. There is way too much waste. I would like to point out that I have offered at least 10 suggestions to improve Obamacare that actually address the issue of Cost...none of which are being offered up by Democrats or Republicans.

I suggest we focus on costs and explore everything from offering steep insurance discounts for signing non revocable DNRs to International Competition via certified Medical Tourism, more limits on Drug Patent Protection, Loser Pays for Medical Liability Lawsuits, National Certification for Doctors and Insurance Plans/Companies, ending the requirement to treat people who don't have insurance and can't pay for treatment...But Republicans and Democrats alike just Poo Poo poor old AlanLeroyCare.

Dan Svatass

Feb 1, 2014
8:06am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy
I suggest we focus on costs and explore everything from offering steep insurance discounts for signing non revocable DNRs

Non-revocable DNRs? So if, in the decades ahead, medical science advances and we can easily resuscitate the brain dead, AlanLeroy thinks we should still kill them because they once signed a form that gave them a 4% insurance discount?

Madness. I'm guessing this alanleroy hasn't yet run his Death Pact idea past his King and Queen yet.

Don

Feb 1, 2014
9:08am

Block User

Allow DonDiego to be the first citizen to place the name "alanleroy" into consideration for the Presidency of the United States commencing his term in January 2017.

Hip Hip Hooray ! Hip Hip Hooray ! Hip Hip Hooray !

Hey, he couldn't be worse than what's there now, . . . pr'bly.

DISCLAIMER
DonDiego has received no remuneration of any kind for introducing the nomination of alanleroy. If President alanleroy were, in fact, elected DonDiego would request no recompense. However, DonDiego would accept the nomination to head the yet-to-be-created Department of Recreation.
.

alanleroy

Feb 1, 2014
10:25am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: Chilcoot

Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
I suggest we focus on costs and explore everything from offering steep insurance discounts for signing non revocable DNRs

Ok. We can have a clause so that if in the future, medical science advances and we can easily resuscitate the brain dead then that voids the non revocable DNR. Does that satisfy you? Good. President AlanLeroy will work with Democrats and Republicans in open session to make AlanLeroyCare better for all.

So, I'm not talking about a 4% insurance discount. I'm talking about a 30 - 50% discount based on the fact that medical costs for the last few months of life take up an extraordinary amount of medical resources. So instead of spending your last 2 months as a brain dead rotting piece of flesh barely kept alive by medical science, you'll die 6 weeks earlier...in a hospice on massive amounts of morphine.

I have a living Will and a DNR because I actually think it's right not to steal resources from the next generation to keep my brain dead self alive in a coma for a few weeks. I think a lot more people could be persuaded to do that if they were paying several thousand dollars less per year in wasted insurance costs. Are you on board? So, instead of the dreaded death panels, we use monetary incentives so people make the right choice for themselves and the next generation. If you don't like it, you can just pay double insurance costs. Just like smokers and the morbidly obese will on AlanLeroyCare. On board Chillcoot? We need to get started on the Exchange.

Did I mention you'll be able to buy prescription drugs including Medical Marijuana from certified international distributors over the Internet with AlanLeroyCare?

Boilerman

Feb 1, 2014
11:01am

Block User

Obama changes laws made by congress. Why does he have to listen to the courts?

Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
There's a system of checks and balances, Boiler. I'm not qualified to determine if the president is overstepping his consitituional authority or not. That's why we have a Supreme Court. Incidentally, you spent 3 years preaching how the entire law was unconstitutional....and the Supreme Court ultimately said you were dead wrong.

I'll defer to them once again. Their record is better than yours.

Dan Svatass

Feb 1, 2014
11:07am

Block User

alanleroys, do you guys realize you are advocating the death panel process the GOP's been demagoguing for years? Get Sarah, Rush, Michelle, Glenn, Huck, Rick, Ted, and their legion on board and we'll talk.

Until then, they'll just demagogue your idea forever.

alanleroy

Feb 1, 2014
11:52am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: Chilcoot
alanleroys, do you guys realize you are advocating the death panel process the GOP's been demagoguing for years? Get Sarah, Rush, Michelle, Glenn, Huck, Rick, Ted, and their legion on board and we'll talk.

Until then, they'll just demagogue your idea forever.

This is absolutely not a 'Death Panel Process'. Just like my choice to have a living will is not a death panel. This is an individual CHOICE based on MONEY. Democrats wanted 'End of Life Counseling'. Like that's going to make a dent in the problem. Republicans feared 'Death Panels' where the 'committee gets to choose who lives and dies'. Who cares what they think?

AlanLeroyCare offers citizens a choice based on MONEY. Save a ton of money on your health insurance and die peacefully in a hospice or spend double for health insurance and spend you last month rotting in intensive care soaking the next generation for your medical bills. It's right for the individual and right for America.

What is Chilcoot's Alternative to reduce the ridiculous End of Life Costs the current system encourages? AlanLeroy's approach removes those costs without coercion. No Death Panels, No worthless counseling He simply 'shows them the money' and they either take it or they don't.

Please note that AlanLeroy is not now nor has he ever been a registered member of the Republican Party so he is not beholdin' to the likes of Rush or Glen or Sarah or any one else for that matter. You seem to imply that you're open the concept, but are afraid the Big Bad Republican Right would poo poo it. Fuck them. Let's just do what right.

forkushV

Feb 1, 2014
12:34pm

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy

Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
alanleroys, do you guys realize you are advocating the death panel process the GOP's been demagoguing for years? Get Sarah, Rush, Michelle, Glenn, Huck, Rick, Ted, and their legion on board and we'll talk.

Until then, they'll just demagogue your idea forever.

This is absolutely not a 'Death Panel Process'...

Chil didn't say it was. He said it would be demagogued as such by some of the evil people he mentioned above. Do you doubt that for a second?

These cretins attempted to conflate end of life counseling with "Death Panels." The Republicans spent a whole night of their convention trying to convince the country that "You didn't build that," was referring to entrepreneur's businesses, and not the public infrastructure. And coming soon, you'll hear some right-wing assholes, some no doubt on this board, repeating Hillary's "What difference does it make," and pretending she was referring to the Benghazi deaths, and not to what someone said on a Sunday morning teevee talk show.

On a tangent, may I recommend the book "Boomsday" by Christopher Buckley, son of William F. It's about politician's proposal that gives financial incentives to people if they agree to kill themselves when they turn 75. It's a fun read, and Buckley was a George H.W. Bush speechwriter and knows his way around real politics.

BobOrme

Feb 1, 2014
1:47pm

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Bob, you're right. the poster said the "average" American will see a tax increase of 6k. Thanks for the correction.

Now lets see if you can stay on topic....is that assertion remotely accurrate of the tax implications on the average American? Do you want to weigh in on that or would you rather declare victory based upon your grammar correction?

The problem is, no one really knows! Not any magazine or newspaper writer. Not any TV commentator or web blogger. Obama keeps delaying implementation of parts of the legislation that he knows will reflect badly on him and other Democrats. He has lied about this law since before he signed it, and he kept lying about it after taking office and signing the bill. I believe the reason why some of the actual implementation has been both delayed and/or spread out over the course of years into the future is because he knows how much this will actually cost Americans. Delaying the most painful impacts on a majority of working Americans is only buying a little time.

«‹6 ›

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:

Diamond Membership

$3 per month

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Limited Member Rewards Online

Join Now

Platinum Membership

$50 per year

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Exclusive Member Rewards Book

Join Now