right wing cons threaten to default on national debt

Wars are not decided over the loss of a single battle, and ObamaScare is an example of how democracy can be blatently and destructively, misused.

 

Obama is the one threatening a shutdown, all because of one issue not going his way. The House is willing to fund the government, and even raise the debt ceiling, but not willing to increase spending on a program, ObamaScare, which would have devastating effect on future budgets when we are currently unable to balance our budgets, Federal, State or Local, with perhaps a couple of Local exceptions.

 

Every time I see a new story relating to ObamaScare the projected cost is greater than previously claimed.
The CBO initially projected the cost over a decade to be $900B.
The next estimate came out as $1.4T, then $1.7T, followed by $2.0T, $2.3T, and currently $2.6T. More often than not the CBO estimates prove to be lower than what actually occurs.
Medicare, being funded by the recipients,is much more easily fixed allowing the recipients to have a say in what they are willing to pay relative to what they wish to receive as a result. On the other hand, most everyone is willing to accept something they don't have to pay for. Is that how democracy should work? High unemployment makes bills such as ObamaScare look much more desirable until people are reemployed and find out what it costs them.
Could such a bill have passed if unemployment was very low?

 

Looking at the growing CBO projected costs alone provides observable grounds to put an end to ObamaScare before it begins.

 

Everyone likes a free lunch, until they begin to pay for not only their own but that of many others with no choice.

Points of view vary greatly on ObamaScare, and while you view it as a good thing, albeit not perfect, many of us view it as a very bad thing and not just imperfect, but terminally destructive.

 

One way or another.......I'm going to get my way. The gubmint WILL shut down. Either we will shut down now , impeach "oby" , or , eventually due to the collapse of "oby" and obamunism the system will implode. Either way the regime collapses. Once again , LIBERTY will win.

 

But you see that's just the thing, I can tell by both yours and RIPTIDE's responses that the reason you feel this way is that the propaganda about what's been said about Obamacare has influenced your views.

We already pay for people's ER care in rising costs in other forms, so to me what Obamacare does with the taxation isn't really any different from pre-Obamacare, it just now makes it easier to track the money flow.

Healthcare companies can't use pre-existing conditions to shirk the care of their customers who need to use their healthcare plans suddenly.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/09/obamacare-myths/

The reasons I doubt the credibility of the Republican Party's criticisms about Obamacare because to me their ethos being hurt by the doomsday-type claims they were making about Obamacare, both pre-passage and post-passage, that turned out to be lies.

I also don't see those who are offering the counter view, that insurance should be just be able to compete across State lines, understand the problems with doing that from the impacts of what healthcare plans cover, they only see the cost issue.

----

So no I disagree with RIPTIDE, that the debt ceiling can be used as leverage, for anything because it's fundamental to credit flow in the country. Not raising the debt ceiling would destroy this country faster than any negative Obamacare ever would.

 

Unless you're in the top richest 1%, you're just voting to fuck yourself in the ass if you vote for a republican. The GOP depends on the stupidity of those that vote for them. And that really exposes the con posts on this thread, because we all know they don't even have enough to pay attention.

 

If you are not a 47%'er ; what reason would you have to support oby and his give-aways? From the standpoint of a producer , we the 53% are screwed more by letting the theft continue. Shut it all down. No one will know the differance but recipients.

 

It has nothing to do with how I feel, and only to do with simple arithmetic. The propaganda Left or Right may have influence on some or perhaps even many, but it remains a fact that you cannot perpetually spend money you don't have, and just printing more of it can only work for so long.

 

Yes, the uninsured are already provided health care. What ObamaScare does is make healthcare a government ran operation, adding greatly to the cost not only of the services but also administratively.
If government was not involved in healthcare, there would be no need to track the flow of money, nor would the cost of doing so be added to providing healthcare.

 

Read the contract, are pre-existing conditions covered? Do pre-existing conditions occur suddenly or out of the blue? If you are claiming that ObamaScare will go so far as to cover anything and everything for everyone regardless of cost, then you should readily recognize such a plan is doomed to eventually consume the entire GDP.

When will people recognize that government does not create wealth by printing or borrowing money, but only creates debt? Ideally, government should contain spending within the tax revenue collected, allowing debt accumulation ONLY when absolutely necessary, such as WW I, or WW II, and then repay that debt as quickly as possible, returning to living within the means provided by the tax revenues collected.

 

Even the CBO, as I showed previously has provided new increased figures representing the predicted costs of ObamaScare. And Liberal campaign contributors such as the Unions are asking and/or being provided a stay of execution from ObamaScare. Looks like neither side has or is presenting the whole truth.

 

Wasn't cost presented as the primary issue? Wasn't ObamaScare presented as the ACA 'Affordable Care Act'?

Healthcare is a combination of both goods and services, neither of which exist naturally, and therefore are made available at a cost which ObamaScare only adds to.

 

The debt ceiling can and should be used to control government spending. What purpose is there to having a debt ceiling if you just allow it to be raised each time government wishes to spend more money it does not have?
ObamaScare would only insure that the debt ceiling would have to be raised much more and perpetually. Eliminating it would not eliminate the need to raise the debt ceiling, but would greatly reduce the amount it needs to be raised for the 2014 budget period, and I would hope the Congress would look even deeper into Federal spending to try and reduce or even eliminate the need to raise the debt ceiling beginning with the 2015 budget.

 

Pre-existing conditions, ended up being any excuse that the health insurance sector (so more than one health insurance company) so they could either drop you from coverage, exclude you from getting coverage if you were attempting to get it, and arbitrarily charging John Doe, a different rate for health insurance compared to Suzy Q, because they just happened to be the opposite gender. (Women were charged different rates than Men in some cases)

Asthma, having a family member with a learning disability, medical complications from pregnancy and thus pregnancy itself, and your entire past medical history determined the medical coverage offered to you.

What ended up happening is people were priced out of getting coverage and they couldn't buy it on the free market on their own, after say a layoff meaning their benefits went away with their job.

---

If you had medical health coverage, were perfectly healthy and then developed a medical condition your benefits were capped and at a specific level treatments X, Y, and Z would not be covered.

There are so many minute details that no individual should be expected to master the entire book, they don't have 8-12 hours a day to sort through all the legal loops the companies threw at them.


Also keep in mind that if an individual decided to go without any health insurance coverage for a period of time (I think it was like 6 months or so), that length of time of being uninsured itself, is a "pre-existing condition" in which case if you ever changed your mind, you'd be denied health insurance.

That length of time where you were uninsured raises a red flag to the health insurance actuaries that you're gonna cost the company $ and not help them make a profit.

----

When my family had to apply for health insurance on our own, the insurance companies wanted the entire medical history of every member of my family. We ended up turning in 20+ years of paperwork, just to apply for coverage.

Sure we got a plan offered to us but the final bill per month for coverage was like $2600 who can afford that along with a mortgage/rent, utilities, among other living expenses?

Families who don't have a choice shell out that $, usually take out a second mortgage which ends up in foreclosure, and that hurts local community economies and your neighbors home values.

---

Ugh the debt ceiling is a horrible name for it.

If the debt ceiling is not raised, it is not equivalent to say that the nation stopped spending money.

The debt ceiling is equivalent to someone paying off their credit card bill, if they don't pay it then you fall into worse debt exponentially. That's exactly what happens if the debt ceiling isn't raised. We already racked up a bill, raising the debt ceiling buys us time as a nation to repay it.

Everyone is freaking out because of the big numbers, and from my perspective it's causing panic in normal everyday American citizens when it really shouldn't, the debt it's a solvable problem that needs to be solved in steps, not all at once in big chunks because it causes market instability.

I tell you, if the debt ceiling is not raised, you will see the results on Wall St. soon after....and there goes all the progress of any economic recovery we had in the last 6-7 years, people's 401K and IRA's will be affected and it'll be the final blow to the middle class.

The right will say it's Obama's fault, but if the GOP just goes raising the debt ceiling we'll see the recovery continue.

--

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...acare-killing-traditional-employer-insurance/

Here's what forbes has to say about that aspect of Obamacare.

 

Which why I feel the GOP is wasting very precious time with political gridlock, when we have a chance.

Because it helps to stabilize the entire system, you don't want to create a scenario where you have the haves and have-nots because it is detrimental to the Republican-democracy.

Also you can't say that even if you're in the 53% as a producer that you will never need healthcare insurance due a sudden illness, accident, and need to use the insurance.

(Note: 53% is a misnomer, and the 47% are not just takers, part of the 47% are actually people who have worked and are retired elderly, are disabled, or are the super rich who use tax shelters).

RIP, your statistics came directly from misinformation...

Avoid the setup of a French Revolution scenario at all costs, because in a chaotic situation everybody loses. It's civil war at that point because of wealth collapse and that affects the rich most of all because they have the most to lose.

 

I can't figure out how the O-care will cost the government money. Isn't it the classic middlemen--the insurance companies that will be raking in the dough? What's the governments position on this regarding where the $$$ goes?? I have my own insurance + medicare, so I really haven't looked into O-care. I pay $ 175 a month for insurance , not counting medicare.


I, of course, am for single pay or medicare for all.

 

It probably won't affect you negatively scratcho, because you already have a type of coverage.

You said you have medicare, can I assume your 62-65 years of age, to qualify for Medicare or do you qualify because of some disability?

Obamacare expands coverage to those who couldn't afford it before, and is likely to help those were you dependent on COBRA and HIPPA, or those who are barred from getting it on the private market because they already have or had a pre-existing condition.


It encourages the States to set up State Healthcare Exchanges, where all the private sector healthcare insurance corporations compete for the market share they wouldn't have otherwise gotten from that State's population, and so the risk is spread out over a larger risk pool and overall healthcare spending costs can be driven down. Which in turn is supposed to help the affects of Medicare on the federal budget, because it slows down overall healthcare spending costs.


http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-facts.php

 

I find your rationality quite humorous. The cost of insurance is based on the risk involved. What you call an excuse is simply a reason. The proper cost of insurance to cover a loss that has already occurred would be the same as the cost of replacement. If the risk is great or imminent, the cost is high, and the less the risk the less the cost. Women are charged different than men because the risks are different. The cost of a life insurance policy is much different for a 20 year old than for an 80 year old, and reasonably so.

And properly so, it would be idiocy when the costs are known to provide coverage at a price anything less than the costs to be paid out.

That happens when people let others, such as their employer or government become more responsible for their needs.