Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-11-2013, 06:50 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
@Chas, ignoring the facts won't make them go away. BryanS already posted the link to the Washington Post which explains that in addition the text in the ACA, there are tons and tons of additional regulations, and if you go here to page 34,560 it states that if the cost increases by more than $5, it cannot be grandfathered. Since this is a requirement that can't be met, therefore It is illegal to grandfather in insurance plans. The news has also been reporting stories that this was well known in the administration and intentional, and that Obama and his advisers had made certain people wouldn't be able to keep their non-ACA compliant plans.

How long are you going to keep defending this before giving in to the mountain of evidence that every major media outlet, including those most loyal to Obama, have already conceded?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
05-11-2013, 07:11 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
(05-11-2013 06:50 PM)frankksj Wrote:  @Chas, ignoring the facts won't make them go away. BryanS already posted the link to the Washington Post which explains that in addition the text in the ACA, there are tons and tons of additional regulations, and if you go here to page 34,560 it states that if the cost increases by more than $5, it cannot be grandfathered. Since this is a requirement that can't be met, therefore It is illegal to grandfather in insurance plans. The news has also been reporting stories that this was well known in the administration and intentional, and that Obama and his advisers had made certain people wouldn't be able to keep their non-ACA compliant plans.

How long are you going to keep defending this before giving in to the mountain of evidence that every major media outlet, including those most loyal to Obama, have already conceded?

You are so full of shit.
"...if the co-payment increases by more than $5, plus medical cost of inflation, then the plan can no longer be grandfathered."

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
05-11-2013, 07:18 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
(05-11-2013 07:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(05-11-2013 06:50 PM)frankksj Wrote:  @Chas, ignoring the facts won't make them go away. BryanS already posted the link to the Washington Post which explains that in addition the text in the ACA, there are tons and tons of additional regulations, and if you go here to page 34,560 it states that if the cost increases by more than $5, it cannot be grandfathered. Since this is a requirement that can't be met, therefore It is illegal to grandfather in insurance plans. The news has also been reporting stories that this was well known in the administration and intentional, and that Obama and his advisers had made certain people wouldn't be able to keep their non-ACA compliant plans.

How long are you going to keep defending this before giving in to the mountain of evidence that every major media outlet, including those most loyal to Obama, have already conceded?

You are so full of shit.
"...if the co-payment increases by more than $5, plus medical cost of inflation, then the plan can no longer be grandfathered."

You call it full of shit, I call it disingenuous. Same fucking thing.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
05-11-2013, 07:45 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
(05-11-2013 07:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are so full of shit.
"...if the co-payment increases by more than $5, plus medical cost of inflation, then the plan can no longer be grandfathered."

(05-11-2013 07:18 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You call it full of shit, I call it disingenuous. Same fucking thing.

You see at the bottom of that link how the Washington Post rates the claim you two are making that Obamacare won't take away people's plans? Four Pinocchios. The biggest lie they can rate. FactCheck same thing. Politifact ditto. Same at NBC CBS LATimes

It speaks mountains to your objectivity that you cannot accept a fact that is so widely accepted, and that is not disputed by even the mainstream left media. It's the equivalent of flat-earthers imo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
05-11-2013, 08:07 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
(05-11-2013 07:45 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(05-11-2013 07:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are so full of shit.
"...if the co-payment increases by more than $5, plus medical cost of inflation, then the plan can no longer be grandfathered."

(05-11-2013 07:18 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You call it full of shit, I call it disingenuous. Same fucking thing.

You see at the bottom of that link how the Washington Post rates the claim you two are making that Obamacare won't take away people's plans? Four Pinocchios. The biggest lie they can rate. FactCheck same thing. Politifact ditto. Same at NBC CBS LATimes

It speaks mountains to your objectivity that you cannot accept a fact that is so widely accepted, and that is not disputed by even the mainstream left media. It's the equivalent of flat-earthers imo.

It speaks mountains about your ideological blind spot that you can't read or quote the actual fucking law accurately.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-11-2013, 08:27 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
(05-11-2013 08:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  It speaks mountains about your ideological blind spot that you can't read or quote the actual fucking law accurately.

Washington Post, FactCheck, Politifact, NBC, CBS, LATimes all side with my interpretation of the law. And the fact is that I had a plan which I liked and was a good value, and which Blue Cross says I am not allowed to keep under the ACA. Considering how impossible it is to get you admit that you're wrong about this fairly minor detail, even when ALL the media confirms it, shows how impossible it would be to get you to admit you're wrong about a big issue that was core to your faith.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
05-11-2013, 08:28 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
(05-11-2013 08:27 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(05-11-2013 08:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  It speaks mountains about your ideological blind spot that you can't read or quote the actual fucking law accurately.

Washington Post, FactCheck, Politifact, NBC, CBS, LATimes all side with my interpretation of the law. And the fact is that I had a plan which I liked and was a good value, and which Blue Cross says I am not allowed to keep under the ACA. Considering how impossible it is to get you admit that you're wrong about this fairly minor detail, even when ALL the media confirms it, shows how impossible it would be to get you to admit you're wrong about a big issue that was core to your faith.

None of your interpretations mean shit.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-11-2013, 09:29 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
(05-11-2013 08:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(05-11-2013 07:45 PM)frankksj Wrote:  You see at the bottom of that link how the Washington Post rates the claim you two are making that Obamacare won't take away people's plans? Four Pinocchios. The biggest lie they can rate. FactCheck same thing. Politifact ditto. Same at NBC CBS LATimes

It speaks mountains to your objectivity that you cannot accept a fact that is so widely accepted, and that is not disputed by even the mainstream left media. It's the equivalent of flat-earthers imo.

It speaks mountains about your ideological blind spot that you can't read or quote the actual fucking law accurately.

The law gives the HHS Secretary wide berth and discretion in implementing the law. So much of the law is left to be promulgated by regulations, that failing to read the regulations is essentially ignoring the law's meaning and effect. The regulations are incorporated as part of the law, and this law relies very heavily on regulations by the HHS Secretary.

It is understandable that the Kos story writer didn't read the 34,560th page of the federal register of rules and regulations to find the regulations that define the grandfathering requirements. Other reporters from non-ideological news sources did do the legwork of reporting on the grandfathering requirements. The Kos story is light on specific details, quoting nothing specific about the law, while the fact checking sites are very heavy on details, including links to the original regulations that spell out that $5 claim. The Kos story uses as its source the white house page that makes the same claims the president has made (who would have thought that page would be consistent with the president's claims?) and a more neutral source that the Kos story cherry picks a quote from. That story also said "The cancellation notices are a feature of the Affordable Care Act, not a bug. The idea was to make insurance coverage more robust -- and that means cancelling policies that offer less thorough coverage.". I wonder why the Kos story did not make reference to this conclusion from their reference.

Meanwhile, all the independent fact checking sites all come to the same conclusion that Obama was dishonest in describing the ability to keep ones plan. If frankksj's sources were the Heritage Foundation or brietbart.com, you'd have something to stand on claiming he was relying on biased opinion to come to his conclusions about the grandfathering requirements. When I posted about the grandfathering issue, I posted a source that was not conservative biased just for the reason that I am arguing from a conservative point of view. The Washington Post fact checker story in fact takes on GOP criticisms of the issue as well, so at least on my part I was attempting to give a fair reference that illustrated my point about restrictive grandfathering requirements.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BryanS's post
05-11-2013, 10:06 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
(05-11-2013 09:29 PM)BryanS Wrote:  
(05-11-2013 08:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  It speaks mountains about your ideological blind spot that you can't read or quote the actual fucking law accurately.

The law gives the HHS Secretary wide berth and discretion in implementing the law. So much of the law is left to be promulgated by regulations, that failing to read the regulations is essentially ignoring the law's meaning and effect. The regulations are incorporated as part of the law, and this law relies very heavily on regulations by the HHS Secretary.

It is understandable that the Kos story writer didn't read the 34,560th page of the federal register of rules and regulations to find the regulations that define the grandfathering requirements. Other reporters from non-ideological news sources did do the legwork of reporting on the grandfathering requirements. The Kos story is light on specific details, quoting nothing specific about the law, while the fact checking sites are very heavy on details, including links to the original regulations that spell out that $5 claim. The Kos story uses as its source the white house page that makes the same claims the president has made (who would have thought that page would be consistent with the president's claims?) and a more neutral source that the Kos story cherry picks a quote from. That story also said "The cancellation notices are a feature of the Affordable Care Act, not a bug. The idea was to make insurance coverage more robust -- and that means cancelling policies that offer less thorough coverage.". I wonder why the Kos story did not make reference to this conclusion from their reference.

Meanwhile, all the independent fact checking sites all come to the same conclusion that Obama was dishonest in describing the ability to keep ones plan. If frankksj's sources were the Heritage Foundation or brietbart.com, you'd have something to stand on claiming he was relying on biased opinion to come to his conclusions about the grandfathering requirements. When I posted about the grandfathering issue, I posted a source that was not conservative biased just for the reason that I am arguing from a conservative point of view. The Washington Post fact checker story in fact takes on GOP criticisms of the issue as well, so at least on my part I was attempting to give a fair reference that illustrated my point about restrictive grandfathering requirements.

Apparently, you didn't read it either.
"...if the co-payment increases by more than $5, plus medical cost of inflation, then the plan can no longer be grandfathered."

It's the co-payment, not the cost. Read the actual fucking text.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
05-11-2013, 10:13 PM
RE: Millions LOSE insurance because of Obamacare. Around 1,000 get insurance
(05-11-2013 10:06 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(05-11-2013 09:29 PM)BryanS Wrote:  The law gives the HHS Secretary wide berth and discretion in implementing the law. So much of the law is left to be promulgated by regulations, that failing to read the regulations is essentially ignoring the law's meaning and effect. The regulations are incorporated as part of the law, and this law relies very heavily on regulations by the HHS Secretary.

It is understandable that the Kos story writer didn't read the 34,560th page of the federal register of rules and regulations to find the regulations that define the grandfathering requirements. Other reporters from non-ideological news sources did do the legwork of reporting on the grandfathering requirements. The Kos story is light on specific details, quoting nothing specific about the law, while the fact checking sites are very heavy on details, including links to the original regulations that spell out that $5 claim. The Kos story uses as its source the white house page that makes the same claims the president has made (who would have thought that page would be consistent with the president's claims?) and a more neutral source that the Kos story cherry picks a quote from. That story also said "The cancellation notices are a feature of the Affordable Care Act, not a bug. The idea was to make insurance coverage more robust -- and that means cancelling policies that offer less thorough coverage.". I wonder why the Kos story did not make reference to this conclusion from their reference.

Meanwhile, all the independent fact checking sites all come to the same conclusion that Obama was dishonest in describing the ability to keep ones plan. If frankksj's sources were the Heritage Foundation or brietbart.com, you'd have something to stand on claiming he was relying on biased opinion to come to his conclusions about the grandfathering requirements. When I posted about the grandfathering issue, I posted a source that was not conservative biased just for the reason that I am arguing from a conservative point of view. The Washington Post fact checker story in fact takes on GOP criticisms of the issue as well, so at least on my part I was attempting to give a fair reference that illustrated my point about restrictive grandfathering requirements.

Apparently, you didn't read it either.
"...if the co-payment increases by more than $5, plus medical cost of inflation, then the plan can no longer be grandfathered."

It's the co-payment, not the cost. Read the actual fucking text.

I did read the text, and yes it says that. What's the problem here? And keep in mind that is only one such requirement. The Washington Post story describes a number of reasons that plans would become disqualified for grandfathering and demonstrated that the Obama admin projected that most plans would not be grandfathered and that is by design.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BryanS's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: