|
Obamacare is only 'exploding' in red states
|
|
Topic Started: Jul 15 2017, 07:35 PM (543 Views)
|
|
CautionaryTales
|
Jul 15 2017, 07:35 PM
Post #1
|
|
- Posts:
- 17,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
When he talks about his efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, President Trump almost always asserts that Obamacare is “exploding.” Republican members of Congress make similar claims, insisting that Obamacare is unsustainable—and that they therefore have no choice but to “repeal and replace” it. There is some basis for this argument. More than 1,300 counties only have one insurer in their exchanges, meaning there is no competition. But there is a nuance that Republicans willfully ignore: This is a problem of their own creation that is largely confined to red states.
Where Republican governors have sought to sabotage the program, they have largely succeeded. Where Democratic governors have tried to make the ACA work, they too have largely succeeded.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-baker-obamacare-red-state-20170713-story.html
|
Have you paid your internet taxes?
|
| |
|
CautionaryTales
|
Jul 15 2017, 07:37 PM
Post #2
|
|
- Posts:
- 17,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
Want to know why the ACA is struggling in some places? Because the Republicans that could sabotage it did sabotage it.
Now they can't fix it....
|
Have you paid your internet taxes?
|
| |
|
clone
|
Jul 15 2017, 07:41 PM
Post #3
|
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
- Posts:
- 26,359
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #155
- Joined:
- Apr 4, 2016
|
Fake news : there have been zero explosions related to Obamacare in red states. None....
This is UUU all the way......
Edited by clone, Jul 15 2017, 07:41 PM.
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
|
| |
|
Robert Stout
|
Jul 16 2017, 12:15 AM
Post #4
|
|
- Posts:
- 27,196
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #112
- Joined:
- Mar 22, 2016
|
Rural areas face problems in healthcare that is due to demographics, not politics....The biggest nightmare is Alaska...........
|
|
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
|
| |
|
ringotuna
|
Jul 16 2017, 05:28 AM
Post #5
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,492
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
http://www.dailywire.com/news/15346/chart-shows-how-many-states-lost-obamacare-aaron-bandler

http://www.dailywire.com/news/13913/7-myths-about-obamacare-debunked-aaron-bandler
Myth: Red states that have been able to reject various aspects of Obamacare are responsible for higher premium increases. Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik made this claim in an October op-ed, arguing that "states that fully embraced Obamacare will see increases of 18.2%. Those that fully resist will see increases of 29.8%." By "fully resist" Hiltzik is referring to states that didn't expand Medicaid and form their own exchanges as well as allowing health care plans that don't meet Obamacare's standards to be grandfathered in. This is a classic example of a post hoc fallacy. While it might be easy to think that states that have resisted Obamacare are experiencing a rise in premiums because of their unwillingness to fully implement the law, the higher premiums in such states is actually due to a matter of basic math. "ObamaCare imposes a one-size-fits-all regulatory scheme upon the insurance market," health care expert Avik Roy told Fox News in 2013. "So if you're in a lightly regulated state today, all of a sudden it's going from a lightly regulated system to a heavily regulated system, and that drives up a lot of the costs." In other words, it's only naturally for states that previously had relatively light regulations in the heath care sector to have higher percentage increases in premiums when they're suddenly bombarded with Obamacare's mass regulations.
|
|
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
|
| |
|
CautionaryTales
|
Jul 16 2017, 06:27 AM
Post #6
|
|
- Posts:
- 17,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
Republican run states fought against (and still fight against) the ACA. "It's only natural" that all of that fight will cause the ACA to be driven to failure in those states, while states that try to make it work have been able to make it work.
Driving the legislation to failure is the tactic that has been used to make the case for repeal and replace. In the states that they have succeeded in damaging the ACA we see a greater level of failure than we do in the states that tried to make it work.
This isn't some hard to understand phenomenon. It is exactly how everything works that needs attermtion or maintenance.
|
Have you paid your internet taxes?
|
| |
|
ringotuna
|
Jul 16 2017, 06:36 AM
Post #7
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,492
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
It's very easy to dumb it down to the most self-gratifying explanation, but the reality of it is that it's more complicated than "Pubs Ruined Obamacare." Insurers in states with fewer regulations are obviously going to retreat when suddenly burdened with more regulations. You seem insistent that the cause here is Republican sabotage. Is it out of the question that there may be more to it than that?
|
|
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
|
| |
|
ringotuna
|
Jul 16 2017, 06:49 AM
Post #8
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,492
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
Ya recon this might have something to do with it as well?
The ACA, however, also had issues before it fell into Trump's cross hairs. For one thing, the mix of people signing up for insurance on the ACA's individual insurance exchanges was leading to large losses for insurance companies, with more older and sicker patients and fewer younger and healthier enrollees than expected. These insurers, facing continued losses, began to pull their plans from the exchanges.
http://www.businessinsider.com/obamacare-2017-insurer-exits-from-states-map-2017-4
|
|
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
|
| |
|
CautionaryTales
|
Jul 16 2017, 08:13 AM
Post #9
|
|
- Posts:
- 17,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
I reckon if you want to make something fail you certainly can make it fail. There is no shortage of people that want the ACA to fail. They are generally "R's"
There are also an apparent higher number of people that want it to succeed. They generally are Democrats.
|
Have you paid your internet taxes?
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
Jul 16 2017, 11:43 AM
Post #10
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,739
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 06:36 AM
It's very easy to dumb it down to the most self-gratifying explanation, but the reality of it is that it's more complicated than "Pubs Ruined Obamacare." Insurers in states with fewer regulations are obviously going to retreat when suddenly burdened with more regulations. You seem insistent that the cause here is Republican sabotage. Is it out of the question that there may be more to it than that?
Nobody is going to be incentivized to sell X at a loss.
This is the left trying to understand business and economics - and failing at it.
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
Jul 16 2017, 11:45 AM
Post #11
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,739
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 16 2017, 08:13 AM
I reckon if you want to make something fail you certainly can make it fail. There is no shortage of people that want the ACA to fail. They are generally "R's"
There are also an apparent higher number of people that want it to succeed. They generally are Democrats. The democrats want to increase government dependency as high as they can - in order to guarantee their voter base.
Its a sickening strategy to be perfectly honest.
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
|
ringotuna
|
Jul 16 2017, 12:28 PM
Post #12
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,492
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
Apparently it's out of the question that anything other than " durr um Pubs r baud" might be an influencing factor for insurers bailing on exchanges.
|
|
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
|
| |
|
CautionaryTales
|
Jul 16 2017, 01:14 PM
Post #13
|
|
- Posts:
- 17,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 12:28 PM
Apparently it's out of the question that anything other than " durr um Pubs r baud" might be an influencing factor for insurers bailing on exchanges. It has gotten to that level. Yes. I see examples of it every day right here on this site. It isn't all Republicans, just A LOT of Republicans that have wilted away to become nothing more than apologists for their leader, Trump. Some of them used to be better than that. Some still are better than that.
Some didn't make the cut.
|
Have you paid your internet taxes?
|
| |
|
ringotuna
|
Jul 16 2017, 03:33 PM
Post #14
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,492
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 16 2017, 01:14 PM
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 12:28 PM
Apparently it's out of the question that anything other than " durr um Pubs r baud" might be an influencing factor for insurers bailing on exchanges.
It has gotten to that level. Yes. I see examples of it every day right here on this site.It isn't all Republicans, just A LOT of Republicans that have wilted away to become nothing more than apologists for their leader, Trump.Some of them used to be better than that.Some still are better than that. Some didn't make the cut.
LOL, Evasive as always. Instead of addressing the issues raised, you go whining about p.com posters. I've listed a number of other reasons why Obamacare is struggling. Do you want to discuss those or do you want to yap about posters here who you feel are not worthy? It's almost as if you're trying to run your own thread off the rails when alternatives to dumbed down"pubs r bad" arises.
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 06:49 AM
Ya recon this might have something to do with it as well?The ACA, however, also had issues before it fell into Trump's cross hairs. For one thing, the mix of people signing up for insurance on the ACA's individual insurance exchanges was leading to large losses for insurance companies, with more older and sicker patients and fewer younger and healthier enrollees than expected. These insurers, facing continued losses, began to pull their plans from the exchanges. http://www.businessinsider.com/obamacare-2017-insurer-exits-from-states-map-2017-4
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 06:36 AM
It's very easy to dumb it down to the most self-gratifying explanation, but the reality of it is that it's more complicated than "Pubs Ruined Obamacare." Insurers in states with fewer regulations are obviously going to retreat when suddenly burdened with more regulations. You seem insistent that the cause here is Republican sabotage. Is it out of the question that there may be more to it than that?
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 05:28 AM
http://www.dailywire.com/news/15346/chart-shows-how-many-states-lost-obamacare-aaron-bandler http://www.dailywire.com/news/13913/7-myths-about-obamacare-debunked-aaron-bandlerMyth: Red states that have been able to reject various aspects of Obamacare are responsible for higher premium increases. Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik made this claim in an October op-ed, arguing that "states that fully embraced Obamacare will see increases of 18.2%. Those that fully resist will see increases of 29.8%." By "fully resist" Hiltzik is referring to states that didn't expand Medicaid and form their own exchanges as well as allowing health care plans that don't meet Obamacare's standards to be grandfathered in. This is a classic example of a post hoc fallacy. While it might be easy to think that states that have resisted Obamacare are experiencing a rise in premiums because of their unwillingness to fully implement the law, the higher premiums in such states is actually due to a matter of basic math. "ObamaCare imposes a one-size-fits-all regulatory scheme upon the insurance market," health care expert Avik Roy told Fox News in 2013. "So if you're in a lightly regulated state today, all of a sudden it's going from a lightly regulated system to a heavily regulated system, and that drives up a lot of the costs."
In other words, it's only naturally for states that previously had relatively light regulations in the heath care sector to have higher percentage increases in premiums when they're suddenly bombarded with Obamacare's mass regulations.
|
|
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
|
| |
|
CautionaryTales
|
Jul 16 2017, 03:51 PM
Post #15
|
|
- Posts:
- 17,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 03:33 PM
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 16 2017, 01:14 PM
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 12:28 PM
Apparently it's out of the question that anything other than " durr um Pubs r baud" might be an influencing factor for insurers bailing on exchanges.
It has gotten to that level. Yes. I see examples of it every day right here on this site.It isn't all Republicans, just A LOT of Republicans that have wilted away to become nothing more than apologists for their leader, Trump.Some of them used to be better than that.Some still are better than that. Some didn't make the cut.
LOL, Evasive as always. Instead of addressing the issues raised, you go whining about p.com posters. I've listed a number of other reasons why Obamacare is struggling. Do you want to discuss those or do you want to yap about posters here who you feel are not worthy? It's almost as if you're trying to run your own thread off the rails when alternatives to dumbed down"pubs r bad" arises. - ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 06:49 AM
Ya recon this might have something to do with it as well?The ACA, however, also had issues before it fell into Trump's cross hairs. For one thing, the mix of people signing up for insurance on the ACA's individual insurance exchanges was leading to large losses for insurance companies, with more older and sicker patients and fewer younger and healthier enrollees than expected. These insurers, facing continued losses, began to pull their plans from the exchanges. http://www.businessinsider.com/obamacare-2017-insurer-exits-from-states-map-2017-4
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 06:36 AM
It's very easy to dumb it down to the most self-gratifying explanation, but the reality of it is that it's more complicated than "Pubs Ruined Obamacare." Insurers in states with fewer regulations are obviously going to retreat when suddenly burdened with more regulations. You seem insistent that the cause here is Republican sabotage. Is it out of the question that there may be more to it than that?
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 05:28 AM
http://www.dailywire.com/news/15346/chart-shows-how-many-states-lost-obamacare-aaron-bandler http://www.dailywire.com/news/13913/7-myths-about-obamacare-debunked-aaron-bandlerMyth: Red states that have been able to reject various aspects of Obamacare are responsible for higher premium increases. Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik made this claim in an October op-ed, arguing that "states that fully embraced Obamacare will see increases of 18.2%. Those that fully resist will see increases of 29.8%." By "fully resist" Hiltzik is referring to states that didn't expand Medicaid and form their own exchanges as well as allowing health care plans that don't meet Obamacare's standards to be grandfathered in. This is a classic example of a post hoc fallacy. While it might be easy to think that states that have resisted Obamacare are experiencing a rise in premiums because of their unwillingness to fully implement the law, the higher premiums in such states is actually due to a matter of basic math. "ObamaCare imposes a one-size-fits-all regulatory scheme upon the insurance market," health care expert Avik Roy told Fox News in 2013. "So if you're in a lightly regulated state today, all of a sudden it's going from a lightly regulated system to a heavily regulated system, and that drives up a lot of the costs."
In other words, it's only naturally for states that previously had relatively light regulations in the heath care sector to have higher percentage increases in premiums when they're suddenly bombarded with Obamacare's mass regulations.
No, my experience is that I don't want to discuss much of anything with you. Take it anyway you want but you've sorta slipped into trollville and I'm just not interested in letting your u drag me there.
Thanks for the offers though.
Durrrr...
|
Have you paid your internet taxes?
|
| |
|
ringotuna
|
Jul 16 2017, 03:54 PM
Post #16
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,492
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 16 2017, 03:51 PM
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 03:33 PM
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 16 2017, 01:14 PM
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 12:28 PM
Apparently it's out of the question that anything other than " durr um Pubs r baud" might be an influencing factor for insurers bailing on exchanges.
It has gotten to that level. Yes. I see examples of it every day right here on this site.It isn't all Republicans, just A LOT of Republicans that have wilted away to become nothing more than apologists for their leader, Trump.Some of them used to be better than that.Some still are better than that. Some didn't make the cut.
LOL, Evasive as always. Instead of addressing the issues raised, you go whining about p.com posters. I've listed a number of other reasons why Obamacare is struggling. Do you want to discuss those or do you want to yap about posters here who you feel are not worthy? It's almost as if you're trying to run your own thread off the rails when alternatives to dumbed down"pubs r bad" arises. - ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 06:49 AM
Ya recon this might have something to do with it as well?The ACA, however, also had issues before it fell into Trump's cross hairs. For one thing, the mix of people signing up for insurance on the ACA's individual insurance exchanges was leading to large losses for insurance companies, with more older and sicker patients and fewer younger and healthier enrollees than expected. These insurers, facing continued losses, began to pull their plans from the exchanges. http://www.businessinsider.com/obamacare-2017-insurer-exits-from-states-map-2017-4
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 06:36 AM
It's very easy to dumb it down to the most self-gratifying explanation, but the reality of it is that it's more complicated than "Pubs Ruined Obamacare." Insurers in states with fewer regulations are obviously going to retreat when suddenly burdened with more regulations. You seem insistent that the cause here is Republican sabotage. Is it out of the question that there may be more to it than that?
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 05:28 AM
http://www.dailywire.com/news/15346/chart-shows-how-many-states-lost-obamacare-aaron-bandler http://www.dailywire.com/news/13913/7-myths-about-obamacare-debunked-aaron-bandlerMyth: Red states that have been able to reject various aspects of Obamacare are responsible for higher premium increases. Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik made this claim in an October op-ed, arguing that "states that fully embraced Obamacare will see increases of 18.2%. Those that fully resist will see increases of 29.8%." By "fully resist" Hiltzik is referring to states that didn't expand Medicaid and form their own exchanges as well as allowing health care plans that don't meet Obamacare's standards to be grandfathered in. This is a classic example of a post hoc fallacy. While it might be easy to think that states that have resisted Obamacare are experiencing a rise in premiums because of their unwillingness to fully implement the law, the higher premiums in such states is actually due to a matter of basic math. "ObamaCare imposes a one-size-fits-all regulatory scheme upon the insurance market," health care expert Avik Roy told Fox News in 2013. "So if you're in a lightly regulated state today, all of a sudden it's going from a lightly regulated system to a heavily regulated system, and that drives up a lot of the costs."
In other words, it's only naturally for states that previously had relatively light regulations in the heath care sector to have higher percentage increases in premiums when they're suddenly bombarded with Obamacare's mass regulations.
No, my experience is that I don't want to discuss much of anything with you. Take it anyway you want but you've sorta slipped into trollville and I'm just not interested in letting your u drag me there. Thanks for the offers though. Durrrr... Hey bro...Whatever excuse you need to run your own thread off it's rails is fine with me.
|
|
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
|
| |
|
CautionaryTales
|
Jul 16 2017, 04:01 PM
Post #17
|
|
- Posts:
- 17,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 15 2017, 07:35 PM
When he talks about his efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, President Trump almost always asserts that Obamacare is “exploding.” Republican members of Congress make similar claims, insisting that Obamacare is unsustainable—and that they therefore have no choice but to “repeal and replace” it. There is some basis for this argument. More than 1,300 counties only have one insurer in their exchanges, meaning there is no competition. But there is a nuance that Republicans willfully ignore: This is a problem of their own creation that is largely confined to red states. Where Republican governors have sought to sabotage the program, they have largely succeeded. Where Democratic governors have tried to make the ACA work, they too have largely succeeded.http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-baker-obamacare-red-state-20170713-story.html Bump, back to the topic.
|
Have you paid your internet taxes?
|
| |
|
clone
|
Jul 16 2017, 04:04 PM
Post #18
|
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
- Posts:
- 26,359
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #155
- Joined:
- Apr 4, 2016
|
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 16 2017, 04:01 PM
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 15 2017, 07:35 PM
When he talks about his efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, President Trump almost always asserts that Obamacare is “exploding.” Republican members of Congress make similar claims, insisting that Obamacare is unsustainable—and that they therefore have no choice but to “repeal and replace” it. There is some basis for this argument. More than 1,300 counties only have one insurer in their exchanges, meaning there is no competition. But there is a nuance that Republicans willfully ignore: This is a problem of their own creation that is largely confined to red states. Where Republican governors have sought to sabotage the program, they have largely succeeded. Where Democratic governors have tried to make the ACA work, they too have largely succeeded.http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-baker-obamacare-red-state-20170713-story.html
Bump, back to the topic. The topic is UUU....there have been zero explosions....
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
|
| |
|
ringotuna
|
Jul 16 2017, 04:06 PM
Post #19
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,492
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 16 2017, 04:01 PM
- CautionaryTales
- Jul 15 2017, 07:35 PM
When he talks about his efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, President Trump almost always asserts that Obamacare is “exploding.” Republican members of Congress make similar claims, insisting that Obamacare is unsustainable—and that they therefore have no choice but to “repeal and replace” it. There is some basis for this argument. More than 1,300 counties only have one insurer in their exchanges, meaning there is no competition. But there is a nuance that Republicans willfully ignore: This is a problem of their own creation that is largely confined to red states. Where Republican governors have sought to sabotage the program, they have largely succeeded. Where Democratic governors have tried to make the ACA work, they too have largely succeeded.http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-baker-obamacare-red-state-20170713-story.html
Bump, back to the topic. Good, if your hissy fit is over, can we now consider some of the other factors which have influenced how well Obama care has performed?
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 06:49 AM
Ya recon this might have something to do with it as well?The ACA, however, also had issues before it fell into Trump's cross hairs. For one thing, the mix of people signing up for insurance on the ACA's individual insurance exchanges was leading to large losses for insurance companies, with more older and sicker patients and fewer younger and healthier enrollees than expected. These insurers, facing continued losses, began to pull their plans from the exchanges. http://www.businessinsider.com/obamacare-2017-insurer-exits-from-states-map-2017-4
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 06:36 AM
It's very easy to dumb it down to the most self-gratifying explanation, but the reality of it is that it's more complicated than "Pubs Ruined Obamacare." Insurers in states with fewer regulations are obviously going to retreat when suddenly burdened with more regulations. You seem insistent that the cause here is Republican sabotage. Is it out of the question that there may be more to it than that?
- ringotuna
- Jul 16 2017, 05:28 AM
http://www.dailywire.com/news/15346/chart-shows-how-many-states-lost-obamacare-aaron-bandler http://www.dailywire.com/news/13913/7-myths-about-obamacare-debunked-aaron-bandlerMyth: Red states that have been able to reject various aspects of Obamacare are responsible for higher premium increases. Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik made this claim in an October op-ed, arguing that "states that fully embraced Obamacare will see increases of 18.2%. Those that fully resist will see increases of 29.8%." By "fully resist" Hiltzik is referring to states that didn't expand Medicaid and form their own exchanges as well as allowing health care plans that don't meet Obamacare's standards to be grandfathered in. This is a classic example of a post hoc fallacy. While it might be easy to think that states that have resisted Obamacare are experiencing a rise in premiums because of their unwillingness to fully implement the law, the higher premiums in such states is actually due to a matter of basic math. "ObamaCare imposes a one-size-fits-all regulatory scheme upon the insurance market," health care expert Avik Roy told Fox News in 2013. "So if you're in a lightly regulated state today, all of a sudden it's going from a lightly regulated system to a heavily regulated system, and that drives up a lot of the costs."
In other words, it's only naturally for states that previously had relatively light regulations in the heath care sector to have higher percentage increases in premiums when they're suddenly bombarded with Obamacare's mass regulations.
|
|
Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated.
|
| |
|
CautionaryTales
|
Jul 16 2017, 04:25 PM
Post #20
|
|
- Posts:
- 17,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #5
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
The factors are many and I'll give you that. The bottom line is that if you want a program to fail and if you put your efforts into making it fail, there is a good chance it will fail in time. The Republicans are on record that they want the ACA to fail and they have taken steps in the states they control to fulfill their intentions.
In the states where efforts are being made to make the ACA successful ( Democratic states) there is a much better chance it will work because efforts are being made to make it work.
It isn't a hard concept to understand. It's actually pretty simple to understand.
Don't service your truck for a couple of years. Don't change the oil, don't take it in for scheduled services. Don't make repairs when a problem becomes evident...see what happens.
Now, watch as your neighbor follows the maintenance schedule on his truck, same truck model as yours. He changes the oil, keeps the service schedule and shines that sucker up on his weekends off.
In three years he has a truck that works for him, your is a pile of crap and you are visiting dealers to look for a new truck.
That's the point of the op. It's a valid point.
|
Have you paid your internet taxes?
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|