End Times and Current Events
December 04, 2022, 07:48:38 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

The true cost of Obamacare

Shoutbox
August 08, 2018, 02:38:10 am suzytr says: Hello, any good churches in the Sacto, CA area, also looking in Reno NV, thanks in advance and God Bless you Smiley
January 29, 2018, 01:21:57 am Christian40 says: It will be interesting to see what happens this year Israel being 70 years as a modern nation may 14 2018
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
September 14, 2017, 04:31:26 am Christian40 says: i have thought that i'm reaping from past sins then my life has been impacted in ways from having non believers in my ancestry.
September 11, 2017, 06:59:33 am Psalm 51:17 says: The law of reaping and sowing. It's amazing how God's mercy and longsuffering has hovered over America so long. (ie, the infrastructure is very bad here b/c for many years, they were grossly underspent on. 1st Tim 6:10, the god of materialism has its roots firmly in the West) And remember once upon a time ago when shacking up b/w straight couples drew shock awe?

Exodus 20:5  Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
View Shout History
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The true cost of Obamacare  (Read 22616 times)
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #270 on: February 18, 2014, 09:54:47 pm »

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/16/obamacare-patients-with-serious-pre-existing-diseases-could-face-expensive-drug/?intcmp=latestnews
2/16/14
ObamaCare patients with serious pre-existing diseases could face expensive drug costs

People with serious pre-existing diseases, precisely those the president aimed to help with ObamaCare, could find themselves paying for expensive drug treatments with no help from the health care exchanges.

Those with expensive diseases such as lupus or multiple sclerosis face something called a "closed drug formulary."

Dr. Scott Gottlieb of the American Enterprise Institute explains,"if the medicine that you need isn't on that list, it's not covered at all. You have to pay completely out of pocket to get that medicine, and the money you spend doesn't count against your deductible, and it doesn't count against your out of pocket limits, so you're basically on your own."

The plan had claimed it would rescue those with serious pre-existing conditions.

"So it could be that a MS patient could be expected to pay $62,000 just for one medication," says Dr. Daniel Kantor, who treats MS patients and others with neurological conditions near Jacksonville, Florida. "That’s a possiblity under the new ObamaCare going on right now."

In fact, one conservative group, Americans for Prosperity, is running an ad on exactly this subject, featuring a woman with lupus, an auto-immune disease.

She starts by saying, "I voted for Barack Obama for president. I thought ObamaCare was going to be a good thing."

But Emilie Lamb says she later got a letter saying her insurance was canceled because of ObamaCare, pushing her premiums from $52 to $373 a month.

"I'm having to work a second job, to pay for ObamaCare,” she adds. “For somebody with lupus, that's not an easy thing. If I can't afford to continue to pay for ObamaCare, I don't get my medicine. I don't get to see my doctors."

One of the problems is that drugs for some diseases such as MS do not have generic versions. So without cheaper alternatives and no help from ObamaCare, patients could face huge personal out-of-pocket bills, forcing some to skimp on their medications.

Kantor worries that "this may drive more patients" to not buy their medicines, "which we know is dangerous," he says. "We know MS can be a bad disease when you’re not treating it. When you’re treating it, for most people they handle it pretty well, but we know when you don’t treat (it), it’s the kind of disease where people end up in wheel chairs potentially."

In the commercial market, of course, drugs not on a preferred list would also be more expensive, but with a major difference, according to Gottlieb.

"You go outside that list, you have to pay out of pocket for it, but you do get some co-insurance, meaning the plans will pay some of the cost of that."

Some say ObamaCare hoped to do better on that problem but ran out of time. Matthew Eyles of Avalare Health, a consulting firm, says although officials wanted "to be able to make sure that all the systems were operational in 2014, they realized that they needed to give an extra year to get those systems changes in place."

Officials intend to try again next year.

Additional benefits cost more, though, meaning premiums would have to rise, or the networks of providers would shrink even further.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #271 on: February 19, 2014, 05:02:31 am »

The greed-for-money games that are being played over prescription drugs turns my stomach. I hate how people can act this way towards fellow human beings.

Seriously, how can a person tell a sick person that they cannot get medical care due to money?

The medicine, facilities, everything is in place, but YOU cannot access it because YOU have no money. "Have a nice day!"

What kind of black-hearted monster does it take to go to a job every day that involves doing that to people, day in and day out?

And there are still people that don't believe evil exists?  Roll Eyes
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21754



View Profile
« Reply #272 on: February 19, 2014, 07:59:38 am »

Man's Scheduled Back Surgery Denied After Switching To Obamacare...

'It's Like We're Second-Class Citizens'...


http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2014/02/18/mans-back-surgery-on-hold-as-doctors-deny-covered-california-coverage/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21754



View Profile
« Reply #273 on: February 19, 2014, 10:37:09 am »

Fourth Georgia hospital closes due to Obamacare payment cuts

The fourth Georgia hospital in two years is closing its doors due to severe financial difficulties caused by Obamacare’s payment cuts for emergency services.

The Lower Oconee Community Hospital is, for now, a critical access hospital in southeastern Georgia that holds 25 beds. The hospital is suffering from serious cash-flow problems, largely due to the area’s 23 percent uninsured population, and hopes to reopen as “some kind of urgent care center,” CEO Karen O’Neal said.

Many hospitals in the 25 states that rejected the Medicaid expansion are facing similar financial problems. Liberal administration ally Think Progress has already faulted Georgia for not expanding Medicaid as Obamacare envisioned.

But the reality is more complicated. The federal government has historically made payments to hospitals to cover the cost of uninsured patients seeking free medical care in emergency rooms, as federal law mandates that hospitals must care for all patients regardless of their ability to pay.

Because the Affordable Care Act’s authors believed they’d forced all states to implement the Medicaid expansion, Obamacare vastly cut hospital payments, the Associated Press reports.

The Supreme Court ruled that states could reject the Medicaid expansion in 2012, as part of the decision that upheld Obamacare generally. Since that decision, the Obama administration has so far instituted 28 unilateral delays and changes to the health care law’s implementation without congressional approval, Fox Business reports.

From verifying eligibility for subsidies to enforcing employer requirements, the Obama administration has already taken a hacksaw to the health care reform law, but it has made no changes to the provision raising problems for half the nation’s hospitals.

While the feds wait for financial pressure to force states to act, several state governments have been taking things into their own hands. Some have criticized these moves as “hospital bailouts.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/18/fourth-georgia-hospital-closes-due-to-obamacare-payment-cuts/#ixzz2tmpzfhZu
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #274 on: February 20, 2014, 01:49:00 am »

Quote
Many hospitals in the 25 states that rejected the Medicaid expansion are facing similar financial problems. Liberal administration ally Think Progress has already faulted Georgia for not expanding Medicaid as Obamacare envisioned.

I get really tired of these major biased articles. It's so petty and childish.

So this person is claiming it's the fault of hospitals because some didn't bow to the feds? Who wrote this stupid article, a mad Republican?  Roll Eyes
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21754



View Profile
« Reply #275 on: February 20, 2014, 11:48:49 am »

W. Va. Daycares Shut Down, Citing Obamacare

Three day care centers in Charleston, W. Va. are citing costs related to Obamacare as part of the reason they are closing down. Fox affiliate WVAH-TV reports that 40 workers are employed by the centers and will find themselves out of a job.

Kanawha County, which operates the centers, said they had lost $65,000 since the start of the school year as a result of expensive repairs and “concerns about added costs because of the Affordable Care Act.”

The county will work with parents to find replacement centers for their children. It will also help employees find new jobs within the district.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/371576/w-va-daycares-shut-down-citing-obamacare-andrew-johnson
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #276 on: February 21, 2014, 03:36:14 am »

This story is a bit shady too! Appears to be a blatant political article that distorts the facts.

My very first question is why is a government agency of any type running a child day care? Anybody else see a problem with that?

Anyway, aside from the obvious problem with the state being in child care, I question the reasons named, which is...

Quote
said they had lost $65,000 since the start of the school year as a result of expensive repairs and “concerns about added costs because of the Affordable Care Act.”


The first reason has NOTHING to do with Obamacare. That's maintenance costs of the facilities, which government has never been good at maintaining any government buildings, because politicians argue back and forth on how much money for a given project, IF they can agree on providing funding for a project.

The second reason given, "concerns about costs..." is a weak argument too. Who doesn't have concerns about costs increasing? The real issue is whether or not their costs ACTUALLY increased for the day cares. All this article says is a concern over costs. They aren't providing any proof of those increased costs associated with Obamacare.

I wonder just what the prevailing party is in Kanawha county...

The county commissioner is Republican. He's the longest serving commissioner, and he's also an insurance broker in that area.  Roll Eyes

Again, this appears to be nothing more than bs political party whining.

Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21754



View Profile
« Reply #277 on: February 28, 2014, 06:36:58 am »

Restaurants Now Charging Customers For Obamacare
A Florida restaurant chain is adding a surcharge onto its bills




Gators Dockside is a Florida restaurant chain known for its southern seafood fare. It's also now known for charging its customers for the costs it as incurred as a result of Obamacare.

Some Gators chains have added an Affordable Care Act surcharge onto its bills, per a report:

    Diners at eight Gator's Dockside casual eateries are finding a 1 percent ACA surcharge on their tabs, which comes to 15 cents on a typical $15 lunch tab. Signs on the door and at tables alert diners to the fee, which is also listed separately on the bill.

    The Gator Group's full-time hourly employees won't actually receive health insurance until December. But the company said it implemented the surcharge now because of the compliance costs it's facing ahead of the ACA's employer mandate kicking in in 2015.

The chains are all owned by independent groups. Thirteen other Gators Dockside restaurants are not charging customers for the Obamacare related expenditures.

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/restaurants-now-charging-customers-obamacare
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #278 on: February 28, 2014, 12:25:37 pm »

A .20 cent surcharge is one thing, but I think the real crime is charging $8.99 for a chicken sandwich and fries! And $2.49 for a tea? That better be a Long Island for that price. And $6.49 for a hotdog? Not me. No wonder less people can afford to go out to eat.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #279 on: February 28, 2014, 01:50:31 pm »

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gop-obamacare-fix-kicks-one-161000372.html

GOP Obamacare Fix Kicks One Million Off Private Insurance

2/27/14

The Congressional Budget Office just poured cold water on a popular Republican proposal to “fix” Obamacare.

The GOP’s bill would change the Affordable Care Act’s definition of a “full time employee” from a worker logging 30 hours each week to someone logging 40 or more hours a week. 

The nonpartisan CBO found that under Obamacare, the GOP bill would increase the deficit by about $74 billion over the next decade and cause one million people to lose their work-based insurance.

Under Obamacare’s employer mandate, companies with 50 or more “full-time” employees must offer health insurance to their workers or pay a penalty if at least one employee purchases a plan through the health care marketplace with a federal subsidy.

Supporters of the GOP bill say the law’s current 30-hour-a-week threshold incentivizes companies to shift full-time workers to part-time status just below the 30-hour threshold to avoid paying for employee health insurance. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) and other Republicans have dubbed these workers the “Obamacare 29ers,” a reference to the reduced weekly hours they say employees would work because of the law.

“Many of these people have either lost or risk losing their full-time status and are being held back through no fault of their own but instead by a misguided law,” Camp said in a statement last week.

Some health policy experts, however, argue that changing the full-time status to 40-hour work weeks makes it even easier for companies to circumvent the requirement that medium to large firms provide health coverage to their workers.

The CBO also found that the GOP’s plan would increase the number of uninsured by 500,000 – and push about another 500,000 onto Medicaid or Obamacare.

“By essentially eliminating any requirement for businesses to contribute to the cost of health coverage, Republicans have just embraced a proposal to put wages and benefits at risk for a million or more hard-working Americans, while substantially increasing the deficit,” House Ways and Means Committee ranking member Sandy Levin (D-MI) said in a statement.

The bill is one of the GOP’s first serious attempts to “fix” Obamacare ahead of the 2014 elections. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) said last week that the House plans to take up the measure in March. Meanwhile, Republicans are finalizing another Obamacare alternative.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #280 on: March 03, 2014, 08:14:22 pm »

http://blogs.findlaw.com/free_enterprise/2014/02/businesses-add-obamacare-fee-to-customer-bills.html?DCMP=CCX-FBC
2/28/14

Businesses Add 'Obamacare Fee' to Customer Bills

 By Aditi Mukherji, JD on February 28, 2014 12:28 PM 

Some businesses -- mainly restaurants -- "are asking customers to help foot the bill for Obamacare" by adding an Affordable Care Act surcharge on their tabs, CNNMoney reports.

Case in point: At least eight Gator's Dockside restaurants in central Florida are now charging a so-called "Obamacare fee" that amounts to 1 percent of a customer's check.

Should your business include an Obamacare fee or surcharge on customer bills?

Surcharge or Raise Prices?

A surcharge is an added liability imposed on something that is already due, such as a tax on tax. A valid surcharge requires full disclosure of the fee that will be charged.

Adding surcharges for employee health care costs isn't a terribly new phenomenon. For example, restaurants in San Francisco have been adding health care surcharges on patrons' bills for years now, following the 2008 passage of the city's Health Care Security Ordinance, a program commonly known as "Healthy San Francisco."

But not every restaurateur went that route. Instead of taking on a surcharge, "we just rejiggered prices across the board in a way that we didn't price ourselves out of the market," one San Francisco business owner explained to the San Francisco Chronicle.

Deciding between a surcharge or menu price hike seems to be a matter of preference.

In San Francisco, businesses in favor of the surcharge say it lets diners know that the extra money is to be used toward employee health care. But others say they "didn't want to bring politics into the dining experience."

Surcharge Fraud?

San Francisco's experience with the "Healthy SF" surcharge reveals a potential issue that "Obamacare fee" chargers should beware: potential surcharge fraud.

Audits of San Francisco restaurants revealed discrepancies in the amount collected in the surcharges versus how much was actually set aside for employee health care, amounting to a form of fraud, the Chronicle reports
.

Restaurateurs have said that the inconsistencies were not intentional, but that the rules didn't make it clear whether the surcharge money could be used to cover other costs.

The lesson: If you add a health care surcharge on your tabs, keep track of how much you're receiving in surcharges, how much of that money is being used for health care, and whether you can use surcharge money to shoulder other expenses.

Need More Help?

For more guidance on the legal ins and outs of adding "Obamacare fees" or other surcharges to your customers' bills, consider consulting an experienced business attorney. In addition, a tax attorney can answer questions about the taxability of surcharges.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #281 on: March 04, 2014, 05:32:52 pm »

http://news.yahoo.com/why-gay-rights-groups-care-about-a-supreme-court-birth-control-case-211337519.html
3/4/14
Why gay rights groups care about a Supreme Court birth control case

Access to hormonal birth control hasn’t typically been a goal of the gay rights movement. But after a near miss on an anti-gay bill in Arizona last week, LGBT advocacy groups are rallying around a Supreme Court birth control case, arguing that gay people’s rights will be collateral damage if the court rules that for-profit businesses do not have to provide contraceptives to female employees.

On March 25, the Supreme Court will hear arguments from the Oklahoma-based crafts store chain Hobby Lobby that the federal health care law is infringing on its religious liberty by forcing the company to provide contraceptive coverage in its health plan. The case is unusual because the family owned company is arguing that for-profit corporations — not just individuals and religiously affiliated nonprofits — have religious beliefs that should be protected under the Constitution and the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Most of the dozens of “friend of the court” briefs in the case, filed in January, are from religious and anti-abortion individuals and organizations on the Hobby Lobby side, and reproductive rights groups on the government’s side. Only two gay rights organizations filed amicus briefs laying out the potential implications the case could have on gay and lesbian people. (The briefs favored Hobby Lobby’s side by a 3 to 4 ratio.)

But on Monday, just a few days after Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed a law that would have allowed  businesses with religious objections to refuse service to gay people, more than 30 LGBT groups signed on to a statement that says the birth control case is “cut from the same cloth” as the recently vetoed Arizona law.

If the conservative-leaning court rules that companies may deny contraceptives based on the religious beliefs of their owners, corporations would have more latitude to argue that serving gays and lesbians violates their religious beliefs, the groups argue.

“People from all across the country would face very real harm if corporations get a license to discriminate under the guise of religious liberty,” the statement says. The groups say the case could allow businesses to deny health care to employees with AIDS or HIV, or for hotels or restaurants to refuse to serve LGBT people.

“The case is directly about women’s access to reproductive health care and we don’t mean to suggest that that’s not the core issue there, but it is important to expand the lens,” said Jenny Pizer, general counsel for Lambda Legal, the gay rights groups that filed an amicus brief in the case.

The Arizona law served as a wake-up call for the general public and the gay rights community that a case about religious objections to birth control could have a big impact on gays.

“We’ve come to see the Hobby Lobby case as the biggest Supreme Court case that nobody’s heard about,” said Eric Ferrero, spokesman for Planned Parenthood. “What really happened with Arizona is it brought to life in very real terms what this agenda looks like.”

Interestingly, many of the nightmare scenarios the groups lay out of businesses turning away gays en masse are actually legal under existing law. There are few existing federal protections for discrimination against employees or customers based on sexual orientation, but advocates hope that Congress and states will move to adopt them soon. (Some gay discrimination cases can be brought as gender discrimination, but courts are split on the claims.) If Hobby Lobby prevails, businesses will have an argument in their back pocket going forward that religious objections to serving gays supersede any future anti-discrimination laws.

“Likely in the future we will have anti-discrimination laws that protect gay people so [this case] is attempting to get pre-emptive religious exemption from that,” said Doug NeJaime, a law professor specializing in gay rights at the University of California, Irvine.

More immediately, a ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby could also serve as a shield for businesses based in the 21 states that prohibit businesses from turning away customers based on their sexual orientation.

Hobby Lobby supporters argue that it’s far from clear that a ruling in the company’s favor would help a business owner who believes homosexuality is a sin and does not want to provide certain services to gay people.

“I know of no American religious group that teaches discrimination against gays as such, and few judges would be persuaded of the sincerity of such a claim,” writes Doug Laycock, a law professor at the University of Virginia.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #282 on: March 11, 2014, 09:05:15 pm »

http://theweek.com/article/index/257834/speedreads-repealing-obamacare-would-now-mean-kicking-42-million-people-off-their-new-insurance-plans
Repealing ObamaCare would now mean kicking 4.2 million people off their new insurance plans ushering in the single payer system

More than 4.2 million people have enrolled in new health insurance plans through ObamaCare's state and federal marketplaces since they went live in October, the Department of Health and Human Services announced Tuesday. Of that total — which runs through the end of February — about 943,000 enrollees signed up last month alone. The administration and health-care experts are expecting a major spike in enrollments this month as people race to get covered before the March 31 deadline to have insurance or face a fine.

Among the enrollees, 25 percent are in the crucial 18- to 34-year-old age bracket, a percentage that rose in February and is expected to rise once again this month as young procrastinators finally get around to picking insurance plans. Meaning, that dreaded death spiral — which was already something of a fantastical fear — is even less likely to happen.

And importantly for supporters of the health-care law, the ballooning enrollment figures will make it that much harder for GOP critics to keep championing an ObamaCare repeal. At this point, anyone calling for repeal is by extension trying to strip 4.2 million people, and counting, off their new health insurance.
 - - Jon Terbush   
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #283 on: March 12, 2014, 05:31:50 am »

Quote
The administration and health-care experts are expecting a major spike in enrollments this month as people race to get covered before the March 31 deadline to have insurance or face a fine.



That article is outdated. If I'm not mistaken, that deadline was tossed out, and moved back a couple years, to October 2016, just before the presidential election.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #284 on: March 12, 2014, 12:25:38 pm »



That article is outdated. If I'm not mistaken, that deadline was tossed out, and moved back a couple years, to October 2016, just before the presidential election.

So they pushed back the individual mandate to 2016?

Either way, from what I understand, most of the damage won't happen until after Obama leaves office in 2017. With that being said, hopefully the rapture will happen prior to that.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #285 on: March 12, 2014, 01:58:02 pm »

Yeah, they usually toss the junk to the next admin, and off to the "private sector" they go.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #286 on: March 14, 2014, 04:37:54 pm »

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/14/lebron-james-becomes-obamacare-pitchman/
LeBron James becomes Obamacare pitchman
Dan Feldman
Mar 14, 2014, 10:00 AM EDT
 


President Obama has ramped up his efforts to promote the Affordable Care Act, even appearing on “Between Two Ferns” with Zach Galifianakis.

With only mild offense intended for Galifianakis (in the spirit of his episode with the president), Obama has enlisted a much bigger celebrity to help with the cause – LeBron James.

In the 30-second spot above, LeBron straightforwardly encourages viewers to sign up at HealthCare.gov.

It’s certainly a political statement in an era where most athletes follow Michael Jordan’s lead and avoid those in order to protect their endorsements. LeBron, via Ethan Skolnick of Bleacher Report:

“I mean, I can’t worry about that,” James said. “Especially who I am. I mean, I know that everything that I do is going to be bigger than what it should be or blown out of proportion. But what I believe in and the people that I support is what it’s all about. So I can sleep comfortably at night.”

“I know that everything that I do is going to be bigger than what it should be or blown out of proportion.” I think that’s what Obama is counting on.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #287 on: March 15, 2014, 05:03:44 am »

My bad! I misunderstood about the mandate. The delay till 2016 is the small business employer mandate.

Apparently they are still holding to March 31 for signing up as an individual. So business owners catch a break, while individuals get shafted. Typical. The delay for business was I guess to appease Republicans.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #288 on: March 20, 2014, 01:38:25 pm »

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Sports/2014/03/20/Kobe-Bryant-Promotes-Obamacare-Says-Obama-Could-Make-Lakers-Roster
3/20/14
Kobe Bryant Promotes Obamacare, Says Obama Could Make Lakers Roster

On The Dan Patrick Show on Wednesday, Kobe Bryant said he thought the Lakers were so bad this year that even President Barack Obama could play for them.

Seriously.

Bryant, who is recovering from multiple injuries, said he got a call from the White House's chief of staff to help the White House promote Obamacare and pitched the Healthcare.gov website while reminding Patrick's listeners that they had until March 31 to sign up.  When asked if Obama could play for the struggling Lakers, Bryant replied, "Yes, he could, actually."

"I'm not dissing the current roster that we have," he continued before saying that his comments were more of a "sign of respect" for Obama's basketball skills.  Patrick compared Obama to Derek Fisher while Bryant said Obama was a left-handed version of the diminutive Michael Adams before settling on Nate "Tiny" Archibald. Bryant said Archibald would ultimately be the best comparison and said Obama probably leads the White House games in scoring after Patrick mentioned that Archibald led the league in scoring and assists one year.

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #289 on: March 22, 2014, 03:18:46 pm »

http://news.yahoo.com/u-allow-people-enroll-obamacare-deadline-000535875--sector.html
U.S. to allow some people to enroll in Obamacare after deadline
3/21/14

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration will soon issue new Obamacare guidelines allowing people to enroll in health coverage after a March 31 deadline, but only under certain circumstances, according to sources close to the administration.

The sources said the new federal guidelines for consumers in the 36 states served by the federal health insurance marketplace and its website, HealthCare.gov, would allow people to enroll after March 31 if they had tried earlier and were prevented by system problems including technical glitches.

On Friday, the administration published in the Federal Register new regulations that would allow state-run marketplaces new flexibility in setting insurance coverage effective dates for people who sign up during special enrollment periods.

President Barack Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requires most Americans to be enrolled in health coverage by March 31 or pay a penalty. It was not clear how much of an effort a potential applicant would have to make in order to qualify for a special enrollment period.

Last December, the administration granted special enrollment periods to thousands of people who were unable to complete enrollment on HealthCare.gov for coverage beginning January 1. Similar steps have been expected for the March 31 enrollment deadline for several weeks.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) could not confirm whether an announcement was expected soon but said the administration would not neglect people who have problems enrolling.

"Open enrollment ends March 31. We are preparing for a surge in enrollment, and if consumers are in line on the 31st and can't finish, we won't shut the door on them. To be clear, if you don't have health insurance and do not start to sign up by the deadline, you can't get coverage again until next year," HHS spokeswoman Joanne Peters said in a statement.

The expected move follows similar decisions by state officials in Maryland and Nevada, where state-run healthcare exchanges have had difficulty handling enrollee applications and are likely to leave applicants stranded by the time the deadline passes in just over a week.

Some states with problem marketplaces had sought to delay the March 31 enrollment deadline outright. But officials say they were encouraged instead to follow the special enrollment model during discussions with HHS. Federal officials said recently that the government lacks the statutory authority to delay the enrollment deadline.

HealthCare.gov was overwhelmed by technical glitches for much of last October and November, the first two months of Obamacare's six-month enrollment period. Most of those bugs have been worked out and more than 5 million people have signed up for private coverage through the federal site and 14 state-run marketplaces.

With the enrollment deadline less than two weeks away, administration officials have predicted a surge of activity that could test the website's capacities in the final days of the enrollment period.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #290 on: March 26, 2014, 08:54:07 am »

Here we go again...

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/25/politics/obamacare-signup-deadline/index.html
3/25/14
Obamacare applicants to get more deadline flexibility

Washington (CNN) -- The Obama administration will give more time to people who try to apply for health insurance coverage through the federal marketplace by Monday but encounter difficulty, administration officials said Tuesday evening.

Monday is the deadline for people to enroll in order to have coverage for this year or face penalties under the Affordable Care Act.

"Open enrollment ends March 31. We are experiencing a surge in demand and are making sure that we will be ready to help consumers who may be in line by the deadline to complete enrollment -- either online or over the phone," said Joanne Peters, a spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services.

Administration officials said this move, similar to the one in December for the large number of people who were trying to sign up by January 1, will accommodate people who face special circumstances or complex cases and need extra time to complete their enrollment.
 
The officials said those who fall in this category will have to attest to their circumstances as part of the application process. They refused to say how much more time these people will get to finish enrollment and still qualify for coverage this year.

The Affordable Care Act wants you

The Washington Post, which first reported the enactment of the new flexibility, said applicants would have until mid-April. Specific details could be released as early as Wednesday.

CNN last week reported the administration was considering this action. In an answer to a question from CNN Senior White House Correspondent Jim Acosta on Friday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney indicated the administration would allow some flexibility for those who encountered problems meeting Monday's deadline.

"As was the case for the December deadline, we're going to want to make sure that people who are already in line can finish their enrollment," Carney said.

Insurance industry sources did not want to comment in detail until they knew of the specifics but said anytime changes are made, it complicates their work and will require manual workarounds to help complete applications. They said so long as the time period is limited, they can accept it.

Republicans Tuesday evening criticized the move by the administration.

"Another day, another Obamacare delay from the same Obama administration that won't work with Republicans to help Americans suffering from the unintended consequences of the Democrats' failed health care law," Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement.

The White House is trying to meet a goal of enrolling 6 million people. As of mid-March, 5 million had enrolled. The administration has been engaged in an exhaustive effort to not only enroll as many people as possible but also to increase the percentage of young adults who apply to help balance the makeup of those insured.

The administration said it has recently seen a major increase in traffic to HeatlhCare.gov. On Monday the site logged 1.1 million visitors, its second-busiest traffic day.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #291 on: April 05, 2014, 12:24:08 pm »

FYI, when Jindal served as Health Secretary in Louisiana(under Mike Foster in the 90's), he all but destroyed New Orleans' free health care system. As bad and wicked as New Orleans has always been, this city had the BEST free health care system in the nation, until Jindal came in to ruin it.

Seriously - what is it with these people saying, "But I have an alternative..."? You can't repackage wickedness and make it look holy, that's for sure!

http://news.yahoo.com/gov-bobby-jindal-thinks-health-care-reform-220053477.html
How Gov. Bobby Jindal thinks health-care reform should work

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal has unveiled an alternative to the Affordable Care Act, which he sees as 'a flawed law.' His plan takes a state-focused approach.

4/4/14

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal also serves as vice chairman of the Republican Governors Association and is considering a run for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. He spoke at the April 2 Monitor Breakfast.

His view of President Obama's Affordable Care Act:

"This is a flawed law. It is causing over 2.3 million fewer people to participate in the workforce. It is not decreasing health-care costs, not decreasing premiums."

The 26-page plan he unveiled at the breakfast to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act with a more state-focused approach:

"This conservative health-care plan puts the patient, not government and insurance bureaucrats, in control. And that is really the most fundamental question: Who do you want to be in control?"

His role in 2016 presidential politics:

"It is no secret it's something I am thinking about. But right now I am focused on winning the war of ideas and also focused on winning these [governors'] elections in 2014."

His prescription for immigration reform:

"Right now we have got low walls and a narrow gate and ... that is the exact opposite of what we need.... A conservative approach [to immigration] would take the opposite approach of high walls and a broad gate."


Why he prefers presidential candidates who have been governors:

"I am absolutely biased toward governors ... folks that have run things, I think, are in a better position to be president of the United States."
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #292 on: April 08, 2014, 09:22:10 pm »

http://news.yahoo.com/many-obamacare-critics-accepted-subsidies-200834189--politics.html
4/8/14
Many 'Obamacare' critics accepted its subsidies

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Several big corporations have reaped millions of dollars from "Obamacare" even as they support GOP candidates who vow to repeal the law. This condemn-while-benefiting strategy angers Democrats, who see some of their top congressional candidates struggling against waves of anti-Obamacare ads partly funded by these companies.

Among the corporations is a familiar Democratic nemesis, Koch Industries, the giant conglomerate headed by the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch. They and some conservative allies are spending millions of dollars to hammer Democratic senators in North Carolina, Alaska, Colorado, Iowa and elsewhere, chiefly for backing President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., renewed his criticisms of the Kochs this week. In a Senate chamber speech, Reid noted that Koch Industries benefited from a temporary provision of the health care law.

The Early Retiree Reinsurance Program, Reid said, "helped the company pay health insurance costs for its retirees who are not covered by Medicare." Reid asked sarcastically: "So it's OK for Koch Industries to save money through Obamacare" even as Koch-related groups seek the law's repeal.

When Congress enacted the health care law in 2010, it appropriated $5 billion for the temporary reinsurance program. The goal was to subsidize employers' costs for workers who retire before they become eligible for Medicare. Hundreds of employers applied — many were corporations, cities and public universities — and virtually all the money was soon distributed.

"If the Affordable Care Act is so awful," Reid asked, "why did Koch Industries use it to their advantage?"

Federal records show that Koch Industries received $1.4 million in early retiree subsidies. That's considerably less than the sums many other employers received. A Koch Industries spokesman said he had no comment on Reid's latest criticisms.

The Koch consortium may be the loudest "Obamacare" critic among the subsidized employers. But many others accepted the subsidies while heavily backing GOP House and Senate candidates, most of who call for repealing the 2010 health care law.

For instance, United Parcel Service received $37 million from the program's subsidies for early retirees. From 1989 through this year, political action committees affiliated with UPS donated $32 million to federal candidates and political parties. Of that, 64 percent went to Republicans, according to records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Union Pacific Railroad's employee health system received $9.7 million in subsidies. Republicans received more than two-thirds of the nearly $20 million in political donations from the railroad's PACs in the 25-year period tracked by the center.

Altria Client Services Inc. received nearly $11 million in the early retiree subsidies. And Republicans received 71 percent of the nearly $24 million in Altria-related political donations from 1989 to 2014.

One of the biggest subsidy recipients was AT&T, at $213 million. More than half of the $56 million in AT&T-related political donations went to Republicans during the 25-year period.

Spokesmen for AT&T and Altria declined to comment about accepting "Obamacare" subsidies while funding candidates who want to repeal the law.

Other companies that steer most of their political donations to Republicans, and the early-retiree subsidies they received, include: Pfizer Inc., $23 million; GlaxoSmithKline, $14 million; Southern Company Services, $7 million; Lockheed Martin Corp., $4 million; CSX Corp., $2.2 million; KPMG LLP, $1.4 million; and Deloitte LLP, $1.2 million.

The data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics omits much of this year's heavy political spending, because many major players are not required to report donations. The Koch-funded group Americans for Prosperity is among those "super PACs" that can keep their finance details private, even as it dominates the airwaves in some states, like North Carolina, with competitive Senate races.

The Kochs and their allies show little sheepishness about denouncing a federal health law that benefited them. In fact, the Koch-related group FreedomPartners is spending more than $1 million on ads criticizing Sen. Mark Udall of Colorado and Rep. Bruce Braley of Iowa, Democrats running in tight Senate races.

Their alleged wrongdoing? Accepting campaign donations from health companies that benefit from "Obamacare."
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #293 on: April 10, 2014, 06:00:51 pm »

Quote
For instance, United Parcel Service received $37 million from the program's subsidies for early retirees. From 1989 through this year, political action committees affiliated with UPS donated $32 million to federal candidates and political parties. Of that, 64 percent went to Republicans, according to records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Remember that news story recently over how UPS, b/c they put themselves under the Obamacare rules, ended up dropping spouses of employees from their insurance coverages? Well - at my volunteer work place today - I overheard 2 other volunteers talk about this. They said how this is NOT QUITE true - one of the 2 said they have a friend working at UPS, and said the reason why this happened was b/c their respective spouses have jobs elsewhere(and therefore got insurance coverage from their other places of employment).

Pt being that BEWARE of a lot of DISINFO going out from SUPPOSEDLY anti-Obamacare "activists"(ie-the Koch brothers are a prime example) - apparently, they will put out this disinfo to the media b/c of just that...to FURTHER cover up the draconian agendas surrounding it(ie-when people see these very same news articles, and see there's lies and distortions within these same articles, then they're going to come away thinking, "There's nothing wrong with the Affordable Care Act").

Alex Jones and his cronies in the "truth" movement are really good at doing this(putting out disinfo here and there on certain NWO agendas).

Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21754



View Profile
« Reply #294 on: April 11, 2014, 09:21:20 am »

Burwell: Low-key manager takes on health care

President Obama picked Sylvia Mathews Burwell to be the new face of health care because she has dealt with the complexities of the federal budget and has managed large organizations.

One other thing: Burwell is a good bet for Senate confirmation.

Just a year ago, the Senate voted by a 96-0 margin to confirm Burwell to her current job, director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Now Burwell, to be nominated by Obama to replace Kathleen Sebelius as secretary of Health and Human Services, will undergo new Senate confirmation hearings focused on Obama's disputed health care law, and Republican attacks on it.

At this point, at least, Burwell has much better relations with Congress than the embattled Sebelius.

"Sylvia Burwell is an excellent choice to be the next #HHS Secretary," tweeted one prominent Republican, Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

When Obama nominated Burwell to be OMB director last year, he cited a resume that included high-ranking jobs with the Clinton administration, Walmart and the Gates Foundation.

"Sylvia knows her way around a budget," Obama said.

In recent months, Obama has praised Burwell's performance in negotiations that ended the partial government shutdown in October and led to a two-year budget agreement with Congress.

As OMB director, Burwell was technically the official who ordered the shutdown after Congress could not agree on a new spending plan.

White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough told The New York Times that Obama regards Burwell as "a proven manager and relentless implementer," qualities that will be important as she oversees continuing development of the complex new health care law.

A staff member throughout her government career, Burwell figures to be a lower-key Cabinet secretary than than the higher profile Sebelius, a politician who once served as governor of Kansas. Sebelius faced heavy criticism over the rollout of the new health care law, particularly the website problems that blocked early sign-ups for policies.

If confirmed by the Senate, Burwell faces a number of health care challenges. Provisions that have been delayed are scheduled to come on line, including the requirement that employers provide health insurance to their workers.

The administration hit its goal of more than 7 million sign-ups when this year's enrollment period ended March 31. A new enrollment period begins later this year, and Republicans are claiming that premiums will rise as financial pressures burden the new system.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said he hopes Burwell's nomination -- "to lead one of the most important jobs in government" -- will be "the start of a candid conversation about Obamacare's short-comings and the need to protect Medicare for today's seniors, their children and their grandchildren."

While she has spent much of her career as a government staffer, Burwell does have something of a political background. Her mother served as the mayor of Hinton, W.Va.,where she was born in 1965.

A Harvard graduate and a Rhodes Scholar, Burwell did several jobs during the Bill Clinton presidency. She served as chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and deputy chief of staff to Clinton himself. She was deputy OMB director to then-budget director Jack Lew, now Obama's Treasury Secretary.

Burwell also has experience in the private sector. She worked at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which develops global health and anti-poverty programs. Burwell has also been president of the Walmart Foundation, the charity arm of the retail giant.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/04/11/obama-sylvia-mathews-burwell-kathleen-sebelius-health-care-health-and-human-services/7572171/

Sylvia Mathews Burwell's Biography

http://votesmart.org/candidate/biography/144444/sylvia-mathews-burwell#.U0f5mlehFyI

Full Name:    Sylvia Mathews Burwell
Office:    Director of the Office of Management & Budget, Democratic
First Appointed:    03/04/2013
Gender:    Female
Family:    Husband: Stephen; 2 Children
Birth Place:    West Virginia
Home City:    Washington, DC

Education

    AB, Harvard
    BA, Oxford University

Political Experience

    Director of the Office of Management and Budget, United States of America, 2013-present
    Nominated by President Obama, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, March 4, 2013
    Confirmed by United States Senate, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, April 24, 2013

Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committee
s

    Board Member, Council on Foreign Relations

Professional Experience

    Former Chief Operating Officer, Global Development Program, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
    Former President, Global Development Program, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

    Former Staff Director, National Economic Council
    Former Deputy Budget Director, Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
    Former Chief of Staff, Secretary of the Treasury
    Former President, WalMart Foundation

Organizations

    Board Member, MetLife

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #295 on: April 11, 2014, 09:28:45 am »

Quote
At this point, at least, Burwell has much better relations with Congress than the embattled Sebelius.

"Sylvia Burwell is an excellent choice to be the next #HHS Secretary," tweeted one prominent Republican, Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

When Obama nominated Burwell to be OMB director last year, he cited a resume that included high-ranking jobs with the Clinton administration, Walmart and the Gates Foundation.

"Sylvia knows her way around a budget," Obama said.

In recent months, Obama has praised Burwell's performance in negotiations that ended the partial government shutdown in October and led to a two-year budget agreement with Congress.

As OMB director, Burwell was technically the official who ordered the shutdown after Congress could not agree on a new spending plan.

Yep, apparently Burwell is a bigger reprobate than who she is replacing.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #296 on: April 13, 2014, 02:36:59 am »

Quote
A Harvard graduate and a Rhodes Scholar, Burwell did several jobs during the Bill Clinton presidency. She served as chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and deputy chief of staff to Clinton himself. She was deputy OMB director to then-budget director Jack Lew, now Obama's Treasury Secretary.

Burwell also has experience in the private sector. She worked at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which develops global health and anti-poverty programs. Burwell has also been president of the Walmart Foundation, the charity arm of the retail giant.

Now we see why she's being nominated.

« Last Edit: April 13, 2014, 02:40:41 am by Kilika » Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #297 on: April 18, 2014, 03:27:13 pm »

Yeah, the current Obamacare has all but been in the works for many years - next up? Likely the single-payer system if this doesn't work out as planned...

http://news.yahoo.com/congrats-heritage-foundation-making-obamacare-142900078.html

Congrats to the Heritage Foundation on Making Obamacare Work

The Atlantic Wire
By Philip Bump
5 hours ago

Why did 8 million people enroll in Obamacare? It isn't because of suppressed demand, as Vox would argue; it's because they had to, as the conservative Heritage Foundation predicted decades ago.

There's a lot of trolling in that first paragraph, so allow me to unpack it. In the early 1990s, as then-President Bill Clinton and other members of his family tried to figure out how to improve and expand health care coverage, the Heritage Foundation developed the idea of the "individual mandate" — the idea, in essence, that making people get coverage would inject money into the system and diffuse risk, allowing a private-sector solution to the problem. That proposal was adopted by Mitt Romney as the governor of Massachusetts, and then made its way into the Affordable Care Act. (Hilariously, the Heritage Foundation tried to deny its role in the idea once Obamacare became a conservative hobbyhorse, but even conservatives wouldn't let them get away with it.)

From Vox.com
As you probably know by now, April 1 was the deadline for avoiding the 2015 tax penalty that results from not being covered in 2014. That's the mandate: you need to have coverage for at least nine months of the year, so if you weren't covered by April, you have to pay up. And so we got the big spike in enrollments in March. You can see it in the graph at right, which is from Vox.com.

At Vox, Sarah Kliff argues that it was demand that drove enrollment. Kliff is unquestionably one of the best reporters on Obamacare in the country, and spent a lot of time talking to the uninsured and pollsters about how and why people signed up when they did. "There's a very simple reason that Obamacare hit 8 million sign-ups," she writes. "Being uninsured is horrible."

People did give it a serious try. And when the site failed them, they waited a few months and gave it another serious try. In March and April, 3.7 million people signed up for coverage, three times as many as the White House had expected.

There's little question that being uninsured can be horrible; a lack of health insurance was the No. 1 cause of bankruptcy in 2013, according to one study. But there's also little question that the individual mandate is why enrollment surged and why Obamacare hit the 8 million mark.

Consider the other data point released on Thursday: that more than a third of those who had signed up for insurance were under the age of 35. This is the famous group dubbed the "young invincibles," the much sought-after group that is expected to pay insurance premiums but rarely require treatment, making the entire system work better for older, sicker, poorer Americans. This is largely not a group that signed up because it worries about the horrors of being uninsured. And it's a group that mostly signed up at the end of the required period simply because they had to.

When the exchanges first opened, older and sicker people, people who had high premiums or who had conditions that had blocked their ability to be covered in the past flocked to enroll. Those people knew the horrors of being uninsured. But at the end of the day, Obamacare hit its numbers because of the Heritage Foundation's idea. It wasn't the only way to insure coverage, but it was the way that passed Congress. And it appears to have worked.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #298 on: April 18, 2014, 03:37:21 pm »

FWIW, was on the Heritage Foundation's web site - clicked on one of the links, and brought me to this...
http://seeksocialjustice.com/

Yes, this "conservative" organization supports SOCIAL JUSTICE!
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #299 on: April 27, 2014, 02:31:13 pm »

The worst thing about all of this is not just this "healthcare" bill itself(which has deep NWO agendas, obviously) - but ultimately all of the MISDIRECTION AND DISINFO that came out, which ended up resulting in lots of confusion. For example, like I was saying in a previous post - the news story over how UPS employees' spouses being dropped from their coverage due to Obamacare had NOTHING to do with Obamacare. It was b/c their spouses found employment elsewhere(so therefore were able to get their own coverages). And then the whole bogus story about abortions being covered in this bill(which turned out to be a lie).

Ultimately, this has been all by design - look how FEW people have enrolled - pt being that when all is said and done, they will likely implement this single-payer system(ie-the Vatican has been pushing for universal healthcare themselves).

As for the RFID chip being in this bill - this is NOT the mark of the beast(last I checked, the rapture of the church hasn't happened as we're still here), NOR is this mandatory for the entire population(OUTSIDE of health and medical, that is). We discussed this here a couple of years ago - if memory serves, it ONLY has to do with those who have health problems(and that are insured under Obamacare), and this RFID chip is put in them to track their on-going health et al(this isn't a good thing either, but just pointing this out).

http://theweek.com/article/index/260577/speedreads-confused-uninsured-people-thought-obamacare-meant-getting-microchip-implants
Confused uninsured people thought ObamaCare meant getting microchip implants

One of the Obama administration's biggest obstacles to getting people enrolled in new health insurance plans was the daunting educational outreach effort necessary to inform people of what in the heck ObamaCare even was. With such a massive overhaul of the nation's health care system, there was bound to be mass confusion, misinformation, and plain old ignorance. And indeed, even late last month, six in ten uninsured adults didn't even know the deadline to enroll in ObamaCare was only a few days away; only two-thirds knew the Affordable Care Act required people to get insurance or face a fine.

Spurred on by politically-motivated counter-narratives, the sheer extent of the confusion was incredible. (Remember those dreaded, though fictional, death panels?) Yet a weekend feature from The New York Times exploring how the swirling uncertainty suppressed ObamaCare participation among the poor offers one of the most astounding tidbits to date: Some poor people believed signing up for ObamaCare involved having microchips implanted in their bodies, like something out of a dystopian science fiction film.

Despite a terrible rollout, ObamaCare still managed to crack its 7 million enrollment goal by April 1. That said, it's worth wondering if enrollments would have climbed even higher had there not been so much confusion surrounding the health care law.
 - - Jon Terbush   

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And this very same confusion was put out by TPTB(and not b/c of "ignorance" by the American public) - yes, even Alex Jones played a big role in this.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy