The Failure of Obamacare

By Liberal Anthropologist

It is very hard to watch the manipulative and propagandistic games of President Obama in his vain attempt to salvage his reputation. Simply put, he is playing statistical games and moving goal posts. For anyone not with a vested interest in seeing him be seen as a success, the manipulations are obvious.

The original key points of the plan are not the incomplete nonsense being tried today.

1) The main point was to achieve universal coverage. 30 million uninsured was the number then. What is the number now? Slightly less? And all because of a slight change in Medicare eligibility rules that would not have been controversial then?

2) If you liked your plan, you could keep it. Lie of the year.

3) If you like your doctor you can keep him. No.

4) Premiums would go down on average. No they haven’t.

5) Each family would save 2500 a year. A joke.

Instead he touts how many people signed up under the program as if it was net new and as if it made a debt in the uninsured. And he touts cbo numbers which are based solely on the question asked and not reality.

Obamacare is a country dividing failure. Anyone who voted for it needs to be voted out of office. People need to stop defending this with games just to avoid a midterm defeat.

Responders should be prepared to show a significant decrease in the per capita uninsured. That it’s the only stat which matters. Good luck.


Comments

  • Ed Myers says:

    What is the alternative solution?
    Hillarycare?
    Single payer system via expanded Medicare to everyone?
    Nothing?
    RomneyCare? Oh snap. This was the model for The ACA.

    We have a problem with uninsured people who don’t pay but still get health care. We had a problem with portability of insurance for pre-existing conditions. We have expensive emergency room facilities that become the health provider of non-emergency conditions because uninsured people don’t have a family physician.

    If the current ACA law had been proposed by President Romney there would be little opposition from Republicans and lots from Democrats. Do we need a Republican president to sign a re authorization of the ACA to end this discussion?

    Really, what would you replace ACA with if you had the votes for repeal? The Democrats would propose a single payer system. Unless that is what you want, sabotage of ACA is not in the best interest of Republican politics. You want the market-based solution to work because the alternatives are worse for your ideology. Complaining fiercely about the ACA to get votes while doing nothing to “fix” it is clearly the political strategy of choice. Just don’t pretend the opposition is based on principle when it is simply rabble rousing for the next election.

  • liberal anthropologist says:

    The alternative solution put forth by republicans is well documented.

  • David Dickinson says:

    Has anyone here actually singed up for Obamacare?

    If so, how has it been?

  • liberal anthropologist says:

    I found some percentage of the population data. In 2008, before Obama took office, 14.5 percent of Americans were uninsured. Now 16 percent are. Gallup poll.

    The usual idiots are lapping up false good news. It is embarrassing that the president is getting away with crowing about meaningless numbers as if that was success.

    The problem he set out to solve is worse than when he started.

  • Pragmatist says:

    I guess you want to gloss over the fact that the number of uninsured tracks unemployment in general. In 2008, the year President Obama was elected, the number of uninsured was 44.2 million. That number grew the first two years of his presidency, (you remember, that right, the time when the Bush economic house of cards came crashing down)? with a peak in 2010 at 49.2 million. The number was down to 47.3 million in 2012.

    Bigger drops can be expected in 2014 as the provisions of the Affordable Care Act begin to take effect. Interestingly, the number of people insured by corporations hasn’t dropped by any statistically significant amount, even though companies were going to stop insuring their workers in droves according to the right…

    On a personal note, I can tell you I’m thrilled the ACA is in place. It allowed me to sign a family member up for insurance at the end of his life. He’d let his insurance lapse because he was receiving care from NIH. When that care was no longer effective and he needed hospice, I was able to immediately sign him up for insurance that paid for hospice care for his final two months of life. Imagine what insurance companies would have done with an application for health care from a terminally ill patient prior to the ACA?

    Here’s a person who worked all his life, paid taxes, paid into SS and received very little back. (You can’t get Medicare until you’ve been totally disabled for 2 years and 5 months. Most patients with a high grade brain tumor don’t life that long, so Medicare is almost never an option for them.)

    Thanks to President Obama’s signature piece of legislation, someone in my family member’s position can obtain affordable health insurance when they need it. Isn’t that what a decent society does for its members?

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    Oh I am not glossing anything over. Do the math. The impact, even accounting for employment rate can best be described as minor. We were not sold minor. We were sold a system that would nearly eliminate the 30 million uninsured. It has not even come close to starting to make a dent in that. And at what cost? 50k per new enrolee? A monumental waste of resources to solve mainly for anecdotes like the ONE family member you can point to that benefited.

    Your calls for what should be in a society are perfectly fine. But you default to government as the way to achieve those societal goals. Government is simply incapable of doing what you want it to do.

    You cannot call this bill a success with a straight face. It has failed to achieve its stated aims and it needs to be repealed and government involvement in the market removed. It is the only way to help the uninsured.

  • Pragmatist says:

    I’m glad you consider a human life an “anecdote”…says a lot about you. I remain happy with the ACA and the results I’ve experienced personally. Keep pushing repeal though…it does wonders for the left’s chances.

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    Pushing for repeal does nothing to help the left since the law is so unpopular.

    Your relative needed affordable health care, not health insurance. There are many ways to provide that. It is possible that it is now more affordable to people like him. But it is at an unacceptable cost. We could have just handed him the money. Like so many government ways of solving a problem, the inefficiency and inhumanity destroys any good intent in original thinking.

  • Jimmy says:

    Oh, the misinformation and misrepresentation – not even worth trying to respond.

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    Yes… that is the poll I am referencing. When you adjust for employment, there has been almost no change in the uninsured.

    I know you want to defend it because of its intentions. This is the failing of statists. It doesn’t work. What little works is at such a ridiculous cost that we would have been better off handing out money.

    The law is a dud. Around 60 percent of the country knows it. It is costing way too much. Spending zero would provide more Healthcare for the poor while improving patient outcomes. I know that is beyond counterintuitive for you. But look at Lasik. Remove the insurance and government heavy handedness and you get things that improve in quality while decreasing in cost.

  • Peter says:

    B
    E
    N
    G
    H
    A
    Z
    BENGHAZI
    Z
    A
    H
    G
    N
    E
    B

  • Jimmy, You should engage as I am dealing with facts. Since most people have a similar opinion, if you have a different one, you should speak out.

Leave Comment