- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What does Jimmy Kimmel's Kids Heart Problem have to do with ObamaCare?
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:40 pm to BamaAtl
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:40 pm to BamaAtl
quote:The term you used was ACHA.
Clear cases of recission happening pre-ACA
Wait . . . maybe I'm wrong . . . . Let me check . . . . Nope, not wrong . . . . you cited the ACHA
So, how would the ACHA change current rescission policy?
1
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:40 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
They're not faulty because you don't agree with them on a policy level.
Perhaps true.
Your interpretation of them is the primary issue.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:42 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
When did I ever mention the AHCA?
Implicit in the thread, as that's the alternative that Kimmel was saying was unacceptable in his monologue.
The problem is you think there's some land of gumdrops and fairies where Republicans repeal the ACA but keep all of the good things you like about the ACA. Since there isn't, let's deal in reality.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:43 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
The term you used was ACHA.
Clearly because the bill as it currently stands would remove protections for those with pre-existing conditions, and would take us back to a pre-ACA landscape (or worse).
You seriously didn't know that? Wow, it's like you haven't been paying attention to the discussion around AHCA at all...
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:44 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Your interpretation of them is the primary issue.
Which, specifically? Please link to a study I've linked that you disagreed with my interpretation.
It would be helpful if you also provided citations for your 'correct' interpretation.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:45 pm to BamaAtl
quote:That would be a refreshing change after the truckload of fertilizer you've dumped here
let's deal in reality
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:46 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Implicit in the thread, as that's the alternative that Kimmel was saying was unacceptable in his monologue.
I don't care about the implicitness of the thread. Ignore it.
This is between the two of us. I've called you out on this every chance I've had, and you never come up with anything. Now is the time.
quote:
The problem is you think there's some land of gumdrops and fairies where Republicans repeal the ACA but keep all of the good things you like about the ACA. Since there isn't, let's deal in reality.
No, the land of gumdrops and fairies would include a free market healthcare system. I'm intelligent enough to know people are too lazy and ignorant for that to ever be reality. That doesn't mean we can't work that way, though.
So, the real problem is, you have no idea what you're talking about.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:47 pm to BamaAtl
I'm referring to your cherry-picked charts. Of course, often times you can't even be bothered to correctly interpret the data in those.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:48 pm to BamaAtl
Hey socialist friend, can you help me find some numbers?
I'm looking for the total cost of the ACA to the tax payer including deductibles, OOP and premiums paid, taxes collected, etc.
The whole shebang.
Readily available, I can only find the cost to the federal government in 2016 which was around $110B.
I would get why no one that supports the ACA would want to combine all the costs into TOTAL cost and maybe that's why it's not readily available.
I'm looking for the total cost of the ACA to the tax payer including deductibles, OOP and premiums paid, taxes collected, etc.
The whole shebang.
Readily available, I can only find the cost to the federal government in 2016 which was around $110B.
I would get why no one that supports the ACA would want to combine all the costs into TOTAL cost and maybe that's why it's not readily available.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:49 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
I'm referring to your cherry-picked charts
Such as? And why wouldn't I pick strong data to support my position? Nothing is stopping you from providing your own data to refute it.
Unfortunately, you're not capable of that - the best you can do is attempt to divert the discussion from areas which you cannot refute.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:51 pm to BamaAtl
quote:Like claiming chirren dying in the streets.
the best you can do is attempt to divert the discussion from areas which you cannot refute.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:51 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Such as?
Well, the chart you linked a few times without realizing that it showed how much support ACA repeal held was a classic.
quote:
And why wouldn't I pick strong data to support my position?
I don't know. You tell me.
quote:
Nothing is stopping you from providing your own data to refute it.
Do they not require English at Alabama anymore?
The data are the same. Your presentation of them is the issue.
quote:
Unfortunately, you're not capable of that - the best you can do is attempt to divert the discussion from areas which you cannot refute.
Incorrect, I'm doing my best to keep you focused. Have that link for me yet?
This post was edited on 5/2/17 at 12:53 pm
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:52 pm to BamaAtl
quote:Link?
Clearly because the bill as it currently stands would remove protections for those with pre-existing conditions
The ACHA retains protections for PECs, and eventually with interstate competition, would provide those with PECs lower cost policies.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:52 pm to roadGator
quote:
I'm looking for the total cost of the ACA to the tax payer including deductibles, OOP and premiums paid, taxes collected, etc.
Doubtful there's anyone collecting these data. Especially considering you'd want to look at it in the context of cost difference between ACA and if there were no ACA.
That is, you can't just count the total amount spent on deductibles without estimating how much that differs from a situation in which we have no ACA.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:52 pm to BamaAtl
For some more laughs, why don't you go over the process of purchasing, operating, and registering a vehicle for us again. 
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:54 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
DisplacedBuckeye
Got that link for me?
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:56 pm to BamaAtl
You can actually do just that unless you don't really want to see how much the beast eats year over year.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 12:57 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Got that link for me?
Are you denying that you discussed it?
Posted on 5/2/17 at 1:02 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
That is, you can't just count the total amount spent on deductibles without estimating how much that differs from a situation in which we have no ACA.
Well considering that deductibles went up more than anything it would be a bad number for the ACA.
Page 9 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News