We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.

Otis A Glazebrook IV • 10 years ago

It is hard to believe that this was the country that signed the Declaration of Independence.
But that is what happens when Social-(ists') Studies are substituted for actual history...

Jim Lloyd • 10 years ago

ObamaCare is a bureaucratic nightmare. The problem with the sign up process is symptomatic of the total incompetence of the authors of this law. The government is forcing people to expose their private information to hackers and un-vetted "navigators", who will use all that information for nefarious purposes --- despite the fact that they know that the security of the system leaks like a sieve. The "hub" of health and financial information can be hacked for both profit and terrorist purposes. The only solution is to scrap the whole system and start over with the Republican plan for HSA, high deductible insurance, and subsidized pool for those with high-risk health problems. The continual assertion that the Republicans don't have an alternative plan is simply not true.

Guest • 10 years ago

There is another aspect of the subject not dealt with. That is governments' (all governments at all levels) propensity to low ball cost estimates on anythng just to get the law passed. Add to that the difficulty when dealing with huge masses of participants in a program to get anything close to reality even if they wanted to do so. I am an accountant, a CPA if you will. Now retired I had more than 30 years of increasingly high level and technical experience. I started at the bookkeeper end and ended as a CFO in a public company. I know just how difficult it is to get accurate information just within one company operating in numerous states and several foreign countries. I can only wonder at getting it on a nationwide basis. It is pretty clear to me that cost estimates used to justify almost all laws are just numbers plucked out of the air.

Guest • 10 years ago
Senior • 10 years ago

All the more questionable that this fiasco is so much so, Czarr - - "ACA", as it has become known, was never about h/c, but an attempted takeover of the insurance industry, it would seem - - and may be achieving it's unstated goal, even with all the "confusion" - - the ignorance of the American people is appalling

Guest • 10 years ago
Senior • 10 years ago

I've decided that the media is "dedicated" rather than stupid - just part of the cult mentality. They know what they're doing & why. They wear the uniform.

trapper • 10 years ago

The failure of central planning--haven't we seen that before?

Guest • 10 years ago
GOP Poll: Many would not have voted for Obama in 2012 if they knew about broken health care promise
The national survey, conducted by Wilson Perkins Allen Opinion Research, the same firm that advises Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. According to the poll, 23 percent of voters who supported Obama would not have voted for him had they known that Obamacare would force insurance companies to cancel non-compliant health policies despite Obama's promise.

The broken promise hurts Obama across a broad cross-section of the public, the poll shows. About 23 percent of men, 31 percent of women under 54 and 17 percent of women over 55 also said they would not have voted for Obama if they'd known.
[Washingtonexaminer]
Pro_sanity • 10 years ago

Voting doesn't matter anymore. The fraud machine is omnipotent now. Wait till you see the historic anomaly that will be next November. You heard it here first.

Jim Upton • 10 years ago

I agree with you sanity, does anybody really believe dingy harry would have done away with the filibuster if he thought for a minute they would lose the majority next November? They have something very sinister up their sleeves. Myself, I'm preparing my family for a worst case scenario. At some point I have to believe the makers will revolt against the takers. The silver lining to that cloud is that the takers are lazy and it won't take us too long to suppress them and put them in their place!

Pro_sanity • 10 years ago

Mull over this. The website was never INTENDED to work. It was another ruse that the administration pre-determined they could manage. They had to do it, there was a deadline, they delivered "something," (with the extra future benefit of a slush fund to be laundered through Michelle's buddy's software firm), and they're in the process of managing it beyond the mid-term elections. And with our main stream media, along with feckless GOP leadership (or leadership nullified by NSA info), they will get past the elections and go to single payer, which has been the plan from the outset.

Guest • 10 years ago

Consider the website to be all part of the plan to Cloward Piven the system, and act as smoke screen to the bigger disaster that is Obamacare.

Fred Chittenden • 10 years ago

No, insurance doesn't have to cover things like normal maternity. For the sake of clarity, this discussion is NOT about catastrophic coverage for the unpredictable health event or situation -- this is true insurance that can and should be pooled, typically in reinsurance pools.

Health care services below catastrophic care can be easily prepaid (as in typical insurance), paid at time of service (cash), post paid (via loan). There's also hybrid options such as Health Savings Accounts where people put money aside to pay for their care -- sort of a prepaid/paid at time of service option.

For anything less than catastrophic health care needs, there is no
compelling reason that requires all health care cost to be prepaid as
part of some massively bloated first dollar coverage package -- prepaid coverage warps the market by putting
inordinate leverage in the hands of a few to twist the market to their own crony
benefit and outcomes. These outcomes are rarely good for the general welfare as a whole.

In the case of maternity benefits, a C-section birth might be well considered a catastrophic event and covered under some form of catastrophic insurance, perhaps with an optional deductible equal to normal delivery costs... A reasonable post-paid financing option might be for those who choose to forgo maternity coverage or should the cost exceed their HSA saving, should they need such care.

FYI this is a model that works well for many health care needs -- dental care for example frequently exceeds one's dental coverage and there are various marketplace post-paid financing tools commonly available when that happens. The financial institution pays the doctor for the care provided, then the patient pays the financial institution over time. If one doesn't want the post paid care financing option, fine pay extra to become part of a prepaid pool.

Just don't force everyone into the same prepaid financing nonsense -- all that does is warp the marketplace to become less sensitive to normal price and quality checks and balances. Then in a foolish attempt to fix this mistake, gubermint puts into place all sorts of nonsense regulations and burrocracies that only make things worse, not better...

Financing health care isn't rocket science, it's how a normal functioning marketplace free from unreasonable gubermint regulations will work for the betterment of all involved. Just get gubermint and OCare out of the way and things will quickly self correct themselves...

One additional economic reality that is typically overlooked in health care financing/coverage debates is how the various financial pools for catastrophic coverage, HSAs, loans and regular premiums all are financial investment tools that promote strong economic growth elsewhere in the private sector economy. This is not the case for single payer systems that always run huge deficits requring the constant extraction of resources away from the private sector and as a result inhibit general growth and prosperity.