Thread: Obamacare

Originally Posted by OCDshaver

And the left are masters of doing something over doing nothing when doing something is not always better than doing nothing. Since we are talking medicine, the concept of "first do no harm" should apply. And then of course there are many, like me, that simply believe that this is not governments business to sort out in the first place. Government usually steps in to make matters much worse, then shows up when it falls apart to offer their solution to fix it. And along the way they will drop a few lies about who is really to blame for the mess (never government). Our previous system may have been imperfect, but the last group I wanted to try and solve it was the government. And now every failure of the new system will be blamed on the Right for not wanting it in the first place and all the damage they have done to it. Never mind that it is flawed from the start....and unpopular. But that leads to the next thing. Why was it so important to do this when the people didn't really want it?

Sometimes Government has to come in and make a decision that isn't popular like a kid who needs medicine but won't take it cause it doesn't taste good. When Social Security was devised it didn't pass easily and most probably didn't want it but I don't know anyone who dislikes it now (except for many conservatives). When medicare passed many didn't want that either but I don't know anyone who has it and would give it up (even conservatives). When WWll was going on there were plenty who didn't want us involved. if it wasn't for Pearl Harbor I have serious doubts we would have entered the war. You can find plenty of examples of the Govt doing what is unpopular or not wanted at the time.

Obamacare is the same. Down the road people will love it. The issue these days is the partisan goings on and all the hate circulating and the unprecedented money available to invent the "truth" and the gullible folks who will believe it.

I just got a letter telling me what the bill will be for the street remodel/repair in front of my house will be. They tried to make us feel like we had some input at the meetings! They have some "Fancy" design that most residents say we like it as it is and that is why we moved here. The original estimate was around $5,000 for my lot that is narrow. That has now risen to $5,900 and they have added $1,900 for some pretty light posts. My neighbor will loose the parking in front of her house and will now have to park at the closest 2 houses down. I haven't seen an accident or heard about one there in 25 years.....

Even our city council women who represents us (who I didn't vote for and disagree for various reasons] and lives a 5 houses down from me is complaining. At least to anyone that talks to her!!!

I digress but myself and many of my neighbors could live with and understand the original cost even if we didn't agree with the design. I have this feeling when I get the final bill it will be even more.

Then the kicker is that then they say don't worry about it we will just spread it over the next 20 years on your taxes. But if you add in the interest and management fees the city will charge!!!!!

Originally Posted by 32t

I just got a letter telling me what the bill will be for the street remodel/repair in front of my house will be. They tried to make us feel like we had some input at the meetings! They have some "Fancy" design that most residents say we like it as it is and that is why we moved here. The original estimate was around $5,000 for my lot that is narrow. That has now risen to $5,900 and they have added $1,900 for some pretty light posts. My neighbor will loose the parking in front of her house and will now have to park at the closest 2 houses down. I haven't seen an accident or heard about one there in 25 years.....

Even our city council women who represents us (who I didn't vote for and disagree for various reasons] and lives a 5 houses down from me is complaining. At least to anyone that talks to her!!!

I digress but myself and many of my neighbors could live with and understand the original cost even if we didn't agree with the design. I have this feeling when I get the final bill it will be even more.

Then the kicker is that then they say don't worry about it we will just spread it over the next 20 years on your taxes. But if you add in the interest and management fees the city will charge!!!!!

There is a town north of me and folks moved there where their streets butted up against the desert plain and simple. They moved there because taxes were almost nothing like $300 a year. Many of those folks liked it. The only problem was there were no storm sewers and every few years a gully washer would come down the hill and wash out the "street" and most of these folks front yards and driveways. When the city grew and the city decided to do some real flood control many of these folks found themselves with bills in excess of 20 grand for the repairs. Many were happy but many didn't like it. The moral of the story is when you own property these things happen and you need to be prepared for them.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

There is a town north of me and folks moved there where their streets butted up against the desert plain and simple. They moved there because taxes were almost nothing like $300 a year. Many of those folks liked it. The only problem was there were no storm sewers and every few years a gully washer would come down the hill and wash out the "street" and most of these folks front yards and driveways. When the city grew and the city decided to do some real flood control many of these folks found themselves with bills in excess of 20 grand for the repairs. Many were happy but many didn't like it. The moral of the story is when you own property these things happen and you need to be prepared for them.

No. I think that the moral of the story is that if the government is in control they will try to make you think that you have some input/control but don't. It will cost double of what they promise and what they promise is expensive to begin with.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

Obamacare is the same. Down the road people will love it.

You're not comparing like things. You're comparing an entire program (the retirement benefit in SS doesn't exist without SS, health care exists without obamacare, and generally a version that's as good or better).

It's not correct to assume that most people would choose to be in social security. I wouldn't. Most people wouldn't. 12.4% of my income would probably make a benefit triple what I can expect to get from social security, but it's pay as you go so those 12.4% are consumed now.

The people who love all of the programs and dictated rules are the ones who don't want to have to plan anything for themselves, or take any responsibility.

Originally Posted by DaveW

You're not comparing like things. You're comparing an entire program (the retirement benefit in SS doesn't exist without SS, health care exists without obamacare, and generally a version that's as good or better).

It's not correct to assume that most people would choose to be in social security. I wouldn't. Most people wouldn't. 12.4% of my income would probably make a benefit triple what I can expect to get from social security, but it's pay as you go so those 12.4% are consumed now.

The people who love all of the programs and dictated rules are the ones who don't want to have to plan anything for themselves, or take any responsibility.

The people who love all of the programs and dictated rules are the ones who don't want to have to plan anything for themselves, or take any responsibility.[/QUOTE]

The thing you and others don't seem to see is you are looking back at the program and looking at it as an investment that doesn't pay too good. That is not what it is or was ever intended to be. Yes you can invest the money and make way more but what happens when the next recession hits and a couple years before you want to retire you lose half or more of your investment. Then what? Maybe you are willing to take that chance but if you lose then you apply for welfare from the state or work until your dying day? If you want to scrap the program because YOU don't like it then you are dictating to others what they are going to have to do. That makes you no better than the Govt eh?

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

The people who love all of the programs and dictated rules are the ones who don't want to have to plan anything for themselves, or take any responsibility.

The thing you and others don't seem to see is you are looking back at the program and looking at it as an investment that doesn't pay too good. That is not what it is or was ever intended to be. Yes you can invest the money and make way more but what happens when the next recession hits and a couple years before you want to retire you lose half or more of your investment. Then what? Maybe you are willing to take that chance but if you lose then you apply for welfare from the state or work until your dying day? If you want to scrap the program because YOU don't like it then you are dictating to others what they are going to have to do. That makes you no better than the Govt eh?[/QUOTE]

It takes a pretty twisted view to say that because I don't want to be told what to do, that's telling you what to do. It's also incorrect.

Social Security was started as a sustenance benefit, it replaced about 16% of final income for most people, and it was created as a survivor's benefit because the average person didn't outlast age 65 by too much.

Now it replaces on average close to 40% and it's payable for about 20 years per participant.

It was intended to be an old age survivor's means to survive, but people expect it to be a pension, one that is highly skewed to the first bendpoint of earnings) it's a transfer system. If anything, I'd rather see it adjusted back to what it was in the beginning, push the retirement age back and decrease the benefits. If someone becomes disabled before that, there's already a benefit there.

Medicare is worse than social security in terms of waste, but I'll let you debate the points on it with yourself.

The bottom line is what happened to these old age survivors before Social Security existed? They either moved in with family or died in poverty. Eliminate it or drastically cut it and that will once again be the outcome. That was at a time when the savings rate in the U.S was astoundingly high by modern standards. I'm sure the Conservative view is too bad no savings suffer. You didn't plan for retirement too bad suffer.

Another thing to remember is even though folks are living much longer that doesn't mean we have a huge population of 70 and 80 year olds who are as fit as a fiddle. Most have serious health issues by that age and can't just keep working. Many do because they have no choice but shouldn't.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

Obamacare is the same. Down the road people will love it. The issue these days is the partisan goings on and all the hate circulating and the unprecedented money available to invent the "truth" and the gullible folks who will believe it.

Obamacare won't last a month past the next presidential election.

The problem with "Obamacare"

Comes from two facts

"We have to pass this bill to see what is in the bill that we had to lie to the American people about because it would have never passed if the truth was told.. So we have to depend on the stupidity of the American voter to get this passed"...


I combined two people into that statement and eliminated a ton of superfluous argument,, but those two things are at the core of the issue with the ACA

Now about 46% of the US population knew it was a Lie and voted that way so we can't be blamed for it...

This also glosses over all the "Fixes" and outright deceptions built into the plan, that we are finding out everyday...


It isn't that Americans don't want a better system, or are not a giving people willing to help those less fortunate, but we would like to know the truth...