world

Republicans threaten U.S. gov't shutdown over Obamacare

61 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2013 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

61 Comments
Login to comment

Twelve Republican senators including potential 2016 presidential candidates Marco Rubio and Rand Paul threatened Thursday to try and shut down the U.S. government unless funding to Obamacare is halted.

We do not have to look for terrorists outside ,it is disgraceful that we have 12 terrorists who do not know how to negotiate and compromise in politics. Is democracy dead?

3 ( +10 / -7 )

No surprise here. The Republicans want the US to remain behind most of the world in terms of care of its people, so long as it means a quick cash grab through their vested interests.

5 ( +13 / -8 )

I think it is extremely irresponsible for the press to refer to the Affordable Care Act as "Obamacare". The name is derisive and it not only appears that the press is taking sides, but it gives one side of the debate an unfair advantage.

I have not decided if I support ACA or not, although the primary objection I have is cost at a time when the U.S. is woefully in debt.

But regardless of Republican motives, shutting down the U.S. Congress would probably be a good thing. (Saying "shut down the government" is an utter falsehood). All the U.S. Congress does anymore is pass laws that steal more freedom, and all the Congressmen do is avoid their duty to protect the American people.

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

President Barack Obama’s historic health care law, his biggest domestic legislative achievement to date, is being implemented in stages, and conservatives have ramped up their opposition, insisting it is too costly for U.S. businesses and families.

Everyone knew this was going to be the case. Lo and behold, Obamacare is going to be a ridiculous burden on American businesses and American workers.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324399404578587513698345272.html?mod=trending_now_4

One explanation is almost surely ObamaCare. The law requires employers with more than 50 workers to provide health insurance to all employees or pay a $2,000 penalty per worker. The law also defines a full-time job as 30 hours a week. All of this gives businesses that operate on thin margins—and that's most businesses—an incentive to hire more part-time workers.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/05/news/economy/june-jobs-report/index.html

The number of people working part time because they couldn't find a full-time position rose by 322,000 from the month before. Some experts also pointed out that many of the newly-created jobs are in low-wage sectors. "Three quarters of these would qualify as low-quality jobs," said J.J. Kinahan, chief strategist at TD Ameritrade.

This trend is happening everywhere. The government is massively increasing the cost of acquiring new skilled laborers at a time when it's ALREADY HARD for new college graduates to find a half-decent job.

It doesn't stop there, though. Nearly every business in my area has already announced that all part-time employees are having their hours scaled back, and some positions that were formerly full-time or near full-time are being scaled back to part-time. They don't tell them explicitly why, but everyone with half a brain knows why.

Oh, but it's gonna be ok, because Obama and the house Democrats ALSO wants to increase the minimum wage again! YAY!

http://democrats.edworkforce.house.gov/sites/democrats.edworkforce.house.gov/files/documents/112/pdf/FairMinimumWageActof2012.pdf

So we won't have to worry about that pesky growth in part-time jobs anymore. We'd rather have no job growth, at all.

Some 60 members of the House of Representatives have taken a similar approach, urging Speaker John Boehner to defund the health care law when Congress negotiates government funding in September.

I was impressed with the recent ruling on the health care law. They stayed true to their responsibility - if there was a way to find the bill constitutional, they had to find it. At the same time, they made it a lot easier to deal with through defining the "penalty" as what it actually was: A tax, that was assessed like a tax and collected like a tax.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Globalwatcher, exactly! This is a nihilist theory of governing. In the legislative process, one advocates, debates, and votes. When your side loses, you get over it (as I did for Bush v. Gore).

Some Republicans for various reasons (rubio winning back an alienated base, etc.) have pulled the pin on the rhetorical grenade and said, " take it back or we all die!"

President Obama enabled this by trying to negotiate routine govt operations thus giving the tea-baggers an inch. Will he have the spine to draw a line in the sand?

As for this particular case, I feel that the long-term benefits outweigh the very real short/medium-term pain. These paranoid, isolationist, xenophobic, no-nothing, tea-baggers are a cancer that must be cut from the body politic. Any subsequent election after the effects of a shutdown were actualized, would do just that. The president should tell these men, "you may believe that you're pointing a gun at my head, but its actually pointed at yours. Go ahead. Make my day."

3 ( +8 / -5 )

They should shut the Government down , pr at least those parts of it that are not providing essential services. country would be much better off without this bloated monster interfering in every aspect of citizens' lives.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

Now if they said we are going to shut down government and we won't be paid for the duration I'd be inclined to listen to what they had to say.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

The GOP guys said: “We believe the only way to avert disaster is to fully repeal Obamacare and start over with a more sensible, practical approach to reforming our health care system."

Which the GOP doesn't have.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Which the GOP doesn't have.

So your suggestion is to allow an obvious incoming train wreck to take place rather than derailing the train until it can be fixed?

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

May be these American politicians should all became sick and needed hospital care. When needing care all of their assets frozen so they cannot pay for their treatment then they would understand those wanting help and cannot have it.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Obamacare is an obamanation. It should not only be repealed, but nationalized/socialized medical programs should ALL be abolished. While we're at it, scrap Socialist Security and Department of misEducation! Dismantle all the federal boondoggles!

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

And the Republicans wanted to shrug off the label of being obstructionists....

JeanValJean, while you are at it, dismantle the DoD since it is hugely expensive, basically only supports the defense of other countries. But, it would hurt the military hardware suppliers, and Republicans would not receive support since the military suppliers have strong economic ties to the Republicans.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

This is getting crazy. You don't just shut down government because you can't win a vote. It's law. It was passed. It's been vetted by the Supreme Court. Republicans have no right to think they can hijack the entire government to subvert the democratic process, and it's dangerous to pander to their radical base who might actually be going around saying, "Hey, a government shutdown might be a good thing!"

From gerrymandering, to trying to change the electoral college, to restricting voting access, to refusing to vote for Obama's appointments, to talk of shutting down the government down, to trying to eliminate abortion, Republicans obviously have a problem with our system of government and they're willing to scrap the whole thing rather than moderate their position to expand their shrinking base.

bfg: So your suggestion is to allow an obvious incoming train wreck to take place rather than derailing the train until it can be fixed?

Two points. First of all, no one really knows what's going to happen under Obamacare. There are already reports from California and New York about significant savings on premiums with the increased competition, with new York seeing a 50% drop in cost of some policies. Any horror story or sunny picture you hear is just an opinion, and there are opinions that run the entire range of possibilities.

Second of all, who the hell are you to decide that a train wreck is coming so we need to derail democracy? Thanks but I think I can get by without your help.

9 ( +14 / -5 )

JeanValJeanJul. 26, 2013 - 11:17AM JST

Obamacare is an obamanation. It should not only be repealed, but nationalized/socialized medical programs should ALL be abolished. While we're at it, scrap Socialist Security and Department of misEducation! Dismantle all the federal boondoggles!

Knock on wood, you will never get sick or disabled while some have no places to go for health care. May God grant you a humbleness, love and compassion to others.

I have 2 very successful professionals who were diagnosed with MS, and their insurance companies have just denied their coverage. I am all for Obamacare as well American Medical Association, American Nursing Association. I know I am on the right side of history and I will fight for these people and for the right cause in humanity. I want to sleep in conscience.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

First of all, no one really knows what's going to happen under Obamacare.

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt. We're dealing with centuries of established economic law, here. Also simple math, watch:

Labor cost = number of workers X wages new labor cost = number of workers X (wages + health care costs)

When health care costs are not equal to zero, will new labor costs be higher or lower than the old labor costs?

There are already reports from California and New York about significant savings on premiums with the increased competition, with new York seeing a 50% drop in cost of some policies.

A link, if you would be so kind.

Second of all, who the hell are you to decide that a train wreck is coming so we need to derail democracy?

They're just blowing steam saying they're going to shut down the government. Politicians have threatened it before, and they've never gone through with it and they never will.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Politics in the US is just getting worse and worse. We need a coup and a benevolent dictator - clearly too much "freedm" isn't working.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

That free enterprise that Republicans fear:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-17/new-york-insurance-rates-said-to-drop-about-50-for-individuals.html

"The state approved plans to be sold by 17 insurers, including UnitedHealth (UNH) Group Inc. and WellPoint Inc., the industry’s two biggest carriers, according to a statement today by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. The lowered rates mean that starting Oct. 1, a New York City resident who now pays at least $1,000 a month for insurance will be able to buy coverage for as little as $308, according to rates posted by governor’s office."

California:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/california-health-insurance-premiums_n_3328110.html

"Covered California, the authority in charge of the state's health insurance exchange, has released details about what the health insurance market for individuals who don't get coverage at work will look like next year. In all, 13 health insurance companies will sell products on the exchange, and premiums will range from 2 percent more to 29 percent less than what comparable plans cost this year, the agency said."

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Hahaha, I guess you didn't read all of the New York article:

New York may have been more ripe for savings than other states. Like the federal health law, New York regulators require insurers to accept all applicants, regardless of medical conditions. Unlike the federal act, the state doesn’t mandate that all residents -- including the young and healthy -- buy insurance. That’s produced a market tilted toward sicker, costlier members and driven New York premiums to among the highest in the country. Starting in 2014, that will be mitigated by the federal law’s subsidies for low- and middle-income customers, and its requirement that all Americans get coverage or pay a penalty.

And:

The new insurance rates won’t come without trade-offs. In Louisiana last week, the state’s BlueCross BlueShield plan said it expected premiums to stay flat or decline next year for about 75 percent of the individual market when subsidies are included. The remaining 25 percent will likely see increases, with rates more than doubling for some people who make too much for the financial assistance, the company said. That could spell trouble if higher prices push healthy customers out of the market, said Carl McDonald, a Citigroup insurance-industry analyst based in New York. “The issue is that the 75 percent of the individual population with stable or lower premiums (including subsidies) are generally older and in poorer health,” McDonald said in a July 13 research note. “The younger and healthier crowd is generally the group facing the most significant increases that are more likely to decide to pay the penalty and not buy health insurance next year.”

Likewise, the effects in Cali are driven by pure, basic market fundamentals:

California is not only the most populous state in the U.S., but it also has the highest number of uninsured residents, 7.3 million in 2011. The state is tied for the fourth-highest percentage of residents without health insurance at 20 percent, census data show. The state embraced health care reform soon after Obama signed the law in 2010 and is seen as a bellwether for whether the initiative can succeed.

Cali and NY are exceptions.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

SuperLib: "It's been vetted by the Supreme Court. Republicans have no right to think they can hijack the entire government to subvert the democratic process..."

You're absolutely right, but then they are Republicans after all -- essentially babies throwing a tantrum when they don't get their way.

-2 ( +8 / -10 )

You're absolutely right, but then they are Republicans after all -- essentially babies throwing a tantrum when they don't get their way.

Republicans aren't unique in that aspect,, that's basically what all politicians do.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

You're absolutely right, but then they are Republicans after all -- essentially babies throwing a tantrum when they don't get their way.

Republicans aren't unique in that aspect,, that's basically what all politicians do.

hmmm. That's what ALL politicians do? That's exactly that as Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal tells GOP: Stop being the stupid party. Yepee.....;)

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Politicians have threatened it before, and they've never gone through with it and they never will.

bfg4987, the GOP was stupid enough to try this once and may be stupid enough to do it again. You may remember a certain former congressman (and former presidential candidate) Newt Gingrich: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_government_shutdown_of_1995_and_1996

Why does the Tea Party so hate democracy?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"… while you are at it, dismantle the DoD since it is hugely expensive, basically only supports the defense of other countries. But, it would hurt the military hardware suppliers, and Republicans would not receive support since the military suppliers have strong economic ties to the…" (fill in the blank) party. The D/R party are the two sides of the same corrupt coin. Neither would venture to even reduce the military-industrial complex and risk their (car)rears.

The truth about Obamacare is in the simple math pointed out by bfg4987 and the evidence is surfacing again as pointed out by bfg4987.

Obamacare will indeed bankrupt all of healthcare and, in turn, the nation, and no amount of QE-infinity will even make a scratch. Like Clinton's housing mortgage contrivance looked good at first, in due time the true cost surfaced and the high-risk mortgages failed and the crooked bankers still came out on top.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

Obamacare will indeed bankrupt all of healthcare and, in turn, the nation....

GOP speak for "What we say now regarding proposals we originated because a Democratic president has instituted them." Not only is your statement not backed up, it is contradicted: in fact, the healthcare cost curve has already flattened.

Also - So what? A politician who opposes a law may try to rewrite it, appeal it, or get used to it. To threaten a government shutdown is danger bordering on treason.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

It's interesting that critics are calling this tactic childish, stupid, or even treasonous. Especially, when the other side(democrats) have threatened to do this as well in order to get their way.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

facevalue, can you name a single instance when Democrats in either the House or the Senate threatened to not pay the government's bills unless a Republican president met their demands? If so, please let me know. A single instance will suffice.

This tactic IS childish, stupid, and even treasonous, and would be humorous if it were not so dangerous - and that is not simply my opinion. The majority of GOP senators have said much the same.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Treasonous? Now who's wearing the tinfoil hat?! The fact is obamaocare has yet to be fully implemented, and has been pushed back until after the midterms to avoid its supporters getting voted out of office when the reality of it drops on the people's heads with its full weight.

Laguna, you really should be aware that I'm Independent. The GOPers to which you refer are the BIG Gubmitt Neo-cons, and they differ with the unLiberal Dems less in content than in style.

The sooner the myth of "intractable partisan warfare" is dispelled, the better. The establishment leadership of the two parties collaborate on far more than they fight. That is a basic truth that needs to be understood. As John Boehner joined with Nancy Peolsi, as Eric Cantor whipped support for the Obama White House, as Michele Bachmann and Peter King stood with Steny Hoyer to attack NSA critics as Terrorist-Lovers, yesterday was a significant step toward accomplishing that.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

As for this particular case, I feel that the long-term benefits outweigh the very real short/medium-term pain. These paranoid, isolationist, xenophobic, no-nothing, tea-baggers are a cancer that must be cut from the body politic.

Providing better overall healthcare at a significantly lower cost as a proportion of GDP is the sort of thing that Europeans do. And everyone knows that Europeans are basically socialists and therefore evil, along with their healthcare systems.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Republicans only care about $$$$!! ANYONE SURPRISED?? Geez I am not! Biggest bloodsuckers on the face of the earth! Never have trusted these dirty cheap lowdown stingy bastards and never will! So they would rather make the US government stand still rather than help people who are about to die???? Only a knuckle head could not see through the horrible racist pranks these stingy bastards always try to pull!

1 ( +4 / -3 )

JeanValJean, a definition of treason: a crime that covers some of the more extreme acts against one's nation. There are two possibilities these extremists are playing with: That they are simply acting out and have no intention of following through on their threats; or that they would indeed destroy the credit and credibility of the United States - thus incurring huge damage to its citizens - simply because they oppose a law which was duly passed by their own institution. The former case would be childish and stupid; the latter really cannot be termed anything else but treasonous.

Also - Rand Paul is a "BIG Gubmitt Neo-con"? Better hold a news conference.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

bfg: Hahaha, I guess you didn't read all of the New York article:

hahah I guess you didn't even know the article existed until I put it right under your nose. My point was that no one knows what will happen, not even you. There is data on both sides. Even if it's new to you.

They're just blowing steam saying they're going to shut down the government.

I guess that's the good news?

Labor cost = number of workers X wages new labor cost = number of workers X (wages + health care costs)

Thanks for the lesson. Please factor in human life and recalculate.

Want to hear something really creepy? Obama announced that he is going to delay business requirements for one year. The Republican response? Vote to delay business requirements for one year. Isn't that just weird? They voted on something that had already been decided by the President anyway. That's along with their 39th vote to repeal Obamacare. Along with Paul Ryan's budgets that repeal Obamacare. And now 12 Republican senators are saying they want to shut down the government. That's a lot of steam.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Obamacare will indeed bankrupt all of healthcare and, in turn, the nation, and no amount of QE-infinity will even make a scratch.

Healthcare and insurance companies will bankrupt the country. Healthcare and insurance will continue to receive money and will survive nicely.

Something needs to be done, and the solution of requiring insurance looks to be the only way. The people without insurance are already impacted those who do have insurance. The costs are passed on to the insured.

I see it as a social good that needs to be done in the U.S. It is also an economic necessity to slow down the growth of medical care costs, insurance costs, and the costs to society of people getting sick from preventable diseases.

It has worked in Japan, UK and Canada. The only reason there is a huge backlash in the U.S. is because people are no going to have to pay for costs that were passed off to others.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

bfg4987,let's please stop pretending that economics is a science with predictive powers comparable to Newtonian mechanics, because if it was we wouldn't be suffering a global fiscal meltdown in the first place, we'd be plugging into (some stuff) + (some stuff) = PROFIT all day long and there'd be no need for debate.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

sigh

While I have no objection to reforming healthcare in the U.S. (It does need it. I used to work processing state Medicaid payments and saw the rampant fraud and abuse of it there), the Obamacare/ACA provisions were the Wrong way to go about them.

A massive omnibus bill passed without anyone really looking at it (Freely Admitted by Nancy Pelosi) is never a good idea as all sorts of ugly little regulations and quangos can be snuck in without scrutiny and lead to more problems). Which definitely appears to be the case as more and more delays on it actually being implimented. So We must be lead to believe the ACA is so badly written from a) Incompetence or B) Malevolence that none of the parties wanted to look at it too closely.

Now it's come to biting people those that passed it in the ass, and I can hear the squealing from DC from here.

A logical thing to do would be to strike ACA down and start fresh from scratch under full public scrutiny as the new provisions are written so that it can be properly debated and adjusted as needed.

but then, the opportunities for graft are minimal at that point. Which is why it will never happen.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@Viking68

JeanValJean, while you are at it, dismantle the DoD since it is hugely expensive, basically only supports the defense of other countries. But, it would hurt the military hardware suppliers, and Republicans would not receive support since the military suppliers have strong economic ties to the Republicans.

So true!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

My old plan didn't qualify as insurance under the law, it was a small co-op with catastrophic injury insurance through a larger provider, and I had to get another one last month when the plan finally wrapped up. Paying an extra 6 grand a year for services I don't want or need, the services I do want I still have to pay out of pocket for, and I'm looking at a big ole hike next year, goodie.

This is just a subsidy for the insurance companies that will drive up the cost of care and insurance. Same as what happened to college debt and what happened to mortgages, the federal government gets involved, prices surge, and in time, the whole thing falls apart. Rinse and repeat.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Four and a half years with Barack Obama in the White House and STILL no free health care for everyone? Sheesh...

0 ( +3 / -3 )

My point was that no one knows what will happen, not even you.

Everybody knows what will happen. Analysts have been saying that this is bad for business and workers for as long as this joke of a bill has been in the works. You're in denial.

There is data on both sides.

The data you claimed was "on your side" turned out to be on my side, because you didn't bother to read or comprehend what you posted. Please find me some data that is legitimately "on your side."

Obama announced that he is going to delay business requirements for one year

Don't you understand why? Even HE realizes this is bad, and bigger than he in his glorious omniscience could have foreseen. I mean, good God, how many waivers and exemptions have been made (or are being sought) for political offices and pet businesses of politicians? Not to mention, how many historically Democrat supporting organizations want exemptions, too?

http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2013/07/12/union-letter-obamacare-will-destroy-the-very-health-and-wellbeing-of-workers/

The Democrat's precious Unions even say this is garbage. Everyone knows this bill is an atrocity. EVERYONE. It's time to give up the ghost, or at least knock off the intellectual dishonesty, because no human being could legitimately support this bill, anymore.

That's along with their 39th vote to repeal Obamacare.

And I hope they continue to vote in such a way until this massacre is fixed.

Please factor in human life and recalculate.

Ohhhh, aren't you sweet, caring about human life.

How about a few other human lives: How about the lives of people whose hours are going to be cut or jobs eliminated because of this bill (Multiple members of my family)? How about the people who don't have health insurance because they cannot afford it, and will continue to not be able to afford it after the full effect of the law is enacted (Multiple members of my family)? How about the lives of people who don't want or need health insurance because it's a waste of money for them(Me.)?

Don't you think that, in this great, advanced, intelligent nation, we can think of a plan to help those who are uninsured WITHOUT screwing over people who are already hurting? Don't you think it's worth putting on hold (that is, eliminating) a sub-par piece of "legislation" until we can find it?

bfg4987,let's please stop pretending that economics is a science with predictive powers comparable to Newtonian mechanics, because if it was we wouldn't be suffering a global fiscal meltdown in the first place,

Let's not pretend you know anything about economics if you're going to make statements like that.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The GOP is steeped in self-interest and works for the interests of their sponsors. They only care for themselves. As to the rest of the people of America? Who are these people anyway Getting into their opportunities for making more money.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

I don't really understand this headline. How would the Republicans shut down the government? By passing a funding bill that doesn't include Obamacare, that wouldn't cause the government to shut down. Everything else in the government would be funded, just not Obamacare. If the Dems throw a tantrum and refuse to pass anything until Obamacare gets money, they can then go ahead and explain to the recipients of Social Security, that Obamacare is more important then them getting their checks. The Dems could explain to the poor who depend on food stamps, why they don't care if they starve, so long as Obamacare doesn't.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

bfg4987Jul. 26, 2013 - 11:51PM JST

Everybody knows what will happen. Analysts have been saying that this is bad for business

Oh dear, you are million miles away to grasp the truth in global economy.

Obamacare is good for business. A marginal cost of American goods and services has been hijacked by a health care cost, and American business is no longer competing in global market place while German and Japanese with National Health care are maintaining the marginal cost to the optimum level. The comment like this is not helping American economy in MACRO global environment. Thanks.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Obamacare is good for business.

Your definition of good, and mine are obviously different. How anyone can define a law that merely adds to a businesses expense, while not at all improving their bottom line, as being a good thing, is beyond me. Additionally, as it forces businesses to cut employee hours, to under 30 a week, it also hurts a huge number of people, who are then going to be forced to go out and find additional jobs to make ends meet.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Obamacare is good for business.

Ha.

A marginal cost of American goods and services has been hijacked by a health care cost, and American business is no longer competing in global market place while German and Japanese with National Health care are maintaining the marginal cost to the optimum level.

What?

Wait, I mean......what? I think you're trying to use words that make you look like you know more than you actually do. You don't have to try so hard, it's ok to be wrong.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

as being a good thing, is beyond me.

You don't have to try so hard, it's ok to be wrong.

Please tell me where I got it wrong. I cannot debate without it. Please be specific. Thanks.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Please tell me where I got it wrong.

As best as I can gather from your last post, you seem to be under the impression that Obamacare will somehow push the American healthcare industry into higher quality and catching up with the rest of the world blah blah blah.

Even IF that were the case, you are completely ignoring all the detrimental effects on the REST of the American business world, which I have already outlined and provided hard data in support of. Don't get me wrong, the American medical industry does need a kick in the pants, but Obamacare is SHOOTING the entire business world in the face. Reform can wait until we come up with a better plan, rather than pushing through a proposal to bring about world peace by blowing up the earth.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Even IF that were the case

You have a lot of "even if" comments. Even if it's better, even if more people get preventative care, even if people can move to different jobs without worrying about coverage, even if more people pay into the system, even if there is more competition, even if yadda yadda yadda. Your slavery to profits does a pretty good job of pushing all of that out of your mind.

Analyzing the cost to business is part of the equation, but it's not God. It might be your God, but it's just one piece of the puzzle. Adding ADA compliant entrances and bathrooms wasn't done to make businesses more profitable. Cost issues shouldn't be taken lightly, but for something as important as universal healthcare I think it's worth taking a look at.

As for companies reducing workers, let's make it clear that it's already happening regardless of Obamacare. These "smart" companies were already finding ways to reduce employee benefits, ship jobs overseas, keep wages low, etc. None of that changed with Obamacare. Some of the famous owners who have come out and spoken against it for your reasons, like Papa John's, have already backtracked. Yesterday I was on the phone with Tech support rep who was in India.....think he's going to get coverage under the law?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

May be these American politicians should all became sick and needed hospital care. ...

Congress has exempted themselves, for life, from the ACA or Obamacare or whatever you want to call it. They get free health care until the day they die because they are so important. The fox is guarding the chicken coop.

Obamacare is going to raise costs for the people who work by giving health care to people who don't. It's a redistribution scheme. It will skew the employment pool and slow the economy. There's no such thing a a free lunch.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

As best as I can gather from your last post, you seem to be under the impression that Obamacare will somehow push the American healthcare industry into higher quality and catching up with the rest of the world blah blah blah.

Even IF that were the case, you are completely ignoring all the detrimental effects on the REST of the American business world, which I have already outlined and provided hard data in support of. Don't get me wrong, the American medical industry does need a kick in the pants, but Obamacare is SHOOTING the entire business world in the face. Reform can wait until we come up with a better plan, rather than pushing through a proposal to bring about world peace by blowing up the earth.

LOL, you and Molenir did not realize I am on the same ideology and page (a marginal cost of running business) with Hilary who may be running for the 2016. Bhwahaha.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Even if it's better,

It won't be

even if more people get preventative care,

Maybe

even if people can move to different jobs without worrying about coverage,

Probably

Even if more people pay into the system,

Because they're forced to

even if there is more competition,

Because it is compulsory

Your slavery to profits does a pretty good job of pushing all of that out of your mind.

Not so much slavery to profits as it is caring for the well-being of people who are already currently in a bad shape and, in all likelihood, will be in worse shape if Obamacare goes into full effect in its current form.

Analyzing the cost to business is part of the equation, but it's not God.

Of course. I'm fully aware that health care reform cannot take place without everyone having to make some sort of sacrifice.

However, the current arm + leg + firstborn child sacrifice Obamacare dictates is NOT worth it, and we can do better. Reform can wait. Pushing through a proposition to blow up the world in order to immediately end all wars isn't a good idea, should we do it even though there isn't currently a better idea?

As for companies reducing workers, let's make it clear that it's already happening regardless of Obamacare

Bzzzzzt. Remember that link I posted yesterday?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324399404578587513698345272.html?mod=trendingnow4

Companies are hiring more workers. However, they're all crappy part-time jobs. Why? Because of Obamacare. Obamacare is hurting new college graduates who can't find good work in their field. Obamacare is hurting current workers whose jobs will have reduced hours. Obamacare is hurting everyone, and it hasn't even been fully implemented yet.

Some of the famous owners who have come out and spoken against it for your reasons, like Papa John's, have already backtracked.

Oh? Have the union leaders for the Teamsters, United Food and Commercial Workers, AND UNITE-HERE backtracked?

http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2013/07/12/union-letter-obamacare-will-destroy-the-very-health-and-wellbeing-of-workers/

Aren't unions the strongholds, bastions of the working man and woman? If they're against Obamacare, what exactly does that mean? What does it mean if some of Obama's biggest supporters call his plan an abomination?

Yesterday I was on the phone with Tech support rep who was in India.....think he's going to get coverage under the law?

Nope, and neither will the people being hired into the new part-time position nor the current part time positions whose hours are being reduced.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

bfg: Not so much slavery to profits as it is caring for the well-being of people who are already currently in a bad shape and

I'm assuming "bad shape" means financially speaking, not cancer or anything like that.

Maybe to preventive care? Seems like you don't want to admit that. Probably that people can move jobs more easily? I'm glad you see there are some benefits. Forced to buy insurance? You have a problem with getting more people to pay into the system? You have a problem with big government making more of a free enterprise market for services? Seems that some of these things would be up your alley.

However, they're all crappy part-time jobs. Why? Because of Obamacare.

Keep drinking the Kool-Aid. That is one of the many reasons why businesses are not hiring, but, please, don't tell me it is THE reason. Part time work has been a thorn in job numbers since the beginning of the recession. One of the most common reasons given is the instability in Washington, and threatening to shut down the government is part of the problem. Solve that and you'll do much more than eliminating Obamacare. And I'm sure you'll admit that producing crappy jobs for low benefits has been a goal of business for a while now since it increases their profits.

Look, my point is that no one really knows what's going to happen. If it doesn't work, then scrap it. If it does work in some ways, then modify it. If it works better than you thought, then keep it. Some people will get more benefits from the system. Some will get less. You have no crystal ball so stop pretending. And get your Republican buddies to understand that they have no guarantees, except for the whole shutting down the government thing which is the only guaranteed disaster.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

This is a joke. There is no economic basis for healthcare. Do you shop for the lowest price when you are in an ambulance? Would you even care? For that matter, do you the best hospital to go to for any specific problem? Do you know which hospital is a trauma center? Do you which hospital is a level 1 trauma center? Do you even have a level one trauma center near you? In Japan, its all a crap shoot if you need an ambulance so don't worry about it. There was a well know conservative that proposed that medicare be extended for every one over 50 or 55 which would save a fortune. American healthcare costs are crazy because of insurance companies. They pay whatever and pass the costs on in premiums so there is no incentive to lower costs. Also they charge US doctors ridiculous premiums for malpractice insurance which also get passed on. Healthcare costs was not a problem until the insurance industry got involved. Also, based on outcome, the US does not have the best healthcare. A few years ago, Taiwan created it's healthcare system. They looked at various systems around the world. If interested in healthcare you should take a look at why they picked their system. US is the only developed country in the world where you can go bankrupted if something major happened to your health.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Look, my point is that no one really knows what's going to happen.

You can say that as much as you want, it's still not true. Just because you lack economic foresight doesn't mean everyone does.

Everyone knows exactly what's going to happen, and it's already happening. The precious unions don't want it, the IRS doesn't want it, politicians' employees don't want it, businesses don't want it, the list goes on and on. Everyone is coming out saying "Please, for the love of God, no, do not do this to us, we beg you." I'm not going to bother posting any more links to data or professional analysis, since you clearly have some kind of grudge against facts. You can keep riding on HOPE (tm), I'll stick with facts.

Everyone knows exactly what's going to happen? . Please tell me something I do not know. Thanks.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

No surprise here. The Republicans want the US to remain behind most of the world in terms of care of its people, so long as it means a quick cash grab through their vested interests.

We don't want that crap! Next we will have taxes like Britain! Learn to take care of yourself and don't rely on others so much. Our hospitals already service people for free, they are called "charity cases". What works in Europe (well nothing seems to be working over there) won't magically work in another place of the world.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Many are making lots of money from the military industrial complex. My comments generally get postitive ratings, but I angered some people with the truth above. Oh well...

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

BFG: However, the current arm + leg + firstborn child sacrifice

You make some good points.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

They must be, since the only rebuttals you have ever offered to my rational conclusions drawn from hard facts is "You can't see the future," some liberal talking points, a couple platitudes, and just plain false information.

Sad but true. Theres no debate when the reality is as bad as this. Its why so many Dems are running away from Obamacare, and why its being called a train wreck by the very people, who were stupid enough to vote for it.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

MolenirJul. 28, 2013 - 05:27AM JST

They must be, since the only rebuttals you have ever offered to my rational conclusions drawn from hard facts is "You can't see the future," some liberal talking points, a couple platitudes, and just plain false information.

Sad but true. Theres no debate when the reality is as bad as this. Its why so many Dems are running away from Obamacare, and why its being called a train wreck by the very people, who were stupid enough to vote for it.

Obamacare will be good. You are just throwing unknown fear to everyone for no reason.

Here is the example of some facts I want to share with you, Molenir:

1) I now spend less for more Medicare coverage.

2)As a matter of fact, I no longer have to carry a Plan D that is about $400 saving a year. Plus, all my medications are 80% cheaper than what they used to be.

3) I have now told I no longer have to carry a supplemental vision coverage that saves $180 a year as my medicare is providing it at free of charge. In addition, my new better pair (normally $860 without insurance) will cost only $270.

Do you have a health insurance, Molenir? I hope so. I am very fortunate that I always had an excellent health insurance without holes. More positive changes are coming in this fall.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I do have health insurance. I get it through my job. I'll continue to get it through my job. Its not great insurance, but its good insurance. Its already changed though under the new regime. My new health insurance, not surprisingly is not as good.

Lets be completely frank here. Some people will benefit from Obamacare. People who now currently do not have health insurance for example. But the majority of people who don't have it, will be forced to purchase it, despite having no need of it. Many others, like myself, will lose the good health insurance we had, for lesser coverage. And of course, others will lose their coverage entirely, and be forced to purchase the expensive alternatives now being created. And of course many people are losing hours from their jobs, and being forced to find additional work, to make ends meet. So while there are a few benefits to Obamacare, and some people may actually benefit overall, the majority of people will be hurt greatly by this law.

Obama announced today, that he will shut down the government, if Republicans aren't willing to waste more money on Obamacare. While he didn't expressly come out and say it, nevertheless, he effectively said, that he doesn't care about retired people on social security, or people who rely on food stamps, and may starve without it. No, apparently, all he cares about is that his burdensome, idiotic health care bill gets money. If it doesn't, he is happy to let people starve. Thats a Democrat for you. Holding people hostage.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

MolenirJul. 29, 2013 - 03:35PM JST

I do have health insurance. I get it through my job. I'll continue to get it through my job. Its not great insurance, but its good insurance. Its already changed though under the new regime. My new health insurance, not surprisingly is not as good.

If you are not carrying a "catastrophe" health insurance, you are doing a lot better than most. The catastrophe health insurance is almost carrying NO health insurance as you know. It has a too high deductible with too many restrictions and holes.

If you have a coverage with a 80/20 coinsurance split with no coverage cap, no health care providers restrictions, $75 emergency, $200 in hospital stay up to 6 days (after 6 days, insurance pays everything), no extra cost to blood supply, for you and you family members, then you are doing fine and doing better than the most.

People often blame this to Obama, it is not so. You need to shift your blame to your corporate management team. It is their responsibilities to work for you. Every year, they need to be hawkish to look for a better health care coverage. They need to negotiate aggressively and demand changes to healthcare insurance company to do better. I have been very fortunate my team always did that (I was in the 10 US top corporations). .

And of course, others will lose their coverage entirely, and be forced to purchase the expensive alternatives now being created.

Others will lose their coverage entirely?

That's the reason Obamacare is here and available for everyone. Oregon is already starting a health care partnership with the Fed Gov. People without insurance can now signed up and the cost is less than $120 a month. If you think this is too expensive, then our discussion ends here, no need to go on.

My state (Blue) is also starting a partnership with the Fed gov for Medicare. Our governor and the state insurance commissioner have been working very hard with insurance provider to do better. If they cannot do better, they have no business here. We want them to stay OUT, do not bother us, they can go elsewhere. A sad story is that all "Red" states are not on this programs. They are still allowing these insurance companies to charge more for less coverage. Jindall (R) is correct to call Republicans a stupid party.

A quality of life is very important to me as always. I concisely selected which state I wanted to live in, and which company I wanted to work for. I never compromised that. Now I am glad I did all that as I am in the most beautiful place ( may be biased) in the world with clean water, air, a center of World Progressive Thinktank thinkers, lots of outdoor activities.

And of course many people are losing hours from their jobs, and being forced to find additional work, to make ends meet. So while there are a few benefits to Obamacare, and some people may actually benefit overall, the majority of people will be hurt greatly by this law

Obama announced today, that he will shut down the government,

?? Again, Molenir, each state can introduce a stature prohibiting such a loophole and business practice. It depends how your state congress members want to do.

So far, I have not heard anything new from Obama today as you have stated as above.

I hope you are not distorting the truth here unless you only watch FOX news( news?) Molenir, that's a thread of this topic to begin with. Republicans threaten U.S. gov't shutdown over Obamacare

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If you have a coverage with a 80/20 coinsurance split with no coverage cap, no health care providers restrictions, $75 emergency, $200 in hospital stay up to 6 days (after 6 days, insurance pays everything), no extra cost to blood supply, for you and you family members, then you are doing fine and doing better than the most.

Yeah, that sounds nice. And definitely is not what I have. I was closer to that before, but after Obamacare was declared constitutional, my company looked at everything, and switched to a cheaper plan. Less coverage, higher deductible, 100k cap.

I don't blame them for the switch. With rates going up, they either have to cut peoples hours to under 30, or change to a health care provider, and plan thats within the budget.

Others will lose their coverage entirely?

The reality is, that all workers over 30 hours, must be provided health insurance by their employer. In many jobs, particularly low wage jobs, this means that instead of having people work 40 hours, they cut their employees hours to under 30. Thus they don't have to provide health insurance. Indeed, the ones who are hurt the most by Obamacare, are the low wage earners. The poor, that Obama professes to care for.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

All I know is I'm sick and tired of not getting my healthcare needs met. Either way people aren't going to get their health needs met. If you pay insurance, you lose. If you don't pay insurance, you lose. As I said before, ideally I'd prefer to only have to worry about how much in taxes would be taken out, but should I need to go to a hospital for anything it would be wonderful to walk in, be taken care of and not have to worry about a bill popping up somewhere. Reminds me of the time I was sick (with no insurance) and I went to a privatized hospital that later sent me a bill for $600 USD just so I could take 1 dose of antibiotics. My ex-gf also had a planned visit to get herself checked on and also received a bill but hers was $700 USD. When I had the same health issue again about 2 years later I went to a state funded clinic that gave me a dose of the same antibody (no insurance) and I only had to pay $20 USD.

Compared to our current healthcare situation in the US, I'd rather have federal oversight where I'd know where my money is going in taxes as compared to either having to go through my business for healthcare plans and services or personally sifting through corporate run HMOs which you still have to pay much more, but should you actually need any healthcare services paid for you have to fight to get it paid.

I'd like to know how much less stressful our lives would be if all of us didn't have to worry about receiving a bill or co-pay in the mail since we'd know we've already paid it through taxes and don't have to look back and worry about every time we need a check up.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites