Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Here's another one
Date:	12/20/2015 10:22:45 AM (updated 12/20/2015 10:34:51 AM)

I recently posted a bit of factual information without comment and received condemnation for the post.  Here is another,...bring it on!!!

The GOP national committee recently released a talking point pointing out, correctly, that in the last 6 years under Obamacare (?the most relevant parts of Obamacare did not go into effect until 2014?) the average premium for a family's health insurance has "soared" upward 26% or $4154 for those 6 years.  Sounds bad, is bad!

Factcheck.org has even rated the claim as true!!  But, they did provide some context...In the first 6 years of W's administration health insurance premiums increased 72%.  Under the 6 Bush years the inflation rate was 13% putting the increase in insurance costs at 5.5 times the overall increase in the cost of living.  Under Obama's first 6 years the inflation rate was 11% so the premium increase was 2.3 times inflation...less than half of in W's corresponding years

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Now a brief comment
Date:	12/20/2015 10:24:43 AM

A FACT IS A FACT, BUT A FACT IN CONTEXT IS TRUTH.  Most of you hate it but that doesn't change the fact or the truth!!

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Now a brief comment
Date:	12/20/2015 5:08:38 PM

You know, I don't think it matters whether it is a success or not.  The government spent a small fortune developing it, the insurance companies spent a small fortune implementing it and the medical community has also spent a small fortune setting up systems that meet the requirements.  No matter what any politician says, I don't think they will do away with it.  Tweak it?  Yes, I think it will evolve over time.  No new system is going to be a raving success when it first comes out.  So my prediction is that whether it is the worst thing Obama did, or if it is the best thing that has ever happened, it's going to be with us in some form for a long time, because too much money has been invested everywhere for it to just go away. 

No doubt, someone will rush to say I am an idiot and don't know what I am talking about, but that is my prediction, nonetheless.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Now a brief comment
Date:	12/20/2015 6:50:19 PM

I asked my doctor what he had to do to adapt to Ocare, and he said there were only two approved software programs and he and his three partners had to shell out $165,000 to buy one of them.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Now a brief comment
Date:	12/20/2015 7:38:25 PM

Exactly what I mean.  And I'm not saying that is a good thing, but it is what it is.  As I understand it, insurance companies also had to make significant changes to accomodate it too.  And we already know the sad story about how much it cost the government to put it in place.  I don't think the medical community will be willing to toss it out, even if they don't like it in it's current form.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Now a brief comment
Date:	12/20/2015 7:44:09 PM (updated 12/20/2015 7:51:48 PM)

I think you need to ask your doctor for a clarification.  Our doctor told my wife late last year that since all Obamacare patients are under private insurance carriers and since the interaction is with the insurance carriers and not the government exchanges, his office had no major changes in the way they operate other than the typical annoying and often inexplicable routine year to year changes in records keeping instituted by the insurance companies and Medicare and setting up accounts for new patients and their insurance carriers.

There is a new federal requirement that all medical practices and hospitals begin move toward a universal computerized system of medical records to insure the quick and accurate and safe transmission of medical records.  This requirement was originally put into Obamacare by GOP members of Congress and supported by Democrats because it made sense and in the false belief it would make the bill more palitable to some Republicans. 

It is also my understanding that no medical practice is required to be a part any particular insurance carriers approved list of practioners just as there is no requirement that any doctor accept Medicare patients. 

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Now a brief comment
Date:	12/20/2015 8:53:32 PM

Hodja.....maybe your doc forgot to apply for the subsidy or just doesn't want you to know he accepted government welfare. Ask him if the government reimbursed him any of the $165,000 and let us know.

"In 2009 as part of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, the federal government set aside $27 billion for an incentive program that encourages hospitals and providers to adopt electronic health records systems (EHR). Billions more were allocated to help train health information technology (HIT) workers and assist hospitals and providers in setting up EHRs that would enable the health data historically sequestered in paper files to be shared among providers and used to improve health care quality."

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Archidiot
Date:	12/20/2015 10:52:10 PM

Has anyone tried to find out how many Americans are actually paying for o-BAMAcare?  I looked on the "official" website and there are three pages of BS with absolutely no answers.  Let's see:  there were 30-47 million in the US without health insurance....who are they...legal?...illegals?.....who knows o-BAMA won't say.  Total buying insurance in 2014...8 million....87% get gubment assistance for premium.  2015 numbers claim 16 million on OC but that includes new Medicaid freebies given w/0-bammiecare.  Gubment won't break out numbers.  There are over 300 million people living in the US but only 8 million on OC....something's wrong here....it's all a huge lie.

Most of the big revision in insurance killing docs is the gubment change and revision in ICD coding.  ICD 10 coding is a long overdue coding revision that will cause mass confusion for months/years, but is not necessarily caused by OC.  Do like Goofhead and jump on one of those bronze policies with their $6,000 annual deductible........is that really insurance??

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Now a brief comment
Date:	12/20/2015 11:23:28 PM

And where the hell do you think those billions came from?  Put your rationalization where the sun don't shine.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Mr Hodgiee Why So Upset???????
Date:	12/20/2015 11:30:51 PM

Why so upset? Obviously, we all know where the subsidy comes from.....Chinese money loaned to US goverment to pay your wealty doc for installing electonic record keeping. He just needs to be honest and admit he was reimbursed. Ask him...don't be pissed at me or are you intimidated by your doc?

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Mr Wixxie Why So Upset???????
Date:	12/20/2015 11:36:34 PM

You are so upset over nothing and you need to slow down before you become a statistic yourself. The forum would be so boring without your jokes. The information is so easy to locate but you seem to enjoy making convuluted statements about how difficult it is. I think you just need more Google experience and you will locate what you are searching for. If I can be of assistance, let me know. 

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Mr Hodgiee Why So Upset???????
Date:	12/21/2015 12:15:13 AM

You need a dose of ExLax

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Wiximbecile
Date:	12/21/2015 8:06:44 AM (updated 12/21/2015 8:12:43 AM)

l don't need any plan, bronze or platnum...l have "socialized" medicine...l am on medicare and love it.  My premiums for Medicare and supplemental coverage is less than 60% of what l was paying for private insurance before l turned 65.  My supplemental has gone from $168/mo to $205/mo in the last 6 years (about 3%/year).  Except for occasional prescription drugs and the outrageous private sector parking fee when l visit my doctor, l have not paid one penny in medical costs beyond the premiums in the last 6 years and that includes 3 minor out-patient surgeries.  Same for my wife and she had a full knee replacement with 4 nights in the hospital and a month of in-home therepy sessions.  Hey, we even get free gym membership!!  We LOVE our "gubment" medical insurance!!!

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Wiximbecile (now that's cute)
Date:	12/21/2015 10:20:19 AM

I, too, have Medicare, and I, too, have Schedule F supplemental, but the difference is you and I paid Medicare taxes and a portion of our SSI to EARN the RIGHT to have medical coverage after the age of 65.  Interestingly you seem to count your Medicare just like Medicaid, which is a freebie offered to lazy, underachievers who CHOOSE to live off the working society, and vote dimokrap.

o-BAMMIEcare offers "assistance payments" to enrollees to fool them into thinking they're paying for their insurance while it's just a way to hide support payments to insurance companies to get the ins industry to go along with the scam..  Guess who pays these payments!!  87% of all o-BAMMIEcare insured receive these scam kickbacks.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Goofbutt
Date:	12/21/2015 12:19:53 PM

The truth, Goofbutt, the truth about the utter failure of your president's failed scam is what I'm looking for, and you won't get it from gubment websites.....

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Wiximbecile (now that's cute)...as is Archidiot
Date:	12/21/2015 11:36:44 PM

Are you unable to read and understand English as well as being an a##hole?  Where did l say that l thought it was free?  Of course I paid into FICA for over 45 years and still continue to pay without objection.  Yes, a large percentage of Obamacare insured receive a payment credit and the vast majority of the insured through their employer receive a supplement if not full payment for their employer provided insurance.  How is it you are smart enough to realize you are having to make up a part uf the credits with higher taxes but too stupid to realize you are paying a small part of those employer supplements in higher service fees and purchase prices?  That is exactly why l believe the most important reform to healthcare insurance is to prohibit employer provided coverage for anyone.  Require everyone under 65 to provide their own private health insurance either through group plans (as I did as a one man architecture firm via the AIA lnsurance Trust Fund) or the Obamacare exchanges.  It aint rocket science!

Name:	buzzbuster -	Reply
Subject:	Now a brief comment
Date:	12/22/2015 12:38:53 AM

 You say that too much money has been invested and I say wasted. We already covered everyone but now it just cost much more to do pretty much the same thing.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Archimbecile
Date:	12/22/2015 6:16:09 PM

Answer this question...Why must employers stop providing the benefit of partially or totally paying health insurance for employees?

It's been working for many decades, what's wrong with it??  Is it counter to your socialist beliefs?  Tell us in great detail......ARCHIMBECILE....I like that, I may steal it.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	wiximbecile
Date:	12/23/2015 10:42:39 AM (updated 12/23/2015 10:47:53 AM)

Since when did taking responsibility for your own needs including health insurance become "Socialist"?  Since when did introducing more competition into the health insurance markets become "Socialism"? Since when was mooching off someone else, including your employer become "OK"?  Does your employer supplement you auto insurance or your homeowner's or life?

I have been a sole proprietor single man shop since 1976 and have had to fend for myself health insurance wise and pay my own freight instead of "mooching" off somebody else like you have!

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Archimbecile
Date:	12/23/2015 4:50:38 PM

You just sound jealous to me.  Many employers supply automobiles for employees....including insurance.  Your socialism is showing!

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	That's ridiculous.
Date:	12/23/2015 5:52:04 PM

A little history archie, which I'm sure you know but refuse to recognize. Health insurance provided by employers was a post WWII benefit offered by large companies in order to attain and retain good help in a robust economy. The biggest promoter of these benefits was your labor unions, so favored by you left wingers. And FYI- many provided a life insurance policy and/or disablillity policy as well.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Hey Wixie
Date:	12/23/2015 6:02:01 PM (updated 12/23/2015 6:05:50 PM)

Nope, not jealous but proud!  Yep, that's me...the "Socialist" that has been paying his own way without "gubmint" or employer help for the last 50 years while many of you rightwinger "self support / self sufficiency / down with the free loaders" types gladly accepted (demanded??) "charity" from your employer.  Sounds like you might also have used your "company" car for private purposes...did you employer approve that?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	You are correct
Date:	12/23/2015 6:15:17 PM (updated 12/23/2015 6:18:44 PM)

Does that historic fact mean it has to always be that way?  I think it has outlived its usefulness.  But, don't get me wrong, I am happy and suprised to know that you are apparently supportive of some of the accomplishments of the unions and the benefits they have helped provide to the American worker.  I'm sure you support other union issues too...higher minimum wage, universal healthcare, immigration reform, safer work spaces and a powerful OSHA,  higher taxes on the very wealthy, and Democratic political candidates.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	You are correct
Date:	12/23/2015 7:39:23 PM

You are delusional if you think unions "stand" for any of that. Unions stand for enrichment of the top union brass and that's it. They give lip service to issues that dems like so as to keep the racket going. Do you reaaly think unions want higher wages for minimum wage workers? They don't give a hoot about them. They don't pay dues. They want the FMW increased because their contracts are tied the the FMW. They negotiate their wages as a factor of the FMW; I.e. pay will be 2.2 times FMW. Higher FMW equal higher wages who h equal higher dues equal richer bosses.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	You are correct
Date:	12/24/2015 11:10:33 AM (updated 12/24/2015 11:16:34 AM)

So you are opposed to unions and union "bosses" when they do anything that is not of direct benefit to you, but support their accomplishments that are of benefit to you...Employer paid Healthcare insurance example.  Now I understand...you are one of Wixie's fellow "moochers".  Let somebody else do the work and take the heat while you offer condemnation, then jump on the gravy train before it leaves the station.  Are you getting all are part of your healthcare benefits paid by your employer?  If so why don't you see if there is an opt-out clause and then put your money where your mouth is!

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Hey Wixie
Date:	12/24/2015 6:54:12 PM

Where in my post did I say I was supplied with a company car......I did not.  As to your socialist leaning, why do you want the gubment to supply all health insurance to everyone, legal and illegal, living in the US?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Hey Wixie
Date:	12/24/2015 11:27:15 PM (updated 12/24/2015 11:31:33 PM)

I just assumed since you brought up the company car that you must have personal experience...poor assumption on my part.

As for me wanting the government providing healthcare for everyone legal and illegal...please point out where I advocated such.  I do not want the government to provide healthcare to everybody and the government (Obamacare) certainly does not provide healthcare to anybody.  The free enterprize private insurers that choose voluntarily to participate in the Obamacare exchanges provide the coverage.

You know, even in those nations that have "socialized" Medicine the service is not free, it is paid through premiums paid directly as premiums to a public and/or private provider or indirectly as a tax item.