Boom - Over 6 million lost insurance under Obamacare

you gotta consider the source bud. i skipped right past this initially, but commend you on the good catch. 07 data bwahaha.. the sad thing is spike believes this BLATANT LIE.


yeah, not only the 07 thing on spending, but the hufftoast article stating that obama is not a socialist because gov't jobs haven't grown.
As if socialism was about the number of gov't jobs. Wouldn't it be more accurate to investigate how much money is being transferred through gov't from one class to another in society if you want to know if socialism is on the rise? They didn't talk about that. I wonder why. And the percentage of people not paying taxes has risen to forty seven percent under obama.
It's the money, not the jobs that tells the tale about socialism.

The entire article was like a case study in how to fool and deceive people.
 
yeah, not only the 07 thing on spending, but the hufftoast article stating that obama is not a socialist because gov't jobs haven't grown.
As if socialism was about the number of gov't jobs. Wouldn't it be more accurate to investigate how much money is being transferred through gov't from one class to another in society if you want to know if socialism is on the rise? They didn't talk about that. I wonder why. And the percentage of people not paying taxes has risen to forty seven percent under obama.
It's the money, not the jobs that tells the tale about socialism.

The entire article was like a case study in how to fool and deceive people.
sure i agree with you. i would only say we don't even have to look that deeply into it. We increasingly resemble the socialist gubs of europe. obamacare is a socialist policy. the guy who wants his name on it, is a socialist. simple. :D

there are of course many more reasons why obama, and many establishment politicians, are socialist or even further left.
 
Obama will go down as one of the great presidents in history and especially for the ACA. It's a great start and one a GOP pos would never have the balls to do.
 
good article from peggy noonan... discussing the - 6 million lost... but this was her best point...


http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...4441304579479700454846082.html?mod=hp_opinion

There's a brute test of a policy: If you knew then what you know now, would you do it? I will never forget a conversation in 2006 or thereabouts with a passionate and eloquent supporter of the decision to go into Iraq. We had been having this conversation for years, he a stalwart who would highlight every optimistic sign, every good glimmering. He argued always for the rightness of the administration's decision. I would share my disquiet, my doubts, finally my skepticism. One night over dinner I asked him, in passing, "If we had it to do over again, should we have gone in? would you support it?"

And he said, "Of course not!"

Which told me everything.

There are very, very few Democrats who would do ObamaCare over again. Some would do something different, but they wouldn't do this. The cost of the blunder has been too high in terms of policy and politics.

They, and the president, are trying to put a good face on it.

Republicans of all people should not go for the happy face. They cannot run only on ObamaCare this year and later, because it's not the only problem in America. But it's a problem, a big one, and needs to be hard and shrewdly fought.
 
It's one thing to spike the football when you actually score a touchdown, but why is Obama celebrating in the end zone when he just got tackled for a safety?

What on earth is this man boasting about? Boasting is obnoxious enough when the braggart in question has accomplished something, but how many people do you know who brag when they've hurt millions?

Under the goal posts in the Rose Garden, Obama said: Obamacare "is doing what it's supposed to do; it's working. ... The debate over repealing this law is over; the Affordable Care Act is here to stay. ... I've got to admit, I don't get it. Why are folks working so hard for people not to have health insurance? Why are they so mad about the idea of folks having health insurance?"

This is outrageous, even for him.

If Obamacare is doing what it's supposed to do, then it was supposed to create chaos in the health care industry, increase our premiums, cause people to lose their doctors, reduce the quality of care and cost the government unconscionable sums of money.

Is that what Obama means by "it's working"? Is this what he envisioned that Obamacare would do?

If not, then why is he all puffed up? Why aren't Democrats sharing in his triumphant bliss? Why is he attacking those who are rightly criticizing this policy?

Obama looked us in the eye and said 7.1 million people have signed up for Obamacare, which is apparently close to the projected number of enrollees necessary to fund this boondoggle. But for that number to work — even if you assume it is legitimate — it has to be a net number.

What Obama didn't tell us is that this figure, in the abstract, means nothing. By throwing out 7.1 million as if it means the administration has met its goal, he is deliberately and brazenly deceiving the American people, because he knows it has not come close. The fact that he would take no questions on this matter is proof that he has something to hide.

It's as if Obama and his advisers were sitting around the table — or the putting green — and he told them, "Hey, we've almost reached the magic number of sign-ups." One of his advisers might have said, "Yes, but we're miles away from our goal." And Obama might have said: "Who cares? This is enough for a sound bite. This is enough for a press conference. This is enough to dupe the American people. Don't question me. Schedule that press conference. I'm the president."

In order for Obamacare to work, it needed some 7 million net new enrollees, at least 38 percent of whom would be young and healthy enough to subsidize the others, according to liberal projections.

But what did he get?

Well, he allegedly got 7.1 million enrollees on paper, but let's look at the myriad ways that number is reduced.

National Journal reports that an estimated 15 to 20 percent of these enrollees haven't paid their premiums, which means they won't be covered. So right off the bat, you have to reduce the number to between 5.7 million and 6 million, which means the figures already won't work.

Instead of 38 percent of these enrollees being in the young and healthy category, Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute reports that less than 30 percent of enrollees are younger than 35.

Also, RAND Corp. estimates that only about one-third of the new enrollees were previously uninsured, which means that two-thirds of the 5.7 million or 6 million cannot properly be counted in these figures. So we have fewer than 2 million net new enrollees. But we're still not finished.

In addition to this, RAND estimates that nearly a million more people lost their plan because of Obamacare and couldn't afford to replace it because Obamacare mandates coverage of additional risks and causes premiums to increase.

Does that mean we are actually down to about 1 million net new enrollees?

Not to destroy your day further, but on top of all this, Obamacare is projected to cost the government — meaning taxpayers — $2 trillion over the next decade, which isn't even being factored in here. And how many believe that number isn't grossly underestimated? Also, Obamacare is going to cause cuts to Medicare Advantage, which will reduce benefits or increase premiums for people by an estimated $35 to $75 per month.

As you can see, Obama is giving you only a fraction of the information you need to understand this picture and imparting the false impression that Obamacare is working now, and when premiums skyrocket next year, he can scapegoat the insurance companies and proceed to his beloved single-payer, full-blown statist scenario.

Obama must be still counting on the fact that he can fool enough of the people enough of the time — Election Day every two years — to continue his sinister plan to fundamentally transform this nation.

The polls are screaming that he's finally run out of juice. Pray it is so.

- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/commentary/david-limbaugh/obama-tackled-end-zone#sthash.1tGhVmgs.dpuf
 
Back
Top