2 The delay of implementing the individual mandate applies to employers with over 50 employees. The delay is to allow employers additional time to ensure their health care plans meet the standards of the ACA, and in cases where employers do not offer insurance at all, to set up health plans for their employees.
My wife works for an employer that employs 75 people or so. Believe me, this is not a big business. It's not a "corporate crony" of the Obama administration. Obama, his administration, Congress, state governor, or state congress doesn't even know who they are. Hardly what you call influential in politics. Just a small distributor tucked away in the Midwest, one of many many small businesses that are subject to the ACA.
Chosen few? LOL Hardly! You are talking about just about every business in America!
One thing I do know though, is they offer health insurance. And it takes literally months and months each year to research all available plans, check all the options, calculate all the costs to offer the coverage, figure out how much the employer contribution will be for all the different plans, calculate the health needs of the employees, compare and contrast all the plans that ultimately will boil down to 1 plan that hopefully is the best plan with best value for dollar for both employer and 75 employees.
In short, it is a huge undertaking, time consuming, number crunching, getting with the lawyers and accountants to run it by them so the very best option is chosen for everyone. And that's under the existing system, not the ACA.
Unless you have seen it or been witness to it, you have really no idea what businesses go through picking health plans for employees. And they pretty much have to do this almost every year, or close to it, when premiums, deductibles and coverage changes under their existing plan. Rarely does the business keep the same plan for more than 2 years, they simply cannot afford to not keep shopping around because it is such a huge chunk of money and it has to be properly investigated and researched and all the numbers crunched because if you don't, your employees don't get the best deal for their money, and you might end up costing your business a LOT of money too and not get the best deal.
Then throw a whole new set of regulations in on this and of course, that adds to the man hours and legal consultations to make sure what you do is in compliance. The bad thing is it takes a lot of hours away from running your business to do it on the first go round. The good news is, you now have another year to get it done (something every business owner BAR NONE appreciates even if they would prefer to not have to do it at all) and once you have been through it once, the market should stay fairly stable and you wont have to put as much time or effort into picking your health insurance plan for your employees in the future. It will pretty much stay the same.
Why should it not be delayed a year for everyone? Please. How hard is it to pick a plan for just you. Really. Delay it a year so you can "think over all the options?" Really? You need a year? I had about 5 plans to pick from, I looked at all of them, spent a few hours doing some research and came to a conclusion. Why should I be given a YEAR to do that?
Horses for courses. It makes sense to allow businesses additional time, it could cost them a lot if they don't do it right. For an individual, however, it's not a massive undertaking. No reason at all why people individually should be granted a year to get it done. You have 3 months now, to make a decision on health care for one person or your family. Plenty of time.
By the way, you're welcome.
DING! DING! DING! RED ALERT! RED ALERT! You have just set of the Lie-O-Meter Tnie. You are no more honest than the President.
Skids asked for an explanation with none of my personal interjections about the intellectual abilities of other readers. I gave him one.
I have enjoyed reading the slew of "attack t.nie" replies. But that is nothing more than one has come to expect from the other side on this site, because that's the best you can do.
That's good though, that you are doing your best. And at least your personal attacks on me are your own original thoughts, albeit not very deep intellectually, instead of just cutting and pasting from your right wing brain washing sites.
Good Job! Gold star!
And by the way, Skids? You seem to have interpreted the delay of the employer mandate as a delay to allow the government to get things in order. I think, if you read my entire 4 or 5 paragraphs on that subject carefully, you will see that the point was to allow EMPLOYERS the extra time needed to sort out their health care plans, not to allow the government time to figure stuff out.
If you're criticism is "you've had 3 years, you couldn't get it done?" then perhaps you might want to redirect that to Employers. And also, you need also remember there was a Supreme Court challenge to the law over a substantial part of that time, so it would be silly for businesses to begin the process of sorting out health care coverage in compliance with a law that no one knew for sure would be deemed constitutional and upheld, or altered, at the Supreme Court. Until that was finished, no business owner really knew what they were going to have to do.
Another factor to consider before jumping to the conclusion that a delay is giving favors to a "chosen few." And, by the way, you still need to admit that the delay in implementation is for every business in America that has to provide health care, not a select "chosen few." Another misrepresentation or misunderstanding of fact on your part.
And by the way, Skids? You seem to have interpreted the delay of the employer mandate as a delay to allow the government to get things in order. I think, if you read my entire 4 or 5 paragraphs on that subject carefully, you will see that the point was to allow EMPLOYERS the extra time needed to sort out their health care plans, not to allow the government time to figure stuff out.
No, actually I understood what you were saying. My point is there are multiple ways to look at the need for delays. All of them reflect poorly on Obamacare.
Employers were told it is coming and to be prepared, yet had NO idea HOW to prepare because NOBODY has a clue what's involved (apparently the passing it to find out what's in it hasn't benefited the implementers yet). Poor reflection on Obamacare.
Obamacare implementation has had 3 years, yet their website (that cost taxpayers MILLIONS) is an absolute disaster (glitches galore, can't log in, get kicked off, can't sign up). Poor reflection on Obamacare.
If it can't be implemented the way it was intended, then the delays should apply to ALL until they can get it right, not just businesses.
If you're criticism is "you've had 3 years, you couldn't get it done?" then perhaps you might want to redirect that to Employers. And also, you need also remember there was a Supreme Court challenge to the law over a substantial part of that time, so it would be silly for businesses to begin the process of sorting out health care coverage in compliance with a law that no one knew for sure would be deemed constitutional and upheld, or altered, at the Supreme Court. Until that was finished, no business owner really knew what they were going to have to do.
Exactly. A poor reflection on Obamacare.
Another factor to consider before jumping to the conclusion that a delay is giving favors to a "chosen few." And, by the way, you still need to admit that the delay in implementation is for every business in America that has to provide health care, not a select "chosen few." Another misrepresentation or misunderstanding of fact on your part.
Actually there are more exemptions that Obama is giving to specific companies, supposedly granting them even longer than others, which I suspect will turn into never. Do you want the list?
Then bottom line is this. This law is a disaster both in it's willy nilly implementation and it's unintended consequences to it's impending burden on those it claims to be helping. The middle class will end up footing the majority of the cost of this behemoth law. Wait and see.
You're both right. Lets get rid of those bad old parties and replace them with the Tea Party and possibly a Libertarian party. I know you are both rolling your eyes over that idea!
I like you idea. I see merit in both of those party ideas. I use to consider myself a Repub, but they left me a long time ago, just after Reagan left office...
Clayton and Dragoon, I just believe we need to get progressives out of the republican party, thats all. And as long as you have that 49% of the country relying on goverment money, you will never have a change in the democratic party. That why I say if you get goverment welfare. You can NOT VOTE! I still dont have an answer from liberals, what happened to JFKs democrat party of limited goverment, strong defense, and the simple statement of "ask not what your country can do for you, But what you can do for your country!"
Clayton and Dragoon, I just believe we need to get progressives out of the republican party, thats all. That's right, kick them progressives OUT! Don't like people in your party who disagree with you? KICK THEM OUT... That way they can become conservative Democrats, thus reducing your potential voters to the radical hard core right wing conservative base. And NEVER win elections again. And as long as you have that 49% of the country relying on goverment money, you will never have a change in the democratic party. That why I say if you get goverment welfare. You can NOT VOTE!Basic math....... 7% Unemployment = 93% EMPLOYED. 50% of nation qualify for government aid programs, hmmmm..... I guess that work doesn't pay these days? Maybe if you would stop blaming Dems and address the issues of income inequality, lousy wages, no benefits jobs, maybe instead of blaming the Dems for your party's failure to appeal and start coming up with some good ideas to get people back to work in GOOD PAYING jobs instead of minimum wage dead end jobs, then maybe people would once again be able to see something worth voting for in a Republican. Until then, forget it. I still dont have an answer from liberals, what happened to JFKs democrat party of limited goverment, strong defense, and the simple statement of "ask not what your country can do for you, But what you can do for your country!"
And the last part about JFK, I don't have an answer either, but JFK died 50 years ago and we don't live in the same country he presided over. MLK had a dream, Lincoln emancipated the slaves, our founding fathers signed the Constitution but things change. I guess by the very definition of "Conservatism" people who are of that persuasion don't like or embrace change. The Amish of our political system, just keep things as they are, no matter what, and scream, shout and holler whenever anything new comes along.
If conservatives had their way, we'd still be riding around on horses and reading by candlelight.
No, actually I understood what you were saying. My point is there are multiple ways to look at the need for delays. All of them reflect poorly on Obamacare.
Employers were told it is coming and to be prepared, yet had NO idea HOW to prepare because NOBODY has a clue what's involved (apparently the passing it to find out what's in it hasn't benefited the implementers yet). Poor reflection on Obamacare.So, its the government's responsibility to personally go to every business and implement it for them? Really? You just said businesses didn't have a clue what's involved? And that is in some way a "poor reflection" of the law? Surely, you cannot be serious. You're just making stuff up now, and trying to blame the law for it. Business people can run large multinationals, but can't read a law? Really? I am supposed to believe that? Sorry. You might comfort yourself with that as a criticism, "oh, that bad law, business was just clueless how to follow it" but quite frankly I think that is a HUGE stretch. A HUGE stretch by any standard to believe business didn't know and couldn't figure it out. That's just beyond belief.
And certainly not born out by anything I have seen. Please find a source that says "business community confused over how to implement Obamacare, ask for delay in implementation." I doubt you'll find any. The largest part of the delay was due to the challenges in the Supreme Court, and when it was upheld, then business began the process of compliance, and THAT put them in a bind. Hence the delay of the employer mandate. But that was not any confusion over the law, just prudent decision making not to put time and effort into compliance with a law that was not considered "settled."
Obamacare implementation has had 3 years, yet their website (that cost taxpayers MILLIONS) is an absolute disaster (glitches galore, can't log in, get kicked off, can't sign up). Poor reflection on Obamacare.And here we have the "Sky is falling" analysis. It's been 2 weeks. Go ahead and throw the whole thing in the trash and declare it's a disaster, but I would point you to an interview with Richard Branson, CEO Virgin Airways, multibillionaire entrepreneur who said he was quite astonished at the criticisms of the websites and the law when it wasn't even really off the ground yet. His take? Give it ten years and see where you are then, a lot of this initial stuff isn't unusual at all. But go ahead and declare it a disaster after a couple weeks. Perfectly logical and reasonable.
If it can't be implemented the way it was intended, then the delays should apply to ALL until they can get it right, not just businesses.
Exactly. A poor reflection on Obamacare.
Actually there are more exemptions that Obama is giving to specific companies, supposedly granting them even longer than others, which I suspect will turn into never. Do you want the list?Yes. Please give me a good, vetted, well presented list with explanations as to these exemptions. I know the list you are going to refer to, I've seen it. But, what you miss is that fact that all the companies on that list are offering a very particular type of health coverage already for their employees, called mini-med plans, and these fall outside of just about every kind of health insurance coverage, but are still health care plans. And the exemptions were for the initial implementation, there was no guarantee those exemptions would continue beyond 2011.
Again, you know what you THINK you know, but you don't know the entire set of facts surrounding it. And again, you should do some research into what these clowns in the echo chamber tell you (hey, did you know Rush was saying today that "truckers are so angry, they're threatening to shut down the roads in Washington??????" For the TRUTH about that, check out the Truckers Ride thread.... More misinformation from Rushbo.....
Then bottom line is this. This law is a disaster both in it's willy nilly implementation and it's unintended consequences to it's impending burden on those it claims to be helping. The middle class will end up footing the majority of the cost of this behemoth law. Wait and see.
About the only thing you said in all that that was logical, reasonable and very factual was "wait and see." Yes. Wait and see. 5 years from now, people will be wondering what the heck was wrong with Ted Cruz and the GOTea party.
At the present rate of applications being filed with the new ACA, they'll have everyone registered in about 17 years...50K a day...how flipping rediculas is this administration..they had three years and unlimited money to set this thing up and they hosed it so bad. I tried to go on the site and reg today, dumped me after 30 seconds.....nice....obummer care will be great, the death panels will be the only part working!!!! People will die before they can get help!!!!
At the present rate of applications being filed with the new ACA, they'll have everyone registered in about 17 years...50K a day...how flipping rediculas is this administration..they had three years and unlimited money to set this thing up and they hosed it so bad. I tried to go on the site and reg today, dumped me after 30 seconds.....nice....obummer care will be great, the death panels will be the only part working!!!! People will die before they can get help!!!!
So far they have spent $634 million on that website. What a bargain !!
And the last part about JFK, I don't have an answer either, but JFK died 50 years ago and we don't live in the same country he presided over. MLK had a dream, Lincoln emancipated the slaves, our founding fathers signed the Constitution but things change. I guess by the very definition of "Conservatism" people who are of that persuasion don't like or embrace change. The Amish of our political system, just keep things as they are, no matter what, and scream, shout and holler whenever anything new comes along.
If conservatives had their way, we'd still be riding around on horses and reading by candlelight.
DUH!!! If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It's all about control and you know. It's about the destruction of all valid opposition and changing this nation into all that they ( a vast minority of Progressives, Communists, Socialists, anarchists, and all other radical factions) want it to be. And you are in this movement up to your eyeballs.
So far they have spent $634 million on that website. What a bargain !!
This should anger vast numbers of the population. But most will not discover it because of a media that suppresses truth like this. tnie should be proud of how his comrads operate.
This should anger vast numbers of the population. But most will not discover it because of a media that suppresses truth like this. tnie should be proud of how his comrads operate.
Originally Posted by t.nie
1So even Obama agrees with you that he was wrong about the debt ceiling vote when he was a Senator.http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ng-debt-limit/
Banned
So far they have spent $634 million on that website. What a bargain !!
It's fact. Here it is. I won't post it unless I can back it up.
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks