Heeeeeeere's Obamacare!

[eeyore1954]

"Rachel Maddow: Where Was the Conservative Freakout When Romneycare Only Signed Up 123 People?!"
Funny how little concern there was back then about the (predictable) equally slow start of Romneycare.

For the most part since it was only one state most people outside of Massachusetts did not know or care about it. To be honest I had heard about it and didn't even know it had passed until I did a tax return for a Massachusetts resident and they owed a penalty.

 

[Unabogie]

How many are old and sick? How many are young and healthy?

That's what matters more than raw numbers. Assuming those numbers aren't BS like all the other figures they throw around.

You and Ziggurat posted the same critique at the same time, almost word for word.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9641004#post9641004

Either you're the same person, or this is the latest shiny talking point on Fox News. I guess now that the numbers are perking up, it's time to quickly pivot to the next attack.

 

[Newtons Bit]

How many are old and sick? How many are young and healthy?

That's what matters more than raw numbers. Assuming those numbers aren't BS like all the other figures they throw around.

How many are people who received cancellation letters?

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

How many are people who received cancellation letters?

I thought I heard approx. 5.5 million policies somewhere, and you multiply by 2.1.

 

[Steve]

I thought I heard approx. 5.5 million policies somewhere, and you multiply by 2.1.

Now, there is some really reliable information.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

"Rachel Maddow: Where Was the Conservative Freakout When Romneycare Only Signed Up 123 People?!"
Funny how little concern there was back then about the (predictable) equally slow start of Romneycare.

Lots of people don't care when it's not their money being affected.... let's face it we're human beings and many of us are hypocritical when it comes to politics. One of the reasons why the ACA is facing such heat isn't all just because it's screwing up on implementation, but because so many people are being directly affected by it. People tend to have this mentality that it'l always happen to someone else....

Anyone who wants to keep track of the ever-growing enrollment numbers for Obamacare, here's a great site that breaks down the numbers nicely: Obamacaresignups.net

Hate to say but while the enrollment numbers appear to be "ramping up" those are still abysmally low. I suppose one way to put things is that while this may or may not change, it goes irrespective that while the problems exist with the website Obama's got his hands tied.... this is really bad PR for something that essentially was his signature legislation, and it's a royal mess for people who have to comply with the law and sign up in the midst of the website errors.

On the other hand... if he can make it "work" he might be able to redirect the momentum

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Now, there is some really reliable information.

If you've got any numbers with a source, feel free to present them.

 

[Steve]

If you've got any numbers with a source, feel free to present them.

I got nuthin'. Your number of 5.5 million without a source is also nuthin'. As a Canadian with good health care at a very reasonable price I am just interested in the points, good and otherwise, that are being presented on this topic. Your comment fell into the category of "otherwise". Hence my comment.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

I got nuthin'. Your number of 5.5 million without a source is also nuthin'. As a Canadian with good health care at a very reasonable price I am just interested in the points, good and otherwise, that are being presented on this topic. Your comment fell into the category of "otherwise".

Well, if you're interested in the points "good and otherwise", you should have at least found my post interesting.

I was mostly posting in the hope of eliciting a response with a link I was to lazy to do myself.

 

[Steve]

Well, if you're interested in the points "good and otherwise", you should have at least found my post interesting.

I guess I did because it was one of the few in this thread I have bothered to comment on .

I was mostly posting in the hope of eliciting a response with a link I was to lazy to do myself.

Can't really blame you for that, I guess.

 

[Ziggurat]

You and Ziggurat posted the same critique at the same time, almost word for word.

You have a peculiar definition of "almost word for word". Both of us said, "old and sick", I said "young health" and virus said "young and healthy", but other than that, there's basically no repetition of words between us.

And these phrasings are hardly unique to Obamacare either. They're rather standard tropes when dealing with health care costs, and for good reason. But go on, complain about the similarity in criticisms, that way you can avoid actually addressing the substance of those criticisms.

So I'm left pondering: your claim is clearly a lie, it's easy for people to see it was a lie, and yet you still told it. You could have just said that our criticisms shared the same substance (which is true), but you didn't. Why? Did you honestly think that your lie would be believed? Or did you, like Obama, "actually believe [your] own bull ****"?

 

[Unabogie]

You have a peculiar definition of "almost word for word". Both of us said, "old and sick", I said "young health" and virus said "young and healthy", but other than that, there's basically no repetition of words between us.

And these phrasings are hardly unique to Obamacare either. They're rather standard tropes when dealing with health care costs, and for good reason. But go on, complain about the similarity in criticisms, that way you can avoid actually addressing the substance of those criticisms.

So I'm left pondering: your claim is clearly a lie, it's easy for people to see it was a lie, and yet you still told it. You could have just said that our criticisms shared the same substance (which is true), but you didn't. Why? Did you honestly think that your lie would be believed? Or did you, like Obama, "actually believe [your] own bull ****"?

Whatever. I just called you on your bad habit of regurgitating Fox News bs. You don't like it, I get that. Remember when you falsely claimed that the ClimateGate code was "error prone"? And I challenged you to back that up? I asked you for a specific line number and what the bug was? Where had you heard that and why did you parrot that like it was a fact you knew? Didn't you think to yourself that you were offering nothing but repeated talking points?

Face it. You spew dogma that you hear elsewhere and rarely bother to check if it's true or not.

This is why I have you on ignore.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Don't worry, Unabogie, you posted the link to Ziggy's post. People can simply read it.

 

[eeyore1954]

You and Ziggurat posted the same critique at the same time, almost word for word.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9641004#post9641004

Either you're the same person, or this is the latest shiny talking point on Fox News. I guess now that the numbers are perking up, it's time to quickly pivot to the next attack.

I have heard it repeated on media of all persuasions (not just Fox) for the past few weeks that in order for the health care law to work a lot of young people have to sign up. Maybe they are also Ziggurat.


Do you consider 8,780 out 332,000 to be perking up on a website that has been working pretty well?
Don't forget these 332,000 will face a penalty if they do not sign up.

 

[Unabogie]

I have heard it repeated on media of all persuasions (not just Fox) for the past few weeks that in order for the health care law to work a lot of young people have to sign up. Maybe they are also Ziggurat.


Do you consider 8,780 out 332,000 to be perking up on a website that has been working pretty well?
Don't forget these 332,000 will face a penalty if they do not sign up.

Where are you getting these numbers from?

8,780?

 

[eeyore1954]

Where are you getting these numbers from?

8,780?

That is the number of uninsured who do qualify for Medicare and the number who have signed up who do not qualify. It was from a link in post 938.
These were the Kentucky numbers.

 

[Unabogie]

That is the number of uninsured who do qualify for Medicare and the number who have signed up who do not qualify. It was from a link in post 938.
These were the Kentucky numbers.

I'm having trouble understanding your point.

Do you mean Medicaid?

 

[Ziggurat]

Whatever. I just called you on your bad habit of regurgitating Fox News bs.

No, you engaged in an ad hominem attack which didn't address the substance of my argument in any form whatsoever. The problem (I mean, aside from what I just mentioned) is that it was such a transparently false ad hominem. Even within the context of fallacious arguments, that's remarkably weak.

Face it. You spew dogma that you hear elsewhere and rarely bother to check if it's true or not.

And did you check to see if it was true? Because, let's face it, a response of "No, you're wrong, here's the factual proof" would have been a lot more damning than "You [Virus] and Ziggurat posted the same critique at the same time, almost word for word" when our critiques, whatever their similarity in content, hardly had any words in common.

This is why I have you on ignore.

You sure don't act like it. Given your other difficulties with the truth, why should I (or anyone else) believe you about this? Hell, why should anyone even care if it's true?

 

[MattusMaximus]

Where are you getting these numbers from?

8,780?

I'm not sure where eeyore is getting the numbers from, but this is the site I've been referencing: Obamacaresignups.net

Check the readout for KY.

 

[WildCat]

Holy crap, I was actually finally able to create an account today!

eta: oops, the account is created and I got the confirmation email, but I can't log into the account. "My information is not valid".