Democrats have engineered a disaster!

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by maxpi, Jul 9, 2013.

  1. maxpi


    (NaturalNews) Even before it is fully implemented, Obamacare is already starting to self-destruct. The White House announced last week it will simply invent its own interpretation of the law and "delay the enforcement" of the employer Obamacare mandate for another year, to 2015. This, we are told, is to allow businesses more time to "smooth" compliance with the law, but that's only the cover story. In reality, the entire private sector economy was preparing to fire tens of millions of workers, cut their hours and radically downsize companies in order to avoid going bankrupt under Obamacare mandates that no one can afford.

    Described as a "train wreck" by one of its original authors (Sen. Baucus), and called a "fiasco for the ages" by the Wall Street Journal, Obamacare is a massive government boondoggle that's headed for complete disaster.

    In a desperate effort to get out of the way of that oncoming train, insurance companies are scrambling to flee the market entirely. America's largest health insurer, UnitedHealth, has just announced it's closing shop in California and walking away from all health insurance customers there.

    That's how bad Obamacare really is, even for the insurance companies: it's better to close up shop than even attempt to serve customers under the government's onerous rules.

    U.S. businesses, meanwhile, are engaged in a new wave of job offshoring to India, Pakistan and the Philippines, where Obamacare doesn't exist and an entire workers' salary can be less than the cost of health insurance in the U.S. all by itself. The realization has hit everyone who owns or runs a business: Obamacare will bankrupt America's private sector unless businesses take proactive measures to minimize the hiring U.S. workers.

    This is especially true in low-wage jobs -- such as the food service industry -- where an employee's contribution to a business simply isn't that valuable to begin with.

    When will the Obamacare train wreck completely derail?

    All these are yet more signs that Obamacare's socialist-inspired health care utopia is turning out to be a total nightmare. As we've predicted here on Natural News, much of the system will eventually have to be scrapped or sharply scaled back. Why? Because almost no one can afford the scheme.

    Employers have already begun slashing workforce hours in order to avoid the employer mandates, and individuals who need health insurance are starting to freak out over the reality that their rates are going to double or triple once Obamacare fully kicks in.

    Remember: This is a law that was advertised as providing either "free" or "affordable" care to everyone, including people with pre-existing conditions. What it actually turned out to be, however, was a monopoly handout to the sick-care industry and the health insurance giants. Instead of promoting health, it kept Americans trapped in a system that profits from chronic disease. Instead of being "affordable," it's making health insurance costs double or triple for many people.

    Obamacare actually designed to destroy the private sector and make everyone dependent on government

    There is one benefit to democrats in all this, however: the fact that employers are already firing workers and downsizing operations in anticipation of Obamacare mandates has results in millions of new people subsisting on welfare and food stamps... and that's the ultimate goal of the socialist progressive state.

    The idea is to destroy the private sector economy and make everyone completely dependent on the government for their food, incomes, housing, education and health care. Only then will the collectivist utopia be fully realized, complete with a domineering spy state, tyrannical police, suffocating tax rates and selective persecution of political enemies by the IRS.

    Since Obama took office, food stamp rolls have exploded. From 2007 to 2011, the number of Americans on food stamps grew by 70% to 45 million, and as of 2012, food stamp expenditures have reached $75 billion a year.

    Over four million Americans are now on welfare, and another 5.6 million are living on unemployment insurance. In most U.S. states, welfare pays more than having an $8 / hour job! So as Obamacare kicks in, employers will start tossing people out of their jobs, forcing many of them onto precisely the spiral-of-dependence government programs the Obama administration has been desperately seeking to expand. As the number of Americans who depend on the government expands, so does voter support for whichever party happens to promise the biggest handouts... the democrats, of course.

    This is how democrats believe you create a perfect society: destroy all private-sector businesses and put the government in charge of everything. This is being done by design, and Obamacare is the lynchpin that will make the hiring of employees all but unaffordable for many businesses.

    Obamacare delay a strategy to protect the 2014 elections

    The one-year delay of Obamacare is timed, no doubt, to make sure employers don't feel the full punishment of Obamacare mandates until after the 2014 election. The White House wants to make sure voters and employers don't fully realize just how tragic Obamacare really is when they go to the polls next year. After all, if democrats can achieve a majority in the House, they can ram through their full package of socialist, fascist policies without resistance. Right now, the House of Representatives is the only thing blocking a full-on socialist agenda that would criminalize the Second Amendment and legalize 11+ million illegal aliens so they can vote. (It's every Democrat's deepest fantasy!)

    Because once Obamacare really kicks in, all bets are off. All over America, tens of millions of workers will be getting pink slips. While those workers probably voted for Obama in the hope that their employer would be forced to provide them full health care coverage, the sobering reality is that no political mandate can alter the laws of economics. If federal law makes hiring employees prohibitively expensive, employers have little choice but to cut jobs and fire workers.

    No mandate from Washington can change the laws of economics

    Democrats, of course, tend to think that money appears as if by magic and that businesses can be forced to pay for things they can't afford. But what they fail to recognize is that businesses always have the choice to simply go out of business or radically downsize, firing workers all the way down as they shrink below Obamacare mandate thresholds. Hence the term "49ers" which isn't a sports franchise. It's the nickname given to all the medium-sized businesses across America that are shedding workers to get below the 50-employee threshold where Obamacare mandates put you out of business. If you just happen to be employee number 50, 51 or 52, expect to be fired even though you've done nothing wrong. Thank Obama for forcing your employer to shrink to 49 employees.

    So all those Americans who suddenly find themselves jobless can thank Obama, Pelosi and all the other nincompoops in Washington for yet more socialist incompetence. What they all fail to realize is that there's no such thing as a free lunch. Not even if it's mandated by the White House. The laws of economics do not bow down to any president.

    Thanks to Obama's delay of Obamacare until 2015, however, you may get to hold on to your job for another year. But unless you're in a high-level position where your employer can't live without you, be prepared to hit the street in late 2014 as companies start slashing jobs in a desperate bid to meet the "49er" requirement. You'll be joined by a wave of other recently-jobless who were also let go because of Obamacare mandates. Good luck finding employment anywhere, since you'll have loads of competition at precisely the same time no company wants to cross the 50-employee threshold.

    Thanks, Obama, for causing even more Americans to lose their jobs. It's one more score for the same President that has expanded Gitmo, kept marijuana criminalized, refused to label GMOs and scaled up a massive domestic surveillance infrastructure run by the NSA. Is there anything Obama promised that hasn't ended in complete betrayal?

    Learn more:
  2. Obamacare was "engineered" and first implemented by republicans.
  3. Lucrum


    NO moron.
  4. Tsing Tao

    Tsing Tao

    What a load of complete horseshit. The Massachusetts plan was negotiated by Governor Romney with the Democratic State Legislators. He compromised to get the deal done, but a good portion of the plan was not his first choice.

    Secondly, what is good for one state is not necessarily good for all states. Each state should be entitled to pursue health care mandates (or not pursue them) according to their needs.

    Lastly, read this so you can educate yourself:
  5. pspr


    Democrats can't think beyond what they perceive will buy them votes. They thought ObamaCare would put them on solid ground with the poor and others without health insurance but instead they have created an impossible monstrosity that could kill their party.

    Just like the immigration reform bill they have tricked some Senate Republicans into supporting, this was just a grand scheme to try a massive give away of benefits for votes. It is gratifying to see the entire scheme blow up in their faces.

    They have shown time after time that they are unfit to govern this country.
  6. Ricter


    Obamacare premiums in California lower than predicted
    By Tami Luhby @Luhby May 23, 2013: 5:06 PM ET

    "Health insurers in California will charge an average of $304 a month for the cheapest silver-level plan in state-based exchanges next year, according to rates released Thursday by Covered California, which is implementing the Affordable Care Act there. But many residents will pay a lot less than that for coverage.

    "Rates will vary by region, age and level of coverage, and many lower-income Californias will qualify for federal subsidies that will greatly lower the premiums. The plans will come in four tiers, ranging from bronze to platinum. The former will charge lower premiums, but carry higher out-of-pocket benefits, and the latter will have the highest premiums but have the lowest out-of-pocket costs.

    "Subsidies will be based on the cost of silver-level plans and will be available to those earning up to 400% of the poverty line -- roughly $45,000 for an individual or $92,000 for a family of four.

    "The state-based exchanges will open for enrollment in October. Coverage under Obamacare, as the act is known, will begin in January.

    "Just how much people will pay for coverage in the exchanges has been the subject of much speculation in recent months. Several estimates, including some focusing on the California market, have predicted that premium rates in the individual market would soar because more older, sicker folks would enter the exchange.

    While Covered California said a direct comparison is impossible because the new plans will provide more benefits, the agency noted that the rates for individuals will be between 29% lower and 2% higher than the average premium for small employers in the state's most populous areas.

    "Some 13 plans from insurers including Blue Cross Blue Shield and Kaiser Permanente will be available, depending on the region. But other large insurers, including UnitedHealth (UNH, Fortune 500), bowed out.

    "The least expensive silver plan for a 21-year-old could cost $216 a month, but those earning only 150% of the poverty line (or $17,235 annually) may pay only $44 after receiving federal subsidies. A 40-year-old may pay $276 a month, or $40 after the subsidies.

    "States are slowly unveiling details of their plans, but California is the largest by far to release its rates. Some 5.3 million Californians may be eligible for coverage through the exchange, with more than 2.6 million of them qualifying for subsidies.

    "Oregon and Washington recently posted their rates, as well. They were also lower than some had expected.

    "Many people will see rates similar to what they're paying now, or in some cases, lower -- and with substantially better benefits," the Washington Insurance Department wrote in a blog post. "We're definitely not seeing the huge rate increases that some insurers had predicted."
  7. pspr


    <a href=><b>Obamacare Sticker Shock, Part 1: Ohio Premiums Expected to Rise 88%</b></a>

    Ohioans should expect their health insurance premiums to rise significantly over the coming years.

    This–despite the fact that the “Affordable Care Act” (ACA) was premised on several statements made by White House staff, Congressional leaders, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and President Obama himself, that the legislation would make premiums more affordable. In fact, they even named the bill “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”

    How do we know that premiums are going to go up? The latest prediction was made on June 6 by the Ohio Department of Insurance, expecting an 88% increase in Ohioans’ premiums, based on the proposed rates submitted to them by insurance companies who want to do business in Ohio. In August of 2011, one of the world’s leading actuarial companies, Milliman, predicted that the ACA would raise Ohio’s premium costs 55-85%. In March of 2013, the Society of Actuaries predicted that the ACA would raise Ohio’s premium costs 81%, one of the largest expected statewide increases in the country.

    So why are experts saying Ohio’s premiums will rise? First, Ohio had relatively low premiums before the ACA. Because of the ACA, Ohio’s costs are now catching up with (and possibly surpassing) the rest of the country–which negates an important competitive advantage Ohio has maintained for years. But more broadly, there are two answers; one is mathematical and the other is philosophical. Below I discuss the math. In future articles in this series, I will discuss the philosophical side and elaborate on my previous discussion on OCR about why the Medicaid Expansion will exacerbate Ohioans’ upcoming premium increases. [Read on OCR: “Cherry-Picking Obamacare.”]

    * In this article, I will define “healthy people” as those whose health insurance premium payments exceed their insurance claims. “Unhealthy people” are those who claims exceed their premiums.

    Why the Math Is Increasing Premiums

    First is a concept called adverse selection. Healthy people are finding ways out of the pool of premium payers, while unhealthy people are working their way into the pool of beneficiaries. The ACA’s risk pool requirements compel the healthy to subsidize the unhealthy. This was supposed to become “affordable” by imposing the individual mandate nationwide, spreading the costs out among the new, mainly healthy, entrants into the pool. It does not appear to be adding up that way at this point.

    Meanwhile, under several ACA mandates, the unhealthy have access to more coverage. Again, this simply costs more money, any way you look at it. Keep in mind the supply and demand aspects of additional coverage: the ACA will greatly increase the demand for coverage, while the supply of medical services is likely to remain stagnant or decrease. Doctor and nurse shortages are already common throughout the country, particularly in Ohio. Basic economics advises that this will further drive costs up.

    But what about out-of-pocket costs for the beneficiaries of the ACA? The ACA’s subsidies and community ratings were supposed to keep out-of-pocket costs down for the unhealthy. The merits of that supposition have been substantively challenged as well. First, the Obama administration has openly acknowledged that subsidies themselves—the ACA is heavily laden with them—drive up costs by eliminating the incentive to economize. It is entirely likely that more subsidies will merely drive up prices more—requiring even more subsidies. Many respected commentators believe this is not only a problem, but the primary problem with American health insurance today. If this is a problem, the ACA greatly exacerbates it.
  8. Ricter


    Oregon may be the White House’s favorite health exchange
    By Sarah Kliff, Published: May 20, 2013 at 2:05 pm

    "One key premise in the health care law is that, when insurance companies compete on an evening playing field, premiums will drop.

    "That’s the idea that underlies the health insurance exchanges, new marketplaces that will act as an Expedia for health insurance. Just as United and American Airlines have their fares displayed side-by-side, along with other factors such as layovers and frequency of delays, insurance plans too will now show up on the same screen as their competitors.

    "That, the Obama administration predicts, will drive down the cost of health insurance. And, in at least one state, we now have evidence of this actually happening.

    "Two weeks ago, Oregon released health plans’ proposed rates for the health insurance exchange. This was, as the Oregonian’s Nick Budnick reported, when the insurers had their rates directly compared with one another online.

    "The price disparity was wide. “One health insurer wants to charge $169 a month next year to cover a 40-year-old Portland-area non-smoker,” Budnick wrote. “Another wants $422 a month for the same standard plan.”

    "That had at least two insurance plans ask for the opportunity to refile their rate proposals at a lower premium:

    Providence Health Plan on Wednesday asked to lower its requested rates by 15 percent. Gary Walker, a Providence spokesman, says the “primary driver” was a realization that the plan’s cost projections were incorrect. But he conceded a desire to be competitive was part of it.

    A Family Care Health Plans official on Thursday said the insurer will ask the state for even greater decrease in requested rates. CEO Jeff Heatherington says the company realized its analysts were too pessimistic after seeing online that its proposed premiums were the highest.

    “That was my question when I saw the rates was, ‘Can we go in and refile these?’” he said. “We’re going to try to get these to a competitive range.”

    "This is pretty close to what the Obama administration dreams of: Insurance plans looking to woo millions of new customers—and slashing their rates in the process.

    "It’s also a relative rarity at this point. Of the half-dozen or so states that have made public their 2014 health insurance premiums, Oregon is the only place where I’ve seen insurance plans ask to reduce their rates (if there’s a state I’ve missed, do let me know in comments).

    "Some economists, meanwhile, have been skeptical of insurers’ ability to keep costs down in a health insurance exchange. Insurers’ often reduce their premiums by negotiating lower rates for the hospitals and doctors they send patients to. They’re able to lower payments by promising to send providers a high number of patients.

    "If more health plans begin competing in these exchanges, as the Obama administration hopes will happen, that chips away at each insurers’ clout. And with less clout, lower reimbursement rates get more difficult to find.

    "In Oregon though, we do have evidence of a competitive marketplace in health insurance–one that did not exist before health plans’ premiums were put side-by-side."
  9. pspr


    Obamacare Health Care Exchanges are Democrat Party Front Organizations

    I hate to do this to you, but the Investor's Business Daily had an editorial yesterday, and they have discovered the purpose of Obamacare. It has nothing to do with health care. The purpose of Obamacare's got nothing to do with your health, and nothing to do with your insurance.

    It's about building a permanent, undefeatable, always-funded Democrat majority. One example: The exchanges. We're being told that the government's running way behind on setting up the exchanges, and we're being told it's because the bill so complicated, big, unmanageable. Nobody could possibly get this done on time. IBD has tracked how these exchanges are being set up, and basically the health care exchanges in these states are going to be Democrat political action committees, funded with your tax dollars.

    They're going to operate under the guise of selling you your health insurance when in fact what they're going to be doing is providing employment for Democrats and Democrat voters and Democrat operatives. They are going to use the exchanges to give out money to sympathetic Democrats and people who vote for other Democrats. I'll give you the details. It's on a par with how I've tried to explain that the stimulus was a money-laundering operation for Democrat campaign coffers.

    Because the vast majority of stimulus money went to keep government union employees working. It went to make sure they weren't laid off in a really bad and down economy. State and local union employees pay dues. They're required to pay it. The dues are collected by Democrat union leaders. They run all the union organizations, and the dues are what fund Democrat campaigns. Well, you can't collect dues if the people aren't working. If you're the Democrats, you can't (not yet, anyway) just write a check for $900 billion to the US Treasury and then start giving it away.

    But you can come up with a "stimulus" bill that you tell people it's all about creating jobs and roads and bridges and building up infrastructure. Then you get the check, and you are in charge of how the money is spent and where it goes, and you see to it that it ends up ultimately in the back pockets of union employees so that they continue to be employed and paying dues. So it's a roundabout way of getting $900 billion, or a percentage of it, back to the Democrat Party in campaign contributions.

    That's what the stimulus bill was!

    I'll take a break. Take a couple phone calls, and then I will share with you the dirty details of the Investors Business Daily editorial on what is really happening with Obamacare and the exchanges.

    "The Obama administration granted a whopping $910 million to California to set up its insurance exchange. That money is not for bandages, surgery, nurses and doctors to care for the sick. ... Shockingly, the $910 million is slated for bureaucracy, including rich compensation packages for exchange employees." In fact, the executive director of the exchange in California will make $360,000 a year. The exchange money, this $910 million, is being used for computer equipment, public relations, and outreach.

    What is the exchange? It's supposedly where you go, by mandate, to buy your health insurance. The exchange is supposed to just be a catalog, basically. And the only thing in the catalog are insurance policies, and you go there and you pick yours. You go there, decide what you want. That's what the exchange is. Instead, the regime has decided to use these exchanges, probably part of the original plan, as Democrat get-out-the-vote efforts complete with walking-around money and employment for loyal Democrats.

    "California lawmakers passed a law (Senate Bill 35) requiring that voter registration be part of the health insurance exchange." California lawmakers, again, passed Senate Bill 35 that requires voter registration be part of the health insurance exchange. Now, you think you're going to the exchange to pick your insurance policy. Guess what? You're gonna get pressured to register to vote, if you're not, and maybe even if you already are. "Last month, Covered California announced $37 million in grants to 48 organizations to build public awareness about the opening of the health exchange on Oct. 1."

    In other words, they're treating this as the grand opening of a great shopping center, a great mall. They're doing this to attract all kinds of people. It's a government bureaucracy. It would be no different than if the DMV started running ads to get you to show up.

    "Of the 48 organizations that got grants, only a handful are health-care related." For example, Covered California announced $37 million in grants to 48 organizations to build public awareness about the opening of the health care exchange. Now, why in the world would the California NAACP get $600,000? But they did. The California NAACP got $600,000 of Obamacare money, California exchange money, to go door-to-door canvassing and registering voters, and to create presentations at community organizations, presentations about the Democrat Party, presentations about registering and supporting the Democrat Party and its candidates.

    "Service Employees International Union, which says its mission is 'economic justice,' received two grants totaling $2 million to make phone calls, robo-calls and go door to door." Now, what in the world does a health exchange need a union going door-to-door for? I'm talking about in the strict structure of these exchanges. Remember, our low-information people have no clue what's gonna hit them here, folks.

    You think they know what a health care exchange is? You and I know what it is. It's a place where we're gonna have to go to get our insurance policy. Little do we know that when we show up we're going to be hit with Democrat Party propaganda. Little do we know that the insurance exchanges are gonna be giving money to the NAACP and the Service Employees International Union to go out and do "voter outreach," voter registration drives, show up at community organizing centers.

    They're gonna be making robo-calls, phone calls all about getting out the vote. "The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor AFL-CIO got $1 million for door-to-door, one-on-one education and social networking." For what? An insurance policy? "It describes its role as 'engaging in both organizing and political campaigns, electing pro-union and pro-worker candidates.'" That's the AFL-CIO. That's how it describes itself.

    So we have the NAACP in California getting 600 grand to go door-to-door to register voters, to do this or that. "Service Employees International Union, which says its mission is "economic justice," received two grants totaling $2 million to make phone calls, robo-calls and go door to door," to the outreach, open community centers, make phone calls, robo-calls, register voters, get them to the polls. The AFL-CIO getting another million. So just in three groups, we're at $3,600,000 from a health exchange to basically gin up support for the Democrat Party.

    "Community Health Councils, a California organization with a long history of political activism against fracking, for-profit hospitals, state budget cuts and oil exploration, got $1 million to conduct presentations at community and neighborhood meetings and one-to-one sessions." So health care exchange money for California has been given to a group that opposes fracking, for-profit hospitals, and opposes state budget cuts, opposes oil exploration.

    They get a million bucks to "conduct presentations at community and neighborhood meetings" against all of these things. In other words, Community Health Councils, California group, got a million dollars to promote the Democrat Party. The AFL-CIO, $1 million to promote the Democrat Party. The Service Employees International Union, $2 million to promote the Democrat Party. The NAACP, $600,000 to promote the Democrat Party.

    It's $910 million total of taxpayer money to the state of California -- and by the way, gonna happen in every state. This is not just California. But you might be asking, "Wait a minute, Rush! Wait a minute! What about getting people actually signed up for health care, insurance policies?" Well, guess what? That has also been assigned to constituencies in the Democrat Party. Basically what's happening is Obamacare's exchanges are being funded, money is being given.

    The same people who got stimulus money, folks. You didn't. Your shovel-ready job didn't. Your school didn't. Your road, your bridge, none of those things got it. Your job didn't get it. Democrat loyalists got the money. The same thing is happening with the Obamacare exchanges. Democrat supporting groups are being given millions of dollars to promote the Democrat Party, register Democrat voters, and get them to the polls on Election Day. The purpose? To set up a permanent one-party system in this country.
    #10     Jul 9, 2013