ObamaCare - Free HealthCare 4 Ever! Hip-hip...hooray!?

[guitarfool2002]

If I could relate this to something The Beach Boys sing about, I wanted to mention drag racing. It's a stretch, I know, but please hear me out.

I don't know how many people know the sport or what's involved, but in competition drag racing there is a difference between what they call a "heads up" race and a "handicap" race.

In a heads up race, both cars start nose-to-nose at the starting line, and race each other flat out. In a handicap race, those terms and others are negotiated so that cars with different strengths or weaknesses can still race each other and have the results be more indicative of a fair contest versus having the clearly more well-equipped car blow the other car away every time.

In the handicap race, the two crews negotiate the terms of the race, including who is running nitrous bottles for increased speed boosts, who runs in, say, a 9 second class (average amount of time to reach the finish line) versus 12 second class, and other points of each car. So the "handicap" may be negotiated in terms of the slower 12-second class car being given a three car-length advantage over the faster car, who would have that much more track to cover after the other driver got the head start. It seems like a scattershot thing, but in competition racing all of those factors are carefully measured and considered so both drivers get what they would agree is a fair shot at winning despite the handicap.

And if they don't want to give the other driver such an advantage, they would instead race heads-up in a different class with cars whose features more closely match up with the competition, such as having 12-second class cars without nitrous bottles race only other 12-second class cars without bottles. It's an even race, and no handicaps are given either way.

With this health care bill, what those unions, both public and private (the difference between the IRS workers union and the teamsters, for example) and other businesses are facing is the prospect of not being given that same race which others are getting. They're being handicapped in a way by being forced to accept concessions which would have their plans being compromised or diminished, short of needing to completely rethink and revise what they currently have in order to accommodate the demands of this new law.

Consider how many other interests besides these specific unions mentioned above have been asking for exemptions so they would not fall under the same requirements.

When you have those unions like the Teamsters asking for changes, and others asking for outright exemptions from the plan, what kind of atmosphere would that create if exemptions are then granted to certain groups like these unions who would not have to comply or change to fit this new plan, while other individuals are still required to comply?

It's hard to get beyond the fact that those elected officials will *NOT* need to comply with the Affordable Care Act and their current plans will not be affected, while the majority of them voted to impose the changes *they themselves did not need to comply with* on the general public, and thousands of businesses both small and large.

I just want people to see this outside the realm of left-vs-right politics and listen to what those who are and who will be affected by these changes are saying, and as the case with the unions expressing concerns AND seeking exemptions from the ACA, are concerned with how it will affect their situations.

What they're asking for is a heads-up competition.

[Bean Bag]

It's hard to get beyond the fact that those elected officials will *NOT* need to comply with the Affordable Care Act and their current plans will not be affected, while the majority of them voted to impose the changes *they themselves did not need to comply with* on the general public, and thousands of businesses both small and large.

Let us eat cake...

I just want people to see this outside the realm of left-vs-right politics...

Yeah, it's disgusting that something as personal as your body be politicized -- which is why healthcare is no where in the Constitution and should have nothing to do with politics.  If this was really about caring for people -- the so called 40 million "uninsured" could have been given plans for a fraction of what this nightmare will cost.  A tiny, tiny immeasurable fraction.  This bill has nothing to do with caring for people.

[Bean Bag]

Congress Gets ObamaCare Waiver:  As Negotiated By Obama
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/07/usa-health-congress-idUSL1N0G820F20130807?feedType=RSS&feedName=rbssHealthcareNews&rpc=22

"The decision by the Office of Personnel Management, with Obama's blessing, will prevent the largely unintended ( ) loss of healthcare benefits for 535 members of the Senate and House of Representatives and thousands of Capitol Hill staff.

When Congress passed the health reform law known as Obamacare in 2010, an amendment required that lawmakers and their staff members purchase health insurance through the online exchanges that the law created. They would lose generous coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program"

This is why I always say -- LOOK AT WHAT THEY DO, NOT WHAT THEY SAY.  They said it was gonna lower the deficit, solve the "healthcare crisis."  But what do they do?  The delay the bill from taking affect.  They opt themselves and their "peeps" out of it.  Look at what they DO.  Fck what they SAY.

Again... it's...
SAY  
DO

Hopefully this example will serve all us well, by freeing us from the need to get into the weeds and discuss anything in any great detail with a Statest/Leftist/Marxist/Communist/Liberal.  What they say is just not important.  

Ain't that right Rn'R?  

[Alex]

Two words: Single payer.

[Gabo]

obama 2012

liberal 4 life

[Bean Bag]

Two words: Single payer.

But first we try a FREE MARKET, Vader!.  

[Bean Bag]

Almost 80 million with employer health care plans could have coverage canceled, experts predict
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/11/26/evidence-shows-obama-administration-predicted-tens-millions-would-lose-plans/

"The reason behind the losses is that current plans don't meet the requirements of ObamaCare, which dictate that each plan must cover a list of essential benefits, whether people want them or not.

"Things like maternity care or acupuncture or extensive drug coverage," said Veuger. "And so now the law is going to force them to buy policies that they could have gotten in the past if they wanted to but they chose not to."


Sht.  Meet fan.