• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Chairman Mao

The Coming ObamaCare Train Wreck

2,202 posts in this topic

I am not optimistic, but I wouldn't wager with you, because you would just change your name when you lost. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Wall St Journal:

Scott & White Health Plan in Temple, Texas, has received 25 enrollees from the federally run exchange so far.

 

At Priority Health in Michigan, health-plan staff are calling new customers to confirm each of their "couple of dozen" enrollees accurately picked the plan, said Joan Budden, chief marketing officer.

 

Sioux Falls, S.D.,-based Avera Health Plans has called each of its 21 incoming customers to make sure the data are correct.

 

From USA Today:

"The federal health care exchange was built using 10-year-old technology that may require constant fixes and updates for the next six months and the eventual overhaul of the entire system."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this interesting from a well know conservative

 

​Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs on Monday described the rollout of Obamacare as excruciatingly embarrassing for the Obama administration. This was bungled badly​, he said.

 

I hope theyre working day and night to get this done and when they get it fixed, I hope they fire some people who were in charge of making sure this thing was supposed to work, Gibbs told MSNBC. This is excruciatingly embarrassing for the White House​ and the Department of Health and Human Services.

 

Gibbs dismissed the administrations claim that the an influx of traffic has caused the websites glitches, and called on the president to fire those responsible for sites design.​ This is not a server problem, like too many people came to the website this is a website architecture problem, he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google "Obamacare problems" and you get 223,000,000 matches.

Whew - that's gonna take a while to sort through!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile the Congressional Budget Office finds no evidence that ACA will bankrupt the country any time in the next ten years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile some continue their ignorance of the current news......

 

The CBO is tasked to use the assumptions in a bill to project revenue and costs. It's part of their mandate.

It does not mean they always get it right. Recall that part of Pelosi's smoke and mirrors to "pay" for ObamaCare were a complex spiderweb of revenue raisers so as to avoid the word "tax". Things like the failed effort to 1099 every vendor you bought everyday items from in an effort to catch cheaters, one that, once the reality set in, was scrapped.

So write off the hundreds of millions a year that little gem was supposed to generate from the initial CBO projections.

Ditto the requirement that businesses above 50 employees........and the 32 hour plus work week........and all the waivers granted by the HHS............get the picture yet?

The requirements were supposed to pay for the entitlements, but that is not going to happen. People will not behave as Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama want them to - they will alter their behavior to reduce their costs and avoid penalties. That means operating just outside the threshold of higher levels of compliance.

You can take the CBO projections and flush them........or you can continue to believe in the ObamaCare fairy tale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile the Congressional Budget Office finds no evidence that ACA will bankrupt the country any time in the next ten years.

 

In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance program of Medicare - the federal health care program for the elderly and disabled - would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost that year was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee said the entire Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. The actual cost in 1990 was $98 billion.

In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost: $17 billion. (link)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Meanwhile the Congressional Budget Office finds no evidence that ACA will bankrupt the country any time in the next ten years.

In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance program of Medicare - the federal health care program for the elderly and disabled - would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost that year was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee said the entire Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. The actual cost in 1990 was $98 billion.

In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost: $17 billion. (link)

Facts are inconvenient sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Meanwhile the Congressional Budget Office finds no evidence that ACA will bankrupt the country any time in the next ten years.

 

In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance program of Medicare - the federal health care program for the elderly and disabled - would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost that year was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee said the entire Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. The actual cost in 1990 was $98 billion.

In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost: $17 billion. (link)

How do errors by a House committee have anything to do with the credibility of a report by the CBO? Are those not very different entities? I realize that logical fallacies look more authoritative when supported by the puppet squad, but why not compare apples to apples?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Meanwhile the Congressional Budget Office finds no evidence that ACA will bankrupt the country any time in the next ten years.

 

In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance program of Medicare - the federal health care program for the elderly and disabled - would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost that year was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee said the entire Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. The actual cost in 1990 was $98 billion.

In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost: $17 billion. (link)

How do errors by a House committee have anything to do with the credibility of a report by the CBO? Are those not very different entities? I realize that logical fallacies look more authoritative when supported by the puppet squad, but why not compare apples to apples? funny I see actual links to back up the numbers posted by RD. I see a statement with zero links by Billy. Hard to compare when one is fact and one was pulled out of the air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Meanwhile the Congressional Budget Office finds no evidence that ACA will bankrupt the country any time in the next ten years.

 

In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance program of Medicare - the federal health care program for the elderly and disabled - would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost that year was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee said the entire Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. The actual cost in 1990 was $98 billion.

In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost: $17 billion. (link)

How do errors by a House committee have anything to do with the credibility of a report by the CBO? Are those not very different entities? I realize that logical fallacies look more authoritative when supported by the puppet squad, but why not compare apples to apples?

 

The CBO didn't exist back then. I suppose if we created another Gov 't entity tomorrow to predict the impact of Obamacare and that entity projected the average family would save $2,500 per year, we would simply have to accept that number?

 

Gov't projections are rarely accurate. When SS was first passed, they actually projected how much it would cost through 1980. How close were they? From the SSA website --

If we look at the actual outgo of the program in 1980 as compared with the original estimate, the picture is not nearly as good. The estimate was $4 billion, whereas the actual figure for OASI was $108 billion. (Link)

I know - the CBO is a different entity, so we have to trust their numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Meanwhile the Congressional Budget Office finds no evidence that ACA will bankrupt the country any time in the next ten years.

 

In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance program of Medicare - the federal health care program for the elderly and disabled - would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost that year was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee said the entire Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. The actual cost in 1990 was $98 billion.

In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost: $17 billion. (link)

How do errors by a House committee have anything to do with the credibility of a report by the CBO? Are those not very different entities? I realize that logical fallacies look more authoritative when supported by the puppet squad, but why not compare apples to apples?

 

Uhhhh, Sol, the CBO is the organization that does the estimates for the house committees. They do it for the senate committees too. A CBO report is part of the information that goes with bills as they pass through the process.

 

You might want to look how Pelosi pointed to the CBO numbers which were developed for the ACA and incorporated in the Senate bill that she loved so much.

 

You might want to look at the recent numbers too. They pretty much follow the same pattern as show by RD in his documented example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile the Congressional Budget Office finds no evidence that ACA will bankrupt the country any time in the next ten years.

In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance program of Medicare - the federal health care program for the elderly and disabled - would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost that year was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee said the entire Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. The actual cost in 1990 was $98 billion.

In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost: $17 billion. (link)

How do errors by a House committee have anything to do with the credibility of a report by the CBO? Are those not very different entities? I realize that logical fallacies look more authoritative when supported by the puppet squad, but why not compare apples to apples?
funny I see actual links to back up the numbers posted by RD. I see a statement with zero links by Billy. Hard to compare when one is fact and one was pulled out of the air.

That does not answer my question. The CBO and the Ways and Means committee are very different entities. You realize that, do you not? If you wish to verify the CBO report, do so by asking for it and raising questions about it. Changing the subject by attacking the credibility of something else is the kind of thing the Minister of Information and Dances with Puppets would do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile the Congressional Budget Office finds no evidence that ACA will bankrupt the country any time in the next ten years.

In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance program of Medicare - the federal health care program for the elderly and disabled - would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost that year was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee said the entire Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. The actual cost in 1990 was $98 billion.

In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost: $17 billion. (link)

How do errors by a House committee have anything to do with the credibility of a report by the CBO? Are those not very different entities? I realize that logical fallacies look more authoritative when supported by the puppet squad, but why not compare apples to apples?
funny I see actual links to back up the numbers posted by RD. I see a statement with zero links by Billy. Hard to compare when one is fact and one was pulled out of the air.

That does not answer my question. The CBO and the Ways and Means committee are very different entities. You realize that, do you not? If you wish to verify the CBO report, do so by asking for it and raising questions about it. Changing the subject by attacking the credibility of something else is the kind of thing the Minister of Information and Dances with Puppets would do.

 

I suppose we could simply pass a law that says whatever the CBO, or any other Gov't body projects, will be reality.

 

That seems like what you are getting at. If the CBO says it - it will be true?

 

I suppose we will have to wait 10 years before we can either give Obama and the CBO a pat on the back or Ted Cruz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I suppose we could simply pass a law that says whatever the CBO, or any other Gov't body projects, will be reality.

 

That seems like what you are getting at. If the CBO says it - it will be true?

 

I suppose we will have to wait 10 years before we can either give Obama and the CBO a pat on the back or Ted Cruz.

Not at all. I am saying that if you wish to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, the best way to do it is to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, not to attack the credibility of the Ways and Means committee.

 

If you want to convince people not to buy the Chevy Volt, the best way to do that is to point out the flaws in the Chevy Volt, not to argue that Ford Pintos explode when they get rear ended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I suppose we could simply pass a law that says whatever the CBO, or any other Gov't body projects, will be reality.

 

That seems like what you are getting at. If the CBO says it - it will be true?

 

I suppose we will have to wait 10 years before we can either give Obama and the CBO a pat on the back or Ted Cruz.

Not at all. I am saying that if you wish to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, the best way to do it is to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, not to attack the credibility of the Ways and Means committee.

 

If you want to convince people not to buy the Chevy Volt, the best way to do that is to point out the flaws in the Chevy Volt, not to argue that Ford Pintos explode when they get rear ended.

 

All you are saying is that the only way to attack the CBO's report is in hindsight - wait 10 years to see if the seeds in the unicorn plops grow flowers.

 

A scene from one of my favorite movies-

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dT0J0rcJTLo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I suppose we could simply pass a law that says whatever the CBO, or any other Gov't body projects, will be reality.

 

That seems like what you are getting at. If the CBO says it - it will be true?

 

I suppose we will have to wait 10 years before we can either give Obama and the CBO a pat on the back or Ted Cruz.

Not at all. I am saying that if you wish to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, the best way to do it is to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, not to attack the credibility of the Ways and Means committee.

 

If you want to convince people not to buy the Chevy Volt, the best way to do that is to point out the flaws in the Chevy Volt, not to argue that Ford Pintos explode when they get rear ended.

 

All you are saying is that the only way to attack the CBO's report is in hindsight - wait 10 years to see if the seeds in the unicorn plops grow flowers.

 

A scene from one of my favorite movies-

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dT0J0rcJTLo

I said what I said. If you wish to argue against something else, go right ahead.

 

Surely there are flaws in the CBO's report that Billy cites. If you keep running away from his source and arguing against the straw, it makes it seem like you are afraid of his source. I have not seen his source, but I know that if i see you running scared from it by arguing the strawman argument, it is probably something you cannot refute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

I suppose we could simply pass a law that says whatever the CBO, or any other Gov't body projects, will be reality.

 

That seems like what you are getting at. If the CBO says it - it will be true?

 

I suppose we will have to wait 10 years before we can either give Obama and the CBO a pat on the back or Ted Cruz.

Not at all. I am saying that if you wish to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, the best way to do it is to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, not to attack the credibility of the Ways and Means committee.

 

If you want to convince people not to buy the Chevy Volt, the best way to do that is to point out the flaws in the Chevy Volt, not to argue that Ford Pintos explode when they get rear ended.

 

All you are saying is that the only way to attack the CBO's report is in hindsight - wait 10 years to see if the seeds in the unicorn plops grow flowers.

 

A scene from one of my favorite movies-

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dT0J0rcJTLo

I said what I said. If you wish to argue against something else, go right ahead.

 

Surely there are flaws in the CBO's report that Billy cites. If you keep running away from his source and arguing against the straw, it makes it seem like you are afraid of his source. I have not seen his source, but I know that if i see you running scared from it by arguing the strawman argument, it is probably something you cannot refute.

 

Fine, Sol. The Gov't says it is so. That it shall be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

I suppose we could simply pass a law that says whatever the CBO, or any other Gov't body projects, will be reality.

 

That seems like what you are getting at. If the CBO says it - it will be true?

 

I suppose we will have to wait 10 years before we can either give Obama and the CBO a pat on the back or Ted Cruz.

Not at all. I am saying that if you wish to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, the best way to do it is to attack the credibility of the CBO's report, not to attack the credibility of the Ways and Means committee.

 

If you want to convince people not to buy the Chevy Volt, the best way to do that is to point out the flaws in the Chevy Volt, not to argue that Ford Pintos explode when they get rear ended.

 

All you are saying is that the only way to attack the CBO's report is in hindsight - wait 10 years to see if the seeds in the unicorn plops grow flowers.

 

A scene from one of my favorite movies-

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dT0J0rcJTLo

I said what I said. If you wish to argue against something else, go right ahead.

 

Surely there are flaws in the CBO's report that Billy cites. If you keep running away from his source and arguing against the straw, it makes it seem like you are afraid of his source. I have not seen his source, but I know that if i see you running scared from it by arguing the strawman argument, it is probably something you cannot refute.

 

Fine, Sol. The Gov't says it is so. That it shall be.

I'm not sure why you quoted me there. That's not what I said. I would never trust the government without reading the report and making up my own mind about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance program of Medicare - the federal health care program for the elderly and disabled - would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost that year was $67 billion.

In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee said the entire Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. The actual cost in 1990 was $98 billion.

In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost: $17 billion. (link)

How do errors by a House committee have anything to do with the credibility of a report by the CBO? Are those not very different entities? I realize that logical fallacies look more authoritative when supported by the puppet squad, but why not compare apples to apples?
funny I see actual links to back up the numbers posted by RD. I see a statement with zero links by Billy. Hard to compare when one is fact and one was pulled out of the air.

That does not answer my question. The CBO and the Ways and Means committee are very different entities. You realize that, do you not? If you wish to verify the CBO report, do so by asking for it and raising questions about it. Changing the subject by attacking the credibility of something else is the kind of thing the Minister of Information and Dances with Puppets would do.

Where did the committee get its numbers? The role of the CBO is to do the numbers for the committees.

 

from the CBO website

 

 

how do you decide what you study?

CBO’s chief responsibility under the Congressional Budget Act is to help the House and Senate Budget Committees with the matters under their jurisdiction. CBO also supports other Congressional committees—particularly the Appropriations, Ways and Means, and Finance Committees—and the Congressional leadership.

CBO produces a number of reports specified in statute, of which the best known is the annual Budget and Economic Outlook. Other CBO reports that are required by law or have become regular products of the agency owing to a high, sustained level of interest by the Congress are described in our products.

In addition, CBO is required by law to produce a formal cost estimate for nearly every bill that is “reported” (approved) by a full committee of either House of Congress; the only exceptions are appropriation bills, which do not receive formal cost estimates. (CBO provides information on their budgetary impact to the appropriation committees.) CBO also produces formal cost estimates at other stages of the legislative process if requested to do so by a relevant committee or by the Congressional leadership. Moreover, the agency produces informal cost estimates for a much larger number of legislative proposals that Congressional committees consider in the process of developing legislation.

Beyond its regular reports and cost estimates, CBO prepares analytic reports at the request of the Congressional leadership or Chairmen or Ranking Minority Members of committees or subcommittees. CBO analysts work with requesters and their staffs to understand the scope and nature of the work that would be most useful to the Congress.

 

If a committee is using some number other than that from the CBO, its just something that a chairman or ranking member pulled out of their ass.

 

If it's a number in a bill that comes to the floor, it came from the CBO by law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New York doctors are feeling queasy about ObamaCare — and many won’t participate in the new national insurance program because they fear they’ll go broke, The Post has learned.


“ObamaCare is going to send me more patients to see and then cut the payments to provide the care — that’s what’s going to happen,” predicted Donald Moore, a primary-care doctor in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn. “I will not accept it.”


Despite a much publicized rollout, many other doctors said they haven’t decided whether to become ObamaCare providers, because they haven’t been notified by insurers or the state about ­reimbursement rates.


“I have not spoken with anyone who has made a decision to participate in the exchanges. We simply don’t have any information about which we can make a decision,” said Dr. Paul Orloff, president of the New York County Medical Society. “We have no idea what the reimbursements will be or what the claims-form process will entail.”


http://nypost.com/2013/10/18/doctors-worried-sick-over-obamacare/


Wow, Obamacare is sure to be a smashing success, with this shit happening......Obama's best hope is that the websites continue to freeze up, if they sign up anywhere near their targets without the doctors to support the new entitlements we are all screwed.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The debacle is already under way, the question is when the shit hits the fan.

 

Any wagers?

 

Define shit hits the fan...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

New York doctors are feeling queasy about ObamaCare — and many won’t participate in the new national insurance program because they fear they’ll go broke, The Post has learned.

“ObamaCare is going to send me more patients to see and then cut the payments to provide the care — that’s what’s going to happen,” predicted Donald Moore, a primary-care doctor in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn. “I will not accept it.”

Despite a much publicized rollout, many other doctors said they haven’t decided whether to become ObamaCare providers, because they haven’t been notified by insurers or the state about ­reimbursement rates.

“I have not spoken with anyone who has made a decision to participate in the exchanges. We simply don’t have any information about which we can make a decision,” said Dr. Paul Orloff, president of the New York County Medical Society. “We have no idea what the reimbursements will be or what the claims-form process will entail.”

http://nypost.com/2013/10/18/doctors-worried-sick-over-obamacare/

Wow, Obamacare is sure to be a smashing success, with this shit happening......Obama's best hope is that the websites continue to freeze up, if they sign up anywhere near their targets without the doctors to support the new entitlements we are all screwed.....

Boo Hoo

"A new Washington Post/ABC News poll once again drives home a core truth about our politics right now: Disapproval of Obamacare does not translate into support for GOP tactics against the law. We've long known that to be the case. But the new Post/ABC poll takes this further, confirming that the horrific web-based problems we're seeing right now with the Obamacare exchanges -- which Republicans cite as evidence the law is a catastrophe that must be blotted from the landscape - are not producing support for the GOP position, either." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/21/as-obamacare-runs-into-problems-americans-still-want-to-give-it-a-chance/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

New York doctors are feeling queasy about ObamaCare — and many won’t participate in the new national insurance program because they fear they’ll go broke, The Post has learned.

“ObamaCare is going to send me more patients to see and then cut the payments to provide the care — that’s what’s going to happen,” predicted Donald Moore, a primary-care doctor in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn. “I will not accept it.”

Despite a much publicized rollout, many other doctors said they haven’t decided whether to become ObamaCare providers, because they haven’t been notified by insurers or the state about ­reimbursement rates.

“I have not spoken with anyone who has made a decision to participate in the exchanges. We simply don’t have any information about which we can make a decision,” said Dr. Paul Orloff, president of the New York County Medical Society. “We have no idea what the reimbursements will be or what the claims-form process will entail.”

http://nypost.com/2013/10/18/doctors-worried-sick-over-obamacare/

Wow, Obamacare is sure to be a smashing success, with this shit happening......Obama's best hope is that the websites continue to freeze up, if they sign up anywhere near their targets without the doctors to support the new entitlements we are all screwed.....

 

it's an absolute disaster - despite what the Greek Chorus of SA says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right Ed, this administration is fueled by pixie dust and entrusted to kind-hearted wizards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right Ed, this administration is fueled by pixie dust and entrusted to kind-hearted wizards.

Its such a train wreck that a typically fair and balanced news reporter on Fox News is forced to lie about it on air destroying his credibility. How can Hannity survive this train wreck?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're right Ed, this administration is fueled by pixie dust and entrusted to kind-hearted wizards.

Its such a train wreck that a typically fair and balanced news reporter on Fox News is forced to lie about it on air destroying his credibility. How can Hannity survive this train wreck?

What credibility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

New York doctors are feeling queasy about ObamaCare — and many won’t participate in the new national insurance program because they fear they’ll go broke, The Post has learned.

“ObamaCare is going to send me more patients to see and then cut the payments to provide the care — that’s what’s going to happen,” predicted Donald Moore, a primary-care doctor in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn. “I will not accept it.”

Despite a much publicized rollout, many other doctors said they haven’t decided whether to become ObamaCare providers, because they haven’t been notified by insurers or the state about ­reimbursement rates.

“I have not spoken with anyone who has made a decision to participate in the exchanges. We simply don’t have any information about which we can make a decision,” said Dr. Paul Orloff, president of the New York County Medical Society. “We have no idea what the reimbursements will be or what the claims-form process will entail.”

http://nypost.com/2013/10/18/doctors-worried-sick-over-obamacare/

Wow, Obamacare is sure to be a smashing success, with this shit happening......Obama's best hope is that the websites continue to freeze up, if they sign up anywhere near their targets without the doctors to support the new entitlements we are all screwed.....

Boo Hoo

>"A new Washington Post/ABC News poll once again drives home a core truth about our politics right now: Disapproval of Obamacare does not translate into support for GOP tactics against the law. We've long known that to be the case. But the new Post/ABC poll takes this further, confirming that the horrific web-based problems we're seeing right now with the Obamacare exchanges -- which Republicans cite as evidence the law is a catastrophe that must be blotted from the landscape - are not producing support for the GOP position, either." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/21/as-obamacare-runs-into-problems-americans-still-want-to-give-it-a-chance/

 

Which has absolutely nothing to do with physician participation in New York.

 

Want to try again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is such a train wreck that Obama is in a no win situation. He gave big business a delay and is still holding his ground on the individual mandate.

 

He's not going to look good when he has to delay the individual mandate because the $600 million federal exchange website gives you a screen, when it is working, that gives you an 800 phone number to call and sign up.

 

I'd have developed that web ap on my own using freeware and charged $6,000 -- which would have been too much.

 

BTW -- The most transparent administration in history is absolutely lying about this. The HC exchange wasn't and isn't being crashed by the masses trying to log on at the same time to sign up. It simply doesn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This train wreck is just starting to come off the rails. After the dust settles and the fires subside, I think we be shocked at the damage it caused to the Republican party. Might even kill off a few RINOs too. We will only know after the 2014 mid-terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Regatta Dog is suffering from a severe case of premature exultation.

 

That would be Obama on the launch of Obamacare. That Sebelius still has a job is dumbfounding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inexcusable --

 

 

Days before the launch of President Obama’s online health ­insurance marketplace, government officials and contractors tested a key part of the Web site to see whether it could handle tens of thousands of consumers at the same time. It crashed after a simulation in which just a few hundred people tried to log on simultaneously.....

.......Some key testing of the system did not take place until the week before launch, according to this person. As late as Sept. 26, there had been no tests to determine whether a consumer could complete the process from beginning to end: create an account, determine eligibility for federal subsidies and sign up for a health insurance plan, according to two sources familiar with the project. (link)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You're right Ed, this administration is fueled by pixie dust and entrusted to kind-hearted wizards.

Its such a train wreck that a typically fair and balanced news reporter on Fox News is forced to lie about it on air destroying his credibility. How can Hannity survive this train wreck?

 

 

Please…Everything Obama has told us about Obamacare has been a lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The website failure is just a small indication of the disaster beginning to unfold.

The assumptions, used by Obama to rig the CBO numbers, have already proven false, or have been delayed or granted waivers.

The real disaster starts when the "young invincibles" don't bother to overpay for insurance they never wanted, and people do what people do - minimize their expenses.

Oh, and lest we forget the taxes and penalties that are supposed to fund this fuckup - when people excercise their right to minimize (or, avoid) their exposure the revenue will be nowhere near projections .

 

And that's just the funding side. Supply on the medical side has will not be increased, but demand will.

This should be an interesting chapter to the Obama legacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real disaster is when the death panels get up to speed. I hope the FEMA camps are ready to take in the millions waiting for their turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This train wreck is just starting to come off the rails. After the dust settles and the fires subside, I think we be shocked at the damage it caused to the Republican party. Might even kill off a few RINOs too. We will only know after the 2014 mid-terms.

 

That's my prediction as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This train wreck is just starting to come off the rails. After the dust settles and the fires subside, I think we be shocked at the damage it caused to the Republican party. Might even kill off a few RINOs too. We will only know after the 2014 mid-terms.

 

That's my prediction as well.

that would explain the meltdowns around here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came to the realization that ODS is not caused by racism, its caused because Obama is so damn good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4.5 hours on the phone - failure:

 

 

From the right wing news source at ABC News.

Meanwhile, Ed has another dixie cup of Kool Aid.

 

220px-Kool_Aid_Man.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came to the realization that ODS is not caused by racism, its caused because Obama is so damn good.

Good at what? Reading the teleprompter his puppeteers put in front of him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I came to the realization that ODS is not caused by racism, its caused because Obama is so damn good.

Good at what? Reading the teleprompter his puppeteers put in front of him?

And Benghazi. Never forget Benghazi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I came to the realization that ODS is not caused by racism, its caused because Obama is so damn good.

Good at what? Reading the teleprompter his puppeteers put in front of him?

And Benghazi. Never forget Benghazi.

If only he had a drone nearby... just not enough civilians in the area for a good drone attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I came to the realization that ODS is not caused by racism, its caused because Obama is so damn good.

Good at what? Reading the teleprompter his puppeteers put in front of him?

And Benghazi. Never forget Benghazi.

If only he had a drone nearby... just not enough civilians in the area for a good drone attack.

And some BarryCades.

If the consulate had security like the ones he deployed during the "shutdown" to close public roads and forests........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Metrics define the success or failure. The only metrics we 'll get will come come from thewhite House.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

New York doctors are feeling queasy about ObamaCare — and many won’t participate in the new national insurance program because they fear they’ll go broke, The Post has learned.

“ObamaCare is going to send me more patients to see and then cut the payments to provide the care — that’s what’s going to happen,” predicted Donald Moore, a primary-care doctor in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn. “I will not accept it.”

Despite a much publicized rollout, many other doctors said they haven’t decided whether to become ObamaCare providers, because they haven’t been notified by insurers or the state about ­reimbursement rates.

“I have not spoken with anyone who has made a decision to participate in the exchanges. We simply don’t have any information about which we can make a decision,” said Dr. Paul Orloff, president of the New York County Medical Society. “We have no idea what the reimbursements will be or what the claims-form process will entail.”

http://nypost.com/2013/10/18/doctors-worried-sick-over-obamacare/

Wow, Obamacare is sure to be a smashing success, with this shit happening......Obama's best hope is that the websites continue to freeze up, if they sign up anywhere near their targets without the doctors to support the new entitlements we are all screwed.....

Boo Hoo

>"A new Washington Post/ABC News poll once again drives home a core truth about our politics right now: Disapproval of Obamacare does not translate into support for GOP tactics against the law. We've long known that to be the case. But the new Post/ABC poll takes this further, confirming that the horrific web-based problems we're seeing right now with the Obamacare exchanges -- which Republicans cite as evidence the law is a catastrophe that must be blotted from the landscape - are not producing support for the GOP position, either." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/21/as-obamacare-runs-into-problems-americans-still-want-to-give-it-a-chanc

e/

Which has absolutely nothing to do with physician participation in New York.

 

Want to try again?

 

 

 

Question: What is the Dr trying to say? He isn't needed to participate in the exchanges. Is he saying he won't accept patients with insurance bought through the exchange? How will he know? Given the insurance is offered by private companies, how is the gov't going to cut reimbursements?

 

Now - if he was saying he wouldn't take more medicare patients - that makes more sense, and has been occurring for quite some time. How do you think cost is cut, anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York doctors are feeling queasy about ObamaCare — and many won’t participate in the new national insurance program because they fear they’ll go broke, The Post has learned.

“ObamaCare is going to send me more patients to see and then cut the payments to provide the care — that’s what’s going to happen,” predicted Donald Moore, a primary-care doctor in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn. “I will not accept it.”

Despite a much publicized rollout, many other doctors said they haven’t decided whether to become ObamaCare providers, because they haven’t been notified by insurers or the state about ­reimbursement rates.

“I have not spoken with anyone who has made a decision to participate in the exchanges. We simply don’t have any information about which we can make a decision,” said Dr. Paul Orloff, president of the New York County Medical Society. “We have no idea what the reimbursements will be or what the claims-form process will entail.”

http://nypost.com/2013/10/18/doctors-worried-sick-over-obamacare/

Wow, Obamacare is sure to be a smashing success, with this shit happening......Obama's best hope is that the websites continue to freeze up, if they sign up anywhere near their targets without the doctors to support the new entitlements we are all screwed.....

 

Boo Hoo

 

>"A new Washington Post/ABC News poll once again drives home a core truth about our politics right now: Disapproval of Obamacare does not translate into support for GOP tactics against the law. We've long known that to be the case. But the new Post/ABC poll takes this further, confirming that the horrific web-based problems we're seeing right now with the Obamacare exchanges -- which Republicans cite as evidence the law is a catastrophe that must be blotted from the landscape - are not producing support for the GOP position, either." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/21/as-obamacare-runs-into-problems-americans-still-want-to-give-it-a-chance/

Which has absolutely nothing to do with physician participation in New York.

 

Want to try again?

 

 

Question: What is the Dr trying to say? He isn't needed to participate in the exchanges. Is he saying he won't accept patients with insurance bought through the exchange? How will he know? Given the insurance is offered by private companies, how is the gov't going to cut reimbursements?

Now - if he was saying he wouldn't take more medicare patients - that makes more sense, and has been occurring for quite some time. How do you think cost is cut, anyway?

It's the NY Post, much like Fox News. Owned by News Corp., much like Fox News. That's all you really need to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

New York doctors are feeling queasy about ObamaCare — and many won’t participate in the new national insurance program because they fear they’ll go broke, The Post has learned.

“ObamaCare is going to send me more patients to see and then cut the payments to provide the care — that’s what’s going to happen,” predicted Donald Moore, a primary-care doctor in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn. “I will not accept it.”

Despite a much publicized rollout, many other doctors said they haven’t decided whether to become ObamaCare providers, because they haven’t been notified by insurers or the state about ­reimbursement rates.

“I have not spoken with anyone who has made a decision to participate in the exchanges. We simply don’t have any information about which we can make a decision,” said Dr. Paul Orloff, president of the New York County Medical Society. “We have no idea what the reimbursements will be or what the claims-form process will entail.”

http://nypost.com/2013/10/18/doctors-worried-sick-over-obamacare/

Wow, Obamacare is sure to be a smashing success, with this shit happening......Obama's best hope is that the websites continue to freeze up, if they sign up anywhere near their targets without the doctors to support the new entitlements we are all screwed.....

Boo Hoo

<

blockquote>

>"A new Washington Post/ABC News poll once again drives home a core truth about our politics right now: Disapproval of Obamacare does not translate into support for GOP tactics against the law. We've long known that to be the case. But the new Post/ABC poll takes this further, confirming that the horrific web-based problems we're seeing right now with the Obamacare exchanges -- which Republicans cite as evidence the law is a catastrophe that must be blotted from the landscape - are not producing support for the GOP position, either." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/21/as-obamacare-runs-into-problems-americans-still-want-to-give-it-a-chanc

e/

Which has absolutely nothing to do with physician participation in New York.

 

Want to try again?

 

 

Question: What is the Dr trying to say? He isn't needed to participate in the exchanges. Is he saying he won't accept patients with insurance bought through the exchange? How will he know? Given the insurance is offered by private companies, how is the gov't going to cut reimbursements?

 

Now - if he was saying he wouldn't take more medicare patients - that makes more sense, and has been occurring for quite some time. How do you think cost is cut, anyway?

 

 

It could well be a decision to participate in the plans offered by the exchanges. I'm not sure what the plans and levels offer in terms of in and out of network. Quite a lot is happening in the area of medicare 'advantage' plans (I know, it's not a part of the exchanges) which typically show up as the zero dollar insurance around this time of year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meet Edward Voas.

"Voss, 60, of Iowa City, is one of the first Iowans possibly the first to successfully purchase insurance via the problem-plagued website healthcare.gov."

"Voss said Monday that he tried more than 100 times before finally being able to sign onto healthcare.gov, type in his personal information, compare insurance plans, and purchase a policy"

 

http://altoonaherald.desmoinesregister.com/article/20131021/NEWS09/131021038/

 

Wow - success. At this rate Iowa will enroll a second person by the end of the month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meet Edward Voas.

"Voss, 60, of Iowa City, is one of the first Iowans possibly the first to successfully purchase insurance via the problem-plagued website healthcare.gov."

"Voss said Monday that he tried more than 100 times before finally being able to sign onto healthcare.gov, type in his personal information, compare insurance plans, and purchase a policy"

http://altoonaherald.desmoinesregister.com/article/20131021/NEWS09/131021038/

Wow - success. At this rate Iowa will enroll a second person by the end of the month.

He will surely stand up at the next "State of theUnion" address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VNS is about to have a huge meeting concerning staffing cuts due to the implementation of ACA.

I guess they don't need nurses, PTs and Home Health Aids now that we have Obamacare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfucking believable

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/10/22/healthcare_gov_testing_washington_post_reports_that_there_were_obvious_problems.html

 

Days before the launch of President Obamas online health ­insurance marketplace, government officials and contractors tested a key part of the Web site to see whether it could handle tens of thousands of consumers at the same time. It crashed after a simulation in which just a few hundred people tried to log on simultaneously. Despite the failed test, federal health officials plowed ahead.

When the Web site went live Oct. 1, it locked up shortly after midnight as about 2,000 users attempted to complete the first step, according to two people familiar with the project. ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VNS is about to have a huge meeting concerning staffing cuts due to the implementation of ACA.

I guess they don't need nurses, PTs and Home Health Aids now that we have Obamacare.

The Visiting Nurse Service (VNA?) is part of the mess Obama inherited. He will blame their demise on the Republicans in short order, at another dog and pony show in the Rose garden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look guys there's nothing wrong here. They're just working out a few bugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then there is this from CBS News --

HealthCare.gov pricing feature can be off the mark

CBS News ran the numbers for a 48-year-old in Charlotte, N.C., ineligible for subsidies. According to HealthCare.gov, she would pay $231 a month, but the actual plan on Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina's website costs $360, more than 50 percent higher. The difference: Blue Cross and Blue Shield requests your birthday before providing more accurate estimates.

The numbers for older Americans are even more striking. A 62-year-old in Charlotte looking for the same basic plan would get a price estimate on the government website of $394. The actual price is $634......

.......

(CBS News) CBS News has uncovered a serious pricing problem with HealthCare.gov. It stems from the Obama administration's efforts to improve its health care website. A new online feature can dramatically underestimate the cost of insurance.

The administration announced it would provide a new "shop and browse" feature Sunday, but it's not giving consumers the real picture. In some cases, people could end up paying double of what they see on the website, CBS News' Jan Crawford reported Wednesday on "CBS This Morning."......

.......Industry executives CBS News spoke with could not believe the government is providing these estimates, which they said were useless and could easily mislead consumers. They also said that the website repeatedly states the actual prices could be lower, but it makes no mention that they could be higher.(link)

 

Really. Isn't it time to delay the individual mandate? This is nothing short of fraud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

VNS is about to have a huge meeting concerning staffing cuts due to the implementation of ACA.

I guess they don't need nurses, PTs and Home Health Aids now that we have Obamacare.

The Visiting Nurse Service (VNA?) is part of the mess Obama inherited. He will blame their demise on the Republicans in short order, at another dog and pony show in the Rose garden.

Looks like a load of No. 2.

 

Googled Visiting Nurse Service layoffs and only got this:

 

http://www.vnsnet.com/employment/current-job-openings

 

They are hiring people in at least one place in NY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google visiting nurse service in El Paso

They are closing due to ObamaCare cuts to Medicaid.

(Cue the Blame Republicans choir)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google visiting nurse service in El Paso

They are closing due to ObamaCare cuts to Medicaid.

(Cue the Blame Republicans choir)

What ObamaCare cuts to Medicaid are you referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 2010, that was the big Republican campaign theme, Medicare cuts.

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2010/oct/11/republican-exaggerations-about-cutting-medicare/

 

Good point. Never mind any of this. At least Obama did something - regardless of how poorly executed or the potential downsides.

 

We should all buck up like good little soldiers and march in a line of acquiescence behind our flawless president.

 

Hail Obama.

 

adf3198d2a80.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CrackDog,

 

El Paso is in Texas where Rick Perry declined ObamaCare and its Medicaid dollars. Instead Texas Medicaid is getting cut. Add to that sequestration cuts.

 

Oops.

 

http://www.npr.org/2013/05/23/186303141/health-officials-decry-texas-snubbing-of-medicaid-billions

 

The feds are still feeding the same Medicaid money, per the same old Medicaid formula, they always have had, they are calling the increase in aid from the feds they would have gotten had they adopted Obamacare a loss. A key quote in that article, they have cut their own Medicaid recently.

 

"I don't think we will be OK, actually, especially when you consider the state cut us about $700 million a year in Medicaid payments because of the budget shortfall," says John Hawkins, a senior vice president at the Texas Hospital Association. "Now we're dealing with sequestration, which is another 2 percent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VNS is about to have a huge meeting concerning staffing cuts due to the implementation of ACA.

I guess they don't need nurses, PTs and Home Health Aids now that we have Obamacare.

and cost cuts come from where?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now She Tells Us: Sebelius Says Obamacare's Exchange Website Needed Six Years of Development, Instead Of Two

Avik Roy, Contributor

 

For people who have been following the story closely, it’s been clear for months that Obamacare’s exchanges were not ready to go live on October 1, and that their implementation needed to be delayed. The Obama administration insisted otherwise, claiming that everything was hunky-dory, and that reports to the contrary were simply the work of partisan saboteurs. But earlier this week, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admitted the truth. “We didn’t have enough testing…for a very complicated project,” she conceded to the Wall Street Journal. The exchanges needed five years of construction and one year of testing, and instead had only “two years [of construction] and almost no testing.” That leaves us with an obvious question: Why, then, did Sebelius insist on rolling out the exchanges four years ahead of time?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/10/23/now-she-tells-us-sebelius-says-obamacares-exchange-website-needed-six-years-of-development-instead-of-two/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now She Tells Us: Sebelius Says Obamacare's Exchange Website Needed Six Years of Development, Instead Of Two

Avik Roy, Contributor

 

For people who have been following the story closely, it’s been clear for months that Obamacare’s exchanges were not ready to go live on October 1, and that their implementation needed to be delayed. The Obama administration insisted otherwise, claiming that everything was hunky-dory, and that reports to the contrary were simply the work of partisan saboteurs. But earlier this week, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admitted the truth. “We didn’t have enough testing…for a very complicated project,” she conceded to the Wall Street Journal. The exchanges needed five years of construction and one year of testing, and instead had only “two years [of construction] and almost no testing.” That leaves us with an obvious question: Why, then, did Sebelius insist on rolling out the exchanges four years ahead of time?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/10/23/now-she-tells-us-sebelius-says-obamacares-exchange-website-needed-six-years-of-development-instead-of-two/

 

Does she have anyone with any IT experience advising her? 5 years of development and 1 year of testing is batshit crazy.

 

I'd be happy to give them another two years to get it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the news on NPR radio yesterday, they are using some of the top IT people in private industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the news on NPR radio yesterday, they are using some of the top IT people in private industry.

 

Should have used them from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

According to the news on NPR radio yesterday, they are using some of the top IT people in private industry.

Should have used them from the start.

Apparently the best and brightest IT people work for companies that lack the expertise required to navigate the maze government regulations. Not so easy to break into government contracting. I know, I tried and failed miserably. NPR had a piece on this a week or so ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the news on NPR radio yesterday, they are using some of the top IT people in private industry.

To try to fix the mess that they've already made of things... You're welcome, BB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now She Tells Us: Sebelius Says Obamacare's Exchange Website Needed Six Years of Development, Instead Of Two

Avik Roy, Contributor

 

For people who have been following the story closely, it’s been clear for months that Obamacare’s exchanges were not ready to go live on October 1, and that their implementation needed to be delayed. The Obama administration insisted otherwise, claiming that everything was hunky-dory, and that reports to the contrary were simply the work of partisan saboteurs. But earlier this week, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admitted the truth. “We didn’t have enough testing…for a very complicated project,” she conceded to the Wall Street Journal. The exchanges needed five years of construction and one year of testing, and instead had only “two years [of construction] and almost no testing.” That leaves us with an obvious question: Why, then, did Sebelius insist on rolling out the exchanges four years ahead of time?

 

 

 

Because Pelosi, Reid and Obama said this was so critical that it had to be voted into law immediately and online immediately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

According to the news on NPR radio yesterday, they are using some of the top IT people in private industry.

Should have used them from the start.

Apparently the best and brightest IT people work for companies that lack the expertise required to navigate the maze government regulations. Not so easy to break into government contracting. I know, I tried and failed miserably. NPR had a piece on this a week or so ago.

 

When you write the proposal, say yessir, yessir, yessir. Absolute compliance is the key to winning. Meanwhile, you keep track of the foolish requirements and log them for ECP development on award.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose we have to add Ohio to the honor roll.

 

Obamacare wins in Ohio as John Kasich expands state’s Medicaid coverage

He had to circumvent his own Republican legislature to do it, but Ohio’s Republican governor, John Kasich, succeeded Monday in a year-long quest to expand his state’s Medicaid program under the Affordable Care Act. As a result, nearly 300,000 low-income Ohioans—mostly working adults living near or below the federal poverty level—will qualify for basic health coverage starting January 1.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ohio-medicaid-expansion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose we have to add Ohio to the honor roll.

 

Obamacare wins in Ohio as John Kasich expands state’s Medicaid coverage

He had to circumvent his own Republican legislature to do it, but Ohio’s Republican governor, John Kasich, succeeded Monday in a year-long quest to expand his state’s Medicaid program under the Affordable Care Act. As a result, nearly 300,000 low-income Ohioans—mostly working adults living near or below the federal poverty level—will qualify for basic health coverage starting January 1.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ohio-medicaid-expansion

 

 

You are doing a fabulous job of trying to derail a thread about a trainwreck.

 

Start another thread. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your sock had posted that you might have had a point.

That's not fair, you need to specify which sock. He has a drawer full.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I suppose we have to add Ohio to the honor roll.

 

Obamacare wins in Ohio as John Kasich expands state’s Medicaid coverage

He had to circumvent his own Republican legislature to do it, but Ohio’s Republican governor, John Kasich, succeeded Monday in a year-long quest to expand his state’s Medicaid program under the Affordable Care Act. As a result, nearly 300,000 low-income Ohioans—mostly working adults living near or below the federal poverty level—will qualify for basic health coverage starting January 1.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ohio-medicaid-expansion

 

 

You are doing a fabulous job of trying to derail a thread about a trainwreck.

 

Start another thread. .

Hey RD do you, or have you ever posted on these forums as anything other than Regatta Dog?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I suppose we have to add Ohio to the honor roll.

 

Obamacare wins in Ohio as John Kasich expands state’s Medicaid coverage

He had to circumvent his own Republican legislature to do it, but Ohio’s Republican governor, John Kasich, succeeded Monday in a year-long quest to expand his state’s Medicaid program under the Affordable Care Act. As a result, nearly 300,000 low-income Ohioans—mostly working adults living near or below the federal poverty level—will qualify for basic health coverage starting January 1.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ohio-medicaid-expansion

 

 

You are doing a fabulous job of trying to derail a thread about a trainwreck.

 

Start another thread. .

Hey RD do you, or have you ever posted on these forums as anything other than Regatta Dog?

 

I did. Once, during the 1,000 days thread I created a sock puppet that was "Almighty God" or some such thing. I think I used it a half dozen times in that thread. Other than that? Not that I can remember - and I am willing to out any sock puppets I have created. Anyone who thinks I have multiple socks, has my permission to PM BJ and get a list. Link to this post and I'll send BJ a PM for him to fully disclose my history here.

 

Thanks for asking instead of assuming, Mike

 

Edit - I sent a PM to BJ to pull all the socks out of my drawer. Anyone else willing to man up? BTW, anyone who wants to know my real identity doesn't have to work to hard at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a sock. And I can't imagine why anybody would.

Thanks for being honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-dogs-1343903389.jpg

 

Poor hound! You should be ashamed of yourself!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter how badly the launch is bungled, when you're provider cancels your policy you will be forced into the system. Don't you think the administration is meeting with insurers and telling them to get busy cancelling policies? Why wouldn't the insurer comply, they get to charge double.....

 

Pretty fucked up.......but that's how the thugs from Chicago roll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nancy Pelosi offers a very simple solution to the website problems:

 

"Just fix it, so we can go forward," she added. "Fix the technology, and let's not get too bogged down in what happens if they're not able to fix it."

 

http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/330145-pelosi-on-obamacare-woes-just-fix-it#ixzz2ieHYyT00

 

Nancy said to just look at her district because of all the tech stuff. I did. Her district is basically downtown SF and the suburbs. Silicon Valley is a lot further south.

 

Now, if I needed advice on how to play cornhole, I might call her staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nancy Pelosi offers a very simple solution to the website problems:

 

"Just fix it, so we can go forward," she added. "Fix the technology, and let's not get too bogged down in what happens if they're not able to fix it."

 

http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/330145-pelosi-on-obamacare-woes-just-fix-it#ixzz2ieHYyT00

 

Obama said to call the 800 number - problem is, the operators use the website portal........you just can't make this shit up.

53 days to go......unless he takes the Republican's advice and extends the individual mandate.

Problem now is that they just outlawed 20-80 percent of the 19 million individual policies.

If it weren't so serious it would be funny - but I'm not laughing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nancy Pelosi offers a very simple solution to the website problems:

 

"Just fix it, so we can go forward," she added. "Fix the technology, and let's not get too bogged down in what happens if they're not able to fix it."

 

http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/330145-pelosi-on-obamacare-woes-just-fix-it#ixzz2ieHYyT00

 

Nancy said to just look at her district because of all the tech stuff. I did. Her district is basically downtown SF and the suburbs. Silicon Valley is a lot further south.

 

Now, if I needed advice on how to play cornhole, I might call her staff.

If you go directly to voicemail, they might be busy, out at a parade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it weren't so serious it would be funny - but I'm not laughing.

I'm splitting a gut. You just can't buy this type of entertainment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites