ObamaCare + waivers = ?

I was going to do a 3-part post on the waivers thing. Analyze political poll numbers on O.C. approval and then analyze political affiliations of the waivered.

But why bother? We know how it’ll come out.  Instead here’s Marvelous Michelle’s latest. The more Democrats “approve” of ObamaCare, the more likely they are not to be bound by it.

Sound similiar to any other historical practices? Like, oh I dunno, maybe…slavery? For some reason slavers always seemed to like slavery.  But would a poll of their “property”  return the same numbers?

Here’s a 2011 CNN poll, and here’s a slightly more detailed one from Fox .

According to CNN, 74% of Democrats approve of ObamaCare. 14% fully, 60% mostly. For Republicans, 1% fully approve and 11% mostly approve. So, 3 out of 4 Democrats claim to like or love it. 7 out of 8 Republicans don’t like it at all. Moderate squishes fall between these two, obviously.

So who’s getting the exemptions? Democrats.

The Fox poll is similar. 27% of Democrats want ObamaCare repealed, 87% of Republicans do.

So naturally, waive out the Democrats and force everyone else in.

You remember when Obama caused a little stir by referring to his political opponents as “enemies”? He was just being honest for once. 

He and his allies will keep trying to enslave us until we kick their butts so hard they have to stop and rub them.  And just as soon as the owie goes away they always start back up.

There’s no reasoning with them.  So start calling them what they are:  thieves, tyrants, and slavers.  An through their whiny rage tell them you’ll stop once they stop trying to take over your life.  

Because that’s what tyrants and slavers do.

About wormme

I've accepted that all of you are socially superior to me. But no pretending that any of you are rational.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to ObamaCare + waivers = ?

  1. Billy says:

    It should be, and probably is, unconstitutional, for the government to favor one company/industry over another. If the waivers we given instead with a broad description of who qualifies for the waiver, something like “any company who would otherwise drop their existing health coverage”, as apposed to “any company named McDonald’s”, it would be much different.

    OC really missed an opportunity. Imagine if health costs were to actually go down because of the new law. Wouldn’t that be great for the country? Medicare/Medicaid would costs much less. Seniors would have less out of pocket expenses, thus helping on Social Security increases. More companies could offer some health coverage. More people could buy it. Unfortunately, keeping cost down was not their plan.

    Here’s how I’d do it.

    1. Decouple health benefits from your employer. Instead, an employer can offer a Health and Safety Net Fund (consider it pre-tax dollars) that the employee can put in their personal Health/Safety Net fund. From here the person can pay medical expenses or insurance premiums. Use it for unemployment needs. If it reaches a certain amount, allow some of the money to be used for *any* reason, although then taxed. This HSN-Fund can be invested by the person, probably restricted to some degree, like the investment must stay in this country.

    2. Health plans with co-pays suck. I’m sorry, but they only drive up cost. If a person can pay $20 for a visit to the Dr., how is that person concerned about the total costs of the visit.

    3. Model it like car insurance. With car insurance, you use it on a per-incident basis when the damage is severe enough. Health insurance should be that way too. For a check-up, upset tummy, nagging cough, pay for it through your HSN-Fund and don’t even bother the insurance company. Less paper work. Less auditors. Less total costs. You should be able to shop around for the cheapest Doc. Right now, you can’t. “How much will the visit be?” I ask. “We don’t know how much it’ll cost until we know what insurance you have, and until we file” they currently answer.

    That’s enough ranting for now. Cheers.

    btw, did you see this? http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/01/28/meet-tiny-hour-clock-blood-cells/?test=faces

    • wormme says:

      Your suggestions are very good. And a majority, possibly a great majority, favors those very changes.

      But they don’t centralize power and increase the government’s control over our lives. That being the point, to statists.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s