MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
Saturday, September 20, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 73.0° F  Mostly Cloudy
Collapse Photo Bar

Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby wack wack » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:09 pm

bdog wrote:
wack wack wrote:In truth, the majority of people in Wisconsin will pay less money for more health care. Additionally, it will decrease the size and cost of government, increase the quality of health care and increase access for those truly in need of assistance.

Liar.


I'm glad you feel that way... please remember this the next time Republican talking points are nothing more than the opposite of what the Dems say. In other words, the next time you encounter any Republican talking point.
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3148
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby wack wack » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:11 pm

Meade wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:And the GOP alternative for health care reform is... ?

State, not federal, health care reform.

Not burdening citizens with a massive new tax/penalty - especially during the third summer in a row of economic stagnation. And when I say citizens, I'm talking about citizens who make well less than $250,000/year.


My taxes won't go up. Will yours?
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3148
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby rabble » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:14 pm

bdog wrote:No one has "proof" that any of this is going to work since it doesn't exist yet.

And we won't see any proof, since Walker's not implementing it. And he can't. It might save some money, and then where would he be? Better to refuse it saying it would cost us money while he keeps doing things that cost the state money.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6157
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby bdog » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:15 pm

wack wack wrote:
bdog wrote:
wack wack wrote:In truth, the majority of people in Wisconsin will pay less money for more health care. Additionally, it will decrease the size and cost of government, increase the quality of health care and increase access for those truly in need of assistance.

Liar.


I'm glad you feel that way... please remember this the next time Republican talking points are nothing more than the opposite of what the Dems say. In other words, the next time you encounter any Republican talking point.

Does not matter which party you are with - if you make a statement about the future you are, plain and simple, a liar.

Charlie Shortino - liar.
bdog
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3248
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:26 am

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:22 pm

Meade wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:And the GOP alternative for health care reform is... ?

State, not federal, health care reform.

Tell me more. What is Walker's plan for Wisconsin?
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19883
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby wack wack » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:27 pm

bdog wrote:Does not matter which party you are with - if you make a statement about the future you are, plain and simple, a liar.

Charlie Shortino - liar.


Liar.
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3148
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby Stebben84 » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:30 pm

bdog wrote:No one has "proof" that any of this is going to work since it doesn't exist yet.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx-9t2Con_k

You realize that it has been working for a while now, don't you? This is just one testimonial.

Meade wrote:State, not federal, health care reform.


That's not an alternative, that's a talking point. Otherwise known as a distraction.

Meade wrote:Not burdening citizens with a massive new tax/penalty


About $325 a year for I think it's about 5% of the population. Massive I tell you, MASSIVE. AHHHHHHHHHHHH.

If you can't afford that it means you're poor enough to get medicaid and won't have to pay it.

Henry Vilas wrote:Tell me more. What is Walker's plan for Wisconsin?


To tell the uninsured to buck up and lose your house if you have to.

The funny thing is that poor people still get treatment if the can't afford it thanks to Regan:

http://www.salon.com/topic/healthcare_reform/

Ronald Reagan imposed his own national healthcare mandate on the country. The mandate is well know today — it requires emergency rooms to treat anyone in need, regardless of their ability to pay


What a dirty rotten socialist. And by the way, you know who ends up footing the bill. Taxpayers.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4843
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby fennel » Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:44 pm

Stebben84 wrote:
Ronald Reagan imposed his own national healthcare mandate on the country. The mandate is well know today — it requires emergency rooms to treat anyone in need, regardless of their ability to pay


What a dirty rotten socialist. And by the way, you know who ends up footing the bill. Taxpayers.
And hospitals. Which is why hospitals will not be too keen on Walker's bluster when it comes to turning away needed funds.
fennel
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3173
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:24 pm
Location: Inside the Green Zone, Madison

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby bdog » Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:21 pm

Stebben84 wrote:
bdog wrote:No one has "proof" that any of this is going to work since it doesn't exist yet.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx-9t2Con_k

You realize that it has been working for a while now, don't you? This is just one testimonial.

THAT's your proof? Face palm.
bdog
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3248
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:26 am

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby Stebben84 » Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:01 pm

bdog wrote:
Stebben84 wrote:
bdog wrote:No one has "proof" that any of this is going to work since it doesn't exist yet.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx-9t2Con_k

You realize that it has been working for a while now, don't you? This is just one testimonial.

THAT's your proof? Face palm.


Coming from someone who says it "doesn't exist yet."

I wasn't saying that this was some sort of definitive proof. It was anecdotal and I venture to guess there are many, many more stories like this. It's a start and it's more proof than you've got that it won't work.

This brings me to another question. Do you actually WANT this to work, or do you want it to fail. Sounds like the latter which is partisan hackery. Let me also ask you this. Do you think the provisions about pre-existing conditions and letting your kids on your insurance past the age of 18 are a good thing?
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4843
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby Meade » Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:19 pm

The actual cost of the regulations and taxes may be more or less than predicted. What is known, however, is that severing other provisions from the Individual Man- date and Medicaid Expansion necessarily would impose significant risks and real uncertainties on insurance com- panies, their customers, all other major actors in the sys- tem, and the government treasury. And what also is known is this: Unnecessary risks and avoidable uncertain- ties are hostile to economic progress and fiscal stability and thus to the safety and welfare of the Nation and the Nation’s freedom.
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby snoqueen » Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:21 pm

Not implementing the Affordable Care Act would help Wisconsin because the state would not incur the costs of expanding Medicaid.


How sweet of you to be so solicitous of the well being of our dear state, which is a corporate entity (and therefore a person, I suppose).

What if you shift your gaze to actual, natural persons? Persons who might benefit by the expansion of Medicaid because right now they're not getting regular healthcare at all? Persons who now have to choose between medical care/medications and other needs because there's no way they can pay for both?

This is one costly system we're running, with benefits distributed very unevenly among those who need them. We can do better.

And cheapness isn't the only standard, let alone the highest, even for a state.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11501
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby bdog » Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:25 pm

Stebben84 wrote:This brings me to another question. Do you actually WANT this to work, or do you want it to fail.

I would love for it to work. I'm in the middle on it, mostly because I don't understand it yet. What I do know is it doesn't make sense to call anyone a liar over it.
bdog
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3248
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:26 am

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby Stebben84 » Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:26 pm

Meade wrote:
The actual cost of the regulations and taxes may be more or less than predicted. What is known, however, is that severing other provisions from the Individual Man- date and Medicaid Expansion necessarily would impose significant risks and real uncertainties on insurance com- panies, their customers, all other major actors in the sys- tem, and the government treasury. And what also is known is this: Unnecessary risks and avoidable uncertain- ties are hostile to economic progress and fiscal stability and thus to the safety and welfare of the Nation and the Nation’s freedom.


Link please Meade. Board rules and for all I know your Aunt Minnie could have written this.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4843
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Walker may reject $4 billion Obamacare funds

Postby snoqueen » Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:29 pm

Here's a link to the whole text of the law (by section, fortunately) along with explanations of various features. This is a government site (DHHS), not a blog or media page.

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/index.html

Someone -- pj, I think -- asked about appeals of healthcare decisions. Here is the page where they discuss those:

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/features/ ... /index.htm
Last edited by snoqueen on Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11501
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: green union terrace chair and 3 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar