Read 'em and weep. Then look up epistemic closure.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/defau...

- - - - - And nobody liked Obamacare. That is why it was able to be made into a law. - - - - - -

That's a fundamental characteristic of all human endeavors in which diverse viewpoints are summarized into (conceptually) binary action choices. People disagree on stuff. We need to take actions in some areas where we disagree. "Everyone equally unhappy" is just the other half of the Pareto walnut.

sPh

I just can't imagine the level of cognitive dissonance involved in Mr. Anti-Government Norquist leading a campaign to have government-built and operated facilities throughout the land named after St. Ronald Reagan.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/defau...

"CBO and JCT project that 12 million more
nonelderly people will have health insurance in 2014
than would have had it in the absence of the ACA. They
also project that 19 million more people will be insured
in 2015, 25 million more will be insured in 2016, and
26 million more will be insured each year from 2017
through 2024 than would have been the case without the
ACA."

"Relative to their previous projections, CBO and JCT now
estimate that the ACA’s coverage provisions will result in
lower net costs to the federal government: The agencies
now project a net cost of $36 billion for 2014, $5 billion
less than the previous projection for the year; and
$1,383 billion for the 2015–2024 period, $104 billion
less than the previous projection.
[...]
Those estimates address only the insurance coverage pro-
visions of the ACA, which do not generate all of the act’s
budgetary effects. Many other provisions, on net, are
expected to reduce budget deficits. Considering all of
the provisions—including the coverage provisions—
CBO and JCT estimated in July 2012 (their most recent
comprehensive estimate) that the ACA’s overall effect
would be to reduce federal deficits."

Forbes? Really? REALLY?

sPh

Can't help but noticing you left the duration out of those Breitbert-ized numbers.

You also ignored the cost of what happens if we _don't_ have 12 million people in reasonably-managed health insurance plans. While people in the US with no insurance plan may not get much care during their lives they usually get pulled into the standard system in their last years and generate huge costs - which could have been managed or avoided with lifelong basic health care. And of course there is the loss of productivity to the economy when people are unable to obtain basic medical care during the productive years of their lives.

Also about 1437 other factors you left out or simply put a hard right wing glibertarian spin on.

sPh

Google broken for you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

http://council.brandeis.edu/

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/hsrinfo...

The Affordable Care Act is working extremely well, with 12 million Americans who previously had essentially no access to health care having been covered this year alone, so I'm not sure where "blame" comes from in your post. Projection perhaps? The ACA's basic design was the Heritage Foundation plan of 1993 which was claimed at that time by Republicans to be a 'free market-based' alternative to the Clinton health care reform proposals. Between 1993 and 2014 it suddenly stopped being free-market? Huh.

sPh

The Roman government (both Republic and Empire) built roads, aqueducts, and sewers some of which are still in use today 2000 years later. But you know, governments never accomplish anything.

sPh

Americans who purchased coverage are paying for it (payment rates running a bit higher than privately-placed insurance, so yes "they paid for it"). Americans who could not previously afford any health insurance and therefore were essentially locked out from most health care are now being subsidized at a level about 40% of all the US' G8 peers. With that subsidy they are able to obtain reasonably-priced basic medical service thus greatly enriching their lives and - it is believed by 97.3% of health care economists - lowering the overall cost of medical care to the entire nation.

Your complaint is?

sPh

- - - - - The Obamacare website was a total disaster. - - - - -

A site intended to serve up to 30 million people execute complex financial changes in a 90-day window was three months late, went live at ~80% capability, and will probably be close to 95% capability at the beginning of its second year of operation is a "disaster"? Perhaps you don't remember the early days of, say, Amazon?

sPh

- - - - - A) a government sponsored software project can be done without corruption, delays and major budget problems? - - - - -

I'm generally in agreement with what you say, but when we have 30 years of "the government is the problem, the government is incompetent, let's drown government in the bathtub" and Grover Norquist the result is - surprise - government capabilities degraded or destroyed. Look at the Hoover Dam, the TVA [1], the Post Office's tremendous scientific and engineering advances in automated sorting and handling systems in the 1960s, the Iowa class battleships, the reforestation of large areas of the south, etc for examples of highly capable and well-executed government projects.

sPh

There are hundreds of EDI-type transactions behind every one of those "simple" actions. Plus verification, cross-matching with multiple insurance carriers (each with their own system), testing all the interconnections. Just to scratch the surface.

sPh

Ohhhh, here comes the hard right wing downrate brigade. No reply on 12 million newly covered of course.

sPh

Side effect of the adamant insistence by both the Senate Republicans and the Very Serious People(tm) of the Washington power elite that the ACA and the insurance exchanges for the uninsured be handled "by the states". There is always some benefit to diversity, but having 30 different insurance exchanges built at the same time was ridiculous.

The Republicans of course refused as a body to vote for the bill that was based on Heritage Foundation [hard right wing] principles and modified to suit the (R)'s requests.

sPh

In your foaming response, please describe _exactly_ what you find so objectionable about the Affordable Care Act. Discuss the 12 million previously uninsured Americans who were able to obtain health insurance and health care in 2014 and what you believe should happen to them. If you were extended on your parents' plan for at least a year post-2011 state how many additional years on your parents' plan you used. If you have corporate health insurance, describe exactly how the ACA affected your coverage. If your response is that premiums went up, you had to change doctors, etc list how many times that happened to you in the 10 years prior to the ACA being passed.

sPh