Just a realistic ACA reminder.

Just a reminder that the failure of a govt program to perform is not the primary thing used to evaluate whether or not to keep it. It has to fail for a very long time and be a very big failure in order for lawmakers to change it on their own.

The ACA website performing poorly will not be grounds to end the law. The people will have to demand it directly, so if you want the ACA over, keep calling, writing and petitioning. Watching it fail on the news or even reporting such will do little for the cause.

Again, failure of the ACA will not be grounds to actually remove it for some time.

Given this wishing failure would be like wishing the ship you were on to sink simply because you got drafted. I am not saying I like this concept, but....

Good point. So many messed up government programs and they are still around.

More good news!

CBS News. Finally. It hits the mainstream media.

Obama: When his lips are moving he's lying.

Obamacare: More than 2 million people getting booted from existing health insurance plans

The White House is on the defensive trying to explain it, after Mr. Obama repeatedly said, "If you like your doctor or health care plan, you can keep it."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162- ... ance-plans

on that note wrote: Just a reminder that the failure of a govt program to perform is not the primary thing used to evaluate whether or not to keep it. It has to fail for a very long time and be a very big failure in order for lawmakers to change it on their own.

The ACA website performing poorly will not be grounds to end the law. The people will have to demand it directly, so if you want the ACA over, keep calling, writing and petitioning. Watching it fail on the news or even reporting such will do little for the cause.

Again, failure of the ACA will not be grounds to actually remove it for some time.

Given this wishing failure would be like wishing the ship you were on to sink simply because you got drafted. I am not saying I like this concept, but....

If enough people who actually vote get hurt, the change will come at the voting booth and these Dems running in 2014 know it all too well. But I agree, we can't just lay down and accept the ungreased shaft they are forcing on us. We have to remember that they work for us and they were never intended to have this much power over our freedom. It's going to take another crash and more pain for enough people to wake up.

Good point OTN.

Expect to see lots of stumping in 2014 to get rid of ACA. It should be pivotal and get the voters out.

Rick wrote:

on that note wrote: Just a reminder that the failure of a govt program to perform is not the primary thing used to evaluate whether or not to keep it. It has to fail for a very long time and be a very big failure in order for lawmakers to change it on their own.

The ACA website performing poorly will not be grounds to end the law. The people will have to demand it directly, so if you want the ACA over, keep calling, writing and petitioning. Watching it fail on the news or even reporting such will do little for the cause.

Again, failure of the ACA will not be grounds to actually remove it for some time.

Given this wishing failure would be like wishing the ship you were on to sink simply because you got drafted. I am not saying I like this concept, but....

If enough people who actually vote get hurt, the change will come at the voting booth and these Dems running in 2014 know it all too well. But I agree, we can't just lay down and accept the ungreased shaft they are forcing on us. We have to remember that they work for us and they were never intended to have this much power over our freedom. It's going to take another crash and more pain for enough people to wake up.

Too bad this is the only way you can really look at it. It has now become another ABORTION ISSUE. Something that despite rights being important, becomes a surrogate voting issue. So now more idiots (yes I said idiots) will vote for people, that will represent them on EVERY ISSUE for some time will vote one way or the other because of just the ACA.

We have a problem when we must pick people in stead of the solutions to issues.

So now we will have 1/2 the votes cast due to the ACA and abortion. People who vote on these two issues alone have done a great deal to ruin the power of the people. Obama got elected because of the abortion difference and the race difference between the parties.

Actually I take it back, the only real difference between the parties now are the ACA and abortion. I guess this is all we are really voting on, in the end most other policies are the same.

on that note wrote: So now we will have 1/2 the votes cast due to the ACA and abortion. People who vote on these two issues alone have done a great deal to ruin the power of the people. Obama got elected because of the abortion difference and the race difference between the parties.

Actually I take it back, the only real difference between the parties now are the ACA and abortion. I guess this is all we are really voting on, in the end most other policies are the same.

Well when you find some politician on either side that doesn't make a single issue, or a line in a party platform the only issue... you let me know. Otherwise we have to vote with the hand they deal us.

And what are your solutions to all this beside incessantly harping on the same theme over and over? You talk up your same political philosophy until it's beaten and blue.

Prediction: ACA will still be here 10 years from now if it hasn't been replaced by a single payer system. Maybe named HillaryCare?

Walter L Newton wrote:

on that note wrote: So now we will have 1/2 the votes cast due to the ACA and abortion. People who vote on these two issues alone have done a great deal to ruin the power of the people. Obama got elected because of the abortion difference and the race difference between the parties.

Actually I take it back, the only real difference between the parties now are the ACA and abortion. I guess this is all we are really voting on, in the end most other policies are the same.

Well when you find some politician on either side that doesn't make a single issue, or a line in a party platform the only issue... you let me know. Otherwise we have to vote with the hand they deal us.

And what are your solutions to all this beside incessantly harping on the same theme over and over? You talk up your same political philosophy until it's beaten and blue.

Wow,

1. Just because they market themselves under the single issue does not mean you have to fall for it. All you have to do, I repeat all you have to do, is remember, I repeat, remember, that once they are in office, they will have influence over more than that one issue they marketed to you, I repeat they will have influence over more than that one issue they marketed to you. I repeat because you know this, yet you still posted what you did.

2. I constantly state my solution. Isn't that what a political philosophy is? Just because it is not a two party solution within our system, does not mean I have not stated it. Very clearly, we need to stop voting on so many things, voting on so much of other people's money and preserve liberties for the people on most issues. I feel that the rules, that we all must abide by when we interact with others can be listed on one piece of paper, 8-1/2 x 11 in 10 pt type. They include murder, rape and steeling rules, a foundation for some justice on when these basic issues are not settled. You can find just about every last thing I would put on that paper by looking back on this board. I would reduce govt programs by something like 80% or more. I would minimize voting on people, increasing voting on issues and then limit the issues we can vote on to things that are not reserved to individuals. I would also likely limit the % of collective taking that can happen. I have previously suggested 10% as something that has stood that test of time longer than 50%+, again as an upper limit. I may make taxes voluntary. Again, just because my solution is not some canned D or R rant, does not make it unstated. I suggest we stop setting international policy domestically and stop doing so in secret. I suggest we stop borrowing money by the govt that cannot be paid back within short time (say 1-5 years) unless we are in an outright emergency. I suggest for the most part you choose for your life and I choose for mine and I suggest that the dumb get screwed for being dumb, but the incapable get taken care of because we are advanced enough to do so. We need to stop our focus on the 3rd tier from the bottom because they market well and focus our help on the bottom tier. I think we need to end public education as a failure and inefficient or at a minimum use the new ACA funding to fund this if people cannot give up the system outright( make parents pay and if they cannot, help them). I think we should do cost benefit analyses on programs at some reasonable point after they start (ahh the point of starting this thread, that we will not to a CBA on the ACA, we will debate it for the politicians benefit forever). This would in fact end such debate, before the ACA started it should have had a specific measuring stick with consequences if it does not work. In stead we will debate the non issues until the end of time and the will sand and reprint the numbers on that measuring stick as much as they want. I have said all of this over and over and over again. I offer much detail on my thoughts, my criticism and how I would do it differently. But again, my solution is not a heavy handed govt solution, so most feel like it is a non solution because they want the heavy hand on their back, they feel the weight, but I guess fell protected.

I feel your post is unfounded on most levels.

I am not here to propose baby steps so that we can continue this crap. I come here to try and break the party lines, which seem to be so strong here, yet so confused. I come here to talk about issues, despite the fact that most people respond with their sports team, party talk. Hearing people state such mindless cult philosophy does often cause me to say the same thing, my personal and empowering philosophy. SNAP OUT OF IT.

FredHayek wrote: Prediction: ACA will still be here 10 years from now if it hasn't been replaced by a single payer system. Maybe named HillaryCare?

You may be right.

I predict the ACA will crash and burn in the next 6 months (low likelyhood) or will be here in 20 years. I think universal govt paid health care financed through our taxes is dead for two reasons.

1. The ACA will wear people out on trusting these folks.

2. The economy over the course of years, not months, is going to get progressively worse and people are going to be more and more strapped (these are the good times). It will be hard to sell the forever increase in taxes on a bunch of people that have little left. Then again, if we can get unemployment high enough, which is very realistic, and get the voting public to be made up of mostly bleeding heart rich folks and the poor unemployed, it may be very viable to vote in any govt service, kind of like the socialist revolutionettes of SA. So this really depends on the rate of economic demise relative the progress of the current system. If both happen slow enough, which appears to be the most likely path, I think the ACA is here to stay. People will become hooked, and they wont even understand what they are hooked on. They will just become progressively more desperate and less open to change. So slow decline and ACA will stay, incline and the ACA will be lost in the wash (for now), fast decline and we will have universal care, food, housing and more, but it will suck and you may not get your share, wait in line.