Shutdown Supporters, Now That It's All Over But The Crying....

And when you cut the size and population of the U.S. down to the size and population of Germany or The Netherlands, it just might work. Let us know when you've succeeded in doing that.

My contention is that 3.1 million young, healthy people are now paying affordable premiums into the system which, for those of us who understand scary things like numbers, comes under the heading of "spreading the risk."

After you've responded to that, you can talk about what you want to talk about.

So you're not going to address the fact that your talking point utterly conflicts with reality. You could have just said that.

You're denying the 3.1 million figure? You'll need to present some data with that.

That's not how it works, and you know it. You presented the figure, you substantiate it. Claim requires evidence, non-acceptance requires none.

Then you should have questioned it in Post #90 instead of farting around for over an hour. Here ya go:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/mone...18/health-care-law-young-americans/55677268/1

http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/19/pf/health-care-young-adults/

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Dai...form-implementation-young-adult-coverage.aspx

http://www.boston.com/politicalinte...th-coverage/R6MpQ7gBU5cRcnX0TbsHRN/story.html

http://www.workforce.com/articles/3...ained-coverage-through-health-care-reform-hhs

http://www.benefitspro.com/2012/06/19/31-million-young-adults-covered-under-health-refor

http://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20120619/NEWS03/120619895

Even your buds at FOX admit that the parts that have been implemented so far mean "the law will only become more popular and harder to repeal" because it's working so well:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013...e-obamacare-plus-one-reason-why-theyre-gonna/

Now, I'm going out to dinner, but I'm confident that by the time I get back, you'll have refuted every single one of those sources.

Or you'll be waving your arms and jumping up and down as usual.

Translated: "It should bring costs down... we don't have any data to base that "should" on, but..."

Now let's address what you don't have the honesty to:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...ost-my-health-insurance-plan-due-to-obamacare

http://blog.heritage.org/2013/02/27/3-years-of-obamacare-millions-lose-their-current-coverage/

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396390443437504577545770682810842

http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/Oversight-Gov-Reform-Testimony_2012.pdf

So while Obamacare's "newly covered" number is artificially inflated, its "newly without" number is swept under the rug. Additionally, premiums and particularly deductibles are up under Obamacare in all but a few states.

http://www.heritage.org/research/re...exchanges-how-will-your-health-insurance-fare

I started a thread about this very subject and, yes, those stories so far have turned out to be completely fabricated lies. Please check out the thread because I started it specifically in response to your post.

Blog.

Blog.

Subscription only.

Twenty-page PDF prognostication that you wouldn't be able to recap if your life depended on it because you didn't read it yourself.

Another prognostication about what might happen.

None of these show anything that has happened.

And none of them refute the fact that 3.1 million young, healthy new subscribers are now paying into the system.

You're not even trying.

Irrelevant.

Then buy a subscription, or find a way around the paywall like I did.

The "prognostication" is extensively sourced via footnote throughout, and here's the tip of the iceberg:

No, they're not paying into the system; their parents are paying into the system, because those 3.1 million "new subscribers" are dependents on their parents' plans. Plans which are, lest we forget, mandatory. You can't claim people who pay nothing are "subscribers" to a plan which is "popular" when that plan is mandatory.

And you're being dishonest, as you always are, which is why you are rarely humored when you pull this crap.

John, you're just wrong. Yes, some of them are on their parents plan but a hell of a lot of them are also covered by the medi-caid expansion (which means as far as the hospitals are concerned they're paying customers) and still more will be covered by plans purchased off of the exchanges. You're just not arguing from a position of fact, my friend.

Don't call me your friend, Wordin. And some of them "will be" covered by plans purchased on the exchanges? When? Has the decade-old exchange software been unfucked yet? Not to my knowledge, or anyone else's. And how many is a "hell of a lot" where Medicaid is concerned? How many of those mysterious 3.1 million "children" up to age 26 are covered by Medicaid?

You can say that facts aren't on my side all you like; that doesn't mean a cinnoman-sugar unicorn fart if you aren't bringing anything to the table besides a claim.

People crying about the crashing exchange software are as big an idiots as those who whined about Obama bowing.

Do a little research, pretty much no widespread software has gone live on the internet without major issues...and these are companies that employ the best. Companies like Activision/Blizzard, Sony, Microsoft, etc....


As far as the bowing thing, stop sounding like a stereotypical idiot American. Bowing is a sign of respec, not a sign of subservience.

By all reports the California exchange software/website is working perfects and in fact most state websites are working fine. Yes, the Federal one has had issue mostly due to getting much more traffic than they were designed to handle but the solution is simple, red states need to unfuck themselves and actually make their own websites if they're so unhappy with the federal website. In any event people have six months, half a year, to sign up so problems in the first week or so really aren't a big deal because they still have half a year to complete the 20 minute process.

None of this changes the fact thatt John Castle has been completely wrong about everything, post #101 showed that, but it is still nice to know.

While you're talking about research, I think you should do some. The design behind Healthcare.gov is dated by ten years, plagiarizes unattributed code in violation of the software license, and it's not "glitching", it's shit.

http://www.businessweek.com/article...g-the-moral-of-the-healthcare-dot-gov-debacle

On just about everything else you seem to have your head on straight; that's what makes it so perplexing that you're sucking down the Obamacare Kool-Aid like this. The concept behind the law is shit. The effects it's having now and is projected to have in the future are catastrophic. The Feds' exchange website is fail. I don't know why you're wearing Obama's ass for a hat about Obamacare, but fuckin' stop it, it's disgraceful.

I got a better solution for the the red states, it'll solve the problem completely. Nullify the law and refuse to comply/enforce it.

Over three million new subscribers. Can't refute it. Keep waving your arms.

Jeff Davis agrees!

I don't find not being a partisan caricature disgraceful at all.

Jefferson Davis never nullified anything as a congressman and the Confederacy existed after the first nullification of a law. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison agree.

Yes, thank you. So you're not arguing for outright secession, just :tantrum:. Or, IOW, more of the same.

I'd like to paraphrase a speech from Captain Picard.

This is not about revenge, this is about saving the future of humanity. I will not sacrifice the country. We made too many compromises already, too many retreats. They invade our privacy, we fall back. They pass unconstitutional laws, we fall back. Not again, the line must be drawn here, no further!

Well, THAT certainly makes you easier to take seriously.

An approximate 1% enrolment success rate though... ZeroHedge have a nice chart.

That's for enrollment in the full program that begins January 2014.

The 3.1 million were enrolled under the initial 2010 roll-out, and have been participating since:

https://www.healthcare.gov/timeline-of-the-health-care-law/

It's been rolling out in stages, something else Castle doesn't get.

Nullification is a pointless concept post Civil War.

Calling the ACA a failure because relatively few people have enrolled so far is one of the sillier arguments to have come along recently.

First, people going to a website multiple times before they buy is pretty normal; conversion rates for any kind of eCommerce tend to be low. That's why there are companies whose sole purpose is retargeting -- allowing you to serve ads to people who have already visited your site but left without buying. That there are more site visits than signups is not much of a surprise.

Second -- and, probably, the bigger reason -- it's mid-October, and the plans don't kick in until Jan. 1. I'm somebody who will be signing up through the exchanges; because my employer is too small to participate in any group plans, it's the only way for me to get insurance at all after COBRA runs out. If I could buy a plan right now and dump my expensive COBRA premium, I would; but because the signup is for coverage that starts in January, there just isn't that much of a rush.

And I waited until 10/3 and signed up then without any difficulty, because I had a hunch a lot of people would jam up the exchanges on 10/1.

Why?

• Maybe they thought 10/1 was the only day they could sign up, despite the numerous sources telling them that enrollment would begin on 10/1 and run through 3/31/14

• Maybe they fell prey to Black Friday thinking. "Ya gotta camp out in front of the store overnight 'cause there's only a limited amount and ya gotta get there before it all runs out"

And there's probably a number of people who've no real intention of signing up, but are looking out of curiosity. You know, to see if they have a better choice with the plans offered via Obamacare than what their employer gives them.

There is no such thing as nullfication. Never has been and never will be and it is hilarious that people who claim to care so much about the constitution seem to always not understand what is in it.