Obama Calls on Private Sector IT Pros to fix HealthCare.gov

[m32]

I don't want Obamacare. It seems like a good idea but the effects are too negative for me to support.

Yes, I just wanted to keep it short and not be negative.

 

[skit75]

Part of the problem is the folks that specialize in navigating government protocol & regulations concerning bidding on a government contract, are not the same folks who specialize in building high traffic websites.

 

[bigshootr8]

Part of the problem is the folks that specialize in navigating government protocol & regulations concerning bidding on a government contract, are not the same folks who specialize in building high traffic websites.

Which goes to a earlier point that I made that government and technology don't mix shall I bring up the example of SOPA and how it took people explaining to them what the deal was for them to listen. To them servers? net traffic? Whats that. If you are going to put millions of the tax payers money into a website it needs to work or you'll be put through the ringer over and over again.

 

[skit75]

Part of the problem is the folks that specialize in navigating government protocol & regulations concerning bidding on a government contract, are not the same folks who specialize in building high traffic websites.

Which goes to a earlier point that I made that government and technology don't mix shall I bring up the example of SOPA and how it took people explaining to them what the deal was for them to listen. To them servers? net traffic? Whats that. If you are going to put millions of the tax payers money into a website it needs to work or you'll be put through the ringer over and over again.

It will be fixed. People's lives depend on it, really. I just hope the government sends the original contractor the bill for fixing it.

@m32 - The Affordable Care Act is the law. It's been challenged in court & found constitutional. It isn't perfect but we will all use the healthcare system at some point in our lives so, get on-board. I guess you don't know anyone with a "pre-existing condition".... how fortunate.

Single/Payer 2016 anyone?

 

[Martell1977]

Part of the problem is the folks that specialize in navigating government protocol & regulations concerning bidding on a government contract, are not the same folks who specialize in building high traffic websites.

Which goes to a earlier point that I made that government and technology don't mix shall I bring up the example of SOPA and how it took people explaining to them what the deal was for them to listen. To them servers? net traffic? Whats that. If you are going to put millions of the tax payers money into a website it needs to work or you'll be put through the ringer over and over again.

It will be fixed. People's lives depend on it, really. I just hope the government sends the original contractor the bill for fixing it.

@m32 - The Affordable Care Act is the law. It's been challenged in court & found constitutional. It isn't perfect but we will all use the healthcare system at some point in our lives so, get on-board. I guess you don't know anyone with a "pre-existing condition".... how fortunate.

Single/Payer 2016 anyone?

For the record, its Congress' job to make, change and even repeal laws, so the "it's the law" argument is irrelevant. The penalty was found constitutional, not the entire law. The penalty was focused on in the lawsuit because it is a no brainer that our government should not be allowed to penalize people for not buying a product. The verdict that its a tax not a penalty is false, even Obama said it wasn't a tax.

If the government had let the free market do its job, health care coverage would have been much cheaper.

What i don't understand is, if you want socialism so bad, why not move to a country that has it, why work so hard to destroy this country? Does is bother socialists that their system sucks compared to what we have/had?

 

[Rick_09]

Anything can be fixed, as long as there is political will to do so, which normally there isn't. We didn't need this massive disaster... I mean overhaul. What we need(ed) is a few important changes, like getting rid of "pre-existing conditions", limiting the ability for insurance companies to choose who they insure or not, opening the healthcare market to out of state insurance companies. Theoretically, that's what "Obamacare" was supposed to do. What we really got was a huge mess.

Also, I love how Europeans arrogantly talk about their "awesome" universal healthcare. A system so awesome that most European countries are clearly shifting to private healthcare systems because their glorious public HC systems are bankrupting their countries. In countries like Portugal, Spain, Greece, it's so flagrant that you get a dual system: one awesome system for the rich or those who can afford it, and one for the poor, where it's good... if you're not sick! This attitude from Europeans doesn't surprise me though... they have always considered themselves to be smarter than everyone else, yet they have repeatedly created some of the most horrendous dictatorships known to man. Shall I list some?

 

[wardler]

I get so enraged when reading all these liberal posts. I just don't understand how people can be so ignorant of the country they were born and raised in. The US education system has failed us all. Or maybe it was designed to give the government more control over us. The only change I have seen in the healthcare system is that my insurance rates have skyrocketed so high that I will have to go without insurance, got without the doctor, and also pay a 3500 dollar tax, because of my choice. The health insurance companies are LAUGHING at us as they double and triple premiums and slash the benefits.

I wish I could go on to explain why all of this is wrong on so many levels, but it just makes me too sick to continue talking about it. I feel hopeless sometimes.

And FYI I live in an extremely poor area of the US and have yet to see people die from lack of treatment.

 

[Portser]

Wardler, you're so clueless.

The US education system sucks because it's written by idiots, instead of people who know what they are doing.

Who were those idiots? People voted into office by the likes of you.

Finland, best education on the planet. Government plays a large role in it.

But be a good drone of the corporations.

 

[Portser]

Also radiovan, you're a prime example of how intellectually devoid this site has become. You think the US has a socialist anything in it, lmfao.

The entire politics of the US is so right winged, even centrists are called socialists.

Oh and nice BS about Canada's healthcare.

 

[skit75]

@Martell1977
When exactly was the free market going to reverse course? I've been with the same small-business employer for 13 years. When I started, the healthcare benefits package was on par with some of the best. Every two years the insurance rep shows up delivering the same news.... higher premiums & eroded coverage with higher co-pays presumably with no end in sight and zero alternatives for those who have exceeded a care cap. Next comes bankruptcy due to an illness/disease and John Q. Taxpayer foots the bill anyway.

@wardler - Who do you think is paying for that treatment right now?

 

[Martell1977]

@Martell1977
When exactly was the free market going to reverse course? I've been with the same small-business employer for 13 years. When I started, the healthcare benefits package was on par with some of the best. Every two years the insurance rep shows up delivering the same news.... higher premiums & eroded coverage with higher co-pays presumably with no end in sight and zero alternatives for those who have exceeded a care cap. Next comes bankruptcy due to an illness/disease and John Q. Taxpayer foots the bill anyway.

@wardler - Who do you think is paying for that treatment right now?

The free market hasn't been allowed to operate properly for a long time. When the government put regulations limiting insurance companies to operate state by state, it gimped competition. There are other regulations that have damaged the free market system, but that is a major one. You have to remember that our government has been creeping socialism into the system for decades.

The system needed some fixes, but obummercare was definitely not the right way to go. There are several things that could have been done to improve the system, but the likes of obama, pelosi and reid don't want the system fixed, they want control. Make no mistake, obamacare is more about obama than it is about care.

 

[skit75]

I get so enraged when reading all these liberal posts. I just don't understand how people can be so ignorant of the country they were born and raised in. The US education system has failed us all. Or maybe it was designed to give the government more control over us. The only change I have seen in the healthcare system is that my insurance rates have skyrocketed so high that I will have to go without insurance, got without the doctor, and also pay a 3500 dollar tax, because of my choice. The health insurance companies are LAUGHING at us as they double and triple premiums and slash the benefits.

I wish I could go on to explain why all of this is wrong on so many levels, but it just makes me too sick to continue talking about it. I feel hopeless sometimes.

And FYI I live in an extremely poor area of the US and have yet to see people die from lack of treatment.

@Martell1977
When exactly was the free market going to reverse course? I've been with the same small-business employer for 13 years. When I started, the healthcare benefits package was on par with some of the best. Every two years the insurance rep shows up delivering the same news.... higher premiums & eroded coverage with higher co-pays presumably with no end in sight and zero alternatives for those who have exceeded a care cap. Next comes bankruptcy due to an illness/disease and John Q. Taxpayer foots the bill anyway.

@wardler - Who do you think is paying for that treatment right now?

The free market hasn't been allowed to operate properly for a long time. When the government put regulations limiting insurance companies to operate state by state, it gimped competition. There are other regulations that have damaged the free market system, but that is a major one. You have to remember that our government has been creeping socialism into the system for decades.

The system needed some fixes, but obummercare was definitely not the right way to go. There are several things that could have been done to improve the system, but the likes of obama, pelosi and reid don't want the system fixed, they want control. Make no mistake, obamacare is more about obama than it is about care.

Control over what? I was with you until the last two sentences of your reply when all of a sudden, I was on AM talk radio. Maybe you're right, I am sure it had little do with exploding costs. Who cares what the CBO report says about lowering costs under the current plan, huh? The tourniquet has been applied. We've bought some time. Now, we can rehabilitate our healthcare system to one that does more for the amount of money that we invest in it.

CBO report summary:
In brief, between 2009 and 2012, the federal government recorded the largest budget deficits relative to the size of the economy since 1946, causing federal debt to soar. Federal debt held by the public is now about 73 percent of the economy’s annual output, or gross domestic product (GDP). That percentage is higher than at any point in U.S. history except a brief period around World War II, and it is twice the percentage at the end of 2007. If current laws generally remained in place, federal debt held by the public would decline slightly relative to GDP over the next several years, CBO projects. After that, however, growing deficits would ultimately push debt back above its current high level. CBO projects that federal debt held by the public would reach 100 percent of GDP in 2038, 25 years from now, even without accounting for the harmful effects that growing debt would have on the economy. Moreover, debt would be on an upward path relative to the size of the economy, a trend that could not be sustained indefinitely.

Link to full report: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44521

 

[Martell1977]

@skit75 said: Control over what?

Everything, the socialists want to control everything. Healthcare is about 1/6 of the economy, to get control over that is huge. The more people are dependent on the government, the more than government can dictate what you do and how you live.

Remember "A government powerful enough to give you everything, is powerful enough to take it away"

As for the debt, its so out of control its not even funny. As for the CBO,I trust them as much as I trust the IRS. They always give figures, (which become talking points for whichever side can benefit from them), then after a while, "revised" numbers come out and they tend to be much worse than what was originally projected. The trend I see is, if the CBO says something will cost 780 billion, you can count on it actually costing upwards of 1 trillion.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against people having healthcare coverage, I just oppose the government controlling it. If there weren't so many business unfriendly policies out there (not just obama's), I believe the economy would be doing better and as employment rises, so will healthcare coverage. Obamacare is not a tourniquet, its a butcher knife. Among other things, it's a glaring example of why 1 size does not fit all. How many people are paying more for coverage they will never use. I'm a male, I do not need nor want to pay for a HC plan that includes maturity coverage, as I'm sure post menopausal women don't care to, yet I am forced to pay extra for a plan that includes it.

Socialized HC does not work, eventually you run out of other peoples money.

 

[JonathanR]

Re: JonathanR

As all information is inherently biased, a brief list of mine before I respond. (Lived in US entire life, liberal arts college educated in Social Sciences/History, currently working in IT, living in part of the US that is traditionally lower income.)

The problem of universal health care in the United States, ... is not health care at all. The issue is multi-faceted, all leading to one conclusion.

1. The USA has a two party political system, instead of a multi-party system. The USA has had this system, for the most part, since the country's inception. (Yes, there have been a few times when a third, and sometimes fourth, party would gain some national acceptance. However, two parties have traditionally dominated.
2. Americans, like most other "common" voters in democratic countries, either do not care about (or do not have the resources to acquire) the true background information about the people that run for election.
3. Today, almost all elections in the country, from the selection of a candidate for a party to the final vote to see who wins, are influenced, in some way, by the two political parties.
4. Generations of Americans have been taught that one party represents one thing, while the other party represents "the opposite" on all issues. Social welfare, military funding, civil rights (and to what extent they exist), gun (person weapon ownership) control, government budgeting... everything. If one party states one thing, the other party... will usually state the opposite.
5. Many of the ballots we use on election day even give the option to "vote for one party's candidates" instead of forcing people to vote for individuals.
6. The US, as a nation, was founded on the concept of "individual liberties and rights." In the modern day, two of these crucial liberties are "what money I make is mine" (lower taxes) and "I make my own decisions about my life" (don't control my life).
7. Finally, some history. The US has kept its "usually two party" system intact over the years by the two major parties absorbing "third" parties (and part of their platforms) if the third party gains any strength. (Historical example: Populist party and the Democratic Party. Modern example: Tea party and the Republican party.)

The Health care battle is not a battle over health care, itself. It is a battle between two completely different ideologies. On the one side, one party believes that the government should be smaller, provide less, tax less. Furthermore, that same party now has many members whose main platform is "balancing the federal budget." (Government run health care, as implemented with President Obama's system, will cost the national and sub-territories, states, more money.) On the other side, one party believes that government should be larger, should provide for its citizens more, tax more (to provide said services), etc.

The American people, for the most part, identify themselves as a Democrat or a Republican. They do this, usually, over one or two issues that they feel are most important, most likely hot topic social issues. (Examples: Should legal abortion exist? Should citizens be allowed to own guns? Should church and state, truly, be separated?)

"Joe" American, in regard to the health care bill, searches online for Health Care news, news about "his party" (the only party that is right, as the other party is the "enemy"), etc. He reads the things that back him up, and it is now fact. He reads something he doesn't agree with and simply closes the page, angry... or makes comments such as "stupid ... opposite party."

Most news outlets in the USA have a political leaning as well to their news reports. Thus, a member of a political party will listen to "completely accurate news" from one outlet, and... it is fact. A member of the opposite party will listen to a different outlet, and get different facts.

Compromise in our government is near impossible now. Unless one party controls both of the houses of our legislative branch and the presidency, no major bills will pass. Universal healthcare was passed when the Democrats had this control. Republicans, picking up Healthcare for obvious reasons (more taxes to pay for it, less control of an individual's rights) have made it a hot topic, and they now control one house of our legislature. As a result, the goal is to stop the bill from being implemented anyway they can. (It would happen the exact same way if the parties were switched, and the Republicans had passed something the Democrats could grab.)

I hope I have been as neutral as possible on the issue.

I just wanted to thank everyone that replied to my post and gave me their viewpoints and especially terr281, who explained it to me very nicely. I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of this, for me very insightful, post.

Thank you!