AOL CEO: 'Obamacare Is an Additional $7.1 Million Expense For Us'

Again, you can make any assumption you want, but I dont go around reading Fox news and if I do, it is on the science/tech stories.

 

and you still have yet to tell us what makes the ACA a catastrophe, or how it makes people "suffer." nada....not one word.

 

I never said "catastrophe" (your word, not mine) only that it is not working as it was intended right now. Only time will tell if it works out.

Further, I was being facetious when I said suffer. Not literally...... I did not know you were that dense... When employers dump the higher costs this bill creates on you and me, it is an added burden. In that case, I said suffer (higher fees etc)...........

You and Red only seek to argue over nothingness....

 

It's obvious you are frustrated with this debate but your frustration isn't with me, it is with your inability to offer some evidence of your position. You said the ACA wasn't working as it was intended and I asked you to justify that statement with facts and, so far, you have been unable or unwilling to do so. Instead, you act like we are picking on you or arguing over "nothingness." Quite the contrary, we are trying to debate you but in order for a debate to happen both parties have to have support for their beliefs and you have none.

One more time: offer some support of your position that the ACA isn't working as intended or drop it.

 

You know the headlines on MSNBC, CNN, the Wash Post and NY Times aren't enough for you and Red. 123, I and many others cite articles from every place but Fox yet you fall into the tired response of accusing us of being Rush zombies or Fox freaks. Find a new game sports. The whole thread has been filled with cites you ignore.
BTW don't bother to ask us to repeat what was cited...do your job and go back and read them your selves...if you can.

 

Or what? You gonna fight me?


LOL how old are you anyway....

 

Winston, I read articles from both media every day and, yes, I've read plenty of opinion pieces that cited problems with the ACA, sometimes real and sometimes perceived or wished for. Nevertheless, the truth of the matter is that the website rollout was a disaster, which no one has denied here, but the law is sound. In spite of the rights encouraging young people not to sign up for healthcare, it appears that enough young people are indeed signing up. After a predictably slow start it also appears that we are nearly on pace to collect those 7 million enrollees before the end of March, if not on pace now altogether. People are starting to realize the benefits of having health insurance, some who've never had it before. How is any of this bad? Sure, there were stories about people losing their coverage or receiving letters about their premiums going up but when you dig a little deeper you find out that those stories weren't exactly and entirely true, that there were other options available that the right's media conveniently left out of the stories. There were people walking around with health insurance that offered little other coverage than a yearly trip to the doctor or two but if the person was seriously hurt they were just screwed, or bankrupt, or both. So what if you are paying a cheaper price if you aren't getting what you are paying for? Why in the hell have insurance if it doesn't cover you when you need it? My point is that one by one, all of these scary stories have been debunked. So much so that now it's like the boy who cried wolf.

No, I'm not so enamored with the law that I think it is flawless or will not require revision, but for God's sake let's get on with something constructive if you don't like it. If you can show me an example of something that needs to be changed and have proof that it isn't working then let's see your evidence and, who knows, maybe you'll change my mind.

 

childish

old enough to know better

 

lol yea.

Prove it, no you prove it, NO YOU.... OK bra.