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

He is dead no? Get laid once a year and you've got him whuped

 

Sum bitch. Got an answer for everything dontcha

 

MY RETORT
The Law is only 43 days old. Sigh, so ridiculous. Does that mean that Obamacare can’t take credit for helping to reduce the cost increases in health care spending in 2012, 2011, and 2010? I didn’t think so. The law took effect March 23, 2010 when Obama signed it into law. On March 24th those in the medical industry who hadn’t previously started, began planning projects that would lead to large changes in their business processes, system configuration, infrastructure, and employees. Health care started changing that day. And we won't see those changes in total and see how everything works until the cycle runs at least twice. The cycle period is a year. To say it sprang into being fully grown 43 days ago is what - Obamacare Creationism.

Responding to your paragraphs by the numbers

1 - Obama lied – You make a really passionate language parsing argument. It may have sold me if he had said it once or twice. But it was used as a key sales point dozens of times. It was a lie, but maybe not his lie. Some of his staff knew it was wrong and decided not to tell him. There are always elections to be considered.

2 - Premiums increase. – Who is this diatribe directed at? Why am I supposed to respond? Do you have echo’s of previous arguments in your head. I read the Forbes article. Premiums have, are, and will go up. Where did you pull the 'what do you have against the free market' comment from?

3 - The individual mandate – Again, I was not a part of this useless discussion and it’s a useless argument. For the most part, anything Washington wants to do is legal, because they make their own rules. For instance I have to adhere to a set of rules in the “Texas Open Meetings Act” that are good rules for open government. Washington wipes their asses with open government rules every day. Jackasses and Gumps are fully bipartisan in this area. It makes me want to throw up in their lap.

4 – You call 'bull shit' to my comments that the websites problems are not over. Challenge accepted.

· My Credentials - I am a Project Management Institute certified Project Management Professional with 5,000+ documented hours of project management on file with PMI. Project management is only about 30% of my job so I'm not the best on the team. But, I spend another 40% of my time as a SME on other projects who have better Project managers than I ever will be, I've experienced a lot. All of these projects involve IT at some level and usually involve interfaces of some kind to move data between applications either real time or via overnight batch to be processed for the next application. Several of these projects have involved enhancing Websites or building them from scratch.

· My Source of information – Robert Gibbs, press secretary during Obama’s first term. HINT he’s not a Republican. Robert said on a Sunday morning show (not Fox) something like “This is embarrassing. The problems are not just the website, there are problems with the data architecture.” The important words are ‘data architecture’, which is an exact quote. He knows this is bad; he wouldn't have said it in that setting if he wasn't sure it was true. There have been other sources that said the same thing about the website problems. Of course poor UAT allowed the flaws to fall through the cracks.

· My Analysis – Robert is saying the problems are not just about user experience or the GUI. It’s not just the rollout. The foundations of the website have problems. It’s like the slab in your house being flawed and you see cracks in the wall. You can paint over them but they will be back. The only cure is to dig down and repair the slab. Healthcare.gov must have a pretty complex slab. It has to validate and pass data to credit agencies, several different insurance companies, the IRS, and who knows what else. And it has to pass all of that securely. And of course they have to stay live during the repair project, except for code deployment. AND they likely have another work stream to enhance the current GUI user experience to help increase sign up. The good news is the worse the problem the more low hanging fruit is available. So it can look better rather fast. But eventually you run out of simple issues and you run into the hard stuff. You can only have a certain number of people working on a slab before they start getting in each other’s way. Bottom line - it will be fixed, it will take time, it will cost a lot. During the fix there will likely be problems with data getting lost, with people rightfully thinking they have coverage but the system says they don’t, payment processing glitches, and more. It's virtually inevitable. And it was totally unnecessary.

So that analysis is why I say there will be more issues down the road. Please respond with your analysis showing why I'm wrong. In addition please include why you say that I actually want people to have more problems getting health care. And why you ask me "Why are you so against allowing more people to have access to that care". Show me why you say I'm so callous that I actually want my friends and neighbors to either have problems or to not even be able to get health care at all. You should have more than passion and cool aid to do that.

ARGO

 

True, but you would be a good source for a second opinion.

 

It's no secret that components of the ACA have been implemented over the past three years but there is still no way to judge the law until it has been fully implemented, which was now 44 days ago. So you're still jumping the gun friend.

You never really responded to the first point. The insurance companies made changes to the policies after those policies were grandfathered in. You have offered nothing to refute that point.

I listed the points because Red and I have been begging you guys to make a list of the "problems" with Obamacare and all of you have refused other than to say, "It's all over the news..." So I took the liberty of listing the major complaints against the ACA which have all been shown to be incorrect or, at least, inaccurate.

Nothing personal, but I could care less about your credentials. It seems as though you are very accomplished in your respective field.....good for you, but they are meaningless in a chat forum discussion.

Lastly, you wasted two long paragraphs on Robert Gibbs statement about the rollout of the website. Gibbs was frustrated, like many on the left were after the web site rollout was bungled, and wanted to vent some of his frustration. Even his statements about the data architecture were made in reference to the bungled rollout. In later interviews Gibbs said as much many, many times. Further, no one has disputed the fact that the web site rollout was a mess. Hell, even I wanted heads to roll over the bungled roll out. But to try and take that statement and extrapolate that to mean that the law is doomed is careless.

As I have said all along, and I will say it once more, give the law 2-3 years to operate and let's see what needs fixing then fix it. All this bluster is premature.

 

@kluke shreds you and this is the only thing amid all that other garbage obama choad swallowing you did that makes any damn sense. I gotta hand it to you libs. When you jump in, by God you jump in head first.

 

I would think credentials are indeed important in a chat forum discussion unless chat forum discussions are meaningless to begin with.

 

He is just angry because whopper flopper doesn't look so great next to a project manager