Slashdot Mirror
Officials Say HealthCare.gov Site Now Performing Well
The much-discussed health care finance sign-up website HealthCare.gov has benefited from the flurry of improvements that have been thrown at it in the last several weeks. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid spokesman Aaron Albright told Fox News Saturday that "[w]ith the scheduled upgrades last night and tonight, we're on track to meet our stated goal for the site to work for the vast majority of users." CMM spokeswoman Julie Bataille. "said the installation of new servers Friday night helped improved the response times and error rates, even with heavier-than-usual weekend traffic." If you've used the site this weekend, what has your experience been like?
It's just too hard for me.
--AOL user
I'll let you know when the page loads.
To test it, they want you to put in all kinds of personal information. No thanks.
Working for the "vast majority" is not good enough. It needs to work for "everybody who doesn't fuck it up themselves."
If officials say it, that makes it official. No need to check.
Go forth and force men and 50-year old women to buy insurance for childbirth! Forward.
things in development model faster, cheaper, new core is going see. The number to you by Penisbird on baby...don't Worse and worse. As dying. All major for membership.
It would be a disaster if this thing actually worked. Don't anger those with the money.
Given government practices, I believe the term "Vast Majority" was defined in a rider clause to some obscure "Save the Children-Feed up Pork" bit of legislation as:
* A number which can be interpreted as positive based on the needs of the agency which is quoting it, so long as it meets at least the 2 of the following (642) requirements:
i. Must be a real number. ("Real" having been defined in line 18, paragraph ZB, page 382, section N, subsection(s) c.,d. of the "Feed Really EgrEgious Denominations Of Money to the Republican Or Conservative Klingon Species ("FreedomRocks) Act.)
ii. Must be able to obfuscated in no less than 40 (double spaced) pages of irrelevant statistics and methods hiding the method whereupon the number was derived.
iii.......
iv. PROFIT!
If "performing well" = "selling the American people down the road to slavery, and making them pay for the privilege" then yes.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
I hope it works well now and that millions sign up for healthcare insurance.
I'm unemployed and without insurance. If I go to the dentist's office to get a small no-anesthesia filling, as I did last week, they will accept $116 from an insurance company but will charge me $167 for exactly the same procedure because I'm a cash payer. When an insurance company pays them, they deduct the difference between $167 and $116 as a "loss" to reduce their taxes. Obviously, they've got quite an incentive to do that.
It's not just dentist's offices. Those are the shenanigans going on with tens of thousands of health care providers across the US, it's to the tune of tens of billions of dollars of "losses" pulled out of thin air, and it has to fixed before any of this is going to improve. Subsidizing private insurance companies with taxpayer money and mandating that people sign up with them while allowing insurance companies to keep skimming profits out of the system and penalizing cash-payers is the wrong thing to do.
with all of these anti-ObamaCare stories. By recognizing the problems, YOU are supporting the Republicans in their war against allowing minorities to have healthcare. The editors here should be ashamed of themselves.
"We instructed the IETF to change HTTP, 4xx now means the same as 2xx".
BOSS: Our mandate is to make this site work for the vast majority of users in two weeks. Otherwise we don't get a bonus. And by "we" I mean "I". ... well, I just thought you could hire a few competent engineers for a change. That might get the job done.
ENGINEER ERNIE: But there are millions of users! Right now the site can only handle 200 simultaneous users, and we just don't have the hardware for more. If we work our asses off and spend a bunch of money on servers, we might be able to get it up to ten thousand. That's nowhere near the vast majority.
BOSS: Damn it, I promised my son I'd buy him a Cessna for his birthday. I need that bonus! You guys had better think of something quickly.
ENGINEER DAVE: I think I have an idea...
BOSS: Spit it out, man!
ENGINEER DAVE:
BOSS: Look, I tried that. It was nixed by the big shots -- they don't want to develop a reputation for competence, okay? You've gotta figure something out that works with our current human capital.
ENGINEER ERNIE: Uh, I have an idea. Say again what the mandate was?
BOSS: We have to make the site work for the vast majority of users in two weeks.
ENGINEER ERNIE: That's what I thought. So if we just drive away all the users right now, then we will have no users in two weeks, right?
BOSS: Yeah... how does that help?
ENGINEER ERNIE: Well, what's the vast majority of zero?
[Silence]
ENGINEER DAVE: But... but...
BOSS: Shut up and start sabotaging the code, or you're fired.
ENGINEERS: Yes, sir!
Healthcare still sucks ass and is expensive and semi-useless. But at least the website works now!
Now it can deny useful coverage and overcharge people as intended.
great.
Zippy and responsive. Each page was uncluttered, and what little info I had to give to "see plans in my area" was reasonable. I got back a dozen quotes in under a minute just clicking through things.
Now, the actual registration process is probably more complex, but if the rest of the website responds as beautifully as it did for me during those dozen screens I saw, then they really did a good job fixing it.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
I'm not sure I care about site performance if I can't get past the verification step. The first time I called they said try back in 24hrs. The second time I called they said "Try it on a weekend!", the third time, "Try back after the 1st of the month"...
...have said a lot of things about the ACA and Healthcare.gov, the vast majority of which turned out to be false. I would not expect anything different now.
C:\>ping www.healthcare.gov
Pinging bh.georedirector.akadns.net [127.0.0.1] with 32 bytes of data:
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Basically all accounts created in the first week ten days must be abandoned and fresh account created. If you try to continue with the old account, it would retrieve an old incomplete corrupt data file and you are screwed. But start a new account, new email id, and it would be a breeze for most people. If you want to check your subsidy etc I heard there were trouble. Also heard that most troubled were older people unfamiliar with internet and web pages and were intimidated by all the new fangled terms and legalese.
Two days back got an email saying, "why don't you try again?". I logged in opened a chat window and asked "williams" to cancel that account. He said dont bother it will time out and die by itself.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Watching the home page load, this shows up:
[17:06:07.510] GET https://stats.g.doubleclick.net/dc.js [HTTP/1.1 304 Not Modified 40ms]
[17:06:06.192] GET https://cdn.optimizely.com/js/166688199.js [HTTP/1.1 304 Not Modified 40ms]
Hm.
So I'm in the process of trying to sign up for healthcare.gov. I'm already having problems, because it won't accept my e-mail address as my username, even though it would appear to fit the criteria.
"The username is case sensitive. Choose a username that is 6-74 characters long and must contain a lowercase or capital letter, a number, or one of these symbols _.@/-"
If they are having problems explaining the most basic things, I'm not hopeful.
The site is also less secure for me because none of my standard, extremely secure, never before had a problem with them passwords will work for it. That will force me to write it down, making the site inherently less secure.
5 Minutes later...
LOL. What an absolute piece of garbage of a web site. I tried to change my username to just the username of my email address and the site says it's invalid. It should be valid based on the instructions, but no joy. If they actually want the username to contain a number, then that's a joke; it's something I've never seen before on ANY website EVER.
WHO LAID OUT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS SITE? JOE BIDEN? HAVE THEY NEVER EVEN USED THE INTERNET?
When sites come up with new, unusual standards for usernames and passwords (e.g. must contain a %, *, or ^), then they are making the site less secure because they are increasing the odds that people will have to write down their usernames and passwords.
No one.
Obama lost the "hearts and minds" even thought he got the numbers for the election 2012,
Now prancing and masturbating around a bookstore "Politics and Prose" ... I'm glad he went to Politics and Prose! Sad, it is his first visit and sad that he will never visit again! Like much of the U.S.A. Obama wrote it off and damn'ed it washing his hands and wishing for it a nuclear grave. That has not happened ... much to his dislike and disdain of Obama "Our Hero ... NOT!"
QED
Same here, strangely enough. Looks like a measure to avoid load caused by foreigners that got curious from all the bad reporting that this website got.
http://www.moonlight3d.eu/
If one plugs the First Family's income and ages into the web-based DC Health Link Calculator, the annual health care cost estimates for the Obama household come out to be $20,125 (Bronze), $19,537 (Silver), and $21,902 (Gold), not a good deal at all when compared to the starting-at-under-$200-a-month family health coverage available to the President and Congress through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. By the way, if the Obama family members were 10 years older and their combined household income was reduced to $95,000, the estimated cost would be a staggering $26,339 (Bronze), $25,728 (Silver), and $29,021 (Gold).
FU in spades.
QED
Well, I just tried it out for the third and final time and well, if you consider "working well" the same
as calling a passed-out stoner as sober then it is working just fine dude.
My father was diagnosed with prostate cancer last year. Prognosis without treatment was 5 years tops. Was taken in to hospital a week later, had an operation to remove the cancer, had further treatment, support afterwards to make sure everything was working, and regular checks until he was finally given the all clear.
Reality very much does match the rhetoric, it's just that you seemingly choose to ignore it.
It resolves to e8132.dscb.akamaiedge.net (23.7.74.194) in the U.S. if you care to take a gander. Not to say it won't reject you when you get there via IP too.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
At least not in my case. I was paying $165 for a better than platinum level plan.
Were you paying the entire bill for that plan? Did you have a large deductible? Most people that get health insurance have a major portion of the tab picked up by their employer. They think they pay $165 or whatever their price is because they never see the actual full cost of the plan. I've spent a LOT of time looking at health insurance plans in recent years. I have NEVER seen anyone get a plan with that much in the way of features for that kind of price unless they were paying a huge deductible. I had a catastrophic coverage plan a few years ago that had a $5000 deductible but had pretty good coverage after that and the price was around $150/month. But that first $5000 was entirely on me.
I run a manufacturing company. We provide health insurance for our employees and have picked up 50% of the cost. Our group rate for a pretty good 80/20 HMO with a zero deductible (roughly equivalent to a gold plan) cost about $525 per employee per month. Net cost to our employees is around $260/month since the company pays half. The plans we've found under the new regulations for the Affordable Care Act will give similar coverage for about $200-300/month (varies with age but always a lot less than current cost) or almost a 40% reduction in total premium over what we pay now. Furthermore a lot of our employees will qualify for subsidies so the coverage will cost even less.
While this whole roll out has been a fiasco, at the end of the day the people who work for me are mostly going to end up with similar or better coverage for less money. Furthermore their coverage will not be tied to their employment with us which is LONG overdue. No one should EVER lose health coverage just because they lost a job.
Mussolini got the trains to run on time. That the mechanisms of tyranny are working is not a good thing.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
The brand is tainted, and the politicians who supported it suffered loss of confidence. The fact is the website itself was meaningless. The underlying statutes are the problem, and will continue to hound the democratic party for years.
Write a bad law, pay the consequences.
Works in Canada.
Hello,
There is a huge amount of ignorance exhibited here, and I really expected better from slash dot readers.
I am an expatriate Australian. Australia has had universal healthcare for 40 years. Everyone pays into Medicare, similar to the US Medicare tax, however it is not restricted by age. Why was it necessary to create the current behemoth of a website when the delivery system already existed?
As for the various Republican shills here, wanting everyone to "die in the street" if they can't afford healthcare, just remember that you could be dying in the street in the future. And I for one would prefer you to get care, even when you can't afford it.
I had some routine blood tests from LabCorp. The official price was about $1000. I paid about 100$ because I had insurance, even though the insurance didn't actually pay for anything (high deductible) - I just got to make use of their negotiated rate that was 1/10 of the official one. That's seriously messed up.
Still not working for me.
A legitimate alternative to the ObamaCare insanity from Mr. Virtual President.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Just wanted to let you know that socialized healthcare has worked out great for the past several generations. Sincerely, the rest of the world. PS: We find your internal bickering over issues the rest of the world solved decades ago hilarious. Keep up the good work!
I had a non-group plan that just got canx. It cost me $15 a month, covered every known and unknown med procedure with no deductible or co-pay. Now my premiums have gone up to $256 a month because of all the Obama dick sucking morons. Or maybe I'm lying just to make sure the Tea Party can continue partying for another few years. Hope this post helps.
....used Healthcare.gov from Illinois and he reported that his experience was quick and painless.
Finding God in a Dog
You are just fucking kidding, right? You get better care at our emergency rooms than in intensive care anywhere else.
Apparently you have missed the whole point of the ACA. Which was to make the best of the best health care we have here in the US available for a larger group of people.
Typically, you insure against disaster/catastrophies. Having a cough or a cold or a minor injury is not a disaster.
Home Insurance doesn't cover your day to day repair stuff.
That's how medical insurance should be. Medical costs increase because a doctor now has staff to deal with the insurance bureaucracy and billing. And the doctor has to figure out what's covered not covered etc.
In the USA we spend 8100 dollars per person in the USA for healthcare. Simple solution to save a lot of overhead money right off the top, one insurance for everyone that covers all needs paid on a sliding scale for anyone with under 100,000 income per family they pay one price. Everyone for 100,000 to 300,000 they pay another price, everyone with income over that gets screwed.
That will dramatically right out of the gate reduce costs of healthcare since we spend nearly 30% on ADMINISTRATION. That is approximately 2733 of that 8200 dollars on overhead a large part of that is the INSURANCE COMPANIES!
"An update of that analysis more than a decade later, after the diffusion of managed care and the widespread adoption of computerization, found that administration constituted some 30 percent of U.S. health-care costs and that the share of the health-care labor force comprising administrative (as opposed to care delivery) workers had grown 50 percent to constitute more than one of every four health-sector employees." --business week
That's 1/3 less.
Next offer free school for doctors in exchange for set prices on healthcare services for doctors that have above a 3.5 out of 4 average in college. That will greatly reduce the costs of services.
Next put a cap on prices paid for hospital equipment. One buyer for all equipment buying in bulk and distributing it throughout the USA to hospitals and doctors offices. Equipment prices paid in the USA is crazy higher than other countries. That will save a ton of money.
Next setup flat tax rate on all US sales no exceptions if you sell it in the USA you pay taxes on it simple as that across the board for everyone, kill the rest and that will save a ton of money on taxmen.
Next stop fighting costly wars that we can't have a hope to win. That will save future 14 trillions paid and huge healthcare costs.
That is just a start.... b52
As of 11:30 Saturday, it was still not any faster and still doesn't complete for me. Took about 20 minutes to get all the way through for me and my wife. And at the very end after reviewing and signing, I get an error and it never verifies my ID. So, no change from last month ... yet.
.. at www.healthcare.gov.
'nuff said.
...now that the site works, does that mean that the law isn't flawed? Or are the people who made that argument just going to backtrack now?
just before I looked at the paycheck 4 $6482, I didnt believe that my neighbour woz like they say realie earning money parttime online.. there best friend has been doing this 4 only about eight months and recently took care of the dept on their home and bourt themselves a Lotus Elan. navigate to this site============> www.blue48.com =============
So to render the homepage, an average of a second seems reasonable? I did not post to a form to find out. What crap.
httping healthcare.gov ...
PING healthcare.gov:80 (healthcare.gov): ...
connected to 23.78.167.205:80 (230 bytes), seq=0 time=1155.39 ms
connected to 23.78.167.205:80 (230 bytes), seq=1 time=676.95 ms
connected to 23.78.167.205:80 (230 bytes), seq=2 time=703.38 ms
connected to 23.78.167.205:80 (230 bytes), seq=3 time=1265.81 ms
connected to 23.78.167.205:80 (230 bytes), seq=4 time=1353.09 ms
connected to 23.78.167.205:80 (230 bytes), seq=5 time=780.69 ms
connected to 23.78.167.205:80 (230 bytes), seq=6 time=811.66 ms
connected to 23.78.167.205:80 (230 bytes), seq=7 time=841.58 ms
connected to 23.78.167.205:80 (230 bytes), seq=8 time=1117.90 ms
--- healthcare.gov ping statistics ---
9 connects, 9 ok, 0.00% failed, time 17277ms
round-trip min/avg/max = 677.0/967.4/1353.1 ms
You mean the same "officials" that said things like:
"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan PERIOD!"
"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor PERIOD!"
"It will only cost $900B"
"etc..."
..could never have been tested and debugged thoroughly in that amount of time.
AND the government is running it.
This program will never work. Ever.
For YOU it does, but that's the whole point of the Akamai "georedirector", is to find the nearest server TO YOU.
I love all the comments about knowing what I need and that my needs are meaningless in comparison to those of the many.
In Soviet Slashdot, the website signs up you!
If a private sector insurance salesman promised that, it would be called business as usual.
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
Precisely.
In a way the bad web site put off the death of Obamacare for 2 months because people kept thinking the problem is/was the poorly conceived web site.
In fact, the problem is a poorly conceived plan.
... the Americans are still mired with a dumbfucked website !
Attaboy, America !
Is rejected:
Invalid URL
The requested URL "/", is invalid.
Reference #9.9d23bc3.1385902992.d15aa6
Though as an expat living in one of those dreaded socialist states, I just get my health insurance here.
For me (in the UK) it resovles to 23.74.87.205, but the connection gets reset if I try to load the web page. Tried proxying through my US server, and the page loads. Looks like they don't want non-US IP addresses!
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
but I just got a letter from my insurance company that says that they will pay for only 4 of the 22 physical therapy visits my doctor requested. Thank GOD ALMIGHTY and PRAISE JESUS we don't have single payer healthcare in this country! I'd hate to have someone from the government standing between me and my doctor! I sleep much better at night (when my shoulder lets me) knowing that some accountant at the insurance company has MY best interest in mind and knows what is best for me.
I logged on in the early days of October to disastrous effect. After multiple attempts and cache clearings I was able to register but could not progress very far. Now I am able to pull up and edit my application with no "serious" glitches. The site still throws up poorly designed pages, imposes goofy requirements, and loads slower than would be optimal. It does, however, appear to get the job done which is what counts in a critcal government service. Unfortunately, I don't actually qualify for ACA coverage so I was not able to test the critical identity verification process.
I find the "OMGZ i have to get health insurance this is slavery!!!11!!" posts to be insane.
Canada's health care isn't perfect, but I have never had to pay a dime for going to the doctor, hospital, or any operation (and I've had a few). I've never even thought about it. When I was kid, I just always assumed doctor's were free. In addition, I make "normal" (slightly above the national average) money, and I can afford a reasonable house, a normal car, etc. without more debt than just a mortgage. I am not a slave, my quality of life is high, and I have no complaints.
So, what's the problem here? Why is there such an irrational fear to a health system that is obviously working in many other countries? Health care shouldn't be something you worry about because you can't afford it. That's a totally asinine approach to me.
and ask a few questions regarding healthcare.gov:
"Could it be that the problems with the site were made worse by hackers being paid to cause problems?"
"Could it be the RNC and health insurance industries that paid those hackers?"
I have no evidence- I'm just asking the questions...
Perhaps you don't understand what a better than platinum plan is. I buy individual insurance, I am not member of a group plan like your manufacturing company has.
I understand perfectly well thanks but since you don't know me I'll overlook the condescending remark. Frankly, if you claim to be getting a "better than platinum" plan for $165/month without being a member of a group and with a deductible under $3000 I'm going to call bullshit unless you can provide some actual evidence. Even for a healthy 20 year old you simply cannot get a non-group plan for that kind of cash that will actually cover anything unless it has a huge deductible. Prove me wrong. What specific plan do you have with what insurance company? What specifically does it cover and what is the deductible?
Love that optimism.
No optimism needed. I pay our bill each month right now so I know to the penny what we currently pay and I have gotten quotes directly from Blue Cross and Priority Health for what coverage they will get next year. The full cost of the plan *will* be less than it is now (by about half for most) and their out of pocket will in most cases be equal or less as well. This is not supposition on my part. I'm merely reporting what our company has experienced.
Keep in mind that that insurance will also have to be purchased not just once, but for the rest of your employees' lives. Just because you might be right this year about a cost reduction, doesn't mean you'll be right in the years to come.
Just like it always has been. Do you have a point to make you can back up with some actual facts or are you just chicken little-ing?
The poor slobs now have to sell you health care EVEN IF YOU ALREADY HAVE AN EXPENSIVE CONDITION
Now why, why would any more or less healthy person who is not expecting a baby sign up for health care? Pay the small fine, it's cheaper. Pay out-of-pocket for the one or two times you need to see a doctor or get a flu shot this year. It's still cheaper.
And if you find out that you have cancer, a heart condition, or (like myself) a chronic condition like ulcerative colitis which is going to require tens of thousands of dollars' worth of health care every year to manage... well, THEN sign up, and get the Gold option, and laugh at the clueless corporate fucks in the insurance industry who thought that getting into bed with the government and forcing everyone to buy their product, would actually result in moar profit...
Part of the Second American Revolution!
I mean, I know we don't live in a particularly nice society. Heck, I just read an article about how much we distrust one another in the US. The fact is that society functions better if we try to take care of each other. Dog eat dog fails in the long term.
Yeah, I get it. Some of you are paying more now. But how is that any different than paying more in taxes for road construction or schools? You may never drive on those roads or send children to those schools. However, you are investing in the infrastructure of our society. Likewise, with the healthcare, you are investing in the people that make this society possible. Investing in people means less sick people, less defaulting on loans (by those sick people), and ultimately, lower costs for all goods because labor becomes a bit cheaper by virtue of fewer sick people.
For those of us that support the ACA, we're fighting against shortsightedness. This is better for society, period. Still, even if you are such a monster that can't see past your own wallet, this will benefit you directly. Albeit, in small ways that will never be the least bit obvious.
What are republicans going to complain about now?
Still broken for me...and the idiots on the live chat are not very helpful!!!!
...now that the site works, does that mean that the law isn't flawed? Or are the people who made that argument just going to backtrack now?
I don't know, but that's a great hypothetical question. If these were actual people rather than straw men then I guess we'd eventually find out.
I managed to set up an account. Halfway into entering my personal information it returned an error and suggested I try again in 30 minutes.
You are just fucking kidding, right? You get better care at our emergency rooms than in intensive care anywhere else.
The available facts do not support your argument. The US is paying way more money per capita than anyone else for worse outcomes than a large number of other countries. While there are areas where the US does lead the pack (particularly research and medical technology), the US does not have the best results for life expectancy, immunizations, or average cost of a hospital stay among other important categories. The data on outcomes simply does not support the assertion that the US has the best healthcare system because the US does not get the best results overall nor does it get the best results per dollar spent.
Gapminder's main site
Go ahead, check out the stats. By any measure, the US is NOT number one when it comes to health care and we spend a higher percentage of our GDP than everyone else for demonstrably poorer results.
CNN tries it and it still fails, but now it fails after they collect all your information... So at least the NSA and IRS are happy!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Insurance is a ponzi scheme, health care comes from apples, carrots, greens...you know, raw food that grows in the ground, not in a lab.
Or do all the pro-ACA posters here sounding siminar-callerly ? There is a small nugget of stories here that stink like paid posters. I have not met one person or business owner in my town that is happy with the new prices and plans. Those for whom the price was reduced were getting insurance on their own under subsidies for the first time. They were previously covered via parents or work.
And all the users who keep telling me that the uninsured are raising the prices for the rest of us, of the medically bankrupt, three-quarters of that group had insurance, at least when they first got sick.
Are they the same ones who said there never was a problem?
Or the ones responsible for the problem?
Or the ones who dont care if it works or not as the control is all they actually care about. ??
Which liars are saying this to us now?
"Performing Well" and "Performing Well under actual use" are two different things.
Not a problem. The taxpayers are still footing the bill no matter what a fiasco the whole thing is.
FO
Will Not Comply.
Will not sign up, will not pay for freeloaders.
And just to make it perfectly clear, if you are a freeloader with your hand out, go fuck yourself.
Google here has the power, should they decide to use it, to extract any data they want from any page or form in Healthcare.gov by downloading a suitable tracker. Whether you think this is evil depends on how much you trust Google.
It's even worse than that. Those little bits of "tracker" code being injected are written and controlled by each tracking service. So not just Google, but CrazyEgg or ChartBeat staff could upload spyware into HealthCare.gov's site.
Google does a little checking on the injected code, mostly to make sure it won't crash the page with bad Javascript syntax. Each snippet of tracking code is enclosed in a try-block, so one tracker won't abort the other trackers. But there's no indication that Google takes any steps to limit the intrusiveness of the tracking.
CrazyEgg collects every click on every page. This is used to generate a "heat map" of web page usage, and can be misused to find out which check boxes and buttons someone used when signing up for health insurance.
Of course, all these parties claim they won't do bad stuff.
No matter how anyone pitches it, the Obamacare website still does not work. I was able to create a profile, but it will not take me to the next step to determine eligibility. It appears that the software module connecting to the IRS does not work.
Let's cut to the chase and admit that the ACA is a moral argument. If there was a benefit to me, somehow, I'd have a check in the mailbox. There isn't one. The only reason that we put up with this federal slavery is to make a few people feel good about themselves, that, we're all pitching in for their causes because the people doing the most preaching don't really want to pay for their causes themselves.
The rest of us are just slaves to their dreams. No matter how good they are, they are still tyrants, and that must never be forgotten, and no man that preaches, should ever be trusted. Always remember that to make someone else's life better, government ruined yours.
This is my sig.
In the sense that, if your country was so voluntarily willing to pitch in for health care, then you wouldn't need taxes to make it compulsory, would you? Just saying. As it is, there is at least a credible minority of people in Canada who are essentially slaves - they are working for something they don't want, and, you don't speak for them....
This is my sig.
First off, let's establish that these 20% don't want the coverage. Otherwise, there would not be a law that forces them to buy it. So, why don't you rephrase your tragedy as "not everyone is paying for what I want.", which is more accurate.
This is my sig.
...now that the site works, does that mean that the law isn't flawed? Or are the people who made that argument just going to backtrack now?
Wait. WTF? You mean the same assholes who voted >40 times to repeal it even though they knew they did not have the votes to prevail?
No, we have a democracy and we can change the rules of society. We can completely shut down the federal government and if you want to have single payer in your state, go ahead and have it, just don't foist it off on everyone else's so you can feel good about for yourself for wrecking the lives of those people that are managing their health risks in ways that makes more sense to them.
This is my sig.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
???? How much did the DNC just pay you to put that comment on here??? was it as much as the other poster boys are getting at reddit... I wonder ;)
FragHARD or don't frag at all
I got a better idea. How about you die, hopefully in the most miserable and painful way possible, and then this finally becomes a free country again? With a lot cheaper oil to boot.
You don't have a fucking clue, of course. That's why you make such a good slave.
I saw people making this exact argument over and over right here on slashdot. They aren't strawmen.
I won't be mandated and I won't sign up for this socialist trash.
The site mot working is simply a symptom of the real problem. The government is generally incompetent. Even in warfare the government is generally incompetent, they are only saved by the fact that the people (governments they are fighting are even more incompetent.)
The site was broken because the premise of government intrusion into health care at this level is flawed. The law is flawed to the same extent.
Does the site really work? If it does that means the back end has been fixed too doesn't it? We know that's not happened.