Generation Opportunity, a nonprofit financed with $5.04 million from a fund
controlled by the Koch brothers’ lobbying team, just launched a new
television advertisement to kick off an anti-Obamacare campaign. The creepy ads,
which provides no actual information about healthcare reform and instead seem
designed to scare people away from doctor visits, have already been dissected by
many in the media. What’s more revealing is Generation Opportunity’s
real agenda, which was explained to Yahoo News in a story unveiling the new
campaign (emphasis added):Their message: You don’t have to
sign up for Obamacare. “What we’re trying to communicate is,
‘No, you’re actually not required to buy health
insurance,’” Generation Opportunity President Evan Feinberg told
Yahoo News in an interview about the campaign. “You might have to pay a
fine, but that’s going to be cheaper for you and better for you."(The Nation)
I sure hope there are no Millennials gullible enough to believe this article or
that Generation Opportunity is a "nonpartisan organization." The sheer
fact that he calls the ACA "Obamacare" and cites the National Center for
Public Policy Research is proof positive that his organization is anything but
nonpartisan. The President of this group won't even come clean
about his organization, why would he be honest about the ACA? Seriously, some
people have no integrity.
Whenever I read an op-ed piece that strikes me as bizarre the first thing I do
is Google the author and the author's organization.It took 30
seconds to find this from Yahoo News:"Generation Opportunity, a
Virginia-based group that is part of a coalition of right-leaning organizations
with financial ties to billionaire businessmen and political activists Charles
and David Koch, will launch a six-figure campaign aimed at convincing young
people to “opt-out” of the Obamacare exchanges."This
movement could care less about the health of young people - they're shills
for the Koch brothers and the insurance industry.Also, the author
got his start at the conservative Heritage Foundation, which originally came up
with the key elements of the Affordable Care Act, including the individual
mandate that he now says young people should ignore. The
hyper-conservatives who are now throwing fits over "Obamacare" not only
are disconnected from reality, they've also lost their appreciation for
If only we'd have been able to get to the point of a single payer system,
we wouldn't have to play these games.
I think some of the authors of these comments would do well to find an
introductory textbook on logic and look up "ad hominem fallacy." The
validity and soundness of an argument do not depend on the wealth or political
preferences of the arguer. I got a letter yesterday that my medical
premiums will rise 76% in 2014. The only medical claim I ever make is for a
routine annual physical. It's very much in my interest to look at ignoring
Obamacare, paying the penalty, and finding catastrophic medical insurance
outside of the exchange system for emergencies... if that's even possible.
You may despise the author of this article because he's outside your
political bubble, but his argument makes perfect sense for me. And I'm
older than a twentysomething.
Sorry, Evan. It turns out that insurance premiums under Obamacare can be had
for less than half of what premiums are going for in the so called
"private" market. Obamacare is the better deal for the cost conscious
individual of any age!
Tackling one point: the insidious nature of "inter-generational
subsidies":Guess what? Intergenerational subsidies have been
with us since before the beginning of time, known by another (perhaps
increasingly derogatory) term: parenthood. Thus far, nobody has come out of the
womb ready to take on the world, which is apparently some kind of new
neo-conservative fantasy, intended to divide society.It gets worse:
young parents, in their desire to provide for their children, shamelessly rely
on overt and coerced "intergenerational subsidy", otherwise known as tax
money for childrens' education.Sure, everyone since Thomas
Jefferson has glorified the education of children, and young parents blithely
steal from older generations to satisfy their own selfish instincts to raise
their children. Furthermore, the tax code is biased toward more irresponsible
production of children, punishing those who have raised their kids or otherwise
don't have children, and shifting benefits toward un-established young
parents who somehow think it's a gift to society for them to produce
children.It's no wonder the offspring of this corruption is
raised to perpetuate the theft.Or, maybe we all benefit. You
Daniel L.: "I got a letter yesterday that my medical premiums will rise 76%
in 2014. "A letter from whom? Your employer? Your health
insurance provider? A political fundraising group?Context, please.
Government knows best? Give me a break!
Does Generation Opportunity have some money they would give you should you
actually have a medical problem? No? So their only gamble is that their ad might
be ignored, right? What could possibly go wrong? What other advice are they
willing to share?
My problem is not with Mr. Evan Feinberg, after he is doing what his bosses pay
him to do. My concern is with DN a so called Christian newspaper. ACA may be
imperfect but is the beginning of the most serious attempt to provide health
insurance for most if not all Americans.10CC said perfectly
"Guess what? Intergenerational subsidies have been with us since before the
beginning of time, known by another (perhaps increasingly derogatory) term:
parenthood. Thus far, nobody has come out of the womb ready to take on the
world, which is apparently some kind of new neo-conservative fantasy, intended
to divide society."I work for public schools system where more
than 70% of its population doesn't have children in our schools. We are a
village and we all should work together. May be the DN needs to read the book of
Acts 2:44 or the history of the LDS Church.I have a very good health
insurance. Should that be enough? Of course NOT! Everybody deserves be
protected, and the young paying to help for the older, why not? We (the old)
support the infrastructure of society for the benefit of the young generations.
"The simple fact is that they are a bad deal for young people." But
they are good deal for their parents who will have to cough up the money to pay
for their care if they get sick, a simple economic fact which seems to elude
"Generation Opportunity, a nonprofit financed with $5.04 million from a fund
controlled by the Koch brothers’ lobbying team, just launched a new
television advertisement to kick off an anti-Obamacare campaign. " The
D-News could be a little more explicit about the origins of the opinion pieces
"These problems, along with others, have even caused Congress to exempt
itself from the exchange."-------------------------------Yeah, Congress has been great at saddling us with all sorts of garbage
from which they have conveniently made themselves exempt.Little
wonder that the counties surrounding DC has been consistently listed among the
areas with highest average incomes for several decades. They and their former
colleagues turned lobby shills feed on the industry and gullibility of the rest
of the country. For example, you can see several classic examples of the
gullible Obama sycophants here in the commentariat.
The 'social justice' crowd continues the mantra of a utopian society
built by force and compulsion and those 'noble' feelings that will
surely run through every human until we all can 'imagine' no
possessions, war ete. As long as man is running things, and as long as people
continue to support government intervention to solve all of the worlds ills,
chaos and problems will literally plague the process. It is also something that
was bound to happen and anybody who thinks that the young are going to be
signing up in droves because of their noble desires to support the system are
deluded. Ah, just for the record, this is the Entitlement generation that
believes that money grows on trees and accountability is something meant for
someone else. Sorry to be the bearer of the truth.
Yep, I hope all the kids sign up! Yes sir, as long as all the young-un's
sign up, I looking at getting me some low-cost healthcare paid for by the
Yes…….most Americans won’t be much affected. The online
marketplaces are focused on the roughly 15 percent of the population who are
uninsured or buy plans individually. Yes, it’s a new place where people
can shop, compare and buy health insurance in a way that was not available
before obamacare. Yes, when the new plans take effect, insuers can no longer
deny coverage based on health status or preexisting conditions. And all plans
must cover essential benefits, such as hospitalizations, maternity care, and
mental health services….and insurance companies cannot drop coverage just
because someone gets sick….and small business will have more options for
insuring workers, and get tax credits to pay for it. But remember what
TeaPublicans are trying to accomplish here. Just like Sen. Gram said…if
obamacare succeeds, then that woman hillary Clinton will be president in 2016!
This “war on health care” is about taking back our American and
making that guy obama fail and stopping that woman hillary! This is about
taking back our American and no true Republican wants to be seen as helping the
president! Just not going to happen!
All we need to know about Obamacare is that the hypocritical Democrat
politicians who forced this mess down our throats have exempted themselves from
Obamacare! Amazing hypocrisy for them to tell us its good for us but not enough
If Obamacare is such a good deal for all Americans, why has Obama, all who work
under him, Congress, and 9 million federal employees (including the IRS who
will oversee the whole mess) opted out and will be entirely exempt from it. They
will have their own private healthcare plan, NOT Obamacare! If it is good enough
for us, why isn't it good enough for them?! You can't dispute that
one! That fight needs to be heralded from every rooftop in this country. Too
many people are under-informed about this.
Just for the record. Ronald Reagan was the last Republican President I voted
for, so when someone says that Republicans are just against Obama, that may be
true. Not for me! I'm against anything that destroys initiative and
accountability, whether Republican, Democrat, or Tea party. Those who keep
thinking that government should provide healthcare haven't thought much
about how it erodes responsibility and accountability. The African American
family has almost been completely wiped out and a major part of that can be laid
at the feet of Democratic and Republican lawmakers that thought providing free
everything would make a difference. It hasn't. Now, who is destroying
Character? Is the citizens who believe in responsibility or Democrats and
Republicans that want to maintain power and control by handing out free stuff to
keep the slaves quite?
Really. This is another counter factual, biased piece which ignores the fact
that our existing American Healthcare System is broken. It is way too costly and
the quality outcomes are lower than countries that spend far less on Healthcare
than the USA does. While Obamacare isn't perfect, it is a good start!.
With Obamacare, greedy insurance companies can no longer deny folks with a
preexisting conditions (like dwarfism for example)from having health insurance.
It is ALREADY EXREMELY EXPENSIVE to buy individual or family health insurance if
your employer doesn't offer it. Many employers do not. There are a lot of
misrepresentations out there about Obamacare including this article. When
corporations, certain small employers and the healthcare empire start thinking
more about the health of the American people, and less about huge profits, we
can re-visit Obamacare. Until then, it is probably the best solution for over
40 million uninsured or under insured Americans. Thanks President Obama for
bringing Healthcare to All Americans!
Re:BYUalumHate to burst your bubble--but it is a well known fact
that Congress and their staff are not exempt from ACA/Obamacare.Congress will be picking their insurance plans from the exchanges along with
those not now covered by an employer insurance plan. Except, for
Ted Cruz. He is covered by his wife's health insurance plan provided by
her employer--Goldman Sachs.
Interesting that the "Congress exempted itself from Obamacare" myth is
still circulating.Instead of bouncing this idea back and forth to
yourselves within the FOX-fuel echo chamber, how about looking up the
Congressional Accountability Act of 1995? It specifically made sure that laws
dealing with civil rights, labor and workplace safety regulations applied to the
legislative branch of government. The independent Office of Compliance was set
up to enforce the laws in Congress.And while you're at it, look
up both the Snopes and FactCheck web pages for this topic.Spoiler
alert: If you believe Congress exempted itself from the Affordable Care Act,
you're 100% wrong. FactCheck rates it a "pants on fire" lie.
Actually it would be a smart move for everyone.Even leftist leaders
and advisors to Obama like Krugman, have admitted their are the so-called
"death panels" deciding who gets care and how much.Many of
Obama's friends or supporteres and congress are are getting exemptions
from it, they know how bad it is.If only we could all opted out or
Sounds like a good idea, oh right I unexpectedly ended up needing a surgery
which cost 13,000 dollars if I was uninsured. I only had to pay a tenth of that
thanks to my Obamacare insurance (being a student between 22 and 25 at the time
so I could stay on my parents' plan). So yeah... doing what this article
suggests would've been a really really stupid move for me.
Just look at social security. It was based upon a large number of people paying
into the system to support one retired person. The problem with SS started when
government started using that money for other programs. Then the ratio of the
working to the retired has been greatly reduced. This is what obamacare is based
upon. The only difference will be the governments ability to limit the care that
the old will receive. This ratio will continue to grow smaller.
Re: "Whenever I read an op-ed piece that strikes me as bizarre the first
thing I do is Google the author and the author's organization."No doubt.That's a lot easier than attempting to counter
the facts laid out by someone you disagree with.Truth is, Mr.
Feinberg makes several important and inarguable points liberals are
uncomfortable addressing. Primary among them is that Obama's
"Affordable Care Act" is ANYTHING but.
We will all find out soon enough if if the ACA is blessing or a curse and it
will effect us no matter who we voted for unfortunately.
I have not had health insurance for most of my life. I don't think the
government should be involved in controlling health care until they make
Medicare and Medicaid more efficient. Hospitals and doctors have been figuring
out that it's not wise to make their patients go bankrupt, and they have
been engaging in ways to help those who are more restricted financially either
make payments or pay reduced amounts on bills. I know that because our family
was in that situation more than once. Somehow, no matter how politicians try to
spin this, I suspect somewhere that there are certain health care lobbyists and
people at the top who thought, "Hmm, how can we make more money off of
everyone in the whole country?" Maybe Obama will be on the board of some
health care company after his Presidential days are over.
I don't know much about this, so please correct me if I'm wrong: I'm turning 25 next month. When I get off my parent's plan
and buy my own, I have to pay a fee simply for the option of buying a private
plan??? If that's the case, that makes my blood boil. There's no way
I'm putting my health in the hands of a government as dysfunctional as the
one in Washington. The only way that these new exchange programs can
be affordable is if 1)They are of significantly lower quality, limiting the
options and types of healthcare provided or 2) They are subsidized by increases
in the cost of private insurance.Why are we trying to fix
what's not broken? This is just Econ 101: Shouldn't competition among
the insurance companies maximize quality while minimizing prices? As far as I
know, there aren't any monopolies. This all seems like one big negative
Just what is the government good at operating? The schools? Nope. The post
office? Nope. The national parks? Nope. The forest service or the BLM?
Nope. Airport security? Nope. Healthcare??? Why would this be any different.
It seems to me that Christians are ignoring the blessings that would come from
caring for all the sick in this country. Do you not believe the heavens can
open? That and even if you're an atheist you should figure out
that selfishness leads to an economy that looks pretty gray and dull without
opportunities. Education, roads, safety and yes health all prime the pump for a
great economy full of opportunities. Lindon J Robinson : "Like a
bright ribbon running through the entire Book of Mormon narrative is the promise
that "[if] ye shall keep my commandments, ye shall prosper" One awful alternative to loving God and his children is to love one's
riches more than one's neighbors. Those who love their riches more than
their neighbors invariably separate themselves from both God and others and
break the commandment to be one. Symptomatic of this separation is the economic
inequality that "exalts" those who love their riches above those with
less (see D&C 49:20). The paradox is that a love of riches not only
separates neighbors but also makes acquiring more wealth more difficult.
I agree with BYUalum. There should be a law against congress making themselves
immune from laws they themselves pass.
Alternative to Obamacare: Do not get sick.Seems like a very good
plan, just as long as you don't get sick.
Young people are not invulnerable. A car accident, a bout with leukemia, a
skiing mishap and all of a sudden they might face catastrophic medical bills.The US is the only developed nation where a medical emergency can
literally ruin a person financially.Conservatives claim to believe
in personal responsibility. Well, personal responsibility means getting
insurance so that the rest of society doesn't have to pay for your medical
bills.Young people will be old someday. Today they may have to pay
a little more to subsidize an elderly or ill person, but tomorrow they will be
getting that money back. It is the most democratic of subsidies because we will
all be getting more than we put in when we get old.
For all of you who tout that Congress and their staff are exempt from Obamacare,
please educate yourself.Google "did congress exempt itself from
Obamacare"Look for reasonable sources, not left or right, and you will
get the answer.At least make an attempt to find out the facts before
posting. While the answers you find may not further your partisan
slant, at least you would be able to have a factual, reasonable discussion.
Breaking News: The insurance mandate was a GOP idea to begin with. TALK ABOUT
BIG GOVERNMENT IDEAS. GOP came up with it first. Mitt Romney made all of
Massachusetts do it. Republicans now oppose it because their guy didn't
sign it into law.
This sounds like one of those social science experiments where the subject is
given the option to make a move that helps himself (and he will) but if he knows
that that same move would still help himself, but would help someone else
more... he won't.Seems we are all self-centered by nature when
it comes down to it. Some overcome that natural tendency... some
don't.Why would Millennials do anything that might help protect
themselves AND their parent's generation (or their grandparents)???
It's not like their parents or grandparents ever made any sacrifices for
THEM!I have been forced to pay a good part of my pay-check into
Social Security all my working life (since I was 14) knowing that I was probably
never going to see a cent of it back. And I don't have a problem with
that. I have to pay for the promises made by my government even though those
programs are projected to be defunct before I reach retirement age.That's the way it is sometimes in life. Life is NOT always
Evan Feinberg should do more research before sending misleading op-eds to
newspapers like the DN.His suggestion that "[I]t makes more financial
sense for millennials to opt out and purchase a non-Obamacare policy on the
private market," is technically impossible.That's because after
January 1st, all new insurance policies sold on the private market will include
the same ACA consumer protections (ie. 10 essential health benefits) and rules
(ie. age banding changes) as the policies sold on the new marketplaces. So there
won't actually be a "non-Obamacare policy on the private market."
He's telling millennials to do something they can't do--at least after
January 1st. Plus, the ironic thing is that the Utah marketplace is
the only place that millennials will be able to receive premium subsidies to
reduce the cost of their insurance. Those subsidies won't be on the private
market. Our research shows that people under age 30 will receive the bulk of the
premium subsidies in Utah, and they can still purchase a catastrophic-only
coverage that will be cheaper than full insurance. Real Answers from
Health Reform 101.-UHPP
If I have to drop my current family provider,(A real possibility seeing as how I
got my notice telling me my premiums will triple and not being able to afford
the new premiums) I will opt out of Obamacare and will refuse to pay the fine
for doing so. I'm willing to go to prison over not paying this fine.
@Tyler McArthur"When I get off my parent's plan and buy my own, I
have to pay a fee simply for the option of buying a private plan???"No, the fee is only for those who don't buy any insurance. @high school fan"Healthcare??? "Medicare is
extremely popular to the point that tea party protestors were yelling "get
your gov't hands off my medicare" oblivious to the fact that Medicare
is a gov't program...
Anti Bush-Obama,The fine for breaking the law the first year is only $90.
Just pay it... it's worth $90 to not go to jail.Do the math.
It's way more economical to go without insurance and just pay the $90 fine
(if you have a family and coverage is $900/month). Since they can't turn
you down for pre-existing conditions... if you get in a wreck or someone in the
family gets cancer... you can always just sign up for any insurance then (and
they can't turn you down for your existing condition).I think
there's some fine print in one of those 2000 pages of regulations that
should address this loophole, but it won't stand up in court. The
insurance company will be forced to give you coverage (even though they know
they will probably drop them the month after they pay your huge bill).If too many people do this... obviously the insurance company you choose will
go out of business OR... have to increase their premiums on the rest of their
customers to pay your bill.
I can't help but chuckle at some of these comments. You can't opt out
of Obamacare and buy a non-compliant policy -- insurance companies can only sell
ACA compliant policies.Unless you owe taxes you can't refuse to
pay the fine -- it will be deducted from your refund. Before the IRS will send
you to prison you have to fail to file and fail to pay a LOT of taxes.These claims about doubling and tripling of insurance premiums seem odd since
projections show that across the board increases are unlikely. I was especially
amused about the gentleman who only had a claim for a preventative check-up. If
this is the case, then buy the bronze plan and save some money since
preventative exams are covered without cost.
I have read many comments about people "opting out" or being
"exempted" from Obamacare. The Affordable Care Act won't affect
anyone who currently has insurance. Its primary focus is for uninsured
Americans. So, tell me why so many INSURED people want to keep so many UNINSURED
people from having affordable health insurance? Either we help them get
insurance or we pay for their care entirely at taxpayers expense, as no American
is denied some sort of healthcare!!As long as the Koch brothers and their
ilk can affect American politics with their money, the Republican party will be
the party of the rich and the corporations. Any poor to middle-class Americans
who thinks the Republicans are out to help them are fools. The lower income
people of our great country don't really pay that much in taxes, and are
the support mechanism for the rich, who are trying to convince them that life is
great and would be even greater with less taxes...on the rich...
The Koch brothers do not need to buy this publication, printing these articles
show they already own it.
I got a letter that my healthcare insurance will go down 87%. No
details or facts needed on this side either.
The ACA act has some good parts to it, I'm not too "Right Winged"
to admit that. Insurance for all sounds great, helping those with pre-existing
conditions is definitely important. There are other great pieces to this
plan.However, as this article pointed out, this plan can cost
millenials money buying insurance they don't need or want. This plan will
slow economic growth as countless businesses, large and small have been forced
to cut hours, cut benfits or put a freeze on hiring. My hope is that
this country can eventually find a way to cut out the bad of this plan and
incoporate the good.
The Affordable Care Act:Better health care at cheaper prices, and
more people will have access...And you say it was originally
Romney's plan?Weird, Fox News never tells me that. They
call it Obamacare, and they never actually give me any real information about
it. They just tell me to be scared of it. They say it will be the
downfall of this nation.
Daniel Leifker—I think you may be wrong about the commenters using the ad
hominem fallacy against Evan Feinberg.An ad hominem requires an
attack on a writer’s character rather than on the merits of an argument.
The commenters did not attack Feinberg’s argument about whether
millennials should use the ACA exchanges. They focused only his claim to be
nonpartisan after they uncovered his partisan associations. Because
his claim of nonpartisanship is untrue, saying that Feinberg has no integrity is
not an ad hominem attack but a statement of fact.