Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Rod Pemberton" Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: OT: ObamaCare vs. Google Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 20:29:55 -0500 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 87 Message-ID: References: <1f417310-eee5-4c00-a34f-2efd28661a86@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: CNsg4fVcCsvs3UaOgZtQCw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (Linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:27056 On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:00:57 -0500, Mark Wills wrote: > In fairness to Obama, the *political* challeges involved in putting that > system together are probably unfathomable! > > Now, I'm British so I could have got the wrong end of the stick on some > of this, so do correct me where I err... > > I'm talking about how the system has to: > > * Interface with 1000's of health care providers to get details of > peoples health care plans; Why? All I think you should need is an account number. Like a check (cheque), it should have a routing number for the health care provider and an account number which indicates the type of account. The government wouldn't need to do anything for that. All the government has to do is pre-approve plans for each provider which are compliant with the law. > * Interface with the same to get information on pre-existing health > conditions; Why? 1) It's private and we have privacy laws. I.e., the government really shouldn't be allowed to have your healthcare information, if they are allowed...(?) Anyway, they really don't need it. It should, IMO, be just between you, your doctors, and your insurance, even if it's not that way. The only real rationalization as to why they would want it is as a backdoor method to nationality identity cards (currently illegal in the US), or (illegally) obtaining base biometric data for mass surveillance. Of course, the microwave body scanners at US airports do that too, if you weren't aware. They may not show your genitals anymore in public, but they don't delete the captured images. 2) One of the key features of ObamaCare is insurance companies can't take into account pre-existing conditions. So, again, they don't need it. > * Interface with IRS to get details of your earning and tax returns; Huh? Illegal, I think... The IRS can't provide your information to others, except for financial crimes (IIRC ...). The customer must provide this. In fact, you must, by law, according to an article I read, provide your *NEXT YEARS* income to ObamaCare, *BEFORE* you've actually earned it. True. Funny, ludicrous, but no joke. So, you won't even have tax info from the IRS or your employer to do that since it's future income. That's going to be a huge nightmare for many Americans with variable or intermittent income. > * Interface with benefits agencies, and even sign people up to benefit > programmes where they qualify. If the customer selects an ObamaCare approved healthcare policy from those the insurance providers list on an exchange, why? The insurer knows what they provide. I know what they provide. > I'm sure I'm only covering a small part of it. It looks to me like they don't need any of that. Although, I'm really not sure in full what the law allows and requires. One article indicates over a half-dozen Federal agencies are involved, including many you have to question, e.g., Department of Homeland Security and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. Do suicide bomber terrorists *really* sign up for healthcare? Do their partners get benefits afterwards? Is an illegal immigrant dumb enough to sign up for ObamaCare if he suspects ICE or the FBI will do a background check and then deport him? ... > And there's the problem. The time-frame. This is a truly massive > project, and I would estimate one would have block out their calendar > for approximately six years to get something like this in working order. Honestly, do you think our government is qualified to *ever* get it working? Yes, that's funny, but I'm not joking. I don't. The IRS just abandoned a $1 Trillion (capital T) USD computer upgrade just a few years ago because they couldn't get it working after a decade of work. How are they going to get a half-dozen Federal agencies to working together if they can't even fix the IRS for taxes? ... Taxes on everyone. Healthcare for everyone. They spent 2,000 times as much trying to fix _just_ the IRS. Rod Pemberton