Fox News basic math via their graphics

[dank69]

So they're lying as well...and the backend is fine and the insurance companies are not having severe administrative issues? Is that what you're really saying when you chose to attack the source rather than the information presented?

No, I'm not saying all is well or even that any of that is or is not true. Just that I won't be taking Fox's word for it.

 

[dank69]

I didn't ask how many had been paid, I asked how many had been issued and billed.

... But on the flip side it's a shame we don't have data on how many have actually paid their premiums. ...

... Fox demanding these numbers now is just more of their attempt to create negativity.


Maybe they can stick to the facts? Is that possible for them?

What facts? The Government/Insurers should release the facts so we could really know where we're at instead of all sides trying to spin what they think is going on.

 

[Matt1970]

No, I'm not saying all is well or even that any of that is or is not true. Just that I won't be taking Fox's word for it.

How about Reuters?

"However there are still some parts of the back-end systems that remain unbuilt."

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101541025

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

No, I'm not saying all is well or even that any of that is or is not true. Just that I won't be taking Fox's word for it.

And least you're grounded enough in reality to know better than to attempt to refute their facts. If what they said in that article was factually incorrect, the leftwing media would be having a field day right now. Instead, all I hear are crickets from the media and an apologist who'd rather demonize the source and stoop to using ad hominem circumstantial fallacies to make his case.

 

[OutHouse]

Why don't you propose some legislation forcing all private companies to disclose payment history for all customers to the government?

you got owned so try to defect. gotcha.

 

[OutHouse]

No, I'm not saying all is well or even that any of that is or is not true. Just that I won't be taking Fox's word for it.

whos word will you accept?

 

[dank69]

How about Reuters?

"However there are still some parts of the back-end systems that remain unbuilt."

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101541025

Wow, that's not vague at all. Check mate dank69.

 

[dank69]

And least you're grounded enough in reality to know better than to attempt to refute their facts. If what they said in that article was factually incorrect, the leftwing media would be having a field day right now. Instead, all I hear are crickets from the media and an apologist who'd rather demonize the source and stoop to using ad hominem circumstantial fallacies to make his case.

You don't want me to criticize your sources? Use sources that don't have vested interests in negatively spinning anything the Democrats do. What facts? They aren't automatically facts because they appear on Fox's websites.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Foxnews employees (former, present and future) should just STOP using numbers.

Former: back when Glenn Beck was with Fox, he stated 10% of Muslims are terrorists.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/glenn-beck-claims-10-muslims-terrorists-cnn-fareed-zakaria-blasts-fuzzy-math-article-1.474956

Present: this,..

Future: FoxNews NEWSFLASH (boom-cha-cha-choom-cha-choom!!) Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney, set to win the 2016 by an overWHELMING vote of 9,600 hundred thousand precent votes by Feb 31st!!

 

[dank69]

you got owned so try to defect. gotcha.

Son, small government GOP retards such as yourself are asking why private information isn't publicly available. I didn't get owned and I didn't deflect. This conversation, as basic as it is, is still miles over your head.

 

[Matt1970]

Wow, that's not vague at all. Check mate dank69.

Good lord son, you turned into eskimospy.

 

[michal1980]

This is private insurance, so billing is between the customer and the provider.

private insurance that is 80-90% paid for by tax payers?

 

[dank69]

Good lord son, you turned into eskimospy.

I wish I had eskimospy's insight into data and statistics. I'm a weekend warrior by comparison. Funny that you think that was an insult. The world must be so confusing for you.

 

[michal1980]

no other news agency would ever ever ever do that. only fox.

 

[BUnit1701]

Nice to see the goalposts moving to the "yeah, but have they paid yet" argument.

In fairness they have also been using the "The numbers are cooked" argument. It's like anything else positive related to the Obama admin. The numbers are fully believable when they are a negative and completely fake if it's good news for the country.

Funny, weren't there 30-40 million uninsured we were allegedly helping? Why are you twits celebrating barely 7 million?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Good lord son, you turned into eskimospy.

Please don't insult eskimospy...he's reasonably intelligent.

 

[Matt1970]

I wish I had eskimospy's insight into data and statistics. I'm a weekend warrior by comparison. Funny that you think that was an insult. The world must be so confusing for you.

It's more your ability to be able to deny reality, substituting it for what you feel should be the truth and then claiming some victory.

 

[UberNeuman]

It's more your ability to be able to deny reality, substituting it for what you feel should be the truth and then claiming some victory.

This coming from the person that posted and totally believed a news story from a parody website?

You should take Doc's advice. Also stopping the drama queen bit would be nice, Scarlett.

 

[Pens1566]

Funny, weren't there 30-40 million uninsured we were allegedly helping? Why are you twits celebrating barely 7 million?

The # you are looking for is ~46 million uninsured total. The difference between that and the 7 million is, I believe, that this is only those enrolling on the federal exchanges or in states that support the federal exchange. Those states that chose to stand up their own or not participate at all are not included. And no one is celebrating.

 

[IGBT]

This is private insurance, so billing is between the customer and the provider.

..the billing / financial transaction is also reported to the IRS. So the actual "paid" participation is known.

 

[HomerJS]

..the billing / financial transaction is also reported to the IRS. So the actual "paid" participation is known.

will be known

 

[dank69]

It's more your ability to be able to deny reality, substituting it for what you feel should be the truth and then claiming some victory.

Haha, project much?

 

[Matt1970]

This coming from the person that posted and totally believed a news story from a parody website?

You should take Doc's advice. Also stopping the drama queen bit would be nice, Scarlett.

Yes yes, keep drudging up that article from over a year ago. That really is about all you have. Weak.

 

[IGBT]

more then likely just like their hoaxed unemployment numbers that are revised after initial release their unchallenged obamaCare numbers will be revised down in the coming weeks. And why only 7 mil.?? If this thing is so wildly popular why not 10 mil.or more?? And what about the 6 mil.that lost their policy..did they sign up?? There's a ton of public information about the sign up / collected billing that's mysteriously not being used to support this "7 million" proclamation.

 

[Matt1970]

more then likely just like their hoaxed unemployment numbers that are revised after initial release their unchallenged obamaCare numbers will be revised down in the coming weeks. And why only 7 mil.?? If this thing is so wildly popular why not 10 mil.or more?? And what about the 6 mil.that lost their policy..did they sign up?? There's a ton of public information about the sign up / collected billing that's mysteriously not being used to support this "7 million" proclamation.

It should be a lot higher than that with some 47Million people who couldn't get insurance because of pre-existing conditions and cost before the ACA. If this this is as popular as they would like you to believe, and the subsidies are covering what people can't afford, why not 20 million signed up? Or 30?