[CFrance]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

You produced an impressive research list but you are still missing the primary point of this thread.

To wit, the architect of the ACA says he would like to die at age 75. In effect, he’s saying after age 75 he believes life is not worth living. That is a startling statement to read, especially if you live in a retirement community like The Villages. Would you not agree?

While he says he does not prescribe this for others, it is by no means unreasonable to ask the question …hmm, I wonder if he really believes that? It’s also quite logical to then ask well, if the architect thinks life after 75 is not worth living, and given the need to control health care costs, is it possible the government might actually at some point in the future say … you know, maybe Ezekiel was right in that these pesky old folks are costing us a fortune etc

It’s simply not enough for you to readily dismiss this set of questions as “ACA bashing” while accusing questioners as being “prevaricators.” Even if you are zealous ACA true believer (actually “strident” as you yourself say) you presumably also want to live beyond 75 years, so maybe it’s time you at least thought about the potential influence this guy has on the ACA???

You cannot deny that he said what he did.

And that's all you can do--ask the question. There is no proof, nor even a tiny bit of a hint, that he constructed the ACA with the idea in mind that people's lives were not worth living after age 75. That is your personal speculation not backed up by any facts, and it's an outrageous accusation.

And I can deny that what he said applies to anyone other than himself, because he said so.

I am agreement with blueash that this ACA-bashing is based on inaccurate information being put forth by people who are just plain ticked off from listening to the rhetoric of certain people rather than doing their own research.

I am sure there were those violently opposed to Medicare as well. And where would you be without it? And try affording a medical insurance supplement before ACA with a prior existing condition.

And oh--at age 66 last year, I was offered--offered!--a pneumonia shot, paid for by Medicare. I was offered one again this year. I have been having the same labs I always had, with no denial of coverage. I have a supplemental D plan that I pay decent money for so it will cover me anywhere and with any doctor. I am not trying to get along on a free or cheap advantage plan that keeps changing benefits and doctors. You get what you pay for.