Wow! Thanks, Obamacare!
01-13-2014, 12:20 PM
#442
If the majority of the middle class experiences the sticker shock I did when getting a quote for o-care, those that can afford to buy, will not. And, the program will continue to lose support from US citizens. In the end, the government will subsidize the insurance companies and that will put us one step closer to single payer.
Reply
0
0
01-13-2014, 12:24 PM
#443
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,494
Total Cats: 4,080
If the majority of the middle class experiences the sticker shock I did when getting a quote for o-care, those that can afford to buy, will not. And, the program will continue to lose support from US citizens. In the end, the government will subsidize the insurance companies and that will put us one step closer to single payer.
Reply
0
0
"way"
01-13-2014, 12:29 PM
#445
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,112
Total Cats: 35
Very true.. they are relying on the middle class, Between the ages of 21-40 to pay a shitload on their premiums, and not use the healthcare at all, so the rest of the country can have "affordable" healthcare, and use the **** out of it.
BUT, most of the people in that category know that They can opt out, and either pay the penalty (still less than one months premium) or NOT pay at all... break even on tax return, so they cant get their penalty money.
Best part, as has been said in this thread many times already, is that since there is no money owed for goods or services, because there were no goods or services being had, They cant come after you and garnish wages/bank accounts or hire collections. If more people realize and go through with this, the system will begin to collapse before the end of Obamas term.
BUT, most of the people in that category know that They can opt out, and either pay the penalty (still less than one months premium) or NOT pay at all... break even on tax return, so they cant get their penalty money.
Best part, as has been said in this thread many times already, is that since there is no money owed for goods or services, because there were no goods or services being had, They cant come after you and garnish wages/bank accounts or hire collections. If more people realize and go through with this, the system will begin to collapse before the end of Obamas term.
Reply
0
0
01-13-2014, 12:31 PM
#446
If the majority of the middle class experiences the sticker shock I did when getting a quote for o-care, those that can afford to buy, will not. And, the program will continue to lose support from US citizens. In the end, the government will subsidize the insurance companies and that will put us one step closer to single payer.
Reply
0
0
01-13-2014, 12:50 PM
#447
I mean... do you think that the refusal of care that never happened in this situation is different than what was going on before?
To be perfectly clear, i'm NOT for Obamacare.
But i'm VERY for people understanding what the **** they're buying. The main points in that article are 1) Look what happens when someone can't be bothered to learn what they signed up for, 2) doesn't know anything about health insurance, and 3) ZOMG phones are busy!
Again: The "waiting on hold for hours" part is the ONLY thing new and different about any of this. If you have a problem with the rest of it, then you had a problem with it before Obama even took office, let alone before Obamacare became a reality. Or do you simply have a problem with it NOW because of who is in office, and because their program is finally making you mad enough that you're caring enough to learn about any of it all?
I'm amused at all the people that didn't know a damn thing about how this all works until they became enraged at Obamacare.
The problem in this article, specifically, has nothing to do with health care. There was no shitty care given, there was no refusal of care.
Sincerely,
Someone who realizes that if this lady had chosen a PPO, this article would never have happened.
Reply
0
0
01-13-2014, 01:10 PM
#450
This is NOT "same as it ever was." This is adding a NEW LAYER OF BUREAUCRACY to your health care. If you read the article I put up, it also means that insurance companies will now be reimbursed with YOUR TAX DOLLARS whether they do a good job or not. In the old days this "public private" enterprise was simply called "fascism".
Reply
0
0
01-13-2014, 01:21 PM
#451
This is NOT "same as it ever was." This is adding a NEW LAYER OF BUREAUCRACY to your health care. If you read the article I put up, it also means that insurance companies will now be reimbursed with YOUR TAX DOLLARS whether they do a good job or not. In the old days this "public private" enterprise was simply called "fascism".
My mistake. I didn't read your article. I was only discussing the original article that i responded to, which is all i thought we were talking about. In which case, yes. It is absolutely the same as it always was.
I'm not an expert on where the tax dollars are going, so i prefer to keep my face shut about it rather than making an *** of myself on the internet.
But in terms of good job vs. bad job, that would tie in with the whole "on hold on the phone for hours" thing, yes? Which is... the only thing that was out of the ordinary in the article i was referring to.
Reply
0
0
01-13-2014, 01:33 PM
#452
My mistake. I didn't read your article. I was only discussing the original article that i responded to, which is all i thought we were talking about. In which case, yes. It is absolutely the same as it always was.
I'm not an expert on where the tax dollars are going, so i prefer to keep my face shut about it rather than making an *** of myself on the internet.
But in terms of good job vs. bad job, that would tie in with the whole "on hold on the phone for hours" thing, yes? Which is... the only thing that was out of the ordinary in the article i was referring to.
I'm not an expert on where the tax dollars are going, so i prefer to keep my face shut about it rather than making an *** of myself on the internet.
But in terms of good job vs. bad job, that would tie in with the whole "on hold on the phone for hours" thing, yes? Which is... the only thing that was out of the ordinary in the article i was referring to.
The issue with the ACA is that people seem to end up in two camps--arguing in favor of the system that was broken to begin with (championing a failed system), or arguing for a new system that is FAR worse and FAR more expensive, but with no track record, a la the ACA.
One thing we all know for certain; government entitlements are guaranteed monuments to waste/fraud/abuse, and the ACA is simply another government overreach.
I simply ask myself if the government actually can tax us for NOT doing something per the SCOTUS, why didn't they simply require catastrophic health care for all?
Reply
0
0
01-13-2014, 02:32 PM
#453
This is not about PPO vs. HMO or "being put on hold too long"...
It's called the Affordable Care Act, and was sold to us as a better alternative than traditional private insurance (which I am no fan of either btw). My first any only experience showed me this "Act" is anything but affordable. My rates would have doubled and my deductable would have trippled - for the Bronze plan (the worst of them all). And, believe me - our income has been modest, to put it mildly, for several years now.
If my wife did not have a job at the local university, our family would be REALLY F****D right now. I'm sure millions of Americans are now in that boat. And, just wait until it kicks in and affects those on company health plans. We'll probably be lucky as our insurance is through the University, and the dems will probably give them some sweetheart deal or other out.
Instead of trying to fix a screwed up system, they try to act like they know everything, and made it 10X worse. Why, because their egos and ideals were too big to sit down and seriously consider the consquences of what they were proposing. Either that, or the conspiracy theory is true and they are gunning for single payer. In the meantime, the tax payers are all going to be stuck with the bill, even if we opt out. Just hope I'm not alive when the bill comes due.
end of rant... for now...
It's called the Affordable Care Act, and was sold to us as a better alternative than traditional private insurance (which I am no fan of either btw). My first any only experience showed me this "Act" is anything but affordable. My rates would have doubled and my deductable would have trippled - for the Bronze plan (the worst of them all). And, believe me - our income has been modest, to put it mildly, for several years now.
If my wife did not have a job at the local university, our family would be REALLY F****D right now. I'm sure millions of Americans are now in that boat. And, just wait until it kicks in and affects those on company health plans. We'll probably be lucky as our insurance is through the University, and the dems will probably give them some sweetheart deal or other out.
Instead of trying to fix a screwed up system, they try to act like they know everything, and made it 10X worse. Why, because their egos and ideals were too big to sit down and seriously consider the consquences of what they were proposing. Either that, or the conspiracy theory is true and they are gunning for single payer. In the meantime, the tax payers are all going to be stuck with the bill, even if we opt out. Just hope I'm not alive when the bill comes due.
end of rant... for now...
Reply
0
0
01-13-2014, 02:57 PM
#454
Again, i'm ONLY referring to the article i was replying to.
But you're hitting on why i didn't like the misnomer and how the current administration is completely incapable of realizing the difference between Health Care and Health Insurance. ObamaCARE meddles about in INSURANCE.
But you're hitting on why i didn't like the misnomer and how the current administration is completely incapable of realizing the difference between Health Care and Health Insurance. ObamaCARE meddles about in INSURANCE.
Reply
0
0
01-14-2014, 09:24 AM
#455
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,494
Total Cats: 4,080
Obamacare kills disabled family's health coverage | The Daily Caller
“We did not put ourselves in this situation,” she told The Daily Caller. “The government put us in this situation.”
...
Melissa and Ken are covered under Medicaid. Medicaid, however, has never included their children, who are covered by a separate plan.
Under that plan, which was well suited to the family’s needs, the children’s combined healthcare costs could not exceed $2,500 per year.
Nevertheless, they received a letter in the mail informing them that the plan had to be cancelled. The letter named the Affordable Care Act as the culprit, as first reported by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.
...
Melissa immediately went to the exchange to find a new plan. To her disappointment, the best plan she could find was four times more expensive than the old one. It would obligate the family to pay up to $5,100 per year for each child. Taken together, that’s an almost $8,000 increase over the old plan.
Unlike some other families, out of pockets costs matter a great deal to the Daverts, who have frequent medical needs–some regular, some unanticipated. Melissa said money was tight enough for them when they knew their medical costs couldn’t exceed $2,500. Paying up $10,200 each year seemed unthinkable.
...
Melissa and Ken are covered under Medicaid. Medicaid, however, has never included their children, who are covered by a separate plan.
Under that plan, which was well suited to the family’s needs, the children’s combined healthcare costs could not exceed $2,500 per year.
Nevertheless, they received a letter in the mail informing them that the plan had to be cancelled. The letter named the Affordable Care Act as the culprit, as first reported by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.
...
Melissa immediately went to the exchange to find a new plan. To her disappointment, the best plan she could find was four times more expensive than the old one. It would obligate the family to pay up to $5,100 per year for each child. Taken together, that’s an almost $8,000 increase over the old plan.
Unlike some other families, out of pockets costs matter a great deal to the Daverts, who have frequent medical needs–some regular, some unanticipated. Melissa said money was tight enough for them when they knew their medical costs couldn’t exceed $2,500. Paying up $10,200 each year seemed unthinkable.
Reply
0
0
01-17-2014, 07:54 AM
#456
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,494
Total Cats: 4,080
"they expect young people to buy healthcare the same time the ps4 comes out?!"
here's the thing i love about this, everyone knows it's an lawful law, but these are all the same people who championed it and voted for it and obama...gotta love liberals.
Reply
0
0
01-29-2014, 09:57 AM
#457
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,494
Total Cats: 4,080
Obamacare: Tom Coburn loses cancer doctor - Tal Kopan - POLITICO.com
Cancer-stricken Sen. Tom Coburn revealed Tuesday that his health insurance under Obamacare doesn’t cover his oncologist, but said he still is receiving excellent care.
“I’m doing well from a health standpoint, got great docs,” Coburn said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Tuesday when asked about his health. “Fortunately — even though my new coverage won’t cover my specialist — I’m going to have great care, and I have a great prognosis.”
The Oklahoma Republican’s spokesman confirmed to POLITICO that since the senator enrolled in his health insurance plan under Obamacare, his coverage has been reduced and he lost coverage for his cancer specialist. Coburn will continue to pay out of pocket and see his oncologist, his office said.
“I’m doing well from a health standpoint, got great docs,” Coburn said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Tuesday when asked about his health. “Fortunately — even though my new coverage won’t cover my specialist — I’m going to have great care, and I have a great prognosis.”
The Oklahoma Republican’s spokesman confirmed to POLITICO that since the senator enrolled in his health insurance plan under Obamacare, his coverage has been reduced and he lost coverage for his cancer specialist. Coburn will continue to pay out of pocket and see his oncologist, his office said.
Reply
0
0
