Affordabel Care Act Mandate | Romneycare Mandate | Heritage Foundation Mandate

So you never bought any kind of insurance?

I bought insurance that I had the probability of using. For example I know sooner or later I would need a colonoscopy so my insurance covered that. But now I get to pay for pap smears and c sections as well as well even though I will never have one. So you do not get what you pay for as you said. I pay for a lot more than I actually get which means I am paying for shit I do not need and will never use. And that is not fiscally sound in anyone's book.

Most will be: Paying more and getting more instead of paying for policies they have no clue about after being snookered by disreputable agents and companies

Most will be paying for shit they will never use. Hence they will be wasting their money.

Now you fall back on listing what a policy actually will pay for. All policies were subject to change at discretion of companies and when people started using their policies, change was put in.

It has always been bait and switch for any but the most expensive policies like one I had for a short period of time. Even with the most expensive policy...Mass Blue Cross/Shield


I went out of state and my insurer kept insisting they didn't have to pay. ...good thread this one...

thanks

Boo hoo.......

No, it hasn't always been bait and switch. But insurance sure has changed over the last decade or so.

But even the insurance companies are not a monolith. But they have always been regulated. What they do get away with is allowed by regulators.....insurance hasn't been an open market enterprise for a long time.
 
Paying for healthcare has been and is a national problem. Our taxes have been paying for uninsured for decades

clue

I suppose you mean the costs of uninsured clogging our hospitals but walking away after paying nothing.

But we are still paying for the deadbeats under ObamaCare.

Putting millions on Medicaid is no less expensive than the cost of emergency rooms.

That, and the government subsidies aka handouts for millions who will sign up for ObamaCare means that the more things change the more they stay the same.

The ugly truth is that we should shut down the ability of people to walk into an ER and get free care they have no intention of paying for.

If you want to regulate something, regulate the way the financial side is conducted. At least you'd get a clearer picture of what that really is.
 
I bought insurance that I had the probability of using. For example I know sooner or later I would need a colonoscopy so my insurance covered that. But now I get to pay for pap smears and c sections as well as well even though I will never have one. So you do not get what you pay for as you said. I pay for a lot more than I actually get which means I am paying for shit I do not need and will never use. And that is not fiscally sound in anyone's book.



Most will be paying for shit they will never use. Hence they will be wasting their money.

Now you fall back on listing what a policy actually will pay for. All policies were subject to change at discretion of companies and when people started using their policies, change was put in.

It has always been bait and switch for any but the most expensive policies like one I had for a short period of time. Even with the most expensive policy...Mass Blue Cross/Shield


I went out of state and my insurer kept insisting they didn't have to pay. ...good thread this one...

thanks

Boo hoo.......

No, it hasn't always been bait and switch. But insurance sure has changed over the last decade or so.

But even the insurance companies are not a monolith. But they have always been regulated. What they do get away with is allowed by regulators.....insurance hasn't been an open market enterprise for a long time.

Exactly,,,and the PPACA/Obamacare is nothing but smarter ad better regulation

open markets have regulation,,,,it's how capitalism works. Markets free from regulation are anathema
 
Now you fall back on listing what a policy actually will pay for. All policies were subject to change at discretion of companies and when people started using their policies, change was put in.

It has always been bait and switch for any but the most expensive policies like one I had for a short period of time. Even with the most expensive policy...Mass Blue Cross/Shield


I went out of state and my insurer kept insisting they didn't have to pay. ...good thread this one...

thanks

Boo hoo.......

No, it hasn't always been bait and switch. But insurance sure has changed over the last decade or so.

But even the insurance companies are not a monolith. But they have always been regulated. What they do get away with is allowed by regulators.....insurance hasn't been an open market enterprise for a long time.

Exactly,,,and the PPACA/Obamacare is nothing but smarter ad better regulation

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

You bet it is.

Let the unions off the hook.

Lie your ass off to get it passed.

FU the website.

Get people canceled.

Call in MSNBC to help calm down the populace (like the 50 that watch MSNBC).

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
Paying for healthcare has been and is a national problem. Our taxes have been paying for uninsured for decades

clue

I suppose you mean the costs of uninsured clogging our hospitals but walking away after paying nothing.

But we are still paying for the deadbeats under ObamaCare.

Putting millions on Medicaid is no less expensive than the cost of emergency rooms.

That, and the government subsidies aka handouts for millions who will sign up for ObamaCare means that the more things change the more they stay the same.

The ugly truth is that we should shut down the ability of people to walk into an ER and get free care they have no intention of paying for.

If you want to regulate something, regulate the way the financial side is conducted. At least you'd get a clearer picture of what that really is.

The ugly truth is for you is the overwhelming majority of human beings in America do not agree with you. We want a better world than your dystopian dream

the PPACA/Obamacare is about the financial side of health insurance. But one cannot fully address the financial side without addressing what is being financed...

get it yet?
 
Boo hoo.......

No, it hasn't always been bait and switch. But insurance sure has changed over the last decade or so.

But even the insurance companies are not a monolith. But they have always been regulated. What they do get away with is allowed by regulators.....insurance hasn't been an open market enterprise for a long time.

Exactly,,,and the PPACA/Obamacare is nothing but smarter ad better regulation

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

You bet it is.

Let the unions off the hook.

Lie your ass off to get it passed.

FU the website.

Get people canceled.

Call in MSNBC to help calm down the populace (like the 50 that watch MSNBC).

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

kay...talking points and shit


.....................


...............



............


.......


...

..


.


:cuckoo:
 
I suppose you mean the costs of uninsured clogging our hospitals but walking away after paying nothing.

But we are still paying for the deadbeats under ObamaCare.

Putting millions on Medicaid is no less expensive than the cost of emergency rooms.

That, and the government subsidies aka handouts for millions who will sign up for ObamaCare means that the more things change the more they stay the same.

The ugly truth is that we should shut down the ability of people to walk into an ER and get free care they have no intention of paying for.

If you want to regulate something, regulate the way the financial side is conducted. At least you'd get a clearer picture of what that really is.

The ugly truth is for you is the overwhelming majority of human beings in America do not agree with you. We want a better world than your dystopian dream

the PPACA/Obamacare is about the financial side of health insurance. But one cannot fully address the financial side without addressing what is being financed...

get it yet?

Obamacare will never get to the second since the morons in charge have already FU the first.

And the fact that millions still won't get insurance (not to mention the millions who've lost it) kind makes you the one with the dream.

I know you don't get it, so I won't bother to ask.
 
Exactly,,,and the PPACA/Obamacare is nothing but smarter ad better regulation

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

You bet it is.

Let the unions off the hook.

Lie your ass off to get it passed.

FU the website.

Get people canceled.

Call in MSNBC to help calm down the populace (like the 50 that watch MSNBC).

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

kay...talking points and shit


.....................


...............



............


.......


...

..


.


:cuckoo:

The website is doing good ?

Missed that memo....

Reality bites.
 
So you never bought any kind of insurance?

I bought insurance that I had the probability of using. For example I know sooner or later I would need a colonoscopy so my insurance covered that. But now I get to pay for pap smears and c sections as well as well even though I will never have one. So you do not get what you pay for as you said. I pay for a lot more than I actually get which means I am paying for shit I do not need and will never use. And that is not fiscally sound in anyone's book.

Most will be: Paying more and getting more instead of paying for policies they have no clue about after being snookered by disreputable agents and companies

Most will be paying for shit they will never use. Hence they will be wasting their money.

Now you fall back on listing what a policy actually will pay for. All policies were subject to change at discretion of companies and when people started using their policies, change was put in.

It has always been bait and switch for any but the most expensive policies like one I had for a short period of time. Even with the most expensive policy...Mass Blue Cross/Shield


I went out of state and my insurer kept insisting they didn't have to pay. ...good thread this one...

thanks

I never had a problem with my insurance. I had a high deductible policy with a health savings account. The policy covered everything i would ever need after I paid the first 10,000 in a year.

I don't see why it's up to the government to tell me my policy was sub par if it didn't cover drug and alcohol counseling or maternity or dental and eye glasses for children when I will never use any of those services.

It's the government that pulled the bait and switch here.
 
I bought insurance that I had the probability of using. For example I know sooner or later I would need a colonoscopy so my insurance covered that. But now I get to pay for pap smears and c sections as well as well even though I will never have one. So you do not get what you pay for as you said. I pay for a lot more than I actually get which means I am paying for shit I do not need and will never use. And that is not fiscally sound in anyone's book.



Most will be paying for shit they will never use. Hence they will be wasting their money.

Now you fall back on listing what a policy actually will pay for. All policies were subject to change at discretion of companies and when people started using their policies, change was put in.

It has always been bait and switch for any but the most expensive policies like one I had for a short period of time. Even with the most expensive policy...Mass Blue Cross/Shield


I went out of state and my insurer kept insisting they didn't have to pay. ...good thread this one...

thanks

I never had a problem with my insurance. I had a high deductible policy with a health savings account. The policy covered everything i would ever need after I paid the first 10,000 in a year.

I don't see why it's up to the government to tell me my policy was sub par if it didn't cover drug and alcohol counseling or maternity or dental and eye glasses for children when I will never use any of those services.

It's the government that pulled the bait and switch here.

Great post.

If you are not going to meet your deductible, you really do shop and discern.

We have a similar plan but with a lower limit. I love the HSA.

What about the other bullshyt this law brought with it.

An average savings of 2,500 per family...haven't seen that.

There were bad policies out there...and guess who let that happen...the insurance commissioners (i.e. regulators.....or "the government").

So, we turned the whole thing over to them.

I can't rep your post....so thanks.
 
The website is doing fine. The roll out was a public relations disaster...something the right wing thinks and prays will resonate as a partisan issue in 2014 and 2016


dream on


:D:
 
The website is doing fine. The roll out was a public relations disaster...something the right wing thinks and prays will resonate as a partisan issue in 2014 and 2016


dream on


:D:

Sure. Now that they've discouraged so many people that nobody is going to it.

I can make web-sites work like that.

:lol::lol::lol::lol:
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top