Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Hello! What do you think repealing the HC bill would actually do?
230 billion added to deficit
32 million Americans lose HC
Children thrown off parents HC
HC Companies once again able to "cut" sick people
Note to Congress: Keep your hands off our health care law - USATODAY.com
From Rhonda Abrams, "President of The Planning Shop" and publisher of books for entrepreneurs. Her newest is the 5th edition of The Successful Business Plan: Secrets and Strategies.
The best chance for small businesses and the self-employed to get affordable health insurance through health insurance exchanges.
The best chance for entrepreneurs to be able to start new businesses and create jobs by eliminating exclusions due to pre-existing conditions, and the exchanges.
Take my business. This year, my health insurance cost increased a whopping 29%. Last year, I had a 20% increase. Yes more than 50% in two years compounded! Oh you may say my insurance is expensive because we have a so-called "Cadillac" plan. Nope my own health care plan provides little more than catastrophic coverage; I can't afford anything better. And it's not because my employees cost insurance companies a lot we're an unusually healthy group.
Politicians or insurance companies may claim price increases like mine are the result of "Obamacare." Bullhockey! It happens every year.
Why do I and you face such huge premium increases? Because health insurance companies don't want small businesses. We're too risky there aren't enough people in a small group to even out the risk. If only one person in a small business gets sick, insurance companies lose all the profit they've made on our few healthy employees. The way they get rid of us? Continually raising our prices.
------------------
You see, for Republicans, "small business" is at least a billion in yearly revenue.
Anyone who is over the age of 18 is not a child
Bullshit
When you are forced to cover people who already have a p[re exsisting condition you must raise your rates. If you have to raise your rates how is it allowing anyone to save money?
230 billion added to deficit
When you are not having to pay for somethig that does not exsist how does it cost anything?
Dean this is total bullshit because the democrats gave the CBO bogus figures to make the numbers fit their argument.
Yes, but if you allow people who have children going to college to stay on their health care, it certainly helps.
Arguing with you guys is difficult because you refuse to learn anything. Stick with Republican talking points and you just look kinda stupid, seriously.
If someone doesn't have insurance and they get hit by a bus, we, the taxpayers have to pay for that person being in the hospital. Plus, they go bankrupt, we have to pay for that too.
The "pre-existing" condition is finally "spelled out" until it makes sense. Insurance companies categorized "pre-existing" condition as anyone with an allergy, a woman who has had a mammogram within the last six months, anyone who had a health checkup within the last six months, an appendectomy, their tonsils out and so on. Any of these "conditions" and you could lose your insurance if you became really sick.
If your son has an allergy and dad gets cancer, the entire family could be dropped for "pre-existing condition".
Now, none of those work. However, if you have cancer and no health care, you couldn't go and suddenly get health care. That would be like driving, getting into an accident and then going and getting car insurance to pay for your accident. That would be ridiculous. All that is spelled out in this bill.
In fact, that is the reason it makes health care insurance mandatory. So if someone gets ill later on, they couldn't be dropped and they wouldn't try to get health care after they got sick.
Not a single person has been prosecuted for refusing to get health care.
And you guys tell ME that I'm following the talking points? You guys don't even know Insurance Companies definition of "pre-existing" condition.
It's like the difference between "theory" and "scientific theory".
You guys are going to have to do better. You are NOT "master debaters" and you will never be a "cunning linguist".
Yes, but if you allow people who have children going to college to stay on their health care, it certainly helps.
Arguing with you guys is difficult because you refuse to learn anything. Stick with Republican talking points and you just look kinda stupid, seriously.
If someone doesn't have insurance and they get hit by a bus, we, the taxpayers have to pay for that person being in the hospital. Plus, they go bankrupt, we have to pay for that too.
And you guys tell ME that I'm following the talking points? You guys don't even know Insurance Companies definition of "pre-existing" condition.
Wrong.And yet, oddly, I know to capitalize the first word of a sentence, I know the difference between "to" and "too", and I know how punctuation works.
If you knew how punctuation worked you'd know where in that sentence you should have put semi-colons instead of commas.
Leave it up to a Chicago-Republican....a REAL Conservative....to show the Wicked Bitch Of The West.....
.......how to get-it-done.....
Leave it up to a Chicago-Republican....a REAL Conservative....to show the Wicked Bitch Of The West.....
.......how to get-it-done.....
Wow, she looks like an 'after' picture on one of those don't-use-meth posters you see here and there.
Fail.Wrong.If you knew how punctuation worked you'd know where in that sentence you should have put semi-colons instead of commas.
Sorry my friend, your link explicitly proves me right:
Use a semicolon in place of a period to separate two sentences where the conjunction has been left out.
Highlighted above, two sentences where the conjunction has been left out. A semi-colon belongs where you put the comma. Highlighted.
Fail.
Sorry my friend, your link explicitly proves me right:
Use a semicolon in place of a period to separate two sentences where the conjunction has been left out.
Highlighted above, two sentences where the conjunction has been left out. A semi-colon belongs where you put the comma. Highlighted.
There is, however, one exception that can cause you a problem. You don't use a semicolon to connect two complete sentences if there's a conjunction between the clauses (and, but, etc.). In that case, use a comma."I know to capitalize the first word of a sentence, I know the difference between "to" and "too", and I know how punctuation works."
Example: This could be a complete sentence, and this could be another one.
Adding that single word, the conjunction "and," means that you must change that semicolon into a comma.
No kidding. What I wrote is a list of things I know. You use commas to separate items in a list unless a comma is used in the listed items.Fail.Sorry my friend, your link explicitly proves me right:
Use a semicolon in place of a period to separate two sentences where the conjunction has been left out.
Highlighted above, two sentences where the conjunction has been left out. A semi-colon belongs where you put the comma. Highlighted.
There is, however, one exception that can cause you a problem. You don't use a semicolon to connect two complete sentences if there's a conjunction between the clauses (and, but, etc.). In that case, use a comma."I know to capitalize the first word of a sentence, I know the difference between "to" and "too", and I know how punctuation works."
Example: This could be a complete sentence, and this could be another one.
Adding that single word, the conjunction "and," means that you must change that semicolon into a comma.
there is no conjunction between sentence one and sentence two.
No kidding. What I wrote is a list of things I know. You use commas to separate items in a list unless a comma is used in the listed items.Fail.
There is, however, one exception that can cause you a problem. You don't use a semicolon to connect two complete sentences if there's a conjunction between the clauses (and, but, etc.). In that case, use a comma."I know to capitalize the first word of a sentence, I know the difference between "to" and "too", and I know how punctuation works."
Example: This could be a complete sentence, and this could be another one.
Adding that single word, the conjunction "and," means that you must change that semicolon into a comma.
there is no conjunction between sentence one and sentence two.
You're really wrong on this. You should perhaps just walk away.
From my link:No kidding. What I wrote is a list of things I know. You use commas to separate items in a list unless a comma is used in the listed items.there is no conjunction between sentence one and sentence two.
You're really wrong on this. You should perhaps just walk away.
They are complete sentences. There are 3 complete sentences there. You use a semi-colon OR a comma/conjunction to separate complete sentences.
I am white; I am male; I am from New York. Correct.
I am white, I am male, I am from New York. Incorrect.
Best: I am white, male, and from New York.
Anyone who is over the age of 18 is not a child
Bullshit
When you are forced to cover people who already have a p[re exsisting condition you must raise your rates. If you have to raise your rates how is it allowing anyone to save money?
When you are not having to pay for somethig that does not exsist how does it cost anything?
Dean this is total bullshit because the democrats gave the CBO bogus figures to make the numbers fit their argument.
Yes, but if you allow people who have children going to college to stay on their health care, it certainly helps.
Arguing with you guys is difficult because you refuse to learn anything. Stick with Republican talking points and you just look kinda stupid, seriously.
If someone doesn't have insurance and they get hit by a bus, we, the taxpayers have to pay for that person being in the hospital. Plus, they go bankrupt, we have to pay for that too.
The "pre-existing" condition is finally "spelled out" until it makes sense. Insurance companies categorized "pre-existing" condition as anyone with an allergy, a woman who has had a mammogram within the last six months, anyone who had a health checkup within the last six months, an appendectomy, their tonsils out and so on. Any of these "conditions" and you could lose your insurance if you became really sick.
If your son has an allergy and dad gets cancer, the entire family could be dropped for "pre-existing condition".
Now, none of those work. However, if you have cancer and no health care, you couldn't go and suddenly get health care. That would be like driving, getting into an accident and then going and getting car insurance to pay for your accident. That would be ridiculous. All that is spelled out in this bill.
In fact, that is the reason it makes health care insurance mandatory. So if someone gets ill later on, they couldn't be dropped and they wouldn't try to get health care after they got sick.
Not a single person has been prosecuted for refusing to get health care.
And you guys tell ME that I'm following the talking points? You guys don't even know Insurance Companies definition of "pre-existing" condition.
It's like the difference between "theory" and "scientific theory".
You guys are going to have to do better. You are NOT "master debaters" and you will never be a "cunning linguist".
And your point? They still are not children. That is what you called them.
It looks to me like we all could learn from each other and learn from countries that have already been down this road. To bad you can't learn because you are to eager for the government tit.
If someone doesn't have insurance and they get hit by a bus, we, the taxpayers have to pay for that person being in the hospital. Plus, they go bankrupt, we have to pay for that too.
There's that talking point agan. I am an example of not having insurance and going to the hospital.
My second wife and I were out of state she had a miscarriage and I did not have any insurance at the time. She stayed in the hospital for 5 days. I set up payments and paid for the bill myself. People who do not have insurance do things like that.
And you guys tell ME that I'm following the talking points? You guys don't even know Insurance Companies definition of "pre-existing" condition.
Yes you are
From my link:No kidding. What I wrote is a list of things I know. You use commas to separate items in a list unless a comma is used in the listed items.
You're really wrong on this. You should perhaps just walk away.
They are complete sentences. There are 3 complete sentences there. You use a semi-colon OR a comma/conjunction to separate complete sentences.
I am white; I am male; I am from New York. Correct.
I am white, I am male, I am from New York. Incorrect.
Best: I am white, male, and from New York.
There is, however, one exception that can cause you a problem. You don't use a semicolon to connect two complete sentences if there's a conjunction between the clauses (and, but, etc.). In that case, use a comma.
Example: This could be a complete sentence, and this could be another one.
Edited to be an analogue of what I wrote:
This could be a complete sentence, that could be a complete sentence, and this could be another one.
So, again, in summary: You're wrong.
Yes, but if you allow people who have children going to college to stay on their health care, it certainly helps.
Arguing with you guys is difficult because you refuse to learn anything. Stick with Republican talking points and you just look kinda stupid, seriously.
If someone doesn't have insurance and they get hit by a bus, we, the taxpayers have to pay for that person being in the hospital. Plus, they go bankrupt, we have to pay for that too.
The "pre-existing" condition is finally "spelled out" until it makes sense. Insurance companies categorized "pre-existing" condition as anyone with an allergy, a woman who has had a mammogram within the last six months, anyone who had a health checkup within the last six months, an appendectomy, their tonsils out and so on. Any of these "conditions" and you could lose your insurance if you became really sick.
If your son has an allergy and dad gets cancer, the entire family could be dropped for "pre-existing condition".
Now, none of those work. However, if you have cancer and no health care, you couldn't go and suddenly get health care. That would be like driving, getting into an accident and then going and getting car insurance to pay for your accident. That would be ridiculous. All that is spelled out in this bill.
In fact, that is the reason it makes health care insurance mandatory. So if someone gets ill later on, they couldn't be dropped and they wouldn't try to get health care after they got sick.
Not a single person has been prosecuted for refusing to get health care.
And you guys tell ME that I'm following the talking points? You guys don't even know Insurance Companies definition of "pre-existing" condition.
It's like the difference between "theory" and "scientific theory".
You guys are going to have to do better. You are NOT "master debaters" and you will never be a "cunning linguist".
And your point? They still are not children. That is what you called them.
It looks to me like we all could learn from each other and learn from countries that have already been down this road. To bad you can't learn because you are to eager for the government tit.
There's that talking point agan. I am an example of not having insurance and going to the hospital.
My second wife and I were out of state she had a miscarriage and I did not have any insurance at the time. She stayed in the hospital for 5 days. I set up payments and paid for the bill myself. People who do not have insurance do things like that.
And you guys tell ME that I'm following the talking points? You guys don't even know Insurance Companies definition of "pre-existing" condition.
Yes you are
People who do that end up going bankrupt, taking what little they have left, buying a tent and go live in the woods where police go and cut up their tents because Republicans cry, "Every man for himself and we don't want no hobo unemployed living by us".
Harvard study shows unpaid medical bills is the leading cause of bankruptcy in the U.S. - National Health Care | Examiner.com
The researchers studied bankruptcy files in five federal bankruptcy courts in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Texas. They reviewed 1,771 personal bankruptcy files and conducted in-depth interviews with 931 of the individual filing personal bankruptcy.
Conducted in 2001 and reported in 2005, the study concluded that 2 million American, including 700,000 children are affected by medically driven bankruptcies each year.
Study found most had health insurance
Medical Bills Leading Cause of Bankruptcy | Maryland Bankruptcy Center
A report set to be published in the American Journal of Medicine in August, but already online, shows that more than 60 percent of personal bankruptcies filed in 2007 could be attributed to medical bills.
The study also says that over 75 percent of those who filed for bankruptcy because of medical bills had health insurance when they became ill.
----------------------------------------------
What the hell is wrong with you people? Is this what you're defending?
What we want, and will get eventually, is a single payer plan that covers all citizens. And blackhearted bastards like you can go to hell.
And your point? They still are not children. That is what you called them.
It looks to me like we all could learn from each other and learn from countries that have already been down this road. To bad you can't learn because you are to eager for the government tit.
There's that talking point agan. I am an example of not having insurance and going to the hospital.
My second wife and I were out of state she had a miscarriage and I did not have any insurance at the time. She stayed in the hospital for 5 days. I set up payments and paid for the bill myself. People who do not have insurance do things like that.
Yes you are
People who do that end up going bankrupt, taking what little they have left, buying a tent and go live in the woods where police go and cut up their tents because Republicans cry, "Every man for himself and we don't want no hobo unemployed living by us".
Harvard study shows unpaid medical bills is the leading cause of bankruptcy in the U.S. - National Health Care | Examiner.com
The researchers studied bankruptcy files in five federal bankruptcy courts in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Texas. They reviewed 1,771 personal bankruptcy files and conducted in-depth interviews with 931 of the individual filing personal bankruptcy.
Conducted in 2001 and reported in 2005, the study concluded that 2 million American, including 700,000 children are affected by medically driven bankruptcies each year.
Study found most had health insurance
Medical Bills Leading Cause of Bankruptcy | Maryland Bankruptcy Center
A report set to be published in the American Journal of Medicine in August, but already online, shows that more than 60 percent of personal bankruptcies filed in 2007 could be attributed to medical bills.
The study also says that over 75 percent of those who filed for bankruptcy because of medical bills had health insurance when they became ill.
----------------------------------------------
What the hell is wrong with you people? Is this what you're defending?
Again I am proof you don't need healthcare coverage you set up a little thing called payment plan and pay it off. It's just that simple.
