Obamacare Kicking In (And The People Like It So Far!!)

[Skull Pilot]

What young punk wouldn't like to get something for nothing?

You might as well say :

Survey Shows People Like To Get Free Shit

So as a 22 year old college student and you are barely making it financially, you should not take advantage of getting medical insurance on your parents plan....man up and stop getting "free" shit you socialist loving commie.

You sir are an idiot. An idiot or a hack. Your choice.

OOH I think I struck a nerve.

Why don't you man up as you say and pay your own fucking way after all at 22 you are supposed to be an adult and not still sucking mommy's tit.

 

[Truthmatters]

U.S. Health Premiums Outstrip Income Gains: Chart of the Day - Bloomberg


U.S. health-insurance costs are rising more quickly than the ability of U.S. families to pay and the gap is widening, according to the Commonwealth Fund.

The CHART OF THE DAY shows that private-insurance premiums for families rose three times faster than median household income over six years, the New York-based non-profit fund said in a report. Deductibles, the amount that policy holders have to pay before insurance coverage kicks in, rose almost five times faster, the fund said.

“Families are being priced out of the market,” said Cathy Schoen, an economist with the fund, in an interview. “The consequences are less adequate insurance coverage, costlier insurance coverage, higher rates of no coverage and growing stress on the family.”

 

[RDD_1210]

the law will say they must buy something they very well may not be able to afford...nor may never need.

My 24 year old son ius back on our policy....but in the meantime, he has never made a claim on his original policy...other than for his annuals.....but that should never be part of insurance anyway....for insurance ius INSURANCE.....for the unexpected....

Instead, my son was paying $4000 a year to cover his $300 annual visit.

Your post sort of contradicts itself. First you say that people are forced to buy something that they "may never need" but then you go on to point out that insurance is there to cover you for the unexpected.

So isn't that the point? People should have insurance because you never know. No one is immune to accidents, heart attacks, strokes, cancer, etc...and if you don't have the insurance when unexpected illness/accidents hit, you are in a world of hurt (physically and financially).

Yeah, this law require people to buy in to a shitty system dominated by private insurance companies, but it's the system we are stuck with.

it was contradictory...yes....

But my point is my point......

I mean...lets look at it this way...

Do you think there should be a law that everyone who lives within 100 miles of the coast should buy hurrican insurance?

Everyone who lives in tornado alley should buy tornado insurance?

How about this...anyone who lives within 30 miles of a lake, a stream, a river or the ocean should have to, by law, buy flood insurance?

Anyone who lives within 200 miles of a fault line should be forced to buy earthquake insurance?

You know, by the time we are done, we will be spending 75% of our income on insurance....which is something mpost of us will actually NEVER USE.

I hear what you're saying. And I don't like the system we have. Insurance is way to intertwined in to our lives. However, too many people were not getting adequate care because of that system. Unless we had radical change to the system we needed to figure out a way to at least make sure everyone was able to gain access to the shit system we have decided to keep.

 

[RDD_1210]

the government can kiss my ass i am not buying insurance unless I can afford it.

So do you not have health insurance now?

 

[DaGoose]

U.S. Health Premiums Outstrip Income Gains: Chart of the Day - Bloomberg


U.S. health-insurance costs are rising more quickly than the ability of U.S. families to pay and the gap is widening, according to the Commonwealth Fund.

The CHART OF THE DAY shows that private-insurance premiums for families rose three times faster than median household income over six years, the New York-based non-profit fund said in a report. Deductibles, the amount that policy holders have to pay before insurance coverage kicks in, rose almost five times faster, the fund said.

“Families are being priced out of the market,” said Cathy Schoen, an economist with the fund, in an interview. “The consequences are less adequate insurance coverage, costlier insurance coverage, higher rates of no coverage and growing stress on the family.”

But as the Neo-Cons would reply, "Tough shit".

.

 

[Dragon]

Re constitutionality: the only penalty for not buying health insurance is a tax. Congress obviously does have the power to lay and collect taxes.

Re popularity of the AMA: as noted above, most features of the AMA taken individually are quite popular. Also, I remember as the vote was going on in Congress and Republicans were arguing it was unpopular, an invalid mingling of poll numbers was used to show this. Basically, the number of people who disliked the AMA because it was not liberal enough (no public option, no single-payer) was lumped together with those who disliked it because it was too liberal or because they disapproved of health-care reform in itself. The percentage of people who wanted the ACA or something more liberal was a clear majority.

My personal opinion is that the ACA sucks ass -- compared to the health care systems in every other advanced democracy on the planet. On the other hand, it looks pretty good compared to what went before it. I wish we had gotten a single-payer system or at least a public option, but hey, we didn't. This will do until we can fix it.

A single payer system would be wildly popular. How do I know? Because Medicare is wildly popular and that's a single-payer system, just one restricted to old people. The best and simplest way to reform our health-care system would have been to expand Medicare into a universal health-insurance system, and use the resulting bargaining power to lower the prices of medical procedures and pharmaceuticals.

My big complaint against the ACA is that it didn't do that, and my big complaint against Obama is that he didn't even try to do that. Single-payer should have been the starting position. We wouldn't have gotten it, most likely, but bargaining down from the idea would have put is in a better position than we are now.

 

[Jarhead]

Your post sort of contradicts itself. First you say that people are forced to buy something that they "may never need" but then you go on to point out that insurance is there to cover you for the unexpected.

So isn't that the point? People should have insurance because you never know. No one is immune to accidents, heart attacks, strokes, cancer, etc...and if you don't have the insurance when unexpected illness/accidents hit, you are in a world of hurt (physically and financially).

Yeah, this law require people to buy in to a shitty system dominated by private insurance companies, but it's the system we are stuck with.

it was contradictory...yes....

But my point is my point......

I mean...lets look at it this way...

Do you think there should be a law that everyone who lives within 100 miles of the coast should buy hurrican insurance?

Everyone who lives in tornado alley should buy tornado insurance?

How about this...anyone who lives within 30 miles of a lake, a stream, a river or the ocean should have to, by law, buy flood insurance?

Anyone who lives within 200 miles of a fault line should be forced to buy earthquake insurance?

You know, by the time we are done, we will be spending 75% of our income on insurance....which is something mpost of us will actually NEVER USE.

I hear what you're saying. And I don't like the system we have. Insurance is way to intertwined in to our lives. However, too many people were not getting adequate care because of that system. Unless we had radical change to the system we needed to figure out a way to at least make sure everyone was able to gain access to the shit system we have decided to keep.

Thats where we most definitely disagree.

The way the system was as it pertained to those who could not afford insurance was working fine.
The ER was adequate....they got the care they needed...and yes, the tax payer had to foot the bulk of the bill....but I was OK with that.
Contrary to the rhetoric, no one was denied care in the ER due to lack of insurance...no one died.....yes, there was that one poor sould who died due to begligence of the RN who ignored her...but that was human error....not due to lack of insurance.

As for pre existing conditions...that is another story. That was actually created by the greed of the public. Some could afford insurance but did not buy it until they needed it....gaming the game in other words...so what were the insurance companies supposed to do?

And the fix for that?

If you have a pre existing condition, you are not to be denied if you can prove that you had existing insurance when you were diagnosed with the condition.

For those that cant afford insurance but come down with a serious ailment? You must prove you can not afford insurance and the tax payer will pay for your care.

Yes, it may prove to be costly....but there is no mandate to buy something by the government.

As for me....I am not all wrapped up in the cost to the tax payer....I am a conservative...I am wrapped up in the government telling me that I must buy something...even though I will buy it anyway. It is the principle of it......and it can open some really ugly doors as well.

 

[DaGoose]

the government can kiss my ass i am not buying insurance unless I can afford it.

So do you not have health insurance now?

Many people don't even if they can afford it. They can simply get their treatment and let the rest of us pay for it. But most conservatives don't even bat an eye about that.

.

 

[Truthmatters]

Any complaint of premiums going up is to ignore what the problem etailed BEFORE the recent changes

 

[Jarhead]

the government can kiss my ass i am not buying insurance unless I can afford it.

So do you not have health insurance now?

Many people don't even if they can afford it. They can simply get their treatment and let the rest of us pay for it. But most conservatives don't even bat an eye about that.

.

Likewise...many people dont need to be on welfare and/or unemployment....they simply collect their check and are happy not working

But most liberals dont even bat an eye about that.

 

[DaGoose]

it was contradictory...yes....

But my point is my point......

I mean...lets look at it this way...

Do you think there should be a law that everyone who lives within 100 miles of the coast should buy hurrican insurance?

Everyone who lives in tornado alley should buy tornado insurance?

How about this...anyone who lives within 30 miles of a lake, a stream, a river or the ocean should have to, by law, buy flood insurance?

Anyone who lives within 200 miles of a fault line should be forced to buy earthquake insurance?

You know, by the time we are done, we will be spending 75% of our income on insurance....which is something mpost of us will actually NEVER USE.

I hear what you're saying. And I don't like the system we have. Insurance is way to intertwined in to our lives. However, too many people were not getting adequate care because of that system. Unless we had radical change to the system we needed to figure out a way to at least make sure everyone was able to gain access to the shit system we have decided to keep.

Thats where we most definitely disagree.

The way the system was as it pertained to those who could not afford insurance was working fine.
The ER was adequate....they got the care they needed...and yes, the tax payer had to foot the bulk of the bill....but I was OK with that.
Contrary to the rhetoric, no one was denied care in the ER due to lack of insurance...no one died.....yes, there was that one poor sould who died due to begligence of the RN who ignored her...but that was human error....not due to lack of insurance.

As for pre existing conditions...that is another story. That was actually created by the greed of the public. Some could afford insurance but did not buy it until they needed it....gaming the game in other words...so what were the insurance companies supposed to do?

And the fix for that?

If you have a pre existing condition, you are not to be denied if you can prove that you had existing insurance when you were diagnosed with the condition.

For those that cant afford insurance but come down with a serious ailment? You must prove you can not afford insurance and the tax payer will pay for your care.

Yes, it may prove to be costly....but there is no mandate to buy something by the government.

As for me....I am not all wrapped up in the cost to the tax payer....I am a conservative...I am wrapped up in the government telling me that I must buy something...even though I will buy it anyway. It is the principle of it......and it can open some really ugly doors as well.

In other words, "I am willing to pay for $50,000 worth of medical treatment for someone but damn if I'll pay for $50 worth of food stamps so they can feed their kids".

.

 

[DaGoose]

So do you not have health insurance now?

Many people don't even if they can afford it. They can simply get their treatment and let the rest of us pay for it. But most conservatives don't even bat an eye about that.

.

Likewise...many people dont need to be on welfare and/or unemployment....they simply collect their check and are happy not working

But most liberals dont even bat an eye about that.

Tell that to the 200 people standing in line for 25 minimum wage jbs.

.

 

[CaféAuLait]

That's great ain't it. Adults a few years short of 30 can depend on mommy and daddy for health insurance. What happens when they grow up?

the law will say they must buy something they very well may not be able to afford...nor may never need.

My 24 year old son ius back on our policy....but in the meantime, he has never made a claim on his original policy...other than for his annuals.....but that should never be part of insurance anyway....for insurance ius INSURANCE.....for the unexpected....

Instead, my son was paying $4000 a year to cover his $300 annual visit.

your "kid" can get on your tricare now until he is 26. Its a 500 buy in and then its a little over 100 a month. That aint to bad and you can thank Obama for this.

If I may ask where are you getting your numbers?


I was quoted 278 a month for our daughter ( yes TriCare, yes college, no pre-existing conditions or health issues). What you have just said is a lot lower than what I was told for our daughter. Any information you have would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

 

[Jarhead]

I hear what you're saying. And I don't like the system we have. Insurance is way to intertwined in to our lives. However, too many people were not getting adequate care because of that system. Unless we had radical change to the system we needed to figure out a way to at least make sure everyone was able to gain access to the shit system we have decided to keep.

Thats where we most definitely disagree.

The way the system was as it pertained to those who could not afford insurance was working fine.
The ER was adequate....they got the care they needed...and yes, the tax payer had to foot the bulk of the bill....but I was OK with that.
Contrary to the rhetoric, no one was denied care in the ER due to lack of insurance...no one died.....yes, there was that one poor sould who died due to begligence of the RN who ignored her...but that was human error....not due to lack of insurance.

As for pre existing conditions...that is another story. That was actually created by the greed of the public. Some could afford insurance but did not buy it until they needed it....gaming the game in other words...so what were the insurance companies supposed to do?

And the fix for that?

If you have a pre existing condition, you are not to be denied if you can prove that you had existing insurance when you were diagnosed with the condition.

For those that cant afford insurance but come down with a serious ailment? You must prove you can not afford insurance and the tax payer will pay for your care.

Yes, it may prove to be costly....but there is no mandate to buy something by the government.

As for me....I am not all wrapped up in the cost to the tax payer....I am a conservative...I am wrapped up in the government telling me that I must buy something...even though I will buy it anyway. It is the principle of it......and it can open some really ugly doors as well.

In other words, "I am willing to pay for $50,000 worth of medical treatment for someone but damn if I'll pay for $50 worth of food stamps so they can feed their kids".

.

dont be an ass.

I am 100% for welfare and made that statement many times on here.
Despite the fact that some are gaming the game.

Just as I am 100% for the tax payer paying for the ER...even though some are gaming that game as well.

they are both systems that are working for the better of the people despite the fact that there is a small minority in both systems that game the game.

 

[Jarhead]

Many people don't even if they can afford it. They can simply get their treatment and let the rest of us pay for it. But most conservatives don't even bat an eye about that.

.

Likewise...many people dont need to be on welfare and/or unemployment....they simply collect their check and are happy not working

But most liberals dont even bat an eye about that.

Tell that to the 200 people standing in line for 25 minimum wage jbs.

.

get off it goose...

Those 200 people are why I support the system. I dont let the 5 people that abuse the system give me reason to dispute the system.

 

[Warrior102]

Survey: Significant drop in uninsured young adults

The number of young adults without health insurance has dropped significantly, a new survey finds, thanks to a provision of President Barack Obama's health care law allowing them to stay on their parents' plans.

The new Gallup poll findings translate to about 1 million more young adults with health insurance.

.....coverage for young adults has proven to be a popular and relatively low-cost benefit that families were eager to sign up for in these days of prolonged school-to-work transitions.

.

So you're 32, a miserable failure, still living at home with Mommy, and you get extended healthcare benefits. My aren't you blessed.

 

[Jarhead]

Survey: Significant drop in uninsured young adults

The number of young adults without health insurance has dropped significantly, a new survey finds, thanks to a provision of President Barack Obama's health care law allowing them to stay on their parents' plans.

The new Gallup poll findings translate to about 1 million more young adults with health insurance.

.....coverage for young adults has proven to be a popular and relatively low-cost benefit that families were eager to sign up for in these days of prolonged school-to-work transitions.

.

So you're 32, a miserable failure, still living at home with Mommy, and you get extended healthcare benefits. My aren't you blessed.

he may be all of that...

but ya gotta love his avatar.

 

[RDD_1210]

it was contradictory...yes....

But my point is my point......

I mean...lets look at it this way...

Do you think there should be a law that everyone who lives within 100 miles of the coast should buy hurrican insurance?

Everyone who lives in tornado alley should buy tornado insurance?

How about this...anyone who lives within 30 miles of a lake, a stream, a river or the ocean should have to, by law, buy flood insurance?

Anyone who lives within 200 miles of a fault line should be forced to buy earthquake insurance?

You know, by the time we are done, we will be spending 75% of our income on insurance....which is something mpost of us will actually NEVER USE.

I hear what you're saying. And I don't like the system we have. Insurance is way to intertwined in to our lives. However, too many people were not getting adequate care because of that system. Unless we had radical change to the system we needed to figure out a way to at least make sure everyone was able to gain access to the shit system we have decided to keep.

Thats where we most definitely disagree.

The way the system was as it pertained to those who could not afford insurance was working fine.
The ER was adequate....they got the care they needed...and yes, the tax payer had to foot the bulk of the bill....but I was OK with that.
Contrary to the rhetoric, no one was denied care in the ER due to lack of insurance...no one died.....yes, there was that one poor sould who died due to begligence of the RN who ignored her...but that was human error....not due to lack of insurance.

As for pre existing conditions...that is another story. That was actually created by the greed of the public. Some could afford insurance but did not buy it until they needed it....gaming the game in other words...so what were the insurance companies supposed to do?

And the fix for that?

If you have a pre existing condition, you are not to be denied if you can prove that you had existing insurance when you were diagnosed with the condition.

For those that cant afford insurance but come down with a serious ailment? You must prove you can not afford insurance and the tax payer will pay for your care.

Yes, it may prove to be costly....but there is no mandate to buy something by the government.

As for me....I am not all wrapped up in the cost to the tax payer....I am a conservative...I am wrapped up in the government telling me that I must buy something...even though I will buy it anyway. It is the principle of it......and it can open some really ugly doors as well.

You're right we do disagree. The system was anything but "working fine". The system was forcing more and more people out every year. Every year more and more people were declaring bankruptcy because of medical bills, and a majority of those HAD insurance. So the system was FAR from working fine. It needed a dramatic overhaul. This legislation didn't go far enough but it did address some of the issues that people faced. I just wished it addressed more.

And the ER was far from an adequate solution for those without insurance. The ER is there to stabilize, not treat. How many people do know get their chemotherapy at the ER? On top of that, getting your care through the ER is one of the most costly ways of going about it. That cost which can't be picked up by the millions of people who don't have insurance is passed on to the rest of us through increased premiums. So yeah, we definitely will have to disagree on just how well the "solution" of using the ER as a catch-all solution for the uninsured was working.

 

[Warrior102]

Exactly!!!



We are raising a generation of pussies!

And you should know. You're too much of a pussy to debate me in public so you chose to "neg" me for my OP in private instead. And for what? Just because I started a thread that you diagreed with? Well you can KMA pussy.

.

You stupid ass.... here is what I said in private "any 26 yr old on mommies insurance is a FUCKING PUSSY"

How does that differ with what I said in "public"?

I guessed he was 30-something, still in Mommy's basement. He's 26? Hell, he's eligible to grow a set and enlist. We have seven or eight wars going on he can help win for Obama.

 

[Claudette]

Wait till the rest of Obamacare kicks in.

Wait till those with insurance see what its going to cost them to cover all those without.

Wonder if Goosey will be so high on Obamacare then.

Guess what? WE'RE ALREADY PAYING FOR THOSE W/O HEALTH CARE.

If someone who can afford HC chooses not to buy a policy goes to the ER the hospital is REQUIRED to treat them. And what happens? They can sue to get back a little of the costs but you and I will have to pay the rest of his or her bill.

By requiring one to purchase HC coverage he or she will have to the personal responsibility (remember those words?) to shoulder their fair share of the costs.

What do you have against requiring personal responsibility? I thought conservatives believed in that.

.

Your right about us having to pay.

But then we have no choice in the matter.

The Clowns in our Govt have decided that those of us that have need to take care of those that don't have not matter the reason. May work for you but it doesn't for me.

Believe me. If I had my way not one dime of my money would go to take care of anyone.

I do believe in personal responsibility which is why I take care of me and mine. Always have and always will.