ObamaCare Waivers: 729!!!!!

[Bern80]

LOL, no one is opting out of "obamacare". There is a lot that is changing in these businesses offered insurance that isn't sufficient to meet the new standards. So instead of saying tough shit, they are issued temporary waivers to give them more time to get in compliance. Then they'll be held to the same standards as everyone else. This is certainly better then just saying tough shit and putting all of those people out of insurance of sky rocketing their costs.

Why the hell should government get to tell a private business what it has to provide in terms of health care? You clearly still don't get it. You think after a one year waiver a business is miraculously going to have the extra money it needs to pay for the health care some asshole in Washington tells them they have to provide?

You know a simple yes would have sufficed as in 'yes, i think basic rules of economics can be broken'. You people are fucking laughable. You claim we need health care reform to stop insurance companies from gouging people and making huge profits yet you support the measures of Obamacare that allow insurance comapnies to gouge people and increase their profits.

I've never said this healthcare reform was perfect. FAR from it. I hate the fact that it gives more customers and strength to private insurance. I support many of the other aspects of this healthcare reform however that far outweigh the negatives.

Now you're flip flopping. You say you don't have an issue with the waivers or think it's telling of anything cause they'll only last a year, yet you claim you would rather the legislation not give more business to the insurance companies. Well that's exactly what filing a waiver and having it granted does. It's a stay of execution if you will that would otherwise allow government to force a business to give more money to an insurance company. You ought to be all for that and repeated fillings of them.

 

[CoolBreeze]

My wife told me to contribute to the Stinker's campaign, now I wish I would have listened to her.

 

[RDD_1210]

Why the hell should government get to tell a private business what it has to provide in terms of health care? You clearly still don't get it. You think after a one year waiver a business is miraculously going to have the extra money it needs to pay for the health care some asshole in Washington tells them they have to provide?

You know a simple yes would have sufficed as in 'yes, i think basic rules of economics can be broken'. You people are fucking laughable. You claim we need health care reform to stop insurance companies from gouging people and making huge profits yet you support the measures of Obamacare that allow insurance comapnies to gouge people and increase their profits.

I've never said this healthcare reform was perfect. FAR from it. I hate the fact that it gives more customers and strength to private insurance. I support many of the other aspects of this healthcare reform however that far outweigh the negatives.

Now you're flip flopping. You say you don't have an issue with the waivers or think it's telling of anything cause they'll only last a year, yet you claim you would rather the legislation not give more business to the insurance companies. Well that's exactly what filing a waiver and having it granted does. It's a stay of execution if you will that would otherwise allow government to force a business to give more money to an insurance company. You ought to be all for that and repeated fillings of them.

How did I flip flop? I don't like the fact that we strengthened insurance companies, but that doesn't change the fact that these waivers are necessary for companies to be able to continue to offer their current sub standard insurance options for another year. Otherwise people under these companies would have no insurance at all or skyrocketed costs immediately. It's not a perfect system by any means, but it's what we have which is still better then pre-reform.

 

[Bern80]

I've never said this healthcare reform was perfect. FAR from it. I hate the fact that it gives more customers and strength to private insurance. I support many of the other aspects of this healthcare reform however that far outweigh the negatives.

Now you're flip flopping. You say you don't have an issue with the waivers or think it's telling of anything cause they'll only last a year, yet you claim you would rather the legislation not give more business to the insurance companies. Well that's exactly what filing a waiver and having it granted does. It's a stay of execution if you will that would otherwise allow government to force a business to give more money to an insurance company. You ought to be all for that and repeated fillings of them.

How did I flip flop? I don't like the fact that we strengthened insurance companies, but that doesn't change the fact that these waivers are necessary for companies to be able to continue to offer their current sub standard insurance options for another year. Otherwise people under these companies would have no insurance at all or skyrocketed costs immediately. It's not a perfect system by any means, but it's what we have which is still better then pre-reform.

Sub standard according to who? You don't get it RDD. You can call them sub standard if you want, the fact is it isn't yours or governments business what a private company offers for benefits. An employer offers what they offer. Work somewhere else if you don't like it.

And you're being pretty naive if you think most of those 700+ companies won't being filig waivers next year. What variable do you think the avg. business is going to be able to change in a year that is miraculously going to financially allow them to offer the government required plans?

 

[RDD_1210]

Now you're flip flopping. You say you don't have an issue with the waivers or think it's telling of anything cause they'll only last a year, yet you claim you would rather the legislation not give more business to the insurance companies. Well that's exactly what filing a waiver and having it granted does. It's a stay of execution if you will that would otherwise allow government to force a business to give more money to an insurance company. You ought to be all for that and repeated fillings of them.

How did I flip flop? I don't like the fact that we strengthened insurance companies, but that doesn't change the fact that these waivers are necessary for companies to be able to continue to offer their current sub standard insurance options for another year. Otherwise people under these companies would have no insurance at all or skyrocketed costs immediately. It's not a perfect system by any means, but it's what we have which is still better then pre-reform.

Sub standard according to who? You don't get it RDD. You can call them sub standard if you want, the fact is it isn't yours or governments business what a private company offers for benefits. An employer offers what they offer. Work somewhere else if you don't like it.

And you're being pretty naive if you think most of those 700+ companies won't being filig waivers next year. What variable do you think the avg. business is going to be able to change in a year that is miraculously going to financially allow them to offer the government required plans?

You keep putting words in my mouth. When did I say none of them well refile for a waiver? Some of course will, but eventually all will meet the same standards.

 

[saveliberty]

Government will keep lowering the standard until companies can meet them. I've seen HUD housing standards, not good. I've watched fuel economy standards, laughable. Consumer credit protections?

The goals of Obamacare were affordability, access and quality. Nothing has changed to-date. There is increased costs, but you probably don't want to address that.

 

[Bern80]

The goals of Obamacare were affordability, access and quality. Nothing has changed to-date. There is increased costs, but you probably don't want to address that.

Those are the things I think we all want and it isn't the first time such problems have been tackled. Those are very accomplishable goals and should be easy to look back historically and see what works and what does't. Basic principles of economics should tell us what will work and what won't. Yet somehow we manged to pass a 2000 page bill that anyone with half a brain and a shred of objective common sense can see has really no chance of accomplishing that.

Things like access to me would be the ability to be treated when you need to be treated and/or in reasonable amount of time. Anyone ought to be able to see that if you increase the demand on a resource accessibility is going to go down, not up.

Anyone ought to be able to see that when you further limit the types of plans a business can purchase and restrict what they must purchase, said plans will become LESS affordable, not more.