Should There Be An "Opt-Out" Clause With The New ACA To Make Right Winger's Happy?

[Greenbeard]

GUARANTEED...all of the young libs who cried for Obamacare would opt-out in a heartbeat to keep from paying $500 a month for insurance.

Young people can get catastrophic coverage (i.e. a coverage level below the bronze--60% actuarial value--level) in the exchanges.

 

[thewrightway]

Ever since the affordable care act was passed, the right wingers have been going into a complete rampage over having to actually grow up and get health insurance, instead of just freeloading off the rest of the hard working americans.

Now to shut them up and for them to keep their "freedom", should there be an opt-out clause? By signing an opt out wavier, this would mean an up front payment for all medical services. If they require expensive treatment, this will all be need to be paid up front (cash, no credit or loans would be applicable) and the same with a 911 call or emergency.

They would have to "carry their papers" such as a bank statement with a debit card or credit card (no checks) to cover the likely $600 ambulance ride, plus $1,000 to walk in the door of an ER. From there the care would be only administered by how much funds they have available. Run out, then you get a wheel chair ride to the curb, no matter how sick. Sound fair?

Black_Label,

Are you seriously that ignorant? You think that it's the right-wingers that don't pay for health insurance? No. It's the lazy liberal Americans that choose to be left-winged because it guarantees them more handouts from the government, i.e. tax-paying Americans. An opt-out clause is absolutely acceptable seeing as how forcing healthcare onto Americans is un-Constitutional as it is. ObamaCare shouldn't even be considered, but since it's obviously been more than just considered, I'd say let's do everything we can to preserve as many individual rights as possible.

 

[bripat9643]

Doctors are not paid to provide a public service. Just like mentioned before, if you don't have an insurance plan to pay them, you need to pay cash up front to do so.
Why should someone else's bill be paid by you that refuses to pay? That doesn't sound right, does it?

I don't have a problem with that. Whether you have to pay up front is another issue. Hospitals and doctors should be free to make any payment options with you they want.

 

[bripat9643]

Okay, then please DEFINE exactly HOW and WHY it's a Ponzi scheme.

The scheme requires a constant supply of new "investors" to pay off current retirees. No private retirement plan founded on such a basis would be legal, and it would inevitably collapse.

 

[dblack]

Its not the law we preferred. Maybe you missed the whole health care debate. The public option was ObamaCare. The Congress refused to pass it. So they compromised and went with RomneyCare.


That's the difference between R's and D's. When R's can't get 100% of what they want - they whine like babies and refuse to do ANYTHING. When D's can't get 100%, they offer compromise. If modern day Republicans had been at the Constitutional convention we'd still be under the Articles of Confederation.

Compromised with who? The insurance industry? Or do you just mean the compromised their integrity? That much seems obvious.

Why don't you just answer for me?

Ok.. I can only guess - but here's what I think happened. Most of them did really want single payer, or at least a public option. I mean, they're Democrats - they gotta love government running things. But they either weren't confident the public would be behind them, or were too afraid to spurn their corporate benefactors.

 

[bripat9643]

Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme. In a Ponzi scheme, the perpetrator steals the money invested and uses new members' money to pay the old ones. That is not what Social Security does.

That is exactly what Social Security does.

 

[GuyPinestra]

It is simply not true that you can't get medical care unless you have insurance. I have never had insurance. I never went without necessary medical care either. I just paid for it. When I had to go into the hospital, for one thing, if you have no insurance the bill is automatically discounted 75%, then I made payments on the small balance.

Lucky you.

most ordinary people couldn't afford to pay for a fucking appendectomy out of pocket.


And the fact your hospital is able to cut you 75% off for NOT having insurance should tell you something about the insurance companies.

It sure does... It tells me that I don't want to deal with the thieving bastards, yet you folks want to FORCE me to...

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

It is simply not true that you can't get medical care unless you have insurance. I have never had insurance. I never went without necessary medical care either. I just paid for it. When I had to go into the hospital, for one thing, if you have no insurance the bill is automatically discounted 75%, then I made payments on the small balance.

Lucky you.

most ordinary people couldn't afford to pay for a fucking appendectomy out of pocket.


And the fact your hospital is able to cut you 75% off for NOT having insurance should tell you something about the insurance companies.

Now the thieving bastards will be required to spend 80-85% of the premium on actual health care.

It sure does... It tells me that I don't want to deal with the thieving bastards, yet you folks want to FORCE me to...

The fact you erroneously believe an insurmountable health care expense could not possibly ever happen to you does not absolve you of your personal responsibility.

And no one's forcing you into anything. You're quite welcome to pay the penalty tax instead.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme. In a Ponzi scheme, the perpetrator steals the money invested and uses new members' money to pay the old ones. That is not what Social Security does.

That is exactly what Social Security does.

No, it doesn't. Its not "stealing money" when the People consent to be taxed.

 

[Pho_King]

Doctors are not paid to provide a public service. Just like mentioned before, if you don't have an insurance plan to pay them, you need to pay cash up front to do so.
Why should someone else's bill be paid by you that refuses to pay? That doesn't sound right, does it?

I don't have a problem with that. Whether you have to pay up front is another issue. Hospitals and doctors should be free to make any payment options with you they want.

Are you crazy? Individuals simply cannot be trusted to make their own decisions. That's why we have government!

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Doctors are not paid to provide a public service. Just like mentioned before, if you don't have an insurance plan to pay them, you need to pay cash up front to do so.
Why should someone else's bill be paid by you that refuses to pay? That doesn't sound right, does it?

I don't have a problem with that. Whether you have to pay up front is another issue. Hospitals and doctors should be free to make any payment options with you they want.

Are you crazy? Individuals simply cannot be trusted to make their own decisions. That's why we have government!

Are you crazy? Individuals should be allowed to do whatever they want, no matter how much it cost the rest of us.

 

[Pho_King]

I don't have a problem with that. Whether you have to pay up front is another issue. Hospitals and doctors should be free to make any payment options with you they want.

Are you crazy? Individuals simply cannot be trusted to make their own decisions. That's why we have government!

Are you crazy? Individuals should be allowed to do whatever they want, no matter how much it cost the rest of us.

It does not cost you a dime if I do not have health insurance.

 

[whitehall]

Remember the opt-out concept when the little army of suits comes knocking on your door to flash their IRS credentials as they tap your bank account and pension and haul away your property for non-compliance with a freaking 3,000 page law that few people read and nobody understands.

 

[Pho_King]

Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme. In a Ponzi scheme, the perpetrator steals the money invested and uses new members' money to pay the old ones. That is not what Social Security does.

That is exactly what Social Security does.

No, it doesn't. Its not "stealing money" when the People consent to be taxed.

Correct. That is the difference between social security and a ponzi scheme. In a ponzi scheme, no one can tax and print to keep the scheme alive. Excellent point.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Lucky you.

most ordinary people couldn't afford to pay for a fucking appendectomy out of pocket.


And the fact your hospital is able to cut you 75% off for NOT having insurance should tell you something about the insurance companies.

Now the thieving bastards will be required to spend 80-85% of the premium on actual health care.

It sure does... It tells me that I don't want to deal with the thieving bastards, yet you folks want to FORCE me to...

The fact you erroneously believe an insurmountable health care expense could not possibly ever happen to you does not absolve you of your personal responsibility.

And no one's forcing you into anything. You're quite welcome to pay the penalty tax instead.

The fact that you erroneously believe that a third party bureaucrat has the right to define my personal responsibility illustrates your right to be as dense as a post.

ETA: The vast majority of insurance companies ALREADY pay out over 80% in claims, idiot!

 

[Black_Label]

Are you crazy? Individuals simply cannot be trusted to make their own decisions. That's why we have government!

Are you crazy? Individuals should be allowed to do whatever they want, no matter how much it cost the rest of us.

It does not cost you a dime if I do not have health insurance.

Deadbeat right wingers like you without insurance costs those that actually work for a living a fortune from higher insurance premiums to pay for you trash.

 

[JoeNormal]

Ever since the affordable care act was passed, the right wingers have been going into a complete rampage over having to actually grow up and get health insurance, instead of just freeloading off the rest of the hard working americans.

Now to shut them up and for them to keep their "freedom", should there be an opt-out clause? By signing an opt out wavier, this would mean an up front payment for all medical services. If they require expensive treatment, this will all be need to be paid up front (cash, no credit or loans would be applicable) and the same with a 911 call or emergency.

They would have to "carry their papers" such as a bank statement with a debit card or credit card (no checks) to cover the likely $600 ambulance ride, plus $1,000 to walk in the door of an ER. From there the care would be only administered by how much funds they have available. Run out, then you get a wheel chair ride to the curb, no matter how sick. Sound fair?

I wish the cons in my area could opt out of the educational system. Typical self-sufficent conservative demographic in suburban Utah: 5 kids, single (relatvely low) income source, deductions for every kid plus tithing. Contribute about $5 per year to the system while costing many thousands.

 

[Pheonixops]

How about an opt IN. If you want obamacare....want to take advantage of it..... PAY for it.

When it was first presented during the primaries, I thought that was what separated his plan from Hillary's.

 

[GuyPinestra]

How about an opt IN. If you want obamacare....want to take advantage of it..... PAY for it.

When it was first presented during the primaries, I thought that was what separated his plan from Hillary's.

Surprise, surprise, surprise...

 

[Pheonixops]

How about an opt IN. If you want obamacare....want to take advantage of it..... PAY for it.

When it was first presented during the primaries, I thought that was what separated his plan from Hillary's.

Surprise, surprise, surprise...

It's not the first time for people from ALL sides of the political spectrum to be surprised or disappointed in some of the promises that were modified or not kept by the candidates they supported.