Thanks Democrats...daughter will have to quit job to stay on insurance.

[sangha]

There is nothing free market about getting shoved off a student health plan because your plan sponsor can't afford to keep you thanks to government mandates, and has the option to shove you on your parents' plan, but quit your job.

Where is the free market in that?

You have become incoherent. Getting shoved off of a health care plan is what the free market is all about. In the free market, there are no laws preventing this.

Explain how a free market would prevent the insurance company from dumping adult children?

Explain how corporations making record profits can't afford to do the business they've made record-setting profits doing?

You're just a welfare state dependent who wants the Nanny State beaureaucrats in DC to socialize the insurance industry

It's a government imposed disruption. It took a system that worked fine for these people and shoved them out of it.

Nope. It was the insurance companies decision.

The free market just bit him in the ass, and he wants the nanny state to bring him a botty

 

[uscitizen]

Man...wonders will never cease.
LIberals simply have zero concept of cause and affect..as well as everything comes with a price tag. As well as has no ability to compare two disctinctly different situations.

How many conservatives here also wanted HCR?? I will go on a limb and say at least 80% of conservatives also want changes. But we are wise enough to understand that the first step was cost containment.

ie single payor or socialized medicine.
As long as health care is a capitalistinc enterprise costs will rise. Or will rise more than if it was socialized.

 

[Revere]

Man...wonders will never cease.
LIberals simply have zero concept of cause and affect..as well as everything comes with a price tag. As well as has no ability to compare two disctinctly different situations.

How many conservatives here also wanted HCR?? I will go on a limb and say at least 80% of conservatives also want changes. But we are wise enough to understand that the first step was cost containment.

ie single payor or socialized medicine.
As long as health care is a free capitalistinc enterprise costs will rise.

Not the point. Obamacare is government imposed disruption.

 

[Revere]

You have become incoherent. Getting shoved off of a health care plan is what the free market is all about. In the free market, there are no laws preventing this.

Explain how a free market would prevent the insurance company from dumping adult children?

Explain how corporations making record profits can't afford to do the business they've made record-setting profits doing?

You're just a welfare state dependent who wants the Nanny State beaureaucrats in DC to socialize the insurance industry

It's a government imposed disruption. It took a system that worked fine for these people and shoved them out of it.

Nope. It was the insurance companies decision.

The free market just bit him in the ass, and he wants the nanny state to bring him a botty

No, they were pushed into doing it because of government mandates.

 

[sangha]

It's a government imposed disruption. It took a system that worked fine for these people and shoved them out of it.

Nope. It was the insurance companies decision.

The free market just bit him in the ass, and he wants the nanny state to bring him a botty

No, they were pushed into doing it because of government mandates.

No, they decided not to offer the coverage. They have the right to charge whatever they want. If she doesn't like it, too bad

 

[shintao]

There is nothing free market about getting shoved off a student health plan because your plan sponsor can't afford to keep you thanks to government mandates, and has the option to shove you on your parents' plan, but quit your job.

Where is the free market in that?

You have become incoherent. Getting shoved off of a health care plan is what the free market is all about. In the free market, there are no laws preventing this.

Explain how a free market would prevent the insurance company from dumping adult children?

Explain how corporations making record profits can't afford to do the business they've made record-setting profits doing?

You're just a welfare state dependent who wants the Nanny State beaureaucrats in DC to socialize the insurance industry

It's a government imposed disruption. It took a system that worked fine for these people and shoved them out of it.

Hmmm. a 39% insurance increase & reduced benefits was working fine? Tell that to the 30 million who didn't have any coverage. See what your fucking greed gets you? No one is disrupted. You still have freedom to buy private health care insurance or options to reduced costs.

 

[Revere]

Nope. It was the insurance companies decision.

The free market just bit him in the ass, and he wants the nanny state to bring him a botty

No, they were pushed into doing it because of government mandates.

No, they decided not to offer the coverage. They have the right to charge whatever they want. If she doesn't like it, too bad

Incorrect. If government did no harm, they could keep what they have. Government forced her plan sponsor's hand.

 

[shintao]

It's a government imposed disruption. It took a system that worked fine for these people and shoved them out of it.

Nope. It was the insurance companies decision.

The free market just bit him in the ass, and he wants the nanny state to bring him a botty

No, they were pushed into doing it because of government mandates.

Really? What government mandates would those be?

 

[Revere]

You have become incoherent. Getting shoved off of a health care plan is what the free market is all about. In the free market, there are no laws preventing this.

Explain how a free market would prevent the insurance company from dumping adult children?

Explain how corporations making record profits can't afford to do the business they've made record-setting profits doing?

You're just a welfare state dependent who wants the Nanny State beaureaucrats in DC to socialize the insurance industry

It's a government imposed disruption. It took a system that worked fine for these people and shoved them out of it.

Hmmm. a 39% insurance increase & reduced benefits was working fine? Tell that to the 30 million who didn't have any coverage. See what your fucking greed gets you? No one is disrupted. You still have freedom to buy private health care insurance or options to reduced costs.

Only 12 million Americans who want health insurance and cannot afford it don't have it.

Doesn't justify wrecking the system the other 288,000,000 use.

 

[Flopper]

Found a link that describes the rule:

"However, the rules allow an exception for employer-sponsored health plans that were in existence on March 23, when President Obama signed the health care bill. In general, such health plans can exclude adult children of workers until 2014 if the children have access to insurance through another employer-sponsored health plan. That might occur, for example, if a 24-year-old child is working for a business that offers health benefits to employees."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/11/health/policy/11health.html

If your plan was not in effect on March 23rd, then this exception does not apply. It also does not apply beginning 2014. I think you will find that your plan will be revised to meet other requirements and this exception will not apply then.

 

[Revere]

Nope. It was the insurance companies decision.

The free market just bit him in the ass, and he wants the nanny state to bring him a botty

No, they were pushed into doing it because of government mandates.

Really? What government mandates would those be?

Coverage for pre-existing conditions, elimination of lifetime caps, coverage of 26 year old dependents, and preventative care mandates.

 

[shintao]

No, they were pushed into doing it because of government mandates.

No, they decided not to offer the coverage. They have the right to charge whatever they want. If she doesn't like it, too bad

Incorrect. If government did no harm, they could keep what they have. Government forced her plan sponsor's hand.

That is impossible. Its all about profits, and getting rid of the luggage.

 

[uscitizen]

Man...wonders will never cease.
LIberals simply have zero concept of cause and affect..as well as everything comes with a price tag. As well as has no ability to compare two disctinctly different situations.

How many conservatives here also wanted HCR?? I will go on a limb and say at least 80% of conservatives also want changes. But we are wise enough to understand that the first step was cost containment.

ie single payor or socialized medicine.
As long as health care is a free capitalistinc enterprise costs will rise.

Not the point. Obamacare is government imposed disruption.

Yep the HCR bill sucked as it came out of congress it was not what anyone wanted except the health care and insurance industry.
Not at all like it was when it first went in.

 

[Revere]

Found a link that describes the rule:

"However, the rules allow an exception for employer-sponsored health plans that were in existence on March 23, when President Obama signed the health care bill. In general, such health plans can exclude adult children of workers until 2014 if the children have access to insurance through another employer-sponsored health plan. That might occur, for example, if a 24-year-old child is working for a business that offers health benefits to employees."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/11/health/policy/11health.html

If your plan was not in effect on March 23rd, then this exception does not apply. It also does not apply beginning 2014. I think you will find that your plan will be revised to meet other requirements and this exception will not apply then.

That's three+ years off. You're screwed until then.

 

[Revere]

ie single payor or socialized medicine.
As long as health care is a free capitalistinc enterprise costs will rise.

Not the point. Obamacare is government imposed disruption.

Yep the HCR bill sucked as it came out of congress it was not what anyone wanted except the health care and insurance industry.
Not at all like it was when it first went in.

And all the Democrats who voted for it.

 

[Revere]

No, they decided not to offer the coverage. They have the right to charge whatever they want. If she doesn't like it, too bad

Incorrect. If government did no harm, they could keep what they have. Government forced her plan sponsor's hand.

That is impossible. Its all about profits, and getting rid of the luggage.

The profit margin for health insurers is 3-4%.

Is that excessive?

 

[shintao]

No, they were pushed into doing it because of government mandates.

Really? What government mandates would those be?

Coverage for pre-existing conditions, elimination of lifetime caps, coverage of 26 year old dependents, and preventative care mandates.

Well, it seems none of those mandates were this families problem, so?? Maybe it was the corporate insurance mandate to un-ass excess baggage? Huh?

 

[Revere]

Really? What government mandates would those be?

Coverage for pre-existing conditions, elimination of lifetime caps, coverage of 26 year old dependents, and preventative care mandates.

Well, it seems none of those mandates were this families problem, so?? Maybe it was the corporate insurance mandate to un-ass excess baggage? Huh?

Yeah, it was. It forced her kid's college to look for ways to throw people off the plan.

 

[shintao]

Incorrect. If government did no harm, they could keep what they have. Government forced her plan sponsor's hand.

That is impossible. Its all about profits, and getting rid of the luggage.

The profit margin for health insurers is 3-4%.

Is that excessive?

Oh, heavens no, it should be 25% at least. The profit margin doesn't decide when the Boardmembers want to buy their kids xmas gifts. It was already shown some of these insurance companies couldn't justify raising the premiums, but who cares? They should be able to gouge customers as much as they want, IMO. And others, who want National health care should be able to get that as well.

 

[Greenbeard]

Well, it seems none of those mandates were this families problem, so?? Maybe it was the corporate insurance mandate to un-ass excess baggage? Huh?

In fairness, the proposed repeal-and-replace bill eliminates annual and lifetime limits and extends dependent coverage (to 25), as well; these are bipartisan ideas. Eliminating cost-sharing for evidence-based preventive care, however, apparently is not.