Republican: "Thank God For Obamacare!"

[natstew]

Nice. Good for them.

I'm waiting for a wingnut to try to debunk this as false, the way that every single anti-Obamacare story has been thoroughly debunked.

You're a liar, and shame on you for quoting the scumbag liar Harry Reid's despicable lies from the Podium of the Senate.

 

[natstew]

. I do realize that by "subsidize" you probably are referring to the use of government funds to offset losses by the insurance companies. I am not certain if that is true or not. However, If only half of the new enrollees are paying premiums averaging 70 bucks a month each, that's no chump change.

"government funds" wtf, are you on drugs? The government doesn't have any "funds", it is taxpayer money that is footing the bill. Anyone getting anything subsidized means someone else is paying for it; anyone who is paying more is paying for it. Period. It's only going to get worse. There is no "probably" about any of that.

Please point to evidence of conservatives going apeshit over taxpayers subsidizing the most profitable company in human history, Exxon/Mobil.

Subsidizing? Exxon/Mobil gets the same tax incentives as all other corporations, no more, no less. Exxon/Mobil makes less profit than the Government collects in taxes from them. Or, to say it differently, Exxon/Mobil pays over 50% taxes on profits.

 

[natstew]

Please point to evidence of conservatives going apeshit over taxpayers subsidizing the most profitable company in human history, Exxon/Mobil.

Most profitable? That 8% profit average is spread among millions of stock owners. If you're on a retirement plan you probably own some Exxon/Mobil stock, MOfuckingRON!!

Exxon Mobil Profit Margin (Quarterly) (XOM)

 

[Synthaholic]

Nice. Good for them.

I'm waiting for a wingnut to try to debunk this as false, the way that every single anti-Obamacare story has been thoroughly debunked.

It can be beneficial, but people still want to choose to buy insurance, not be forced by govt.

People in hell want ice water, too. There are basic requirements for living in a society and mooching off the taxpayers in case you get sick or hurt is not acceptable.

 

[Synthaholic]

The policy that I had got cancelled because of Obamcare so yes my premiums and deductibles both rose because of it. If it wasn't law I would have the same insurance policy I had for the past 10 years and was perfectly happy with.

Putting aside your bullshit 3000 figure, your policy wasn't cancelled because of Obamacare.

It was cancelled because your insurance company decided to cancel it instead of modifying it.

We all get statements and notices from banks regularly saying that they are changing their conditions. We get emails saying "eBay is changing their site use terms" and such.

So there was no reason why insurance companies couldn't have just informed you that they have amended your policy so that you are now covered for per-existing conditions, etc.

It was cancelled because the government made up some bullshit minimum coverage mandates.

No, it was cancelled because the corporation decided to cancel it instead of modify it.

It's really simple.

 

[Synthaholic]

Nice. Good for them.

I'm waiting for a wingnut to try to debunk this as false, the way that every single anti-Obamacare story has been thoroughly debunked.

You're a liar, and shame on you for quoting the scumbag liar Harry Reid's despicable lies from the Podium of the Senate.

Show me one, then.

 

[driveby]

The democrat party thrives on exploiting the people that mooch off the taxpayers, numbnuts........

 

[Synthaholic]

"government funds" wtf, are you on drugs? The government doesn't have any "funds", it is taxpayer money that is footing the bill. Anyone getting anything subsidized means someone else is paying for it; anyone who is paying more is paying for it. Period. It's only going to get worse. There is no "probably" about any of that.

Please point to evidence of conservatives going apeshit over taxpayers subsidizing the most profitable company in human history, Exxon/Mobil.

Subsidizing? Exxon/Mobil gets the same tax incentives as all other corporations, no more, no less. Exxon/Mobil makes less profit than the Government collects in taxes from them. Or, to say it differently, Exxon/Mobil pays over 50% taxes on profits.

$7 Billion per year, dope:

America's Most Obvious Tax Reform Idea: Kill the Oil and Gas Subsidies

In a world where $100-a-barrel oil is here to stay, there's no need to pad the industry's bottom line.
​

 

[driveby]

Putting aside your bullshit 3000 figure, your policy wasn't cancelled because of Obamacare.

It was cancelled because your insurance company decided to cancel it instead of modifying it.

We all get statements and notices from banks regularly saying that they are changing their conditions. We get emails saying "eBay is changing their site use terms" and such.

So there was no reason why insurance companies couldn't have just informed you that they have amended your policy so that you are now covered for per-existing conditions, etc.

It was cancelled because the government made up some bullshit minimum coverage mandates.

No, it was cancelled because the corporation decided to cancel it instead of modify it.

It's really simple.

If a plan is "modified" to fit the government mandate, causing the premium to increase, the "current plan" is cancelled. The mandate came from the government, not the corporation.

It's really simple........

 

[driveby]

Please point to evidence of conservatives going apeshit over taxpayers subsidizing the most profitable company in human history, Exxon/Mobil.

Subsidizing? Exxon/Mobil gets the same tax incentives as all other corporations, no more, no less. Exxon/Mobil makes less profit than the Government collects in taxes from them. Or, to say it differently, Exxon/Mobil pays over 50% taxes on profits.

$7 Billion per year, dope:

America's Most Obvious Tax Reform Idea: Kill the Oil and Gas Subsidies

In a world where $100-a-barrel oil is here to stay, there's no need to pad the industry's bottom line.
​

Well done, comrade.......

 

[Pop23]

Let me get this straight, cuz this is awfully confusing.

Everyone must purchase health insurance because it is such an important factor in our economy. If everyone buys health insurance that will drive down the overall cost of health care?

Those that refuse should pay a fine? Is that also correct?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Putting aside your bullshit 3000 figure, your policy wasn't cancelled because of Obamacare.

It was cancelled because your insurance company decided to cancel it instead of modifying it.

We all get statements and notices from banks regularly saying that they are changing their conditions. We get emails saying "eBay is changing their site use terms" and such.

So there was no reason why insurance companies couldn't have just informed you that they have amended your policy so that you are now covered for per-existing conditions, etc.

It was cancelled because the government made up some bullshit minimum coverage mandates.

No, it was cancelled because the corporation decided to cancel it instead of modify it.

It's really simple.

My brother had an individual policy from BC. It was fairly minimal, very affordable, covered what he needed (and nothing he didn't need), he has used is a lot in the past ten years including hospitalization.

In order for him to keep that policy no changes of any significance could be made to it and even at that, he would only enjoy that grandfather status for a short period of time. Since obama waved his magic wand, my brother gets to keep his original policy till June at which time it will change to comply with the law. However, his premium has doubled and his deductible nearly doubled because the insurance companies don't base their rates on the waving of magic wands, they were based months and months ago on the (un)aca ... that obama has continuously changed/delayed.

Saying that the insurance companies are the ones responsible for cancelling his (and millions of other) policy(ies) is nothing short of ridiculous. The companies have no choice but to comply with the law that is the (un)aca, so they complied and by doing so the original policies were effectively cancelled. Again, the insurance companies have to comply with the law so existing policies that do not meet the 'standards' of the (un)aca have no place to go but away. Cancelled. They are no more. They have ceased to be. They are an ex-policy!

Spin it seven ways to Tuesday if you'd like but you are wrong. This isn't on the insurance companies it's on the Ds, obama and the ever pesky (un)aca that you guys love so much. You wanted it, you voted for it, you got it. Suck it up, buttercup.

 

[emilynghiem]

Interesting that you choose to see it that way as opposed to the possibility that he was being way overcharged with COBRA.

Is that because corporations can do no wrong in your eyes?

And where do you get the certainty that he is getting subsidized?

Of course he was being over charged for COBRA. And?

wtf?

"the Richardsons only pay $136 a month for health insurance that covers them both." is cheap cheap, they are being subsidized.

You've been properly conditioned.

So it's cheaper and better to subsidize insurance through govt than to
invest resources into cost-effective medical education and services directly?

That's fine if this is the better solution.
I just want to know if it's only politics preventing agreement on this as the solution,
or if it is more cost-effective to invest directly in education, facilities and services
and remove insurance from the equation except as an optional choice.

Hasn't it been shown financially that investing the same money spent on insurance
would produce greater dividends if invested in "other forms of savings" (eg, compare
real estate, where investments pay off greater returns faster than 401K so people retire early.
wouldn't that model work better for paying for health care than govt mandates on insurance?).

So if the govt was going to choose a "middle man" system to invest in
to cover medical costs and health care,
wouldn't OTHER venues of investment actually pay off better than insurance?

Has this been discussed at all?

 

[Synthaholic]

It was cancelled because the government made up some bullshit minimum coverage mandates.

No, it was cancelled because the corporation decided to cancel it instead of modify it.

It's really simple.

My brother had an individual policy from BC. It was fairly minimal, very affordable, covered what he needed (and nothing he didn't need), he has used is a lot in the past ten years including hospitalization.

In order for him to keep that policy no changes of any significance could be made to it and even at that, he would only enjoy that grandfather status for a short period of time. Since obama waved his magic wand, my brother gets to keep his original policy till June at which time it will change to comply with the law. However, his premium has doubled and his deductible nearly doubled because the insurance companies don't base their rates on the waving of magic wands, they were based months and months ago on the (un)aca ... that obama has continuously changed/delayed.

Saying that the insurance companies are the ones responsible for cancelling his (and millions of other) policy(ies) is nothing short of ridiculous. The companies have no choice but to comply with the law that is the (un)aca, so they complied and by doing so the original policies were effectively cancelled. Again, the insurance companies have to comply with the law so existing policies that do not meet the 'standards' of the (un)aca have no place to go but away. Cancelled. They are no more. They have ceased to be. They are an ex-policy!

Spin it seven ways to Tuesday if you'd like but you are wrong. This isn't on the insurance companies it's on the Ds, obama and the ever pesky (un)aca that you guys love so much. You wanted it, you voted for it, you got it. Suck it up, buttercup.

You're actually saying that insurance corporation profits are sacrosanct and cannot be part of the equation.

 

[driveby]

No, it was cancelled because the corporation decided to cancel it instead of modify it.

It's really simple.

My brother had an individual policy from BC. It was fairly minimal, very affordable, covered what he needed (and nothing he didn't need), he has used is a lot in the past ten years including hospitalization.

In order for him to keep that policy no changes of any significance could be made to it and even at that, he would only enjoy that grandfather status for a short period of time. Since obama waved his magic wand, my brother gets to keep his original policy till June at which time it will change to comply with the law. However, his premium has doubled and his deductible nearly doubled because the insurance companies don't base their rates on the waving of magic wands, they were based months and months ago on the (un)aca ... that obama has continuously changed/delayed.

Saying that the insurance companies are the ones responsible for cancelling his (and millions of other) policy(ies) is nothing short of ridiculous. The companies have no choice but to comply with the law that is the (un)aca, so they complied and by doing so the original policies were effectively cancelled. Again, the insurance companies have to comply with the law so existing policies that do not meet the 'standards' of the (un)aca have no place to go but away. Cancelled. They are no more. They have ceased to be. They are an ex-policy!

Spin it seven ways to Tuesday if you'd like but you are wrong. This isn't on the insurance companies it's on the Ds, obama and the ever pesky (un)aca that you guys love so much. You wanted it, you voted for it, you got it. Suck it up, buttercup.

You're actually saying that insurance corporation profits are sacrosanct and cannot be part of the equation.

More coverage costs more money, ALMOST any idiot knows that. Democrats put forth the false notion that it's the insurance companies raising their rates on purpose, to increase profits. Good thing democrats have millions of useful idiots to help foster this notion because people with sense aren't buying it........

 

[LoneLaugher]

Unbelievable. Every nutter here is (or intimately knows) someone who had a shit health insurance plan. Uncanny!

 

[bedowin62]

Democrat who helped WRITE the ACA: "IT'S A TRAINWRECK"

idiots and hypocrites

 

[driveby]

With the millions of plans that were cancelled, i can see how it would be nearly impossible to know anyone that had an individual policy......

On the other hand, i love how all the nutters here think that's impossible and it's great that Obama just wants everyone to have insurance........

 

[Zoom-boing]

Unbelievable. Every nutter here is (or intimately knows) someone who had a shit health insurance plan. Uncanny!

My brother's plan wasn't shit, wasn't "junk", wasn't sub-par, he had it for years, it covered what he needed (and nothing he didn't need), he used the shit out of it including hospitalization.

But that just can't be! zomG! You're lying! Go get me his plan name and all pertinent information! obama!!

The people who have posted about these perfectly good plans being cancelled due to the (un)aca aren't lying.

But please do continue to rant. It's fun to watch.

 

[Zoom-boing]

No, it was cancelled because the corporation decided to cancel it instead of modify it.

It's really simple.

My brother had an individual policy from BC. It was fairly minimal, very affordable, covered what he needed (and nothing he didn't need), he has used is a lot in the past ten years including hospitalization.

In order for him to keep that policy no changes of any significance could be made to it and even at that, he would only enjoy that grandfather status for a short period of time. Since obama waved his magic wand, my brother gets to keep his original policy till June at which time it will change to comply with the law. However, his premium has doubled and his deductible nearly doubled because the insurance companies don't base their rates on the waving of magic wands, they were based months and months ago on the (un)aca ... that obama has continuously changed/delayed.

Saying that the insurance companies are the ones responsible for cancelling his (and millions of other) policy(ies) is nothing short of ridiculous. The companies have no choice but to comply with the law that is the (un)aca, so they complied and by doing so the original policies were effectively cancelled. Again, the insurance companies have to comply with the law so existing policies that do not meet the 'standards' of the (un)aca have no place to go but away. Cancelled. They are no more. They have ceased to be. They are an ex-policy!

Spin it seven ways to Tuesday if you'd like but you are wrong. This isn't on the insurance companies it's on the Ds, obama and the ever pesky (un)aca that you guys love so much. You wanted it, you voted for it, you got it. Suck it up, buttercup.

You're actually saying that insurance corporation profits are sacrosanct and cannot be part of the equation.

I'm saying that due to the (un)aca insurance companies must comply (do you even understand that part??) with the law, must provide certain 'essential benefits' which equates to MORE COVERAGE. MORE COVERAGE costs MORE MONEY. Oh, you think they should just you know, provide more coverage but not charge more? I"m sorry you're having such a difficult time comprehending this. But hey, o-bam-a!, right?