Republicans are pushing a new bill to let Americans keep their health insurance plans

[g5000]

ObamaCare is completely dependent on the young and healthy paying more than their fair share. That is why they are being forced to buy more insurance than they feel they need.

It is astonishing to see supporters of this plan talk out of one side of their face calling such people "deadbeats" and "freeloaders", and then talk out of the other side of their face saying they need to force these same people to pay more than their fair share to support high school dropouts.

It fascinates me their heads don't explode from cognitive dissonance. The complexity of mental compartmentalization this kind of self-contradictory rhetoric requires is a study in psychological dementia.

 

[ron4342]

Consider this, a woman in Florida is losing her insurance plan. Here are some details:
That includes 56-year-old Dianne Barrette. Last month, she received a letter from Blue Cross Blue Shield informing her as of January 2014, she would lose her current plan. Barrette pays $54 a month. The new plan she's being offered would run $591 a month -- 10 times more than what she currently pays.
She was paying $54 dollars a month. Exactly how much insurance are you buying when you pay $54 dollars a month. Read the article at the following link for prospective.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2012/03/junk-health-insurance/index.htm
The link is from Consumer Reports which is as non-partisan as one can get.

Also, that $591 figure doesn't take into account the subsidies that this person is allowed. I would not believe one thing that is being said about these exchanges. We all need to talk with them for our own particular situations.

Why does it have to talk about the subsidies? Assuming she even has any, the bottom line is that a policy she once had that only cost $54 is now costing more than $500 more a month because of this law. Regardless of whether or not she is paying the whole difference or the rest of us are picking up the tab for her, how the hell is that a win for anyone, you drooling drone?

You apparently can not see how this problem affects you. Let me try to explain.
Suppose this gal keeps her $54/month policy and suppose she has a catastrophic accident or illness. Such an illness can create bills up in the mid six figure range. $54 policies come with limits which means the insurance company MIGHT pay a $1000 or two. THERE IS NO WAY AN INSURANCE COMPANY IS GOING TO PAY A $400,000 BILL FOR A PERSON WITH A $54 DOLLAR A MONTH POLICY. The rest of the bill falls on her back. If she cannot or will not pay her bill the hospital suffers a huge loss. To cover that loss they raise their rates. After all, hospitals are business' and they are there to make a profit. If the hospital raises its rates the insurance company has to pay more. They are a business also and their goal is to make money. To cover the hospitals raise in rates the insurance company must raise its rates. In other words, IF YOU ARE ACTING RESPONSIBILY AND HAVE PURCHASES INSURANCE TO PROTECT YOUSELF YOU ARE NOW FORCED TO PAY HIGHER RATES BECAUSE SOME DEADBEAT PURCHASED A $54/MON POLICY. I'm curious, do you like the idea of watching your insurance rates go up because other people are irresponsibly? I don't.

 

[Newby]

And I am especially tired of watching my insurance costing more and more because of the deadbeats. Maybe you want to pay for people who arn't paying their bills, BUT I DO NOT TO PAY OTHERS PEOPLE'S MEDICAL BILLS ESPECIALLY IF IT CAN BE AVOIDED.

If you're not getting Obamacare subsidies, you ARE paying for other people's medical bills.

Not only that, healthcare costs will not go down because of it. Let's see how much costs drop once hospitals are no longer not getting paid for services by people who don't have insurance. Hospitals won't lose, insurance companies won't lose, so someone has to lose, and it will be the consumer/tax payer. As usual.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

And she apparently decided that was good enough coverage for her. How do you know she doesn't have the money available to cover what the insurance wouldn't in the case of a catastrophic event?

Again, I ask you who the hell you are to decide how much insurance someone else needs? How about you and everyone else who thinks they know what's good for everybody else just step the **** off and find a way to make your own lives more fulfilling?

If she has the money to cover a catastrophic event she will have funds in the mid to high six figure range which is more than enough to purchase decent insurance.

Ah, so instead of having her own money available to pay for her own possible medical costs (that she may never even have to do, mind you) now she can throw it all away on overly expensive insurance premiums into the pockets of multi-billion dollar insurance companies that she may never need. Damn, you're a ******* economic genius. They ought to put you in charge of the Federal Reserve.

Also if she doesn't have the money to pay for the insurance there are subsidies built into ACA. Somehow you people always seem to forget that little detail.

Actually, I've asked two people now to explain how a $54 policy now costing $550 is a win for America and our health care system? Who cares if it's subsidized or not? Either she is paying the full cost or the rest of our picking it up for her? The bottom line is it's now costing $500 more a month where as it didn't before. Just because it might be "subsidized" doesn't mean the remaining amount just magically disappears. Somebody is picking up the cost. Again, ******* economic genius, aren't you?

I will tell you why I have decided she needs more insurance. She needs to have more insurance because I am tired as hell from paying for deadbeats who refuse to buy decent insurance and then go to the hospital and run up huge bills they cannot pay. I am tired as hell from watching hospitals boost up bills to pay for the deadbeats who can't or won't act in a responsible manner. And I am especially tired of watching my insurance costing more and more because of the deadbeats.

You know nothing about this woman. In fact, you just said a few minutes ago that if she has the means to pay out what her current policy doesn't cover she's not a problem.

Maybe you want to pay for people who arn't paying their bills, BUT I DO NOT TO PAY OTHERS PEOPLE'S MEDICAL BILLS ESPECIALLY IF IT CAN BE AVOIDED.

That's odd because that's exactly what you're doing by supporting this law, paying other people's medical bills, dipshit.

You know what's ironic? You drooling Obamabots like to point your fingers at Republicans and conservatives and accuse them of fascist behavior and yet here you all are falling over yourselves to support a president who just put every single American under the thumb of Big Insurance, who were the enemy until Obama told you they weren't. You just can't make this shit up. Partisans have absolutely no morals or integrity and are completely void of critical thinking skills. You just follow your marching orders.

 

[Newby]

Also, that $591 figure doesn't take into account the subsidies that this person is allowed. I would not believe one thing that is being said about these exchanges. We all need to talk with them for our own particular situations.

Why does it have to talk about the subsidies? Assuming she even has any, the bottom line is that a policy she once had that only cost $54 is now costing more than $500 more a month because of this law. Regardless of whether or not she is paying the whole difference or the rest of us are picking up the tab for her, how the hell is that a win for anyone, you drooling drone?

You apparently can not see how this problem affects you. Let me try to explain.
Suppose this gal keeps her $54/month policy and suppose she has a catastrophic accident or illness. Such an illness can create bills up in the mid six figure range. $54 policies come with limits which means the insurance company MIGHT pay a $1000 or two. THERE IS NO WAY AN INSURANCE COMPANY IS GOING TO PAY A $400,000 BILL FOR A PERSON WITH A $54 DOLLAR A MONTH POLICY. The rest of the bill falls on her back. If she cannot or will not pay her bill the hospital suffers a huge loss. To cover that loss they raise their rates. After all, hospitals are business' and they are there to make a profit. If the hospital raises its rates the insurance company has to pay more. They are a business also and their goal is to make money. To cover the hospitals raise in rates the insurance company must raise its rates. In other words, IF YOU ARE ACTING RESPONSIBILY AND HAVE PURCHASES INSURANCE TO PROTECT YOUSELF YOU ARE NOW FORCED TO PAY HIGHER RATES BECAUSE SOME DEADBEAT PURCHASED A $54/MON POLICY. I'm curious, do you like the idea of watching your insurance rates go up because other people are irresponsibly? I don't.

So hospital rates will go way down once Obamacare is enacted? By how much?

 

[ron4342]

BEFORE: We will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor you will be able to keep your doctor. If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your healthcare plan.

AFTER: "I am tired as hell from paying for deadbeats who refuse to buy decent insurance." <--- This is what Democrats really think of the American people.

No, that is not what I or Democrats think of the American people. It is what I think of the deadbeats who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and who expect others to bail them out. It is what I think of people who can afford insurance but chose to gamble on not getting sick and then sticking it to those who acted responsibly and purchased decent insurance.
I have good insurance and when I go to the hospital my bills will be covered by my insurance company. I will not cost you or anyone one penny. I am tired of those who could give a shit that others have to pay their way because they were to cheap to do so or who thought they could game the system and get away with it. My question is, why don't you feel the same way? Do you like watching your insurance rates rise because others refuse to purchase insurance? I don't.

 

[Newby]

BEFORE: We will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor you will be able to keep your doctor. If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your healthcare plan.

AFTER: "I am tired as hell from paying for deadbeats who refuse to buy decent insurance." <--- This is what Democrats really think of the American people.

No, that is not what I or Democrats think of the American people. It is what I think of the deadbeats who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and who expect others to bail them out. It is what I think of people who can afford insurance but chose to gamble on not getting sick and then sticking it to those who acted responsibly and purchased decent insurance.
I have good insurance and when I go to the hospital my bills will be covered by my insurance company. I will not cost you or anyone one penny. I am tired of those who could give a shit that others have to pay their way because they were to cheap to do so or who thought they could game the system and get away with it. My question is, why don't you feel the same way? Do you like watching your insurance rates rise because others refuse to purchase insurance? I don't.

They are not the reasons for high healthcare costs, insurance companies are. And why aren't rates being quoted much lower then since anticipated costs are going to go way down now?

 

[Newby]

Why does it have to talk about the subsidies? Assuming she even has any, the bottom line is that a policy she once had that only cost $54 is now costing more than $500 more a month because of this law. Regardless of whether or not she is paying the whole difference or the rest of us are picking up the tab for her, how the hell is that a win for anyone, you drooling drone?

You apparently can not see how this problem affects you. Let me try to explain.
Suppose this gal keeps her $54/month policy and suppose she has a catastrophic accident or illness. Such an illness can create bills up in the mid six figure range. $54 policies come with limits which means the insurance company MIGHT pay a $1000 or two. THERE IS NO WAY AN INSURANCE COMPANY IS GOING TO PAY A $400,000 BILL FOR A PERSON WITH A $54 DOLLAR A MONTH POLICY. The rest of the bill falls on her back. If she cannot or will not pay her bill the hospital suffers a huge loss. To cover that loss they raise their rates. After all, hospitals are business' and they are there to make a profit. If the hospital raises its rates the insurance company has to pay more. They are a business also and their goal is to make money. To cover the hospitals raise in rates the insurance company must raise its rates. In other words, IF YOU ARE ACTING RESPONSIBILY AND HAVE PURCHASES INSURANCE TO PROTECT YOUSELF YOU ARE NOW FORCED TO PAY HIGHER RATES BECAUSE SOME DEADBEAT PURCHASED A $54/MON POLICY. I'm curious, do you like the idea of watching your insurance rates go up because other people are irresponsibly? I don't.

So hospital rates will go way down once Obamacare is enacted? By how much?

Well? How much will they go down now?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Obama would never sign it. He doesn't WANT anyone to keep their current plan. The whole house of cards is founded on the haves paying for the have-nots.

Nope. The whole house of cards is that the insurance companies are being forced to accept and write policies for pre-existing conditions and allow for procedures they have either historically fought or denied.

 

[ron4342]

Why does it have to talk about the subsidies? Assuming she even has any, the bottom line is that a policy she once had that only cost $54 is now costing more than $500 more a month because of this law. Regardless of whether or not she is paying the whole difference or the rest of us are picking up the tab for her, how the hell is that a win for anyone, you drooling drone?

You apparently can not see how this problem affects you. Let me try to explain.
Suppose this gal keeps her $54/month policy and suppose she has a catastrophic accident or illness. Such an illness can create bills up in the mid six figure range. $54 policies come with limits which means the insurance company MIGHT pay a $1000 or two. THERE IS NO WAY AN INSURANCE COMPANY IS GOING TO PAY A $400,000 BILL FOR A PERSON WITH A $54 DOLLAR A MONTH POLICY. The rest of the bill falls on her back. If she cannot or will not pay her bill the hospital suffers a huge loss. To cover that loss they raise their rates. After all, hospitals are business' and they are there to make a profit. If the hospital raises its rates the insurance company has to pay more. They are a business also and their goal is to make money. To cover the hospitals raise in rates the insurance company must raise its rates. In other words, IF YOU ARE ACTING RESPONSIBILY AND HAVE PURCHASES INSURANCE TO PROTECT YOUSELF YOU ARE NOW FORCED TO PAY HIGHER RATES BECAUSE SOME DEADBEAT PURCHASED A $54/MON POLICY. I'm curious, do you like the idea of watching your insurance rates go up because other people are irresponsibly? I don't.

So hospital rates will go way down once Obamacare is enacted? By how much?

Hospital rates will probably not go down. However, the rate at which hospital rates were raising has slowed down since ACA was enacted.

"A series of recent government reports and industry analyses have shown a decrease in overall health care costs. In May, a Congressional Budget Office report showed a $618 billion drop in projected Medicare and Medicaid spending over the next decade. A recent study by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) showed that for Americans who receive health insurance through their employers, premiums rose 3% from 2011 to 2012, the lowest increase since 1996."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/07/29/administration-lowered-premiums-white-house/2596453/

 

[ron4342]

BEFORE: We will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor you will be able to keep your doctor. If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your healthcare plan.

AFTER: "I am tired as hell from paying for deadbeats who refuse to buy decent insurance." <--- This is what Democrats really think of the American people.

No, that is not what I or Democrats think of the American people. It is what I think of the deadbeats who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and who expect others to bail them out. It is what I think of people who can afford insurance but chose to gamble on not getting sick and then sticking it to those who acted responsibly and purchased decent insurance.
I have good insurance and when I go to the hospital my bills will be covered by my insurance company. I will not cost you or anyone one penny. I am tired of those who could give a shit that others have to pay their way because they were to cheap to do so or who thought they could game the system and get away with it. My question is, why don't you feel the same way? Do you like watching your insurance rates rise because others refuse to purchase insurance? I don't.

They are not the reasons for high healthcare costs, insurance companies are. And why aren't rates being quoted much lower then since anticipated costs are going to go way down now?

Apparently you do not understand cause and effect. You claim the high costs are due to the insurance companies.
Follow the reasoning below.
A person without insurance runs up a huge hospital bill.
Because the bill will not be paid the hospital will lose money.
To stay in business the hospital raises its rates to cover the loss.
An increase in hospital rates means the insurance company is forced to raise their rates.
The person who didn't pay their bill forces me to pay more insurance.
Should you or I have to pay higher insurance because somebody either can't or refuses to purchase insurance? I don't.
Oh, and I don't recall there being any talk about rates going down. What Obama is trying to do is to slow the speed at which rates were raising. Prior to ACA the rates were raising at a rate much faster than the inflation rate.

 

[g5000]

BEFORE: We will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor you will be able to keep your doctor. If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your healthcare plan.

AFTER: "I am tired as hell from paying for deadbeats who refuse to buy decent insurance." <--- This is what Democrats really think of the American people.

No, that is not what I or Democrats think of the American people. It is what I think of the deadbeats who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and who expect others to bail them out. It is what I think of people who can afford insurance but chose to gamble on not getting sick and then sticking it to those who acted responsibly and purchased decent insurance.

So you must REALLY hate high school dropouts who don't even have any insurance at all and who stick it to all of us who acted responsibly and stayed in school.

And now they want everyone else to carry them on our backs.

Those are your real freeloaders. That's who you want the young and healthy to carry. You are just trying to justify it in your feeble mind, to assuage your conscience. You have to find a way to invert reality to justify robbing other people to carry the real freeloaders.

No one is fooled by you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And Newby and Ron are making the case for a national health care system.

Guys, either we find a way for a sensible corporatist mix that allows the govt to pick up where it needs to, or we are going to end up with a full scale national government system.

Either you guys find a way to make a consensus, or the government will gladly step in.

And, no, we are not going backward to before ACA. The lack of GOP action for twenty years has closed that door forever.

 

[ron4342]

And she apparently decided that was good enough coverage for her. How do you know she doesn't have the money available to cover what the insurance wouldn't in the case of a catastrophic event?

Again, I ask you who the hell you are to decide how much insurance someone else needs? How about you and everyone else who thinks they know what's good for everybody else just step the **** off and find a way to make your own lives more fulfilling?

If she has the money to cover a catastrophic event she will have funds in the mid to high six figure range which is more than enough to purchase decent insurance.

Ah, so instead of having her own money available to pay for her own possible medical costs (that she may never even have to do, mind you) now she can throw it all away on overly expensive insurance premiums into the pockets of multi-billion dollar insurance companies that she may never need. Damn, you're a ******* economic genius. They ought to put you in charge of the Federal Reserve.



Actually, I've asked two people now to explain how a $54 policy now costing $550 is a win for America and our health care system? Who cares if it's subsidized or not? Either she is paying the full cost or the rest of our picking it up for her? The bottom line is it's now costing $500 more a month where as it didn't before. Just because it might be "subsidized" doesn't mean the remaining amount just magically disappears. Somebody is picking up the cost. Again, ******* economic genius, aren't you?

I will tell you why I have decided she needs more insurance. She needs to have more insurance because I am tired as hell from paying for deadbeats who refuse to buy decent insurance and then go to the hospital and run up huge bills they cannot pay. I am tired as hell from watching hospitals boost up bills to pay for the deadbeats who can't or won't act in a responsible manner. And I am especially tired of watching my insurance costing more and more because of the deadbeats.

You know nothing about this woman. In fact, you just said a few minutes ago that if she has the means to pay out what her current policy doesn't cover she's not a problem.

Maybe you want to pay for people who arn't paying their bills, BUT I DO NOT TO PAY OTHERS PEOPLE'S MEDICAL BILLS ESPECIALLY IF IT CAN BE AVOIDED.

That's odd because that's exactly what you're doing by supporting this law, paying other people's medical bills, dipshit.

You know what's ironic? You drooling Obamabots like to point your fingers at Republicans and conservatives and accuse them of fascist behavior and yet here you all are falling over yourselves to support a president who just put every single American under the thumb of Big Insurance, who were the enemy until Obama told you they weren't. You just can't make this shit up. Partisans have absolutely no morals or integrity and are completely void of critical thinking skills. You just follow your marching orders.

"... dipshit." Another classy republican steps up. I have not called you or anyone else names on this board. Your comment is unnecessary and I refuse to read the comments of someone who cannot communicate in an adult manner. I will refuse to respond to any of your posts on this thread. Have a nice day.

 

[g5000]

It is cut and dry: The Democrats promised you could keep your health care plan.

This was not a small insignificant promise, like, say, "I promise to care more." This was HUGE. This was a promise deliberately crafted to reassure millions to get their votes. This was crafted to get support for ObamaCare.

And it was all a giant lie.

No amount of bloviation and big fonts can hide that fact.

It was a lie. A massive one.

And now ObamaCare is taking off the mask and going predatory on millions of people. In a big way. The vicious defense of this new offense is psychotic.

Cut and dry. No one is fooled.

The Democrats fucked up, and everyone knows it.

 

[Jackson]

Perhaps the Republicans should have just sat on their hands as the Democrats were doing, just still claiming everything is fine.

But it's not their way. If they had some input in this boondoggle, there would have been a working website and people would not be losing their insurance all over the place. But Pelosi, et al could handle it, and look at what we have.

 

[daveman]

Obama would never sign it. He doesn't WANT anyone to keep their current plan. The whole house of cards is founded on the haves paying for the have-nots.

Nope. The whole house of cards is that the insurance companies are being forced to accept and write policies for pre-existing conditions and allow for procedures they have either historically fought or denied.

Oh, so the insurance companies are paying for the have-nots.

Oh, wait -- no, they're not. Those who don't qualify for subsidies are.

It's funny that you think you refuted my post.

 

[Zander]

Perhaps the Republicans should have just sat on their hands as the Democrats were doing, just still claiming everything is fine.

But it's not their way. If they had some input in this boondoggle, there would have been a working website and people would not be losing their insurance all over the place. But Pelosi, et al could handle it, and look at what we have.

They should draw attention to the problems. Relentlessly.

Then they need to draft alternate legislation that keeps the positive aspects of Obamacare and eliminates the rest.

 

[ron4342]

Perhaps the Republicans should have just sat on their hands as the Democrats were doing, just still claiming everything is fine.

But it's not their way. If they had some input in this boondoggle, there would have been a working website and people would not be losing their insurance all over the place. But Pelosi, et al could handle it, and look at what we have.

The big lie is that the republicans had no input into ACA. Here are some facts you might be interested in.

That said, some context: Of the 788 amendments filed, 67 came from Democrats and 721 from Republicans. (That disparity drew jeers that Republicans were trying to slow things down. Another explanation may be that they offered so many so they could later claim—as they are now, in fact, claiming—that most of their suggestions went unheeded.) Only 197 amendments were passed in the end—36 from Democrats and 161 from Republicans. And of those 161 GOP amendments, Senate Republicans classify 29 as substantive and 132 as technical.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/prescriptions/2009/07/this_is_what

 

[ron4342]

Perhaps the Republicans should have just sat on their hands as the Democrats were doing, just still claiming everything is fine.

But it's not their way. If they had some input in this boondoggle, there would have been a working website and people would not be losing their insurance all over the place. But Pelosi, et al could handle it, and look at what we have.

They should draw attention to the problems. Relentlessly.

Then they need to draft alternate legislation that keeps the positive aspects of Obamacare and eliminates the rest.

Excuse me but when have the republicans in the House spent any time trying to draft any legislation other than repealing ACA? As I recall the have voted 41 times on that issue so far. Oh, and bear in mind that they recently voted to defund ACORN. Someone needs to inform that that ACORN has been shut down since 2010.
If I understand correctly the House is only scheduled to be in session about 30 days between now and Christmas. Boehner has stated that they may have to cut back on those days. So, when can we expect that alternate legislation?