I still ask if you have junk insurance or a bare bones policy and NEVER use it, how do you know you like it?
You really think a $770 / mo. premium plan was a bare bones policy?

Hello again, tom:

You really think a $770 / mo. premium plan was a bare bones policy?MANY of the policies sold in right wing controlled states, certainly MIGHT be bare bones at that price. In those states, the QUALITY of a policy is NOT related to its price.

By the way, those are the states where you think EVERY American should buy their insurance... Fortunately, SOME states have insurance commissioners who believe the CONSUMERS of insurance are their constituency, whereas in RIGHT WING states, the insurance commissioner is there FOR the insurance companies..

excon

Why would I want to buy a policy in that state if there was no savings in the reduced coverage plans . Your argument makes no sense. Now Fla, did indeed have bare bones plans . But the people who purchased them paid around $100/month or less ,not over $700 .

Hello again, dad:
Forced??? Is THAT what you call democracy in action???? Let's see.

If I were to say that Texas, for example, is FORCING abortion clinics to close, I'll betcha you'd call THAT democracy in action, wouldn't you?? I'll bet you'd tell the sniveling libs that if they DON'T like it, WIN some elections.

Given those irrefutable facts, WHO'S the one drinking koolaid?

excon

What your talking about has nothing to do with Obamacare. What we the people recieved had nothing to do with democracy. It had everything to do with a ruler forcing his will in his subjects.

Was it debated from the begining? No! Was it read before it was passed ? No ! Was it explained to the people with transparency ? No !

Hardly democratic at all. You guys need to put down that blunt and stop smoking the bs and come back to reality.

Your anecdotes never have enough data to make reasonable decisions because in fact all you want is to portray the downside of sticker shock.

I still ask if you have junk insurance or a bare bones policy and NEVER use it, how do you know you like it? In the past many who liked their insurance didn't like it when they had to use it, and I am sure a 64 year old healthy guy or woman would not like to have cancer screenings or prostate exams NOT covered by the insurance they paid for and liked so well.

Tal, I can see the veins popping out of your neck. Don't get mad at us for sharing what the media has finally discovered, Obamacare isn't such a great deal and Americans are not happy that you're hitting them hard in the wallet for things they don't want and don't need.

Stop pretending you know what's better for us than we do. It's really quite arrogant and insulting.

What your talking about has nothing to do with Obamacare. What we the people recieved had nothing to do with democracy. It had everything to do with a ruler forcing his will in his subjects.

Was it debated from the begining? No! Was it read before it was passed ? No ! Was it explained to the people with transparency ? No !

Hardly democratic at all. You guys need to put down that blunt and stop smoking the bs and come back to reality.

Amen, brother.

Who pays $770 a month for health insurance?

Many people will be paying much more under the Unaffordable Health Care Act . I pay almost $400 with my employer contributing the majority of the rate .Then again ,here in NY the idiots who make the regulations made sure we were covered for everything that Obamacare mandates and more.

Turns out you can't keep your doctor either .
A Stage-4 Gallblader Cancer Survivor Says: I Am One of ObamaCare's Losers - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304527504579171710423780446)

But, but, but...

http://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/396279213067485184/photo/1

Good thing everyone has contraception coverage and their insurance can't drop them if they get sick. Too darn bad they don't have a doctor any more.

Second major health insurer pulls out of California market (http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/2013/release053-13.cfm)


"One of the factors I believe contributed to this decision, even if the two companies are disinclined to acknowledge it, is the special tax break that California law gives to Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, which has allowed and continues to allow those two companies to avoid paying $100 million in state taxes a year," added Commissioner Jones. "Aetna and United Healthcare don't get the special tax break provided to Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, and so they faced a major competitive disadvantage in California."

Aetna had approximately 60,000 people covered by individual policies as of March 31, 2013, and it projects it will have approximately 50,000 people covered by individual policies at the end of 2013, when the company exits the individual market. United Healthcare, through its subsidiary PacifiCare, had approximately 10,000 individual policyholders late in 2012. Policyholders from both companies have been informed they can keep their existing health insurance until December 31, 2013. Aetna and United Healthcare policyholders will be able to purchase health insurance from other health insurers inside and outside the new California health benefits exchange.

All the companies are getting out of the individual insurance market which represents 5% of the insurance buying public. Servicing plans that could be grandfathered under the law, is not profitable even though it has made companies billions just in California. I linked this before but was of course discounted because it doesn't meet the right wing narrative.

You guys weren't pissed when people were routinely kicked off insurance coverage before, so why the hell are you pissed off now? Why have you gotten past this knee jerk narrative and asked the insurance company why they have decide to abandon this market I the first place?

Why ignore the obvious? For every bad story you have you have ignored the 10 stories of people who have already benefited from the new law, despite bad practices of the past by insurance companies. Now all of a sudden they are your heroes that are victims of liberal ideas. Give me a break with your right wing lies, and half truths. It's the insurance companies that are practicing greed and they always have.

Second major health insurer pulls out of California market (http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/2013/release053-13.cfm)



All the companies are getting out of the individual insurance market which represents 5% of the insurance buying public. Servicing plans that could be grandfathered under the law, is not profitable even though it has made companies billions just in California. I linked this before but was of course discounted because it doesn't meet the right wing narrative.

You guys weren't pissed when people were routinely kicked off insurance coverage before, so why the hell are you pissed off now? Why have you gotten past this knee jerk narrative and asked the insurance company why they have decide to abandon this market I the first place?

Why ignore the obvious? For every bad story you have you have ignored the 10 stories of people who have already benefited from the new law, despite bad practices of the past by insurance companies. Now all of a sudden they are your heroes that are victims of liberal ideas. Give me a break with your right wing lies, and half truths. It's the insurance companies that are practicing greed and they always have.

Dude, the only one with a knee jerk narrative is you who are in denial of the current reality. It's your compliant media that's reporting these "right wing lies and half truths," so stop taking it out on us for them finally doing there job. For that one who lost their doctor or can no longer afford the coverage they had this is very real and I'm sure they aren't very happy with you dismissing their concerns.

We wouldn't have this problem with balancing the needs of the 15%, against the needs of the 5%, if we eliminated the for profit middle man and we all had the same insurance from the get go. Now that's equal.

We wouldn't have squat if people can't make a profit for their product. Why are you so against profits?

You ain't got squat now because pofits go up, and wages don't. Of course we know that's what you want, even though YOUR wages haven't gone up either.

We wouldn't have this problem with balancing the needs of the 15%, against the needs of the 5%, if we eliminated the for profit middle man and we all had the same insurance from the get go. Now that's equal.

Then why didn't the Dems pass that ? Because they know in a situation where there are alternatives ,state controlled single payer heath care is DOA in this country . So you set up this scam that is designed to kill the insurance industry first. I sat in a town hall meeting and heard my Dem Congressman all but admit that fact.

Hello again, tom:

So you set up this scam that is designed to kill the insurance industry first. I don't know much about politics, but I don't think FAILING on their signature piece of legislation is a good strategy for achieving what they actually want.. Only in the minds of right wingers, would this be true.

excon

I guess EX hasn't found out how much his rates are going to skyrocket yet... or how high his deductibles are going up as one of the self employed who must buy individucal policies...

Assuming he's been honest with us about that part.

Seniors in NY in Medicare Advantage can't keep their doctor either
The seniors getting hurt by Obamacare - NY Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/seniors-hurt-obamacare-article-1.1504414)

Hello smoothy, fuktard:

Assuming he's been honest with us about that part.What??? I'm gonna explain myself you to you, a$$hole???? Who the fuk do you think you are???

excon

Hello smoothy, fuktard:
What??? I'm gonna explain myself you to you, a$$hole???? Who the fuk do you think you are???

excon

I'm guessing you don't actually have your own business then?


I never claimed to.......

Hello again, tom:

Seniors in NY in Medicare Advantage can't keep their doctor either I have Medicare Advantage. I'm keeping my doctor. My state has NOTHING to do with that coverage. Me theenks NY doesn't either.

excon

Okay wingers it's real simple NOBODY, not even the states can afford rising cost of making insurance company's RICH.

Until you face that fact, you just don't know what you are talking about no matter who you blame. Insurance companies have been doing this crap for DECADES, and now all of a sudden you are their best buddies and protectors.

If you ain't stupid and loud, then you are crazy and loud. Keep hollering, but its obvious you have no solutions, just more of the same.

And Tom, if we had the votes for single payer, we would have it NOW, but we will.

I see Koolaid has been doing a booming business in certain regions.

Hello again, tom:
I don't know much about politics, but I don't think FAILING on their signature piece of legislation is a good strategy for achieving what they actually want.. Only in the minds of right wingers, would this be true.

excon

Since their signature legislation could not pass ;they muscled through what they could and threw in the poison pill that is sure to collapse the health insurance industry... leaving America little choice but to accept the socialist solution... It's the Fabian socialists way of doing things... When they can't get the whole enchilada ,they settle for incremental advances ;always keeping their eye on the ultimate goal.

Hello again, tom:

leaving America little choice but to accept the socialist solution.What have you been smoking??

Look.. I dunno who's been telling you that, but if Obamacare FAILS, NOBODY will give the Democrats a second chance. That would be NOBODY. Ted Cruz will NEVER let that happen, and this time he'll have the backing of the ENTIRE GOP - YOU included.

We'll go back to what we had or WORSE, and Ted Cruz will BE the next president.

excon

Obviously this disaster we warned about coming to fruition is causing the true believers to come unhinged. Don't blame us, blame the morons that gave it to us. That's what you get when your signature accomplishment is based on an applause line and lies.

And Tom, if we had the votes for single payer, we would have it NOW, but we will.
The only votes you had was based on the big lie about being able to keep your insurance and doctor if you like them.

Okay he lied to 5%, and told the truth to 95%. Bet your average ain't as good as his.

He lied to 100%... and he lied about everything.

I think he lied about graduating college too... since nobody has seen his transcripts.

Hello again, tom:
What have you been smoking??

Look.. I dunno who's been telling you that, but if Obamacare FAILS, NOBODY will give the Democrats a second chance. That would be NOBODY. Ted Cruz will NEVER let that happen, and this time he'll have the backing of the ENTIRE GOP - YOU included.

We'll go back to what we had or WORSE, and Ted Cruz will BE the next president.

excon

During the emperor's September 2009 joint session address to Congress on Obamacare, he said that “I am not the first President to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last.” But when the bill passed, he insisted that it was only a critical “first step” to overhauling the system.

I wonder if the "True believers" hawk AMWAY products too.

During the emperor's September 2009 joint session address to Congress on Obamacare, he said that “I am not the first President to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last.” But when the bill passed, he insisted that it was only a critical “first step” to overhauling the system.

He knew you would holler about ANY step and realizes he has to go slow with you guys and the facts dragging you along kicking and screaming was one HUGE project.

He knew you would holler about ANY step and realizes he has to go slow with you guys and the facts dragging you along kicking and screaming was one HUGE project.

This guy nails it.

How Obama went from bulls–t to dishonesty | New York Post (http://nypost.com/2013/11/02/how-obama-crossed-the-line-from-bulls-t-to-dishonesty/)

We're tired of being lied to by this guy.

This guy nails it.

How Obama went from bulls–t to dishonesty | New York Post (http://nypost.com/2013/11/02/how-obama-crossed-the-line-from-bulls-t-to-dishonesty/)

We're tired of being lied to by this guy.

You tired of being lied to by politicians? Start a revolution. Use those guns you have been storing for just such an occasion. You know why you won't do it, because you have too much to loose. Reality is things just aren't that bad, now are they? All right, you are being forced in a direction you don't want to go. When it happened here forty years ago I thought it was a bad thing too. Mind you we had a different take on it but the outcome was the same, someone was going to pay more for basic health care and those with lots of money were going to pay lots. Time resolved this and even the doctors grew to use it without whinging. The specialists are still outside the system doing what they do best, making money, but the poor have their needs taken care of.

We were lied to by one of our own in 1992 . GHW Bush made a very clear promise to not raise taxes . He lied . Because of that ,his base either did not show up ,or voted for Ross Perot . Had he kept his promise ,Bush would've had a 2nd term.Clearly Tal and the Obots support the emperor's deception.

We were lied to by one of our own in 1992 . GHW Bush made a very clear promise to not raise taxes . He lied . Because of that ,his base either did not show up ,or voted for Ross Perot . Had he kept his promise ,Bush would've had a 2nd term.Clearly Tal and the Obots support the emperor's deception.

Exactly.

Now you are blaming Bush in 1992?

Republicans lied, so surprise, surprise oh wait, politicians lied no surprise at all

Republicans lied, so surprise, surprise oh wait, politicians lied no surprise at all

Democrats actually have an adversion to the facts and to truth in general.

Now you are blaming Bush in 1992?

No way can one logically come to that conclusion.

Now the most transparent President ever is flat out lying about his lie.

https://mobile.twitter.com/reidepstein/statuses/397501587368595456

Hello again,

Yes, the rollout has been flawed, and Obama is the guy in charge. But, that's the rollout, and the president.. It's NOT the law. The LAW is gonna work just fine. Yes, there's gonna be some bumps and bruises along the way. But, not every bump is a TRAINWRECK.

Obamacare REQUIRES that insurance companies, for example, spend 80% of its income on claims... Let's say that you own a policy with a company that spends, say 50% of its income on claims.

(1) Why would you WANT to keep it, and (2) why would you THINK the law would let you??

If I were talking to people who WANTED to fix it, I'd expect a rational response.. But, since I'm talking to people who want to KILL it, (3) I'm sure you're gonna run around with your hair on fire..

excon

Flawed is the understatement of the century.

Hopelessly broken is a better definition.

We were lied to by one of our own in 1992 . GHW Bush made a very clear promise to not raise taxes . He lied . Because of that ,his base either did not show up ,or voted for Ross Perot . Had he kept his promise ,Bush would've had a 2nd term.Clearly Tal and the Obots support the emperor's deception.

Just going by what Tom said. Bush lied, even though the previous supply side president was flexible enough to raise taxes when needed to cover his spending. That flexibility was not afforded to Bush one, and got you guys out of the WH.

Now you guys are hollering liar to a promise by Obama that's 97% accurate, and trotting out horror stories of the 3% who have sticker shock and can't keep their plans because of insurance company policy, and state legislatures, even though it's well documented that those that cannot keep those plans have better options than they had before.

But you guys have never been known to look deeper into things BEFORE you holler foul. If you did you would find that the lady in California will be getting into a bigger and better network of doctors going on the exchange than she had with her small carrier that withdrew from the private insurance market in California.

I hope they report her solution as fast as they hollered about her distress.

Just going by what Tom said. Bush lied, even though the previous supply side president was flexible enough to raise taxes when needed to cover his spending. That flexibility was not afforded to Bush one, and got you guys out of the WH.

Now you guys are hollering liar to a promise by Obama that's 97% accurate, and trotting out horror stories of the 3% who have sticker shock and can't keep their plans because of insurance company policy, and state legislatures, even though it's well documented that those that cannot keep those plans have better options than they had before.

But you guys have never been known to look deeper into things BEFORE you holler foul. If you did you would find that the lady in California will be getting into a bigger and better network of doctors going on the exchange than she had with her small carrier that withdrew from the private insurance market in California.

I hope they report her solution as fast as they hollered about her distress.

Obamas clain is 0% accurate... just like everything else the brown messiah spews out of his facial sphincter.

Just going by what Tom said. Bush lied, even though the previous supply side president was flexible enough to raise taxes when needed to cover his spending. That flexibility was not afforded to Bush one, and got you guys out of the WH.

Now you guys are hollering liar to a promise by Obama that's 97% accurate, and trotting out horror stories of the 3% who have sticker shock and can't keep their plans because of insurance company policy, and state legislatures, even though it's well documented that those that cannot keep those plans have better options than they had before.

But you guys have never been known to look deeper into things BEFORE you holler foul. If you did you would find that the lady in California will be getting into a bigger and better network of doctors going on the exchange than she had with her small carrier that withdrew from the private insurance market in California.

I hope they report her solution as fast as they hollered about her distress.

Quit trying to spin tom's post. The point was Bush faced consequences for breaking his promise. You guys support this man's habitual lies and broken promises.

You are just mad because we don't support what you are hollering about. Everybody is running from you. Your lie we run from is when you say most Americans agree with you. That's a whopper.

You guys may think you are a good option, or alternative, but truth is you are not.

You are just mad because we don't support what you are hollering about. Everybody is running from you. Your lie we run from is when you say most Americans agree with you. That's a whopper.

You guys may think you are a good option, or alternative, but truth is you are not.

Polls prove otherwise. And Obama anObamacare approval ratings keep sinking by the day.

Hello again,

I just heard Rubio saying that the Va. Governors race is a CLEAR choice between Obamacare, and the FIRST Attorney General in the nation to OPPOSE it.

Wow. Do you guy wanna go down this road again? I dunno WHY you'd wanna put Obamacare up for a vote. You KNOW that Cuccineli is gonna lose, and you KNOW that you'll disavow what Rubio said about it.

I KNOW it, if you don't.

excon

You are just mad because we don't support what you are hollering about. Everybody is running from you. Your lie we run from is when you say most Americans agree with you. That's a whopper.

You guys may think you are a good option, or alternative, but truth is you are not.

Give it a rest, you're panicking at the reality unfolding and desperately looking for more bullsh*t spin to cover for what Americans now see. You also ignore the fact that regulation was one of the prime factors in denying Americans insurance (http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/health-care-regulation-$169-billion-hidden-tax) in the first place.

The government, both federal and state has had its hands all over our health care and health insurance for ages, and yet you pretend it's all these crappy insurance providers to blame for the mess. Now the government footprint is even larger and so far, it isn't panning out too well. Americans are not stupid, Tal, they aren't buying the propaganda and they don't want to buy your high priced, half-a$$ed policies either.

Definition of Obamacare

Remember when Nancy Pelosi said about Obamacare:
“We have to pass it, to find out what's in it”


A physician called into a radio show and said:
"That's the definition of a stool sample".

That pretty well sums it up.

You love regulations on females health care in Texas. You love regulations on poor people and you hate regulations on rich people forgetting that one in four people in our own state have NO insurance, and you guys are still against really poor people ever getting it.

Maybe its time for cutting out the middle man and making everyone have the same insurance and the same premiums and benefits. All of our institutions need a major overhaul is my position. Insurance companies are NOT gods, so why do you worship them over the people who have suffered for decades with their BAD business practices.

Your arguing for a policy that is not being seriously advanced anywhere .Even in Europe they realize that it aint sustainable . That's why your emperor tried incremental approach . With the disaster that is the law they passed however ,you will never see your utopian fanasy realized .

Who in God's name is worshiping insurance companies? I hate insurance companies, what I hate more is government screwing it up further, the president lying to me and treating us like we're idiots and the endless bullsh* from his defenders.

Again, you're going in panic mode just like the White House, hence the latest lie about his first lie. And you haven't even begun to see fallout yet, buddy. Just wait until more people buy their new super duper plan and realize they can't keep their doctor.

From CNN (http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/04/obamacare-war-room-docs-fewer-options-higher-prices/):


Obamacare 'War Room' docs: We're concerned next media story is some consumers getting on website and finding fewer options, higher prices
By CNN Chief Washington Correspondent Jake Tapper

Washington (CNN) - Officials expressed concern that the next shoe to drop in the evolving story about the Affordable Care Act would be disappointment from consumers once they are able to get on the troubled HealthCare.gov website – disappointment because of sticker shock and limited choice, according to a new document obtained by CNN.

“Mike described a general concern of PM (plan management team): getting to the point where the website is functioning properly and individuals begin to select plans; the media attention will follow individuals to plan selection and their ultimate choices; and, in some cases, there will be fewer options than would be desired to promote consumer choice and an ideal shopping experience. Additionally, in some cases there will be relatively high cost plans,” say the notes from the Obama administration’s Obamacare 'War Room' from one week ago.

I guess you really, really smart people should have considered this before ramming it down our throats.

Your arguing for a policy that is not being seriously advanced anywhere .Even in Europe they realize that it aint sustainable . That's why your emperor tried incremental approach . With the disaster that is the law they passed however ,you will never see your utopian fantasy realized .

Probably not Tom, but I blame the broken economic model more than band aid policies that react to those flaws. Poor circulation is the prognosis for whatever the underlying cause. There are no quick fixes to a systemic global problem.

Hello again, Steve:

ramming it down our throats.Ramming? Nahhh. It's not ramming if we LIKE it.

excon

Who in God's name is worshiping insurance companies? I hate insurance companies, what I hate more is government screwing it up further, the president lying to me and treating us like we're idiots and the endless bullsh* from his defenders.

Again, you're going in panic mode just like the White House, hence the latest lie about his first lie. And you haven't even begun to see fallout yet, buddy. Just wait until more people buy their new super duper plan and realize they can't keep their doctor.

From CNN (http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/04/obamacare-war-room-docs-fewer-options-higher-prices/):



I guess you really, really smart people should have considered this before ramming it down our throats.

You hate everything so what's new? Your solution to destroy and not replace, but keep what didn't work, ain't a solution. Bet you would have hollered as vigorously against SS, and Medicare too if you were old enough.

You hate everything so what's new? Your solution to destroy and not replace, but keep what didn't work, ain't a solution. Bet you would have hollered as vigorously against SS, and Medicare too if you were old enough.

Still waiting for the day you actually argue the points instead of spewing spewing the same rehearsed (and untrue) bullsh*t.

Hello again, Steve:
Ramming? Nahhh. It's not ramming if we LIKE it.

excon

Thank you Mr. Orwell.

Just going by what Tom said. Bush lied, even though the previous supply side president was flexible enough to raise taxes when needed to cover his spending. That flexibility was not afforded to Bush one, and got you guys out of the WH.

Now you guys are hollering liar to a promise by Obama that's 97% accurate, and trotting out horror stories of the 3% who have sticker shock and can't keep their plans because of insurance company policy, and state legislatures, even though it's well documented that those that cannot keep those plans have better options than they had before.

But you guys have never been known to look deeper into things BEFORE you holler foul. If you did you would find that the lady in California will be getting into a bigger and better network of doctors going on the exchange than she had with her small carrier that withdrew from the private insurance market in California.

I hope they report her solution as fast as they hollered about her distress.

I guess the big difference was that GHW Bush had every intention of keeping his pledge to not raise taxes . Contrast that with the emperor ,who knew he was giving the American public a bald-faced lie .

Hello again, tom:

the big difference was that GHW Bush had every intention of keeping his pledge to not raise taxes . Contrast that with the emperor ,who knew he was giving the American public a bald-faced lie .That you believe you know the mind of either of these men is arrogant, to say the least.

excon

Hello again, tom:
That you believe you know the mind of either of these men is arrogant, to say the least.

excon

Oh no, it's quite clear that Obama was always full of sh*t. The evidence is beyond overwhelming, you of all people I wold have thought would acknowledge the lies by now.

It is a fact that the emperor knew that what he was telling us was a lie . Even NBC News has figured that out .
Obama administration knew millions could not keep their health insurance - Investigations (http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/29/21222195-obama-administration-knew-millions-could-not-keep-their-health-insurance?lite)

Yep, and yet another example (https://twitter.com/MyCancellation/status/397504023512625152/photo/1) of someone getting forced out of the crappy plan they liked and could afford into a much better, more affordable plan...


Expecting parents being forced into new health plan now have a deductible 3Xs the amt of old, $10,000 #mycancellation pic.twitter.com/rlzoIptz1H

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BYQ3zabCMAAsb6y.jpg:large

It's enough to turn a lifelong Democrat into a Republican foot soldier.

Canceled health insurance plans add to angst of change | Local News | The Seattle Times (http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2022180687_acacanceledpoliciesxml.html)

Everybody knew about the junk insurance market place and have for years. What do you think pre existing conditions, and the grandfather clause was all about?

Please try and keep up and stop acting all indignant like it was a complete surprise.

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/nhwaiver.pdf


New Hampshire's waiver application notes that four companies offer individual insurance
policies in the state. One of these, Anthem, dominates the market with 72% of enrollees. Of the
three smaller insurers, two met the medical spending requirements in 2009 and would not need to
make changes under the new rule. The third company, junk insurer Chesapeake Life, reports a
shockingly low medical loss ratio of just 43.6%, as adjusted under the federal formula.
Although the application provides no details of the insurance policies sold by Chesapeake in
New Hampshire, we can gain insight into its policies from its sister company, Mega Life and
Health. Both are subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc, which sells through different insurers state
by state, but offers similar products across these companies.
Mega Life and Health sells low-benefit plans with no coverage for many benefits that are
standard on comprehensive policies – including prescription drugs, maternity care, and even
doctor visits unless the customer purchases a rider. The company's deductibles and out of pocket
maximums, which on the surface seem similar to those in other policies, are also misleading
because consumers are required to pay all costs that exceed daily or yearly caps on specific
benefits. The story of Dana Christensen illustrates how such policies fail to protect their
policyholders. Dana was left with $450,000 in medical bills when her husband Doug died of
bone cancer. The couple had purchased a special chemotherapy rider with their Mega insurance
policy, but the rider capped payments at $1,000 a day, while Doug's treatments were as much as
$18,000 a day. (More on Dana Christensen and HealthMarkets' history of deception here:
Dana Christensen's battle with junk health insurance | Consumer Watchdog (http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/blog/dana-christensens-battle-junk-health-insurance))
Consumers would probably be better off purchasing coverage from another company in the
market if Chesapeake were to leave New Hampshire. (The company's extremely low medical
loss ratio suggests it might, although the state's application doesn't provide any data to make the
case.)

What you think NH was the only one complaining about junk insurance and it just started? Why are you guys the last to know, and the least to understand. Why follow the Hannity/Fox example?

That story appears no where else but on Twitter. Any other sources?

Also:
Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare - Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/2013/10/18/inside_the_fox_news_lie_machine_i_fact_checked_sea n_hannity_on_obamacare/)

You'll notice some material that has been used here.

Canceled health insurance plans add to angst of change | Local News | The Seattle Times (http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2022180687_acacanceledpoliciesxml.html)

Great link.


“It turned out not to be the case for most people with individual plans, because the plans were so much worse,” she said. “In all honestly, they didn't provide meaningful coverage.”

The bare-bones plans left people vulnerable to costly medical bills and even bankruptcy. So insurance companies drafted new, more comprehensive plans to meet the law. Then they looked at a subscriber's current plan and tried to match it to one that most closely resembled one of the new plans.

Here's an idea and we can all be happy. You let us keep our old plans with a third lower premiums, copays, out of pockets, caps and deductibles, the doctors and hospitals we liked and you guys have the new super duper insurance.

Here's an idea and we can all be happy. You let us keep our old plans with a third lower premiums, copays, out of pockets, caps and deductibles, the doctors and hospitals we liked and you guys have the new super duper insurance.
What happens when you have to go to the hospital and have to have surgery and your inexpensive plan doesn't cover much of the expense? Or if Aunt Maude is in the same boat and has no savings but has to cough up $2500 as her deductible?

What happens when you have to go to the hospital and have to have surgery and your inexpensive plan doesn't cover much of the expense? Or if Aunt Maude is in the same boat and has no savings but has to cough up $2500 as her deductible?

She's lucky if her deductible is ONLY $2,500, thats pretty reasonible for a surgery even with a DAMN GOOD insurance.policy. I think I paid $1,600 out of pocket on my last one that was outpatient, (orthroscopic repair of rotator cuff) I went in and was heading home inside of 4 hours... I've been seeing cases of $10,000 deductible per year or higher with the new Obamacare quotes....

What happens when you have to go to the hospital and have to have surgery and your inexpensive plan doesn't cover much of the expense? Or if Aunt Maude is in the same boat and has no savings but has to cough up $2500 as her deductible?

No offense but what's it to you? It's my life and if the new crap sandwich is so good it should be an offer they can't refuse.


Here's an idea and we can all be happy. You let us keep our old plans with a third lower premiums, copays, out of pockets, caps and deductibles, the doctors and hospitals we liked and you guys have the new super duper insurance.

No offense but what's it to you?
Remember, "but" means disregard anything I've said before the "but."

Are my tax dollars going to pick up any expense that you can't pay?

Remember, "but" means disregard anything I've said before the "but."

Not true at all Carol.


Are my tax dollars going to pick up any expense that you can't pay?

I pay my bills and my risk to you is less if I don't have to pay a premium that costs 2-3 times more with the higher deductibles. There is no incentive to buy insurance if your risk of going broke is higher for buying it.

Not true at all Carol.
Yes, it is true. "I love you but...."

Yes, it is true. "I love you but...."

Oh good grief, it doesn't negate the sentiment. Only a woman...

Oh good grief, it doesn't negate the sentiment. Only a woman...
Wow, the putdowns come fast and furious.

Dr. Phil said it first.

Everything before the but is a lie - Lawrence Fine (http://lawrencefineblogs.com/2009/02/everything-before-the-but-is-a-lie/)

Wow, the putdowns come fast and furious.

Dr. Phil said it first.

Everything before the but is a lie (http://lawrencefineblogs.com/2009/02/everything-before-the-but-is-a-lie/)

It's simple, I'm the one who said it and it was sincere, I did not want you take offense. So take it from me, not Dr. Phil, and maybe you can avoid goading people into unleashing snarky remarks.

It's simple, I'm the one who said it and it was sincere, I did not want you take offense. So take it from me, not Dr. Phil, and maybe you can avoid goading people into unleashing snarky remarks.
I goaded you? You just couldn't help yourself?

You couldn't help but question my sincerity? It works both ways dear.

Having insurance doesn't mean you actually get to see a doctor...

America Is Running Out of Doctors - NationalJournal.com (http://www.nationaljournal.com/health-care/america-is-running-out-of-doctors-20131104)

Finally we agree on something.

Finally we agree on something.

Then what's the point of this"comprehensive" insurance if you can't see a doc?

Doctors will have to see more people, train a lot more, or hand out more visas to foreign doctors and nurses. What's your idea?

Doctors will have to see more people, train a lot more, or hand out more visas to foreign doctors and nurses. What's your idea?
And medical schools will have to make their education more affordable and accessible (but not slipshod).

Just what we need... more doctors that barely speak the English language.

Just what we need... more doctors that barely speak the English language.
Nope. Nice Caucasian young people. My nephew would have gone from being a male nurse into being a doctor, but couldn't afford it. He didn't make M.D., but was able to afford becoming an anesthesiologist assistant and makes good money keeping people alive on the operating table.

It's time we stop pushing the medical specialties (and big money?) and go back to family practice/GPs.

Nope. Nice Caucasian young people. My nephew would have gone from being a male nurse into being a doctor, but couldn't afford it. He didn't make M.D., but was able to afford becoming an anesthesiologist assistant and makes good money keeping people alive on the operating table.

It's time we stop pushing the medical specialties (and big money?) and go back to family practice/GPs.
If they are coming from overseas for many of them English is not a strong point for them.

They aren't all bad... one of the specialists I see is Indian... and he's one of the top doctors in his field at least in this region.. His English is very good as well.

Most go into specialties because they make more money to pay back their substantial education loans faster. GP's don't make as much and their education costs are almost as high.

If they are coming from overseas for many of them English is not a strong point for them.
All the more reason to include good literacy programs. Old people especially have no patience with doctors who can't speak English very well.

They aren't all bad... one of the specialists I see is Indian... and he's one of the top doctors in his field at least in this region.. His English is very good as well.
Most of the Chinese and Indian doctors I've encountered during the past ten years speak better English than I do.

Most go into specialties because they make more money to pay back their substantial education loans faster. GP's don't make as much and their education costs are almost as high.
All the more reason for medical schools to become affordable. Do they really need all those deans and vice presidents?

All the more reason to include good literacy programs. Old people especially have no patience with doctors who can't speak English very well. that's something they need to deal with in their home countries. I have a knack for dealing with people with broken English or some accents (sorry but I have problems with certain Central American accents or Puerto Rican accents... in English OR Spanish.)


Most of the Chinese and Indian doctors I've encountered during the past ten years speak better English than I do.

I don't know any Chinese doctors, there is a Korean one at the practice my GP is in, saw him when my regular doctor was on vacation and it couldn't wait...He was good in my mind.. My last two dentists were Iranian strangely enough. Different practices. Both spoke excellent English. Actually the last one is still a current one...


All the more reason for medical schools to become affordable. Do they really need all those deans and vice presidents?

Or Deans or Presidents making well over a million a year with lavish houses paid for by the school. Lots of fat to be cut in Universities...

that's something they need to deal with in their home countries. I have a knack for dealing with people with broken English or some accents (sorry but I have problems with certain Central American accents or Puerto Rican accents... in English OR Spanish.)



I don't know any Chinese doctors, there is a Korean one at the practice my GP is in, saw him when my regular doctor was on vacation and it couldn't wait...He was good in my mind.. My last two dentists were Iranian strangely enough. Different practices. Both spoke excellent English. Actually the last one is still a current one...



Or Deans or Presidents making well over a million a year with lavish houses paid for by the school. Lots of fat to be cut in Universities...

So you are getting lots of foreign doctors it will only get worse when they become the only ones who will work for less.itI seems english isn't essential here, I expect it isn't there either but don't worry chinese doctors understand english

Doctors will have to see more people, train a lot more, or hand out more visas to foreign doctors and nurses. What's your idea?

They already have to see more patients than optimum to keep their practices in operation... Let's cut the bs. What the left wants is to have all doctors employed by the state .

They already have to see more patients than optimum to keep their practices in operation... Let's cut the bs. What the left wants is to have all doctors employed by the state .

Highly undesirable idea, free enterprise in medicine is fine s long as gouging isn't allowed , that's all the state should be concerned with other than competence

Free enterprise? That might lead to profits and we can't have that.

Maybe Pain Will Teach You Millenials Not To Vote For Your Own Serfdom - Kurt Schlichter (http://m.townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2013/11/04/maybe-pain-will-teach-you-millenials-not-to-vote-for-your-own-serfdom-n1733722)

So you are getting lots of foreign doctors it will only get worse when they become the only ones who will work for less.itI seems english isn't essential here, I expect it isn't there either but don't worry chinese doctors understand english

What I do is question the quality of their educations...(not CHinese doctors specifically but the others as well) Basically schools nobody knows about.....etc.

How do you know they weren't run out of their home countries for being bad doctors for example? How you you really vet them? It's a potiential mine field.

Hello again,

I'm missing something here... EVERYBODY seems to agree that the Cuccinelli race was a referendum on Obamacare. Tom said as much yesterday. Cuccinelli said it this morning his concession speech... . He said his loss by a teeny teeny bit sends a BIG message to Washington, D.C.

I AGREE with him. He LOST. Just like ROMNEY lost. What message does his LOSS send to YOU - that the stuff he FAVORED was BLESSED by the electorate????? I'll bet you DO believe that... You guys keep telling us that Romney's LOSS meant the country DIDN'T want Obamacare... What's different here?

excon

Here's your referendum on Obamacare.

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval (http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx)

I explained his loss in greater detail on this comment .
Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - Tea Party aversion to reality (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3581221-post34.html)
Had the 3rd party candidate not peeled the vote from Cuccunelli ,he would've won a close race. I also later explained how northern Va. has become a bastion of people who make their living off the Fed Gvt . This has turned Va from a red state to a purple one at best .

Hello again, tom:

I got it.. So, your thinking goes like this: It WAS a referendum on Obamacare.. And, if only a couple things would have been different, he WOULD have won. That's WHY it's a referendum.. Clearly, it means that Obamacare got rammed down peoples throats..

I got it.

excon

Republican rich guys didn't support the Cucc in Northern VA, and if the independent vote hurt the Cucc, explain why they couldn't hold their nose and vote for him, so it was a protest vote from you guys. Or against them both?

Again, here's your referendum on Obamacare. Bush, with the daily death tolls of the war and Katrina gets a one point lead on Obama (http://news.yahoo.com/obama-and-bush-poll-numbers-nearly-identical-five-years-into-presidency-214919924.html) at this stage of his presidency. And it's going to get worse...


“No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period.”

If you were drowning and someone threw you a lifeline, you would probably throw it back.

If you were drowning and someone threw you a lifeline, you would probably throw it back.

At least if someone were drowning I wouldn't throw them a brick.

Maybe we should take after Sean Penn's utopia...

DOCTORS SAY VENEZUELA'S HEALTH CARE IN COLLAPSE (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VENEZUELA_SICK_HEALTH_CARE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-11-06-00-10-00)

One interesting note from this:


The private system has just 8,000 of the country's more than 50,000 hospital beds but treats 53 percent of the country's patients, including the 10 million public employees with health insurance.

I am shocked, shocked that their private system is so much more capable and that all, count 'em all 10 million public employees use that instead of the state run system. Sounds familiar, the people forcing us to live under Obamacare and in charge of enforcing it don't want it for themselves.

After sticker shock and provider shock kin into overdrive I do expect this regime to take after them in one area, creating a new cabinet position - Secretary of Supreme Social Happiness (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/L/LT_VENEZUELA_DEPARTMENT_OF_HAPPINESS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-10-25-15-29-24) .

P.S. My offer still stands, you let us keep our old plans with a third lower premiums, copays, out of pockets, caps and deductibles, the doctors and hospitals we liked and you guys have the new super duper insurance.

Hello again, Steve:

My offer still stands, you let us keep our old plans with a third lower premiums, copays, out of pockets, caps and deductibles, the doctors and hospitals we liked and you guys have the new super duper insurance.Couple things... Who're you kidding??? That would last as long as nobody got sick and got their policy canceled. Then you'd be CRYING for that super duper insurance..

The next thing is, when your insurance company won't cover you, taxpayers like ME will. It's VERY un-right winger like of you to FORCE me to pay for YOUR bills.. Isn't it??

Or, would you rather we didn't?

excon

Its not the government picking and choosing, it's the insurance company which you hate. I cannot believe you would take away access to health care for fifty million, to satisfy 4 million. The logic escapes me.

Now I can go for giving those 4 million an exemption by forcing insurance companies to continue policies with no changes if they are currently under care, less than a million I think(not sure), but maybe a case by case assessment rather than a broad sweeping delay is indicated. Sticker shock and confusion is not enough to throw 50 million people under the bus just yet, not in the first 30 days.

@Ex, great point.

Hello again, Steve:
Couple things... Who're you kidding??? That would last as long as nobody got sick and got their policy canceled. Then you'd be CRYING for that super duper insurance..

The next thing is, when your insurance company won't cover you, taxpayers like ME will. It's VERY un-right winger like of you to FORCE me to pay for YOUR bills.. Isn't it??

Or, would you rather we didn't?

excon

Do you guys have a meeting every day to go over your talking points? Asked and answered (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3580997-post1075.html).

Its not the government picking and choosing, it's the insurance company which you hate. I cannot believe you would take away access to health care for fifty million, to satisfy 4 million. The logic escapes me.

a) the first point is bullsh*t, everyone knows it.

b) your next point has no basis in reality.

Great NON answer on two points.

While you stated you hate insurance companies as much as the government, you clearly come down for the junk insurance and sticker shock you blame on government.

You exploit a twofer to excuse your lack of depth on the issue, and ignore the benefit to 50 million people for the initial reaction to a complex situation.

Hello again, tom:

I got it.. So, your thinking goes like this: It WAS a referendum on Obamacare.. And, if only a couple things would have been different, he WOULD have won. That's WHY it's a referendum.. Clearly, it means that Obamacare got rammed down peoples throats..

I got it.

excon

There were of course other factors in the race besides Obamacare . What I said was that he closed the gap in the last 2 weeks because of the Obamacare backlash. Anyway there is no way that a 1 point race can be considered a referendum on anything .

Christy's win sent a strong message though. He will be a tough candidate if he wins the republican nomination.

Great NON answer on two points.

While you stated you hate insurance companies as much as the government, you clearly come down for the junk insurance and sticker shock you blame on government.

And you pose as an expert on finances, health care and integrity yet think the crap sandwich with extravagantly higher costs to the consumer and fewer choices of providers we were lied to about is a better deal. Chew on that a bit.


You exploit a twofer to excuse your lack of depth on the issue, and ignore the benefit to 50 million people for the initial reaction to a complex situation.

Dude, in light of how we got here I think if I were you I would refrain from accusing others of exploitation.

I think the plan could be better but the alternative we have lived with for years is unsustainable as is whatever alternatives you, the TParty, or most republicans have suggested so far.

To bad Mitt ran away from his own plan. The reality is we are here, and need to get beyond it. Another thing is while I am no expert, I am experienced. VERY experienced.

I am no expert, I am experienced. VERY experienced.

As am I , from the professional side, the consumer side and the total crap that is Medicaid.

What do you have against Medical insurance for poor people? Often working poor people? Or poor kids of working poor people?

What do you have against Medical insurance for poor people? Often working poor people? Or poor kids of working poor people?

What do you have against the truth? You just keep making sh*t up to make us look mean, enough already. I mean for cryin' out loud I have a disabled daughter battling HIV and cancer living in my home on SSI, a paltry 60 or 70 a month in food stamps and Medicaid that no one takes. We have 2 good hospitals, 2 or 3 cancer centers and there is 1 doctor she can see that reluctantly accepts Medicaid for her cancer care.

Don't preach to me about not caring about the plight of others, I live it every freakin' day! When are you going to get that through your thick skull?

I sincerely hope you and your family get through this troubling time with positive outcomes my friend. I would be angry too if I walked in your shoes.

Christy's win sent a strong message though. He will be a tough candidate if he wins the republican nomination.

Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - Tea Party aversion to reality (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3581684-post48.html)

What do you have against the truth? You just keep making sh*t up to make us look mean, enough already. I mean for cryin' out loud I have a disabled daughter battling HIV and cancer living in my home on SSI, a paltry 60 or 70 a month in food stamps and Medicaid that no one takes. We have 2 good hospitals, 2 or 3 cancer centers and there is 1 doctor she can see that reluctantly accepts Medicaid for her cancer care.

Don't preach to me about not caring about the plight of others, I live it every freakin' day! When are you going to get that through your thick skull?

So the system not workin' for you then, I thought Obamacare was supposed to take care of that. We find a single payer system does stop some of those doctors avoiding their responsibilies but when it comes down to specialists, they talk money and you need an insurer to negotiate with them

So the system not workin' for you then, I thought Obamacare was supposed to take care of that. We find a single payer system does stop some of those doctors avoiding their responsibilies but when it comes down to specialists, they talk money and you need an insurer to negotiate with them

If expanding the rolls of the Medicaid system that my daughter has to navigate and pushing us all toward that is a solution then we're screwed.

Hello again, Steve:

The other day you were saying that bad insurance is pretty good. and people should be able to KEEP it if they wanted..

Now that you KNOW someone with bad insurance, you're singing a different tune.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

The other day you were saying that bad insurance is pretty good. and people should be able to KEEP it if they wanted..

Now that you KNOW someone with bad insurance, you're singing a different tune.

excon

I never, ever said the government run insurance was good, it's you guys trying to blow smoke by saying the new more expensive in every way bad private insurance is better. The point was stop feeding me this crap about not caring about the plight of others, I know it, I live it, I can tell you firsthand about both the private care you're screwing up and the public care that sucks already and you want to expand. You guys really do think we're stupid don't you? Ask yet another Obama supporter that doesn't understand why they can't keep their old, BETTER insurance (http://www.propublica.org/article/loyal-obama-supporters-canceled-by-obamacare).

$550 a month for their health coverage ? Must be one of them bare bones plans that didn't cover abortion pills .

$550 a month for their health coverage ? Must be one of them bare bones plans that didn't cover abortion pills .

Or the $4.00 contraceptives Sandra Fluke couldn't find at Target down the street.

Why Health Insurance Cancellations Shouldn't Be a Surprise - ProPublica (http://www.propublica.org/article/why-health-insurance-cancellations-shouldnt-be-a-surprise)


Q. Is Medicaid a success story here?

A. Medicaid enrollment data from the states with their own exchanges certainly suggests a surge in Medicaid. It's still early but it appears that the surge is a combination of ACA Medicaid expansion and the woodwork effect – bringing in individuals already eligible but not enrolled. Medicaid rolls will also increase somewhat as individual commercial polices are cancelled, high-risk pools end, and some small and mid-size employers drop coverage.

Today, Medicaid covers about 74 million Americans. Given all the unknowns, including economic conditions, projected Medicaid enrollment by 2020 ranges from 85 million to 102 million. Regardless, the role of Medicaid in the marketplace and impact of Medicaid on federal and state budgets will only grow.
The Affordable Care Act's Most Important Date: Not What You Think - ProPublica (http://www.propublica.org/article/the-affordable-care-acts-most-important-date-not-what-you-think)


What most people remember about the high court's decision is that it upheld the core of the law: an individual mandate that requires practically everyone to buy health insurance or pay a penalty.

But the most consequential part of the ruling, which got less attention at the time, gave states discretion over whether to expand their Medicaid programs for the poor.

The law originally called for each state to expand Medicaid to people making less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level (now $15,856 for a household of one or $32,499 for a household of four). But the court said states could refuse to go along and not risk losing the federal government's contribution to their Medicaid programs.

Why is this so important? Because about half the states have refused the expansion (or haven't approved it yet), putting Medicaid out of reach for millions of their residents. Those states include Texas, Florida and almost all of the south. Here's a map of what each state is doing.

Like I said, if they can't get a doctor who accepts Medicaid what's the use? I know, those greedy doctors expect to get paid.

Or the $4.00 contraceptives Sandra Fluke couldn't find at Target down the street.

Yeah we went over that and found out you need a doctor who writes a prescription, and have to have insurance to cover both. Contraceptives are not sold over the counter like aspirin.

Nor is it used strictly for birth control. But you know all that.

Why Health Insurance Cancellations Shouldn’t Be a Surprise - ProPublica (http://www.propublica.org/article/why-health-insurance-cancellations-shouldnt-be-a-surprise)


The Affordable Care Act’s Most Important Date: Not What You Think - ProPublica (http://www.propublica.org/article/the-affordable-care-acts-most-important-date-not-what-you-think)

Nah ,it's most important date will be when employer mandates goes into effect. Then the sh*t will really hit the fan. If the death spiral doesn't happen by then ,it will.

Like I said, if they can't get a doctor who accepts Medicaid what's the use? I know, those greedy doctors expect to get paid.

Then the death panel will have to decide the patient's fate .

Then the death panel will have to decide the patient's fate .

That is a problem, and its not just Medicaid. Finding a doctor or clinic that takes whatever your insurance is has been a HUGE challenge to many of us even with employer based insurance or private insurance. Every freakin' county in Texas does things differently, at least the four I have been to, even in the big cities. Even with a computer.

I have found that even with great insurance the final word is with the doctor or hospital you want to deal with, even though they have an option to JOIN whatever network you are part of, most don't. It's worse with specialists, much worse. Ask me how I know.

Even Medicare requires TWO insurance companies, if you don't want to be burdened with those out of pocket expenses which will kick your old a$$. Good luck finding a doctor, its expensive and labor intensive I already know. I think we are all finding out what the TRUE cost of health care is, the hard way, and its more than just paying a monthly note.

Personally I hate insurance companies too, and doctors are not that far behind.

Tal don't ever let that one slip in your Dr's office or you might find yourself getting far more prostate exams than are medically necessary.

We have had that conversation, as have all the other doctors I have been to. Been to court numerous times questioning bills and charges. You only stick your finger up my a$$ once a year that I pay for and anything beyond that you better make an offer I can't refuse.

No doctor has taken me up on that yet!

That is a problem, and its not just Medicaid. Finding a doctor or clinic that takes whatever your insurance is has been a HUGE challenge to many of us even with employer based insurance or private insurance. Every freakin' county in Texas does things differently, at least the four I have been to, even in the big cities. Even with a computer.

I have found that even with great insurance the final word is with the doctor or hospital you want to deal with, even though they have an option to JOIN whatever network you are part of, most don't. It's worse with specialists, much worse. Ask me how I know.

Even Medicare requires TWO insurance companies, if you don't want to be burdened with those out of pocket expenses which will kick your old a$$. Good luck finding a doctor, its expensive and labor intensive I already know. I think we are all finding out what the TRUE cost of health care is, the hard way, and its more than just paying a monthly note.

Personally I hate insurance companies too, and doctors are not that far behind.

When the whole system comes crashing down ,the choice will be bail out the insurance companies or single payer socialist system... Guess you'll be able to hang that 'Mission Accomplished ' banner then.

I am willing to bet there are a lot of people that the system has crashed on and sticker shock is nothing new, nor the worst case scenerio, and indeed we are a LONG way from a better fix.

Doing nothing though? Not a good option. And for fact we already run socialists programs quite well in America. SS, Medicare are very popular. Even the TParty loves them.

I am willing to bet there are a lot of people that the system has crashed on and sticker shock is nothing new, nor the worst case scenerio, and indeed we are a LONG way from a better fix.

Doing nothing though? Not a good option. And for fact we already run socialists programs quite well in America. SS, Medicare are very popular. Even the TParty loves them.

You can thank you Republican buddies for the system you do have, their ideological objections to cleaning the system up mean you only have a system that is good for the doctors and the insurance companies and it seems the attempt to fix it has produced a camel. You need to think of socialist solutions as common sense. If the trains don't run on time you make them, if you need medical care, medical care is provided, if you need education, education is provided, if you need a job, piant rock white

Our solutions are well known . "Doing Nothing " was never one of them .

Heritage foundation supported it right down to the mandates before they were against it, and truth be told NOTHING had been done about it for decades while the problem got worse. Now after taking what republicans had supported and actually done in MASS. Current republicans have been delay, repeal, and defund, and obstruct everything.

Even in Kentucky where its becoming an example of how it works the two Kentucky senators are still squawking foul. Despite the website glitches the squawkers are still republican governors who have done NOTHING, except make the problem BIGGER.

Start over is not an option, and the people have spoken on the republican alternatives by Ryan and the rest. How long were we supposed to wait for YOU guys to do something? Get off the sidelines and help fix it.

Governor Nikki Haley on Health Care: Part Two | FreedomWorks (http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/breeanneh/governor-nikki-haley-on-healthcare-part-two)


Patricia Finley
The following information was already announced in January. Nikki Haley and Tony Keck are just repeating what has already happened. Beginning next year, Medicaid-designated rural hospitals in South Carolina will be fully compensated through the Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) program for their uncompensated care costs. In this news release it says the following - The DSH program is a taxpayer-supported $461 million Medicaid fund used to compensate hospitals in South Carolina for the unreimbursed costs of providing inpatient and outpatient hospital services to the uninsured and Medicaid eligible individuals. I guess in a around about way the DSH program IS a taxpayer supported program - It is a federally funded program. Apparently Nikki Haley is accepting more federal funds than she wants anyone to know about. In news releases she is conveniently leaving out the fact that many programs that she claims to be funding - is being funded with federal dollars.

Sort of like decrying the stimulus and taking a picture with a big fat check and saying "see what I did".

I can't speak to what the Heritage Foundation supported ,and they don't speak for me. I'm a 'more choice' type of person when it comes to the market place ,and health care is in the market place . The choice should not be restricted by state lines or mandates . So ,the McCarran-Ferguson Act should be amended to allow interstate competition in health insurance.You like sticking it to the insurance companies.. right ?What better way than take away their anti-trust exemptions.

The choice should also be in types of treatment options ,including alternative.The choice would include keeping your insurance if you like it when you change jobs or move from state to state .

Medicare and Medicaid need reform first... including cracking down on fraud and abuse ,and then we can talk about expansion for those who truly can't afford any other alternative ,or fall through the cracks because of preexisting conditions... although I believe that fewer would fall through the cracks if they were allowed to cater their coverage for their preexisting conditions instead of for BS they don't need ,but are mandated to buy coverage for , like fertility drugs or abortion pills, or aromatherapy and massage treatment . But just to cover those truly in need ,a high risk pool could be subsidized ,or tax credit to help low income individuals buy health insurance .

Tort reform is part of the solution. That would include reasonable financial damages for breaches of clear and identifiable standards and other transgressions.

Ok ,I will address Heritage .Their thought was to mandate catastrophic care . Further their plan was tax incentives to purchase insurance... not mandates to buy or face a penalty . But even then ,Heritage was an outlier. It is hardly true to say conservatives supported it then. It's more accurate to say SOME conservatives did .

You make a great case for single payer, Medicare for all but where we really disagree is making people wait for insurance while we get rid of abuse and fraud. Do 'em both. Be able to buy across state lines put states with higher standards off living at a distinct disadvantage unless every body has the same basic prices. Single payer accomplishes that, and does away with the for profit middleman. Lowering costs for everybody, and no anti trust issues.

All the states have pretty much the same companies as it is or a subsidiary of a larger company.

Currently though, I can see mandating those currently under care with private insurance keeping what they have. It's the insurance companies leaving them high and dry, and NOT honoring the rather broad grandfather clause and saying the devil made me do it. I can leave all that tort reform stuff to a judge myself. A case has merit, or it doesn't.

You make a great case for single payer, Medicare for all but where we really disagree is making people wait for insurance while we get rid of abuse and fraud. Do 'em both. Be able to buy across state lines put states with higher standards off living at a distinct disadvantage unless every body has the same basic prices. Single payer accomplishes that, and does away with the for profit middleman. Lowering costs for everybody, and no anti trust issues.

All the states have pretty much the same companies as it is or a subsidiary of a larger company.

Currently though, I can see mandating those currently under care with private insurance keeping what they have. It's the insurance companies leaving them high and dry, and NOT honoring the rather broad grandfather clause and saying the devil made me do it. I can leave all that tort reform stuff to a judge myself. A case has merit, or it doesn't.

Well Tal you would think so, but the twist here is the detail which the insurance companies had a hand in writing, you don't think politicians are smart enough to get the detail right, do you, particularly when vested interests are involved. And making it a states issue is a divide and conquer technique. As to Tort, well the insurance companies are pushing the barrow for that and with an election year coming up they just might get it. These things are not about merit but limiting the collateral damage

Our solutions are well known . "Doing Nothing " was never one of them .

I guess one of your solutions wouldn't be having the government get into the private health insurance business.

No, I didn't think so.

Well of course not, it's a democracy, or is it a republic, I get confused, when is a democracy not a democracy. When it is a republic. What is a republic. One thing for sure, it is not government, by the people, for the people. The people can go to hell

All the states have pretty much the same companies as it is or a subsidiary of a larger company.
Hence getting rid of the anti-trust exemptions that create state favored monopolies. I don't see how a single payer system enhances competition... it reduces competition and creates a huge monopoly with the power of the law to back it up. The case I made was NOT for the elimination of the private market.

I can make a case where a medical procedure is NOT regulated and mandated that the pricing goes down as doctors compete for the business. A prime example is lasik surgury or other elective surguries .You see the same dynamics where on-line pharmacies have lowered the prices of some drugs,andfewer dispensing errors than conventional pharmacies .

I can make a case where a medical procedure is NOT regulated and mandated that the pricing goes down as doctors compete for the business. A prime example is lasik surgury or other elective surguries .You see the same dynamics where on-line pharmacies have lowered the prices of some drugs,andfewer dispensing errors than conventional pharmacies .

Rubbish the only way doctors reduce their fees is when they are forced to do so. There is no shortage of patients, therefore they can charge what they like

doctors reduce their fees is when they are forced to do so

Forced to by competition . The facts don't lie. Lasik prices have plummetted . Why ? Because it is an elective procedure not covered by insurance mandates. The doctors who perform it have to compete with ads and best pricing .

I think the jury is out on whether the cost of drugs is coming down from global options or patents for drugs expiring and the use of generics has grown widely or a combination of both, but an aging society is also a driver of costs. Speechless has pointed out many times that the shortage of primary doctors especially for less wealthy consumers is greatly underserved and the trend for hospitals to cherry pick doctors and insurance companies in there networks also contributes to higher costs and mark ups of services that leave many with fewer options.

Eliminating the anti trust exemption may well open the market up, but like the law itself, it's only a step in the right direction. States will still have to do their parts and without the frame work of regulation as a bar to meet, an unregulated market can lead to many money making revenue streams being created that don't work, or work badly for consumers.

One of the downsides of reigning in costs is lowering profits, and the free market isn't a good place to do that. Hospitals are already cutting people to keep the bottom line healthy.

States will still have to do their parts and without the frame work of regulation as a bar to meet, an unregulated market can lead to many money making revenue streams being created that don't work, or work badly for consumers.
As you know ,I'm not opposed to reasonable regulation ,and of course prefer it at the state level . Although I continue to allow myself to be inflicted with the burden of living in blue state hell... it's still my choice . One day I may do a Davey Crockett and say "You go to hell....I'm going to Texas" .

No time like the present, get out see a new world and live among those of like mind

As you know ,I'm not opposed to reasonable regulation ,and of course prefer it at the state level . Although I continue to allow myself to be inflicted with the burden of living in blue state hell... it's still my choice . One day I may do a Davey Crockett and say "You go to hell....I'm going to Texas" .

Come on down, it's a whole other world... for now.

Hello again, Steve:

Come on down, it's a whole other world... for now.At least you admit your ideology is dying out.

Go, Wendy, GO!

excon

I bet .they haven't been completely over run with locust... yet

Hello again, Steve:
At least you admit your ideology is dying out.

Go, Wendy, GO!

excon

You mean Wendy "I'm totally pro-life if the child makes it out the womb and don't stand snow ball's chance in hell" Davis? Bwa ha ha!

Making people have babies and not helping support them is hypocritical. To raise a child the parents have to be raised. That's what she said, no matter how you spin it on the right. But listening is something the right hasn't learned yet. You will though.

Not all conservatives in Texan are right wingers, some are darn good people. :D

Making people have babies and not helping support them is hypocritical. To raise a child the parents have to be raised. That's what she said, no matter how you spin it on the right. But listening is something the right hasn't learned yet. You will though.

Straw man bullsh*t.

OK, back to the OP. I forgot something from my saga of helping my daughter navigate the pathetic Medicaid system - my dad is in the "care" of another public health system, the VA. He's been in a VA nursing home since June.

Two weeks ago he went downhill suddenly and was admitted to the VA hospital. The diagnosis went from pneumonia, to multiple organ failure due to congestive heart failure to septicemia and pneumonia. Once they determined he had septicemia he went on a broad spectrum antibiotic and over the next week he improved to where he was eating again and doing pretty good considering. Today or tomorrow he should be back at the nursing home.

Here's the kicker, the doctor said we need to take care of him - that we basically can't count on the nursing home staff to do a damn thing to see to his medical well-being - we need to tell them if he's sick.

What the hell? Is that not what the 24 hour care is for? WE have to be the nurse, too?

Again, I'm living government health care, and this disaster unfolding does not instill confidence. No thank you.

Join the party, Many us have to make the very difficult choice of how best to care for our aging parents including going the nursing home route. Its difficult, but have you looked into arranging for a visiting nurse? Is that a viable option?

My mom isn't ready for a nursing home. And I lost faith in them long ago. Even with your constant participation, just finding a GOOD one that's close enough for frequent family visits is extremely labor intensive. Right now family is the best 24/7 care to be had from what I have seen and so far my elders all want to be at home, not isolated with strangers.

You are not alone my friend. Not by a long shot.

No, my dad needs nursing home care, but one would expect them be proactive, not expect us to make sure he's healthy and safe.

Is his NH close enough for daily visits by family?

No, my dad needs nursing home care, but one would expect them be proactive, not expect us to make sure he's healthy and safe.
It doesn't work that way. In fact, it has NEVER worked that way. Nursing homes give physical on-the-spot care (clean you up, give you meds [hopefully the right ones], change your bed and your pjs every now and then, do your laundry [maybe, without losing it]). You yourself or your family has always had to be your best advocate for maintaining mental and physical health when in a nursing home.

I've been a family member dealing with elderly relatives and nursing homes for years. Both my MIL who insisted on staying home and who died last year at 93 and my own mom who also insists on living at home and is 89 realized a nursing home is not where they want to be. There are huge efforts being made to keep elderly relatives at home and managing with family help and visiting nurses/community helpers. I'm sorry, speech, that's not possible in your dad's situation.

Sorry, I don't buy it. If a patient is obviously sick they need to take action.

Likely that's a ambulance trip to the hospital. Nursing homes generally cannot perform diagnostic tests. Nor administer any meds not prescribed by doctors. Licensing and liability issues.

Likely that's a ambulance trip to the hospital. Nursing homes generally cannot perform diagnostic tests. Nor administer any meds not prescribed by doctors. Licensing and liability issues.

It's the VA, they have a staff physician.

Sorry, I don't buy it. If a patient is obviously sick they need to take action.
Nope. They can alert the family if they see a need, but it's the family's responsibility to make something happen (a doctor to come in or the patient to go somewhere) if tests are needed, medical care changed, etc. My husband several times a week would visit his aunt in her very nice nursing home (her son and husband had already died, so she gave my husband POA). It fell to him to monitor her health and coordinate with the nursing home to make sure she received the appropriate care.

***ADDED And the same with a VA nursing home.

Nope. They can alert the family if they see a need, but it's the family's responsibility to make something happen (a doctor to come in or the patient to go somewhere) if tests are needed, medical care changed, etc. My husband several times a week would visit his aunt in her very nice nursing home (her son and husband had already died, so she gave my husband POA). It fell to him to monitor her health and coordinate with the nursing home to make sure she received the appropriate care.

***ADDED And the same with a VA nursing home.

Excuse me, but don't tell me what kind of care my dad is supposed to be receiving. It is a skilled nursing facility and it is their responsibility to recognize a medical need.

http://images.quickblogcast.com/35238-32833/ObamaSorry1.jpg

I think you mean sorry for trying to do the impossible with the improvable.

That too I guess. It aint being sorry for lying to the American people and deceiving us with a false narrative about the law being rammed down our throats. He claimed in his interview he was sorry people are losing their plans even after the claim he made multiple times that if you like your plan and your doctors you could keep them.
Obama: "I'm sorry" Americans are losing insurance - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57611424/obama-im-sorry-americans-are-losing-insurance/)
What was really sorry was his self serving apology . He's not at all sorry that people are losing their insurance plans. The worse is yet to come when his one year delay of the employer mandate is over ;and millions of Americans lose their insurance.

That too I guess. It aint being sorry for lying to the American people and deceiving us with a false narrative about the law being rammed down our throats. He claimed in his interview he was sorry people are losing their plans even after the claim he made multiple times that if you like your plan and your doctors you could keep them.
Obama: "I'm sorry" Americans are losing insurance - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57611424/obama-im-sorry-americans-are-losing-insurance/)
What was really sorry was his self serving apology . He's not at all sorry that people are losing their insurance plans. The worse is yet to come when his one year delay of the employer mandate is over ;and millions of Americans lose their insurance.


Intended consequences often lead to unintended consequences. No doubt there will be many more unintended consequences to come. Unfortunately the quantum computer is still in the infancy stage.

Nah ,this was an intended consequence. Oh the web site is an unplanned circumstance mostly due to the collective hubris of the Obots... but the people losing their plans... they knew that would happen .

Nah ,this was an intended consequence. Oh the web site is an unplanned circumstance mostly due to the collective hubris of the Obots... but the people losing their plans... they knew that would happen .

Tom, I think you are giving credit where credit isn't warranted.

Nah they knew .
U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and Treasury Issue Regulation on ?Grandfathered? Health Plans under the Affordable Care Act (http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2010pres/06/20100614e.html)
The generous interpretation is that they knew everyone would have to transition into a plan that the Obots approved . But that is NOT how it was sold.

https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/s403x403/1460128_10151820655788752_1190408624_n.jpg

Hello again, tom:

So, if you have sh!t insurance, why would want to keep it if you can get BETTER insurance through the exchange???

excon

If you read the grandfather clause it basically leaves most private policies in the hands of the companies that sold them. Should have been tightened up long ago, but righties can't read, and think companies can do what they want to make money any way, so what's the right wing beef?

You didn't care if consumers and workers get screwed by for profit private companies before, now all of a sudden you care?

Hello again, tom:

So, if you have sh!t insurance, why would want to keep it if you can get BETTER insurance through the exchange???

excon

That would be my choice.. right.. I may have many reasons to not want what the exchanges are offering... maybe as simple as I like the price. Maybe I don't need all the things that are now being mandated . No one has proven to me that the exchanges are going to be less expensive. Certainly the evidence so far is the opposite .
Again ,the essential point is that the emperor lied repeatedly about it .

If you read the grandfather clause it basically leaves most private policies in the hands of the companies that sold them. Should have been tightened up long ago, but righties can't read, and think companies can do what they want to make money any way, so what's the right wing beef?

You didn't care if consumers and workers get screwed by for profit private companies before, now all of a sudden you care?

BS .That's a convenient deflection . Repeat after me... the emperor lied when he said "if you like your plan you can keep it ...PERIOD "

BS .That's a convenient deflection . Repeat after me... the emperor lied when he said "if you like your plan you can keep it ...PERIOD "
He unfortunately trusted that the insurance companies look forward to gaining more insured and wouldn't do an end run around him. They quickly figured out how to make even more money off the ACA..

He unfortunately trusted that the insurance companies look forward to gaining more insured and wouldn't do an end run around him. They quickly figured out how to make even more money off the ACA..

Lol you make it sound like the insurance companies had a choice. The truth is that the emperor knew that it was standard practice for insurance companies to make annual adjustments for plans... very minor ones . The emperor knew that once that happened the new regulations bound them to discontinue those plans. So stop the ruse of blaming the insurance companies . That dog don't hunt .

So stop the ruse of blaming the insurance companies . That dog don't hunt .
They knock themselves out thinking of ways to make money. This was a no-brainer.

Yes it was a no brainer if the goal was to destroy the private insurance industry . He should hang his Mission Accomplished banner and do a Snoopy dance ,and spike a football instead of his faux phony apology .

Or you can lose the fake outrage and concern for consumers and get a consensus that's fair for us all.

Hello again, tom:
That dog don't hunt .

You appear to BELIEVE that if something goes wrong in the government, Obama KNEW about it. Not only do you believe that, you think he ENGINEERED the deception...

I don't believe that at all.

excon

PS> In case you're interested, I BELIEVE that George W. Bush BELIEVED that Iraq HAD WMD'S.

If the CEO of an insurance company went on air and advertised saying 'if you like your plan you can keep it.. period ' and then pulled this bait and switch like the emperor did ;Eric Holder would be rushing to prosecute him today.

Hello again, tom:

You appear to BELIEVE that if something goes wrong in the government, Obama KNEW about it. Not only do you believe that, you think he ENGINEERED the deception...

I don't believe that at all.

excon

PS> In case you're interested, I BELIEVE that George W. Bush BELIEVED that Iraq HAD WMD'S.

Yes he did know . Even the water carriers at NBC admit that much .
http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/29/21222195-obama-administration-knew-millions-could-not-keep-their-health-insurance?lite

Hello again, tom:

' and then pulled this bait and switch like the emperor did ;Eric Holder would be rushing to prosecute him today.Nahhhh...

Apparently, you don't understand bait and switch very well.. It's illegal because they switch you into an INFERIOR product. That's CHEATING 'em. But, Obama switched people into a SUPERIOR product.. That's giving 'em a BENEFIT.

excon

Try to keep up Tom, insurance companies have been kicking people off their insurance for decades. It use to be pre existing conditions, now its Obama. Its another excuse. The difference now is all those people who got letters of termination have somewhere else to go.

That's what you are really mad about. Admit it.

And he still lies about it .

CHUCK TODD:
Even if you didn't intentionally do it, but at this point, they feel misled. And you've seen the anger that's out there.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:
You know-- I regret very much that-- what we intended to do, which is to make sure that everybody is moving into better plans because they want 'em, as opposed to because they're forced into it.
NBC News Press Release (http://nbcumv.com/mediavillage/networks/nbcnews/pressreleases?pr=contents/press-releases/2013/11/07/nbcnewsexclusiv1471967.xml)
Nope he's forcing people into plans they don't want .

Hello again, tom:

which is to make sure that everybody is moving into better plans because they want 'em, as opposed to because they're forced into it.He made the mistake of believing that people would WANT a superior product, instead of b!tching about losing an inferior one.

It's a pretty right wing belief, wouldn't you concur?

excon

Thanks for making my point. When people were forced off before, you didn't give a rats patoot.

Now you love the rats patoot.

If the CEO of an insurance company went on air and advertised saying 'if you like your plan you can keep it.. period ' and then pulled this bait and switch
They've been doing that since Day One by raising rates and forcing insureds to pay the higher premium or find a cheaper plan with them or dump the company they have for a different one -- or just be uninsured.

They've been doing that since Day One by raising rates and forcing insureds to pay the higher premium or find a cheaper plan with them or dump the company they have for a different one -- or just be uninsured.
I've dealt with various insurance companies covering heath, dental ,catastrophic ,long term care ,auto ,home ,personal life etc for many years .The one time one of them screwed me I dropped them .
Nope I'm quite sure that the people being dropped now feel the betrayal came from the White House

Nope I'm quite sure that the people being dropped now feel the betrayal came from the White House
Dropping for something better is the only way to go. If I were dropped, I would certainly look for what else is out there that is better. You HOPE those people feel betrayed -- but then they may feel betrayed by their formerly beloved insurance companies who dumped them.

Nope they heard the promise the emperor made MANY times

Nope they heard the promise the emperor made MANY times
True. And the insurance companies have NEVER made a promise that they won't screw their insureds any chance they get.

Hello again, tom:

Nope I'm quite sure that the people being dropped now feel the betrayal came from the White HouseIt's true. But, that's due to the lame stream media BUYING into the frenzy at FOX News.

excon

Hello again, tom:
It's true. But, that's due to the lame stream media BUYING into the frenzy at FOX News.

excon

Maybe one day the lame stream media will catch up to this lie too...
“Your healthcare costs will go DOWN an average $2500 per family”.

Hello again, tom:

“Your healthcare costs will go DOWN an average $2500 per family”.The problem with Obama's promises, is that he didn't differentiate BETWEEN particular groups of people... To SOME, and I don't know how many, THAT statement isn't a lie. To MOST of the people in the country, the promise that you can KEEP your plan AND your doctor, ISN'T a lie.

Look. I'm NOT happy with the rollout. I'm not happy with the "bait and switch" as you call it. But, I'd be a great deal LESS happy if the bait and switch resulted in the consumer being CHEATED.

I'm able to look PAST this kerfuffle to see 30 million people having insurance that NEVER had it before... Funny... I don't hear you cheering for THAT.. Of course, you HAVE insurance, don't you.

excon

I'm able to look PAST this kerfuffle to see 30 million people having insurance that NEVER had it before
Mostly people between jobs for a short time and invincibles who don't want it anyway (and probably deserve the hosing they are getting ,as they are the zombies who bit into his whole cr@p sandwich from the beginning) .

Mostly people between jobs for a short time and invincibles who don't want it anyway (and probably deserve the hosing they are getting ,as they are the zombies who bit into his whole cr@p sandwich from the beginning) .

What we had before was a crap sandwich. Prejudicial rhetoric aside.

Nah Gallup's latest poll found that only 22% of uninsured Americans say they plan to get insurance through the exchanges.So the whole system was destroyed to cater to a very small segment of the population.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/11/08/Poll-Most-uninsured-Americans-ignoring-health-exchange-websites/UPI-75571383934233/?spt=rln&or=2
Obamacare was sold as a way to get everyone health insurance. In the end, it is likely going to destroy the health insurance industry so that no one has it.

Obamacare was sold as a way to get everyone health insurance. In the end, it is likely going to destroy the health insurance industry so that no one has it.

Well won't your protected medico's have to deal with reality then

Here's the deal... to insure the alleged and questionable total of 30 million Americans who lacked health insurance ,over 50 million Americans will lose there's ,and will be forced to weigh the choice of paying for a much more expensive plan ,or opt to pay the penalty... oops I mean tax.
WASHINGTON: Analysis: Tens of millions could be forced out of health insurance they had | White House | McClatchy DC (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/07/207909/analysis-tens-of-millions-could.html)

Here's the deal... to insure the alleged and questionable total of 30 million Americans who lacked health insurance ,over 50 million Americans will lose there's ,and will be forced to weigh the choice of paying for a much more expensive plan ,or opt to pay the penalty... oops I mean tax.
WASHINGTON: Analysis: Tens of millions could be forced out of health insurance they had | White House | McClatchy DC (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/07/207909/analysis-tens-of-millions-could.html)

Depends on the group you belong to. If you were part of the 30 m then you would probably think it is a good idea. No doubt you are part of the 50 m who think it is a bad idea.

Depends on the group you belong to. If you were part of the 30 m then you would probably think it is a good idea. No doubt you are part of the 50 m who think it is a bad idea.

Most of them didn't want it anyway. They are the ones ,the so called young 'invincibles' that Obamacare screws, even as it is dependent on their participation. They had already made the calculation that they were healthy ,and their incomes would be better spent on other luxuries like starting their adult life. The very few who were legitimately falling through the cracks could've been dealt with without destroying what we had.

Most of them didn't want it anyway. They are the ones ,the so called young 'invincibles' that Obamacare screws, even as it is dependent on their participation. They had already made the calculation that they were healthy ,and their incomes would be better spent on other luxuries like starting their adult life. The very few who were legitimately falling through the cracks could've been dealt with without destroying what we had.


No one is invincible. In other words, you are saying these people can't have things both ways so they are prepared to take the risk that nothing major will go wrong with their health.

In all honesty what sort of justification are you trying to put forward. Of course it is possible to have it both ways.

I'm saying they exercised their right of choice.

I'm saying they exercised their right of choice.

So that makes it OK then?

Tom, do you want the tired horses or no horses at all? You have a right to choose.

It's a scam. The gvt cut Medicare and is depending on the young and healthy to pony up and make up the difference.

It's a scam. The gvt cut Medicare and is depending on the young and healthy to pony up and make up the difference.

Tom that doesn't cut it. There is absolutely no way that a medically advanced society such as yours should offer up any sort of Hobson's choice, whether it be Medicare or; as in your post, a choice of lifestyle or health insurance.

The REAL problem is that state mandates and other factors like tort law make health care unaffordable to the young. Why should they be covered for sh+t they don't want or need ? When libs talk about affordable health care they mean subsidies that other people pay for . In this case ,it's a wealth transfer from these kids who are not making a lot of money and are trying to start their lives, to the elders who often have more than enough resources to care for themselves . That is and has always been one of the fatal flaws of social insurance .

The REAL problem is that state mandates and other factors like tort law make health care unaffordable to the young. Why should they be covered for sh+t they don't want or need ? When libs talk about affordable health care they mean subsidies that other people pay for . In this case ,it's a wealth transfer from these kids who are not making a lot of money and are trying to start their lives, to the elders who often have more than enough resources to care for themselves . That is and has always been one of the fatal flaws of social insurance .

The real problem is blame shifting. How about you put down your ideological lens for the moment.

Young people are being forced to move from the 'old system' whereby they at least had a choice between lifestyle or health insurance ( according to your post anyway).

Now under the new system they have no choice at all. It is like I said before, do you want the tired horses or no horses at all? I just can't understand why you can't do better. Well, actually I do know.

Better would be getting the government out of it . I don't have the time to go back to my past posts ,but I have already demonstrated that when a medical procedure is not covered by insurance ,and subject to market forces by competing physicians ,the prices are affordable . What the left feeds us is this bs about the possibility that things can be 'free'. Subsidies are just wealth transfers when you break them down to their essentials.

Better would be getting the government out of it . I don't have the time to go back to my past posts ,but I have already demonstrated that when a medical procedure is not covered by insurance ,and subject to market forces by competing physicians ,the prices are affordable . What the left feeds us is this bs about the possibility that things can be 'free'. Subsidies are just wealth transfers when you break them down to their essentials.

You won't put that lens down, will you? Tom, going over your pervious posts will add nothing in terms of our discussion.

You have not addressed any of the issues I have raised.

And still the emperor lies ,even after he allegedly apologized for lying...

For Americans with insurance coverage who like what they have, they can keep it. Nothing in this act or anywhere in the bill forces anyone to change the insurance they have, period.
Title I. Quality, Affordable Health Care for All Americans | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/proposal/titlei)
The emperor has no shame.

You won't put that lens down, will you? Tom, going over your pervious posts will add nothing in terms of our discussion.

You have not addressed any of the issues I have raised.

Tutt he is only capable of addressing his own issues from within an eighteenth century lens

He doesn't understand the principle of mutual assurance, where you contribute over time towards the expenses you may incur because of catastrophy, this is the very basis of insurance, not that you reap an immediate benefit but you will reap a defined benefit upon the happening of a defined event

What's with this spell checker that is only capable of capitalising at the beginning of sentences, if you are going to do something don't do it the US way of SNAFU which obviously carried over into your health system

He doesn't understand the principle of mutual assurance, where you contribute over time towards the expenses you may incur because of catastrophy, this is the very basis of insurance, not that you reap an immediate benefit but you will reap a defined benefit upon the happening of a defined event
Nice try but that isn't how the social insurance system has evolved . It's a generational wealth transfer with a Ponzi scheme built in.

The real problem is blame shifting. How about you put down your ideological lens for the moment.

Young people are being forced to move from the 'old system' whereby they at least had a choice between lifestyle or health insurance ( according to your post anyway).

Now under the new system they have no choice at all. It is like I said before, do you want the tired horses or no horses at all? I just can't understand why you can't do better. Well, actually I do know.

Tired horses or no horses is sure a funny way of putting it when the facts show that not only are there no horses to do anything this system as it has been created (Obamacare) ends up pulling the horses along with everything else.

Lets not forget that this system was designed by the very system it was suppose to regulate and it represents a huge boon for insurance companies as well as more levels for the government to be directly involved in your life by way of law.

Tutt he is only capable of addressing his own issues from within an eighteenth century lens

He doesn't understand the principle of mutual assurance, where you contribute over time towards the expenses you may incur because of catastrophy, this is the very basis of insurance, not that you reap an immediate benefit but you will reap a defined benefit upon the happening of a defined event

What's with this spell checker that is only capable of capitalising at the beginning of sentences, if you are going to do something don't do it the US way of SNAFU which obviously carried over into your health system

Actually we understand the system very well of mutual assurance as that is how home and auto insurance works here. The biggest difference between that and heath insurance is when you want to purchase home or auto you get to choose and it is a needs based system. But with health insurance its not needs based nor can you bypass it. And the monies that many policy holders are getting hit with has nothing to do with actual policy rates. It has to do with how much handout they are to recieve based on how much money they make. So to me wealth transfer is iheirent in the system.


P.S. > If your having trouble or do not want the spell checker you can now go to your "options" page in your profile page and turn it off if you like.

Actually we understand the system very well of mutual assurance as that is how home and auto insurance works here. The biggest difference between that and heath insurance is when you want to purchase home or auto you get to choose and it is a needs based system. But with health insurance its not needs based nor can you bypass it. And the monies that many policy holders are getting hit with has nothing to do with actual policy rates. It has to do with how much handout they are to recieve based on how much money they make. So to me wealth transfer is iheirent in the system.

I'm trying to explain to Tom that health insurance is not a ponzi scheme or a wealth transfer, OK, this differs for other insurance because you have a third party involved, and there, if anywhere, you have socialisation, with the government meeting part of the premium and defining the benefits but it is no more a wealth transfer than social security



P.S. > If your having trouble or do not want the spell checker you can now go to your "options" page in your profile page and turn it off if you like.

Thanks, I'll try that

but it is no more a wealth transfer than social security
I rest my case . It may not be one in theoretical concept ...but it certainly has evolved into one . There is not a young American today who thinks that SS will be available to them when they retire . We just don't make babies like we used to ;especially when we have already wacked 50 million of them .The trust fund is full of IOUs and there aren't enough at the bottom of the pyramid to fund it . In fact ;it looks like a reverse top heavy pyramid with the baby boomers retiring as we speak.

Back in the day we thought SS wasn't going to be there for us either. We were wrong.

I rest my case . It may not be one in theoretical concept ...but it certainly has evolved into one . There is not a young American today who thinks that SS will be available to them when they retire . We just don't make babies like we used to ;especially when we have already wacked 50 million of them .The trust fund is full of IOUs and there aren't enough at the bottom of the pyramid to fund it . In fact ;it looks like a reverse top heavy pyramid with the baby boomers retiring as we speak.


you see Tom you can't have low taxation and Social Security and you need to be kicking the arses of those lazy politicians of yours from Maine to New Mexico so they can do some real work and sort the mess out. If your baby boomers have been doing it right they will have their own schemes anyway, after all, isn't that the land of opportunity. No what has happened is you have been overtaken by the BULLSHlT

Its far from as gloomy a picture as Tom paints Clete.

Tal we are all aware of the problems of an aging population, your system is not alone in groaning under the weight. What it comes down to is making sure that the population is making investments for the future no matter how difficult it seems. The ME generation does want to think about the future and Tom is defending them with all this objection to SS, health Insurance, etc, but I for one am sick of making a wealth transfer to the young, let the lazy little buggers get off their arses and earn for themselves

oh in other words ,people should be planning for their own retirements . But that's the problem when you nurture this nanny state mentality .People stop being self sufficient .

oh in other words ,people should be planning for their own retirements . But that's the problem when you nurture this nanny state mentality .People stop being self sufficient .
yes that's the idea whether it is a government scheme tied into taxation or a personal scheme mandated by government, in other words no free rides and that goes for health insurance too

The wealth transfer to the young is a MYTH. Debt and low wages but no evidence of wealth. Retirement planning takes MONEY and I doubt middle income folks will ever squirrel away enough and all we need is another bank robbery on Wall Street to wipe out the few bucks you do save.

Nobody is talking about fixing the broken capitalist business model that has transferred all the worlds wealth to the very few. Trickle down economics has been replaced by austerity. The nanny state hides the oligarchy, and job creators are a marketing strategy. That's where the true transfer of wealth resides.

The wealth transfer to the young is a MYTH. Debt and low wages but no evidence of wealth. Retirement planning takes MONEY and I doubt middle income folks will ever squirrel away enough and all we need is another bank robbery on Wall Street to wipe out the few bucks you do save.

Nobody is talking about fixing the broken capitalist business model that has transferred all the worlds wealth to the very few. Trickle down economics has been replaced by austerity. The nanny state hides the oligarchy, and job creators are a marketing strategy. That's where the true transfer of wealth resides.

Tal I have to call you on this one, that is total BULLSHlT. Apparently I am among the top 5% of wealthy in my country because I own my own home, have no debts and have some retirement savings. I was middle income, if there is such a thing, though never among to top earners and I did all that in the last ten years of my working life, having gone through a divorce that stuffed any financial planning I had done. The wealth transfer to the young I am talking about is allowing them a free ride by not insisting they make contribution to health care, to social security and retirement planning and to meet their share of taxation so they pay for the economic resource they enjoy and use up.

Sure there are the super rich, a race apart as they have always been, users and usurpers the lot of them, but forget them and look to the average person, they have to change the paradigm they live in or the poor will always be with us

All due respect but comparing what's going on in Australia to what's going on here in the USA is apple to oranges. Talk to me when you have to split your resources between 360 million people.

You are doing good, but we have far more cats to herd.

Yes Tal I know you are different, we long ago found herding sheep was easier, less bullshlt and no meowing about me, you see that was your mistake thinking you need 360 million people, you got the people and you got their problems, we got 360 million sheep, well maybe not quite that many these days, and they don't take up the resources like cats do.

We can't get done what you get done and yet we seem to do what we do better, we have learned to do with less. I expect the cats are the problem, must be a shortage of cat wranglers

I expect the cats are the problem, must be a shortage of cat wranglers
It's the car fur that keeps sticking to our clothes and getting into our food plus the hair balls blowing into the corners.

It's the car fur that keeps sticking to our clothes and getting into our food plus the hair balls blowing into the corners.
so more work for cleaners then, my daughter has a Labrador like that

Yes Tal I know you are different, we long ago found herding sheep was easier, less bullshlt and no meowing about me, you see that was your mistake thinking you need 360 million people, you got the people and you got their problems, we got 360 million sheep, well maybe not quite that many these days, and they don't take up the resources like cats do.

We can't get done what you get done and yet we seem to do what we do better, we have learned to do with less. I expect the cats are the problem, must be a shortage of cat wranglers

Its not like we needed 360 million people, but that's what freedom is about, the right to breed, and multiply. If the rich guys would stop playing hide the dollar, there would be plenty of resources to go around, and when the civil social war is over, back to work we go.

You shouldn't listen to TParty gloom and doom, we don't. Just grab 'em by the legs and pull 'em along. Be careful, they do kick.

Its not like we needed 360 million people, but that's what freedom is about, the right to breed, and multiply. If the rich guys would stop playing hide the dollar, there would be plenty of resources to go around, and when the civil social war is over, back to work we go.

You shouldn't listen to TParty gloom and doom, we don't. Just grab 'em by the legs and pull 'em along. Be careful, they do kick.

Not interested in ultraconservatives, Tal anymore than I am interested in ultraprogressives. the rich have to be tamed and taxation is the way to do that, they have to learn that accumulation should be as the result of investment not hoarding so the tax system should lean towards giving incentives for investment and punishing super profits. There are some who think that the rich are generous but they do nothing from alteristic motives. They like to give handouts rather than contribute taxes

Simply amazing. It's like Kramer is running the country and you people think he's a genius. You promised us muffin tops and gave us stumps. Put us in line with a promise of this fantastic soup only to hear "no soup for you" while making that can of generic condensed split pea unaffordable and telling us it's far superior. Don't even make me go into the whole library cop thing or how you've turned us into a nation of Georges.

Simply amazing. It's like Kramer is running the country and you people think he's a genius. You promised us muffin tops and gave us stumps. Put us in line with a promise of this fantastic soup only to hear "no soup for you" while making that can of generic condensed split pea unaffordable and telling us it's far superior. Don't even make me go into the whole library cop thing or how you've turned us into a nation of Georges.

You want to use examples from a sitcom about nothing, The soup nazi is the Tparty and it's cronies with their no jobs for you mantra and what you have is a whole lot of Marie's looking for their douches. You are a nation run by Georges, just look at your Congress, you don't have Kramer in the White House, you have Jerry, the comedian who talks about nothing

If you're going to try and top me at last make sense.

If you're going to try and top me at last make sense.
Not interested in topping you just playing along with the theme

Yeah, well make sense with it. Meanwhile, Obama's home town paper and cheerleader dumped on him (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/obamacare-ct-edit-1111-20131111,0,459810.story) pretty good - and in the process sounded much like me.


President Barack Obama's signature accomplishment is teetering. The Obamacare website is a national punch line. Millions of Americans, repeatedly reassured by Obama that they could keep their doctors and health plans, are discovering that they can't. Their insurance policies are being canceled. The price of new coverage is substantially higher. The new coverage may force them to choose new doctors. And the law says they have to buy insurance or pay a fine.

People are deeply concerned, and for good reason. This is, as Democratic Sen. Max Baucus famously predicted seven months ago, a "train wreck."

...

Much of the focus in Washington has been on the political consequences of the Obamacare disaster, whether Democrats are vulnerable and Republicans can take advantage.

No surprise there. Democratic leaders forced the law through Congress without a single Republican vote. The architects of Obamacare brushed aside sharp warnings from tech wizards that the computer system wasn't tested and ready. They piled hundreds of pages of last-minute regulations on insurers. They forced insurers to cancel policies by the thousands because those policies fell short of the soup-to-nuts coverage required by the law.

The American public is having a credibility-shattering debate about the president: Did he not bother to learn the details of the law before he told us we could keep our doctors and our insurance, or did he know the truth and flat-out lie?

Political consequences from the early failure of Obamacare are likely. But far more important are the personal consequences for American consumers.

There are early indications that many young and healthy people are opting not to buy insurance. There are two likely reasons: It's nearly impossible for anyone to sign up, and the cost is prohibitive for people who have modest incomes but don't qualify for subsidies.

If this continues, you'll hear the phrase "death spiral" more and more. That's the term insurance execs use to describe what will happen if young and relatively healthy people don't pay into the system while older people with greater health care needs sign up. If that happens, increased costs will vastly outstrip increased revenues, putting enormous financial pressure on the whole scheme.
...

An essential first step: Accept that government doesn't know what's best for everyone. That people can decide what coverage they need and can afford. A strong marketplace offers choices for every wallet. Obamacare's rules curtail those choices. Why, for instance, should only people under age 30 be eligible to purchase lower-cost "catastrophic" insurance? Pinching Americans' coverage choices is one big reason this law doesn't work.

Republicans will have to be constructive. They've talked "repeal and replace," but the public has no idea what they would offer as a replacement.

Democrats will have to avoid being defensive. It was a mistake to attempt such a massive government intrusion on a marketplace and a mistake to do so without anything close to a public consensus.

Damn that all sounds familiar.

Republicans will have to be constructive. They've talked "repeal and replace," but the public has no idea what they would offer as a replacement.

SOS as before more than likely. Quoting a philandering drunk hurts your credibility. So what if he is a democratic senator.

And that's all you got out of that?

if the public has no idea what the Republicans would offer as replacement it's because they haven't paid attention ,and idiots like those in the Chi-town Rag editorial board have not offered to examine them or dismissed them without serious consideration.

if the public has no idea what the Republicans would offer as replacement it's because they haven't paid attention ,and idiots like those in the Chi-town Rag editorial board have not offered to examine them or dismissed them without serious consideration.

Well hey, it took them this long to look into what the emperor has been saying for all these years.

Hello again, tom:

if the public has no idea what the Republicans would offer as replacement it's because they haven't paid attentionI pay attention.. Lemme see if I can name 'em. Tort reform, buying insurance across state lines, health savings accounts, and.. and.....

Am I forgetting something?

excon

if the public has no idea what the Republicans would offer as replacement it's because they haven't paid attention ,and idiots like those in the Chi-town Rag editorial board have not offered to examine them or dismissed them without serious consideration.

What if we read it and rejected it after serious consideration? Like your jobs plan, keep the Bush tax cuts and add more cuts to them, and let the money trickle down to everyone else.

Hello again, tom:
I pay attention.. Lemme see if I can name 'em. Tort reform, buying insurance across state lines, health savings accounts, and.. and.....

Am I forgetting something?

excon

yup those were just some of the things I mentioned

Here are a few that was introduced before Obamacare :
10 Steps to Transform Health Care - Issue Statements - United States Senator Mike Enzi (http://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/10-steps-to-transform-health-care?p=10StepstoTransformHealthCare)
Dr. Coburn, colleagues introduce "Every American Insured Health Act" - Press Releases - Tom Coburn, M.D., United States Senator from Oklahoma (http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ContentRecord_id=044cf2d2-802a-23ad-4edb-ca1777cebe6d&ContentType_id=d741b7a7-7863-4223-9904-8cb9378aa03a&Group_idhttp://ushealthpolicygateway.com/vii-key-policy-issues-regulation-and-reform/p-health-reform/national-health-reform/models-for-health-reform/universal-health-savings-accounts/=7a55cb96-4639-4dac-8c0c-99a4a227bd3a)
Fixed Tax Credits | U.S. Health Policy Gateway (http://ushealthpolicygateway.com/vii-key-policy-issues-regulation-and-reform/p-health-reform/national-health-reform/models-for-health-reform/fixed-tax-credits/)
Healthy Americans Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_Americans_Act)
http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=d2f94455-368c-45b5-8d56-fc195a833884
Individual Pay or Play | U.S. Health Policy Gateway (http://ushealthpolicygateway.com/vii-key-policy-issues-regulation-and-reform/p-health-reform/national-health-reform/models-for-health-reform/individual-pay-or-play/)
http://tomprice.house.gov/sites/tomprice.house.gov/files/HR%202300%20Section%20by%20Section.pdf
Health Status Insurance | U.S. Health Policy Gateway (http://ushealthpolicygateway.com/vii-key-policy-issues-regulation-and-reform/p-health-reform/national-health-reform/models-for-health-reform/health-status-insurance/)
there are others ,but why should I post any more ? You won't read these and will dismiss them out of hand because they don't offer nanny state universal insurance .

Most of what I read is in the ACA, so some serious consideration was made of republican proposals. The problem is once you got your amendments you still voted no.

Republican Ideas Included in the President's Proposal | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/republican-ideas)


Throughout the debate on health insurance reform, Republican concepts and proposals have been included in legislation. In fact, hundreds of Republican amendments were adopted during the committee mark-up process. As a result, both the Senate and the House passed key Republican proposals that are incorporated into the President's Proposal.

Be sure to read the whole thing.