# Nation's largest health insurer about to exit obamacare???!!!



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 19, 2015)

And this is ENTIRELY obozo's fault.  Not a a single repub voted for this nightmare when it passed in 2010. We need to go back to what we had before obamacare.



> Nation's largest insurer may exit Obamacare due to losses
> 
> nov 19 2015   UnitedHealth Group, the largest insurance company in the U.S., on Thursday slashed its earnings outlook, citing new problems related to Obamacare, and told investors it may exit the program's exchanges.
> 
> ...


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> And this is ENTIRELY obozo's fault.  Not a a single repub voted for this nightmare when it passed in 2010. We need to go back to what we had before obamacare.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



We don't need do anything. Obamacare is self-destructing every day.


----------



## saveliberty (Nov 19, 2015)

They insure about 550,000 of the 9.9M on Obamacare.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 19, 2015)

Good. We're getting closer to single payer every day. It's good to know the right can't do anything to stop it. After all, the voted to kill Obamacare more than 50 times.


----------



## Spinster (Nov 19, 2015)

Predicted, actually hope, United Healthcare would fail. Worst experience I've had thus far with health insurance, yet. Had them year before last. Never, ever again. Awful, deplorable customer service!


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 19, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> Good. We're getting closer to single payer every day. It's good to know the right can't do anything to stop it. After all, the voted to kill Obamacare more than 50 times.



After govt failed with obamacare you think america wants MORE govt involvement in health care.?  THINK


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 19, 2015)

We need to consider getting rid of healthcare insurance. As recently as 50 years ago most middle class americans did NOT have it and health care was good and much cheaper.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> Good. We're getting closer to single payer every day. It's good to know the right can't do anything to stop it. After all, the voted to kill Obamacare more than 50 times.



Well, Bernie wanted to go there but his plan would cost $15 Trillion and he had to finally admit we couldn't go to single payer.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> We need to consider getting rid of healthcare insurance. As recently as 50 years ago most middle class americans did NOT have it and health care was good and much cheaper.



I had good health insurance through my employer 50 years ago.


----------



## rdean (Nov 19, 2015)

The GOP plan hasn't changed from "let him die".


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> ShootSpeeders said:
> 
> 
> > We need to consider getting rid of healthcare insurance. As recently as 50 years ago most middle class americans did NOT have it and health care was good and much cheaper.
> ...




I did too, until they dropped me.


----------



## PaintMyHouse (Nov 19, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> Good. We're getting closer to single payer every day. It's good to know the right can't do anything to stop it. After all, the voted to kill Obamacare more than 50 times.


^^^^ bingo.  It's a bad system, not what we need anyway so, crash it and start over with what other modern nations already have.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > ShootSpeeders said:
> ...



I've been insured since I was eighteen. I'm nearly 72 now. Never been dropped by any insurance company. I have heart problems, PAD, diabetes, and COPD.  I never had an Obamacare type policy and I have great insurance paying zero office visit and zero deductible. I have Medicare and my other insurance pays what Medicare doesn't pay. All I pay are the Medicare premium and the insurance premium.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...




If everybody were as lucky as you there would be no need for Obamacare. Sadly, most not.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



No luck involved. It was a question of priorities. I didn't drive a new Ford F150 pulling a nice boat. I took care of my family.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...




Does  that matter? Do people who own boats not deserve the opportunity to buy healthcare?


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Everyone has always had the opportunity to buy health insurance. Many simply chose not to do so until they had a major accident or illness.


----------



## PaintMyHouse (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...


No, the ability of nearly everyone to now by in is new.  Privite companies were not required to provide access even at outrageous prices.  That's capitalism for ya, and part of the problem.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 19, 2015)

Spinster said:


> Predicted, actually hope, United Healthcare would fail. Worst experience I've had thus far with health insurance, yet. Had them year before last. Never, ever again. Awful, deplorable customer service!


Had them for nine yrs.....0 probs


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> Everyone has always had the opportunity to buy health insurance.



In the sense that everyone has always had the opportunity to buy a Lexus.



the_human_being said:


> Many simply chose not to do so until they had a major accident or illness.



Many chose not to, true.  And they're the ones howling the loudest now about being "forced" to take adult responsibility.

However, either you really don't know as much as you claim to, or you're lying about people waiting until they have a major accident or illness.

Here's a test for you: What would happen if you waited until after you smashed up your car to get auto insurance?  (Hint: Your premiums would be obscene.)

Why pretend the old system of health insurance was any different?

The only  area in which it was different was in preexisting conditions.  That would be the equivalent of an auto insurer saying "Sorry, we don't like the model you're driving.  No coverage."

Stop lying.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > Everyone has always had the opportunity to buy health insurance.
> ...



Who's lying?  What I said was that many people waited until they had a major illness or accident. Now, once they have had a heart  attack or something, they now have a pre-existing condition and no insurance company would have taken them. You need to read and understand what I am saying smartass.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

PaintMyHouse said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Yes. Back then the idea was to get your insurance while you were young and healthy and hold onto it. Once you had your insurance, if you suffered an illness, the insurance would pay.


----------



## PaintMyHouse (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> PaintMyHouse said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...


Most people get a group policy, that stays with their job.  Insurance is still capitalism, and therefore not the solution in many cases.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...



Next time make sure to include that last part.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

Listen, I feel sorry for the people. I hate to see anyone without insurance. The truth is though, like I stated, Obamacare is self-destructing every day. To deny that fact is the lie. Anytime a consumer is forced to purchase a product against his will, there must be something very wrong with the product.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

PaintMyHouse said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > PaintMyHouse said:
> ...



And people who become dependent on the employers' group plan don't realize that premiums don't stay the same with health insurance any more than they do with life insurance...they increase every five years.

That dependency leads to confusion and a lot of yammering on message boards.


----------



## deltex1 (Nov 19, 2015)

you might not be able to.  United Health care is backing out...can't afford the losses.  What ya say now Nancy?

Major insurer may leave ObamaCare


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

deltex1 said:


> you might not be able to.  United Health care is backing out...can't afford the losses.  What ya say now Nancy?
> 
> Major insurer may leave ObamaCare



Tell Nancy there's already a thread about this in the correct forum.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> PaintMyHouse said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...



Actually, five years has nothing to do with anything. The premiums could go up annually and often did. Once in a blue moon would the premiums decrease. Employer sponsored health insurance was the way to go for many people. Every federal employee in the world has a fantastic employer sponsored health plan. That's millions of people. The federal government pays 75% of an employee's premium.


----------



## deltex1 (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> deltex1 said:
> 
> 
> > you might not be able to.  United Health care is backing out...can't afford the losses.  What ya say now Nancy?
> ...


Are you competing to be a mod...or just a pain in the ass?


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

Rising Rates Pose Challenge to Health Law


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > PaintMyHouse said:
> ...



Guess it depends on the carrier.  Mine use to tick up every five years.

And, yes, employer-provided coverage was the norm for decades...emphasis on "was," because it's been eroding for decades as well.  The result, prior to the PPACA, was that some people got a free ride, often to a Cadillac plan (the higher up the corporate ladder - i.e., the less likely you were to need "free stuff" - the sweeter your plan), more and more people got dropped when the employer said "Sucks to be you," others relegated to contractor status whether they wanted to be or not, and others were just priced out of the market.

In a word, chaos.

And, again, eliminating the middle man - i.e., the insurer - and going straight to single payer would have made more sense.

But lobbyists for the insurers and the pharma companies spread panic, and so...


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> deltex1 said:
> 
> 
> > you might not be able to.  United Health care is backing out...can't afford the losses.  What ya say now Nancy?
> ...



Obamacare is very political.


----------



## HenryBHough (Nov 19, 2015)

To those who are enraptured by single-payer:

Junior doctors vote to launch first 'all out' strike in NHS history

Yes, you can keep your doctor - if your doctor isn't on the picket line instead of being in the office.

But you liberals will like it that way - _equality_, y'know.....


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



It is what it is. Something, sometime or another will have to be done about the influence these lobbyists put on Congress members.


----------



## Vigilante (Nov 19, 2015)

And as he continues to LIE, now even going so far as to put American lives in danger from muslim terrorists....


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...



Agreed.  But they've been loitering in the halls of government since Washington's day, so it won't be easy.  A gradual turning of the screws on big money interests (the How to Boil a Frog scenario), starting with overturning Citizens United, would accomplish it, with a little patience and a SCOTUS ruling (it was SCOTUS that opened the door for Citizens United in the first place).

It would have to apply to lobbyists across the board, though.

In the interim, single payer health coverage will be a reality eventually.


----------



## deltex1 (Nov 19, 2015)

SassyIrishLass said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > deltex1 said:
> ...




Search Results for Query: Obamacare | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum[node]=19


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Nov 19, 2015)

deltex1 said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



Meh, evidently not political enough....or....


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

Vigilante said:


> And as he continues to LIE...



Someone still doesn't understand the balance of powers...


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

SassyIrishLass said:


> deltex1 said:
> 
> 
> > SassyIrishLass said:
> ...



Or the board owners didn't think it was important enough to have its own forum?

Tell the class why you feel Americans' access to affordable health insurance is "political."


----------



## Vigilante (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Vigilante said:
> 
> 
> > And as he continues to LIE...
> ...


Amazingly, my young head full of bullshit, you don't understand "HE LIED!" and continues to!.... Watching your IQ drop while posting is a fun game!


----------



## Vigilante (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > deltex1 said:
> ...



And the #1 REASON is......


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > deltex1 said:
> ...



You're saying Obamacare isn't political? Really? are you sure? Makes no diff to me if it was moved, I'm getting  used to it.


----------



## Vigilante (Nov 19, 2015)




----------



## deltex1 (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > deltex1 said:
> ...


The link I posted says why it's political....at the least it shows a degree of inconsistency.....ehhhhh Marvin?


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Nov 19, 2015)

deltex1 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > SassyIrishLass said:
> ...



You have to be sort of daft and out in left field not to know Obamacare is political, it was never about insuring people it's about control and an agenda....and revenue


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

SassyIrishLass said:


> deltex1 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



And yet it's provided access to millions who didn't have it before.  Funny that.


----------



## deltex1 (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > deltex1 said:
> ...


And it's all free...


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Good. We're getting closer to single payer every day. It's good to know the right can't do anything to stop it. After all, the voted to kill Obamacare more than 50 times.
> ...



your falling on deaf ears dollar amounts dont mean anything to leftists 

they believe is a never ending supply of it


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Nov 19, 2015)

deltex1 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > SassyIrishLass said:
> ...



Yeah well it isn't. Not long ago my husband's firm's associates had 100% paid healthcare, today they pay for a percentage of it so the leeches can have healthcare, premiums went through the roof and the firm couldn't keep eating the increases so something had to give. Nothing  is ever free, someone pays


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

SassyIrishLass said:


> deltex1 said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



How long ago did your husband's employer ditch their employee group plan?


----------



## Spinster (Nov 19, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> Spinster said:
> 
> 
> > Predicted, actually hope, United Healthcare would fail. Worst experience I've had thus far with health insurance, yet. Had them year before last. Never, ever again. Awful, deplorable customer service!
> ...



Good for you. They couldn't do one thing correctly, including spell my name right. It was a solid year of mistakes and frustration. I would guess I wasn't the Lone Ranger. Maybe your life is blessed and your experiences all good.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 19, 2015)

Spinster said:


> Manonthestreet said:
> 
> 
> > Spinster said:
> ...


Hardly....started over multiple times in my career because of tumult in the industry. there have been times with no insurance,  marginal insurance and great insurance. Right now I have very good insurance at a great price and dont need to see it destroyed by Obamacare.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...




Wrong. Pre-existing conditions prevented many from being able to buy insurance.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 19, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


thats the propaganda.........used to destroy lot of other peoples coverage


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> PaintMyHouse said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...




They would pay right up until they decided to cancel your policy, and then, you couldn't buy another one anywhere. Obamacare fixed that.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 19, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > the_human_being said:
> ...




Idiot


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 19, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> Manonthestreet said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Brothers wife has lupas.....has never had a prob getting insurance....is it more expensive? yep.........but its out there and no thanks to Ocare


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 19, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Manonthestreet said:
> ...




It is there now. It wasn't always there before.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

^Exactly.

And, as an example, this is what lupus meds would cost without insurance:

How Much Does Lupus Treatment Cost? - CostHelper.com

That's just the medication, not the clinic visits, treatment for complications, etc.

Prior to the PPACA, lupus would be one of those preexisting conditions that an insurer might refuse to cover.  Even someone with insurance in place might hit a lifetime cap and be SoL.


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> I've been insured since I was eighteen. I'm nearly 72 now. Never been dropped by any insurance company. I have heart problems, PAD, diabetes, and COPD.  I never had an Obamacare type policy and I have great insurance paying zero office visit and zero deductible. I have Medicare and my other insurance pays what Medicare doesn't pay. All I pay are the Medicare premium and the insurance premium.



People like you are why we need to get rid of health insurance.  You're obese and a smoker and who knows what else.  But you know someone else will pay for your self-inflicted problems.


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> And yet it's provided access to millions who didn't have it before.  Funny that.



Yes  - another handout but even if we approve of that, it  could have easily been done under the old system  Just expand medicaid to include poor people without kids and to also take people with pre-existing conditions. But obozo insisted on overhauling the whole healthcare industry with his 2500 page law.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > And yet it's provided access to millions who didn't have it before.  Funny that.
> ...



(A) It's not a "handout"
(B) It's 906 pages, not 2,500, and you can thank Congress for that
(C) You're essentially describing single-payer, which is what will be the end result

But thank you for a reasonable post.


----------



## HenryBHough (Nov 19, 2015)

Imagine how healthy the population would be after just ten years of letting all the sick and disabled die off!

It's health care that's allowing the defective to breed.  If they all died as infants like God intended then all thke bad genes would be gone in two generations.

Besides, too many people is causing greed and global warming!  

Isn't that right?


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

HenryBHough said:


> Imagine how healthy the population would be after just ten years of letting all the sick and disabled die off!
> 
> It's health care that's allowing the defective to breed.  If they all died as infants like God intended then all thke bad genes would be gone in two generations.
> 
> ...



Thank you, Sarah Palin.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > PaintMyHouse said:
> ...



You are speaking of an individual insurance policy Stupid. We were discussing employer sponsored group insurance policies. When one is part of a group, the insurance company has to cancel the whole group - not just one policy holder.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 19, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > I've been insured since I was eighteen. I'm nearly 72 now. Never been dropped by any insurance company. I have heart problems, PAD, diabetes, and COPD.  I never had an Obamacare type policy and I have great insurance paying zero office visit and zero deductible. I have Medicare and my other insurance pays what Medicare doesn't pay. All I pay are the Medicare premium and the insurance premium.
> ...



Smartass, I weigh 162 lbs and stand 5 feet ten. My COPD was caused by asbestos exposure. You're a special kind of stupid. What if I said you were on AIDS, ugly and on food stamps? How would that go for you. Stupid Idiot.


----------



## Zander (Nov 19, 2015)

Everyone in the country agrees that the VA is the worst healthcare in the country. It' s a single payer program.

Why would we want to double down on stupid?


----------



## HenryBHough (Nov 19, 2015)

Zander said:


> Everyone in the country agrees that the VA is the worst healthcare in the country. It' s a single payer program.
> 
> Why would we want to double down on stupid?



You ask that question in a nation that elected Obama twice?


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> ^Exactly.
> 
> And, as an example, this is what lupus meds would cost without insurance:
> 
> ...


didnt read did ya,,,,,,never had a prob finding insurance


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

Zander said:


> Everyone in the country agrees that the VA is the worst healthcare in the country. It' s a single payer program.
> 
> Why would we want to double down on stupid?



VA care varies by location.  Some of it sucks, some of it's excellent...at least according to the veterans utilizing the system, and I'll take their word over some media wonk.

"Doubling down on stupid" is the same rationale that says "The UK system is single payer and it sucks..." therefore let's ignore all the other countries whose systems have improved on the British system.

The problem with being stuck in a particular mindset is that you assume it's unchangeable.  As soon as it does change, you freak.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > ^Exactly.
> ...



So you say.  Assuming it's been the same carrier throughout, it's possible.  Probably employer-provided, so you'd have no idea what the premiums would be if your brother and his wife had to get pay them on their own (assuming y'all talk about things like that; my brother and I don't).

My point in posting that link was to show how much the treatment for this disease would have cost someone who had no insurance.

That's all.  If you choose to make something else out of it, I can't stop you.


----------



## dblack (Nov 19, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> And this is ENTIRELY obozo's fault.  Not a a single repub voted for this nightmare when it passed in 2010. We need to go back to what we had before obamacare.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Don't worry yourself. This is the purpose of ACA. We're driving toward three our four mega-corporations that will dictate our health care. United will be absorbed by one of these and be fine.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Nov 19, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> And this is ENTIRELY obozo's fault.  Not a a single repub voted for this nightmare when it passed in 2010. We need to go back to what we had before obamacare.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




No we shouldn't go back to the status quo.
We need real healthcare reform that favors the consumer.  The healthcare pricing in the US should be competitive with the rest of the world.  Before Obamacare the cost of healthcare in the US was outrageous and it still is.  It doesn't take a genius to see that.  Americans were getting fucked over and we still are getting fucked over.
It really can't be that tough, the rest of the world isn't getting fucked in the ass by the healthcare industry, no it's just the US.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

dblack said:


> ShootSpeeders said:
> 
> 
> > And this is ENTIRELY obozo's fault.  Not a a single repub voted for this nightmare when it passed in 2010. We need to go back to what we had before obamacare.
> ...



Y'all didn't seem to mind it when the big banks started gobbling each other up...


----------



## Zander (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Everyone in the country agrees that the VA is the worst healthcare in the country. It' s a single payer program.
> ...


----------



## dblack (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > ShootSpeeders said:
> ...



Pretty sure you got no idea what "Me'all" is about.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 19, 2015)

Zander said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...







dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Tell me you'd be in support of reinstating Glass Steagall and I'd be encouraged.


----------



## dblack (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



Repealing Glass Steagall was a mistake. I'd support reinstating it, but likely not for the same reasons as you. I'd much rather end the Fed entirely.


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 19, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> (A) It's not a "handout"
> (B) It's 906 pages, not 2,500, and you can thank Congress for that
> (C) You're essentially describing single-payer, which is what will be the end result
> 
> .



Not a handout????  uranidiot.   People that are poor but not poor enough for medicaid get a pretty good policy for $10 a month.  You think  that's the true cost of the insurance???  THINK


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 19, 2015)

the_human_being said:


> ShootSpeeders said:
> 
> 
> > People like you are why we need to get rid of health insurance.  You're obese and a smoker and who knows what else.  But you know someone else will pay for your self-inflicted problems.
> ...



Sorry but no one believes you.  Almost all diabetics are  fatties. As for the asbestos exposure - that's your fault.


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 19, 2015)

kiwiman127 said:


> [
> It really can't be that tough, the rest of the world isn't getting fucked in the ass by the healthcare industry, no it's just the US.



BS - socialized healthcare is a nightmare everywhere. I was recently reading a book about mexico and the author said that , contrary to what everyone says, mexico does not have universal health care. Their national health care system is just for the poor and is not very good.  Wealthy or middle class people are not eligible and pay  their own way.  And it's all in cash.  No insurance companies and no checks or credit cards. The author said  such health care is as good as america's (she spent most of her life in america) and at about 1/10th the cost.


----------



## Mac1958 (Nov 20, 2015)

No surprise.  UNH won't be the last.  What a ridiculous pig of a law.

The Medicare/Medicare Advantage/Medicare Supplement template is already set up and functioning.  It combines universal coverage with private sector competition & innovation, it would eliminate the fucking absurd seven-headed beast of a "system" (ha) we have now and would take a massive monkey off the back of American business.  It's sitting right there, functioning fine, just waiting to be scaled up.

Unfortunately, the two parties have their heads too far up their asses to see and act on this.
.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Nov 20, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> Good. We're getting closer to single payer every day. It's good to know the right can't do anything to stop it. After all, the voted to kill Obamacare more than 50 times.



This is exactly what the original prediction was. The left would give us Obamacare, and when it starts to fall apart and unable to be fixed, Dim lawmakers would throw their hands up in the air and say the only fix is to go full-blown single-payer.
Exactly what the goal was from the start.


----------



## the_human_being (Nov 20, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> the_human_being said:
> 
> 
> > ShootSpeeders said:
> ...



How man needles did you swap around before you got AIDS?  Do you have a medical license to practice over the internet?  When did you ever examine me?  Did you contact AIDS by sleeping around?  You need to do a refresher on diabetes. Many people with diabetes actually lose weight.  Brush up  on your subject.  As far as the asbestosis, it was not known back in the 1960's that it was harmful. Once again, your ignorance is astounding.

Why Do People With Diabetes Lose Weight? | LIVESTRONG.COM


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 20, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> This is exactly what the original prediction was. The left would give us Obamacare, and when it starts to fall apart and unable to be fixed, Dim lawmakers would throw their hands up in the air and say the only fix is to go full-blown single-payer.
> Exactly what the goal was from the start.



Yes, a lot of people said that but we'll see if it pans out that way. If we're gonna end obamacare we can just as easily  return to what we had before as go to single payer. It worked pretty well despite obozo's claim it was broken.  The moron says that about everything.


----------



## Zander (Nov 20, 2015)

Progressivism 101
Use government regulations to create an imbalance in the marketplace. Proclaim that the only way to fix the problem is with a government program. After that program creates dozens of new  problems, create a whole new government program to solve them. Wash, rinse, repeat.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

Zander said:


> Progressivism 101
> Use government regulations to create an imbalance in the marketplace. Proclaim that the only way to fix the problem is with a government program. After that program creates dozens of new  problems, create a whole new government program to solve them. Wash, rinse, repeat.



The imbalance was created when for-profit insurers entered the market.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 20, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Good. We're getting closer to single payer every day. It's good to know the right can't do anything to stop it. After all, the voted to kill Obamacare more than 50 times.
> ...



Single payer has always been the better system,but considering the right's pathological need to say no to anything, Obamacare was much better than what we had, and the best that could be done. at the time. If the right continues to  refuse to cooperate in any way, and prevents Obamacare from being as successful as possible, the only choice will be to go to single payer.


----------



## dblack (Nov 20, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Good. We're getting closer to single payer every day. It's good to know the right can't do anything to stop it. After all, the voted to kill Obamacare more than 50 times.
> ...



The goal of ACA was to avoid single payer.


----------



## dblack (Nov 20, 2015)

That's what so damnably frustrating about ACA. Those who support it are hoping it will fail. But it won't. We'll end up with a handful of mega-insurance corps, deeply embedded with government. Permanent rent seeking leeches, feeding at the public trough.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 20, 2015)

dblack said:


> That's what so damnably frustrating about ACA. Those who support it are hoping it will fail. But it won't. We'll end up with a handful of mega-insurance corps, deeply embedded with government. Permanent rent seeking leeches, feeding at the public trough.



If the RWNJ states would have cooperated just a little, it could have been better than it is. Unfortunately, they cared more about opposing our president than they care about the people.


----------



## dblack (Nov 20, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > That's what so damnably frustrating about ACA. Those who support it are hoping it will fail. But it won't. We'll end up with a handful of mega-insurance corps, deeply embedded with government. Permanent rent seeking leeches, feeding at the public trough.
> ...



They didn't vote for it. They didn't sign it into law.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

dblack said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Correct.  Congressional Republicans voted against the bill from the outset, then picked it to death at every stage - adding this, deleting that, adding something else, deleting yet another thing in an attempt to kill it. Then when they got all the "fixes" they wanted they voted against it anyway.

They were outnumbered.  Just as they've been outnumbered every time they've tried to kill it now that it's law.



dblack said:


> They didn't sign it into law.



Damn that tricameral government, huh?


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 20, 2015)

dblack said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...




States didn't have the opportunity to vote for or against it. All they could do is either implement it or pick it to pieces, assuring that it wouldn't work as well as intended.The goal for those states was to make sure it didn't work as possible. Thy screwed their own citizens in their effort to oppose a black president.


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 20, 2015)

dblack said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...



Yup - Not a single repub voted for this mess when it passed in 2010.  They knew it was going to implode.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



As I indicated in Post #95.  They picked at it and whined and stamped their feet until the insurers and pharma got what they wanted, then vetoed it in one Borg-like groupthink anyway.

If there's one thing y'all do best, it's carry on like four-year-olds.


----------



## dblack (Nov 20, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


They, most of them at least, voted against it for purely partisan reasons. ACA was essentially the same legislation Republicans would have produced if they'd been in charge. So I give them little to no credit for their opposition. 

But the Democrats had control of Congress and the White House. They got the law they wanted. For apologists to claim otherwise, for them to blame the flaws of ACA on those who didn't vote for it, is pathetic.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

dblack said:


> ShootSpeeders said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



This^.



dblack said:


> But the Democrats had control of Congress and the White House. They got the law they wanted. For apologists to claim otherwise, for them to blame the flaws of ACA on those who didn't vote for it, is pathetic.



That's a convenient dodge.  There's this thing called "compromise."  You'd have to look at the process over the lifetime of the bill (no different than most bills, really) to see what it began as and how it ended up and why.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 20, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




But it didn't implode. The right did succeed in making it less effective and denied decent healthcare to some, but that is all they did.


----------



## Votto (Nov 20, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Good. We're getting closer to single payer every day. It's good to know the right can't do anything to stop it. After all, the voted to kill Obamacare more than 50 times.
> ...


 
But the majority opposed Obamacare as well.

They no longer need our consent.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 20, 2015)

Votto said:


> ShootSpeeders said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




A large percentage of those opposed thought it didn't go far enough. There were very few who didn't want any healthcare program.


----------



## Votto (Nov 20, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> Votto said:
> 
> 
> > ShootSpeeders said:
> ...


 
Like I said, they no longer need our consent.

Thanks for proving my point.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

Votto said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Votto said:
> ...



Is it your perception that this is the exception to the way things run in this country, or is it just that this one annoys you?

What's your insurance status?


----------



## Zander (Nov 20, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Progressivism 101
> ...



That is something only a simpleton would believe.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

Zander said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...



If by "simpleton," you mean "someone familiar with the history of health insurance in the U.S.," you're correct.

If you mean something else, you'll refute my statement.


----------



## longknife (Nov 20, 2015)

Back to the thread!

*Largest Private Health Insurer Quitting ObamaCare *







What does that mean? Another cut in the side of the massive elephant in our midst?

_Translation: UHC is losing money by the truckload on O-Care policies and is looking to cut its losses, just like the smaller competitors that preceded them out the individual market door:_

Read more @ Political Pistachio: Largest Private Health Insurer Quitting ObamaCare


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

longknife said:


> Back to the thread!
> 
> *Largest Private Health Insurer Quitting ObamaCare *
> 
> ...



Another blog...and you might not want to use "elephant" as a metaphor...it's your party's logo.

Unless you mean that when we transition to single payer it will destroy the GOP.


----------



## Zander (Nov 20, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...




I am more than happy to read your explanation that - "for-proift" insurers created an imbalance in the healthcare market. I could use a good laugh. Have at it.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

Zander said:


> I am more than happy to read your explanation that - "for-proift" insurers created an imbalance in the healthcare market. I could use a good laugh. Have at it.



Judging from your sarcasm, I'm guessing you don't even know that the "Blues" began as nonprofits.


----------



## longknife (Nov 20, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Back to the thread!
> ...



So - what's wrong with a blog? Especially when it links to a "valid" source?

You are so brainwashed that you can't recognize truth when it hits you in the face.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

longknife said:


> So - what's wrong with a blog? Especially when it links to a "valid" source?



Why not just link to the valid source?


----------



## dblack (Nov 20, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > ShootSpeeders said:
> ...



What's to dodge? How and why ACA ended up a piece of shit is irrelevant. Maybe you're right. Maybe it was all the Republicans' fault. Maybe they got together with the insurance lobby and tricked the Democrats into writing a bad bill. But they weren't responsible for voting it into law. The Democrats could have stood up to the Republicans and health care lobby, but they didn't. The President could have vetoed the bill, but he didn't. The Democrats own ACA now, warts and all.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Again, the initial bill was not "bad."

And there's something called "compromise" that goes into the formulation of every law.  The problem in recent years has been Tea Party politicians convincing themselves (and their constituents) that compromise means "We do things my way or I shut the government down."


----------



## longknife (Nov 20, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



Gee whiz. That sounds like Dingy Harry and Queen Nancy,


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

longknife said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



I'm not familiar with all of the _dramatis personae_ in the Tea Party, only the ones that make the most noise.


----------



## longknife (Nov 20, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



What you Libtards love to ignore is that *THERE IS NO TEA PARTY!!!!!*

There are small groups of Americans all across this country who are fed up with the attacks upon the foundations of this nation and their freedoms.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

longknife said:


> *THERE IS NO TEA PARTY!!!!!*
> 
> There are small groups of Americans all across this country who are fed up with the attacks upon the foundations of this nation and their freedoms.



As distinct from the GOP, no, there is no Tea Party.  Just a subset of Republicans who ran on the premise "Put me in government and I'll shut down government," and tools like you who voted for them because they didn't see the disconnect.

Get back to me when you've figured out that there's no "Democrat party."


----------



## dblack (Nov 20, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...


Again, that's irrelevant. The final bill was bad. Democrats voted for, and Obama signed into law. No 'dodge' can deny that.


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 20, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> And there's something called "compromise" that goes into the formulation of every law.  The problem in recent years has been Tea Party politicians convincing themselves (and their constituents) that compromise means "We do things my way or I shut the government down."


 Democrats are the ones that wouldn't compromise. When you want to pass major legislation like obamacare it's important to have support from both parties. But obozo refused to  even listen to the GOP , and thus no repub voted for his bill and now he has to take all the blame. What a moron obama is.


----------



## Zander (Nov 20, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > I am more than happy to read your explanation that - "for-proift" insurers created an imbalance in the healthcare market. I could use a good laugh. Have at it.
> ...



Judging from your response, I'm guessing you cannot support your original statement.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > And there's something called "compromise" that goes into the formulation of every law.  The problem in recent years has been Tea Party politicians convincing themselves (and their constituents) that compromise means "We do things my way or I shut the government down."
> ...



When one party's definition of "compromise" is "NOOOOOOOOOOOO!" that doesn't leave much room for negotiation.

Word of advice: Make up your mind who the POTUS is.  You do yourself no service by flippety-floppeting on name changes in the same frigging post.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Nov 20, 2015)

rdean said:


> The GOP plan hasn't changed from "let him die".



In your case it's true.

For everyone else....you are full of s**t.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 20, 2015)

Zander said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...



Not if you can't even acknowledge that you understand what I'm talking about.

Now, dance around it a little more.


----------



## longknife (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > *THERE IS NO TEA PARTY!!!!!*
> ...



_As distinct from the GOP, no, there is no Tea Party.  Just a subset of Republicans who ran on the premise "Put me in government and I'll shut down government," and tools like you who voted for them because they didn't see the disconnect._

And who are you to say that all members of Tea Party groups are Republican?

From my research, they don't identify with either party and are either Independents or simply unafiliated.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 21, 2015)




----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 21, 2015)

longknife said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > longknife said:
> ...




Yet they always vote republican. Sounds like a distinction without a difference.


----------



## longknife (Nov 21, 2015)

BULLDOG said:


> longknife said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



What choice do they - and I - have?

A vote for anything other than the Big Two is a total waste. Better to chose None of the Above.

The Big Two have tied up the nomination and election process at the lowest level so it is almost to get viable and electable candidates on the ballots


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


>



So you'll be voting for a Democratic candidate in order to break up the big banks?  Assuming you can find your way to the correct forum, that is.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Manonthestreet said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


You do know your party bailed them out, refused to prosecute them and  is now bailing out the health insurance co's


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

longknife said:


> What choice do they - and I - have?



If they even knew how to spell "compromise," they could join forces with disaffected members of _both_ major parties as well as unaffiliated voters and form a genuine third party.  It's not as if that hasn't happened before.

Instead, they choose to drag the GOP ever further to the edge of their flat Earth until they either all fall off or moderate Republicans come to their senses and stop the splinter groups from destroying what was once a credible organization.


----------



## chikenwing (Nov 21, 2015)

rdean said:


> The GOP plan hasn't changed from "let him die".


Looks like the parrot hasn't learned any new words.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Manonthestreet said:
> ...



It's funny how you mention unaffiliated voters in one post and immediately default to "if you're not a Republican you must be a Democrat" in the next.

It's not "my" party.  It never has been.  I'm an unaffiliated voter and always will be.  If the GOP ever returned to the values that produced the Eisenhower era y'all love to cite until you realize it involved an upper tax rate of 90%, I might vote for one of its candidates.  Instead, it gives us the Clown Car.  Pass.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Manonthestreet said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...


Nice excuse to vote dem while claiming not to be one  LMMAAOOOOO


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Manonthestreet said:
> ...



Lame distraction is lame.  But now that we've exposed your hypocrisy, and since you clearly have nothing to say about the PPACA but plenty to say about the bank bailout, tell me why you wouldn't support breaking up the big banks.  Has any member of the Clown Car promised to do that?  If so, I might be interested.  Impress me.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 21, 2015)

Distraction.........your team does nothing......and yes its your team as you defend them at every turn.....and then you ask me why we havent.........who controls Justice Dept right now........you dont need an act of Congress to do what you want....btw my Congress critter voted against bailouts


----------



## Wry Catcher (Nov 21, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> And this is ENTIRELY obozo's fault.  Not a a single repub voted for this nightmare when it passed in 2010. We need to go back to what we had before obamacare.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



United Health Care isn't about health care, it's about profits.  F 'em, there are dozens more out there who will offer a product likely better than UHC, their business plan puts profit first and patient care a distance back - after all those co-pays, limits and denials of service for specious reasons.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> Distraction.........your team does nothing......and yes its your team as you defend them at every turn.....and then you ask me why we havent.........who controls Justice Dept right now........you dont need an act of Congress to do what you want....btw my Congress critter voted against bailouts



So you really don't want to talk about the PPACA or insurers or...and you don't want to start a thread about bank bailouts.  Ramble on, then.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 21, 2015)

Bailing out the insurers isnt related to Obamacare??????? Talk about rambling


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> Bailing out the insurers isnt related to Obamacare??????? Talk about rambling



Life insurance company =/= health insurance company.  Even if it did, the AIG bailout occurred in '08.


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 21, 2015)

Health insurance bailout is happening right now.....try to keep up


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> Health insurance bailout is happening right now.....try to keep up



Links?

(Oh, please let it be a blog!)


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 21, 2015)

http://nypost.com/2015/11/20/a-new-taxpayer-bailout-to-cover-up-obamacares-failure/ 
CMS Final Rule Offers Insurers Reassurance On Risk Corridor Funds for Exchange Plans | AIS Health


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> http://nypost.com/2015/11/20/a-new-taxpayer-bailout-to-cover-up-obamacares-failure/


Note question mark in headline.  Speculation, not fact.


Manonthestreet said:


> CMS Final Rule Offers Insurers Reassurance On Risk Corridor Funds for Exchange Plans | AIS Health



Article is dated May 26, 2014.  Has anything actually changed in the 18 months since the article was written?


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 21, 2015)

Second link backs first.......provision is all in place


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> Second link backs first.......provision is all in place



So an 18-month-old article creates a provision, an article written today questions whether said provision _might_ be be activated, and -?


----------



## Manonthestreet (Nov 21, 2015)

And BAILOUT.....not if....just when


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

Manonthestreet said:


> And BAILOUT.....not if....just when



Get back to us when it actually happens.  Until then, beware of Ice Giants.


----------



## dblack (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Manonthestreet said:
> 
> 
> > And BAILOUT.....not if....just when
> ...


It's already begun. Insurance companies have a legal mandate that people buy their product.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Manonthestreet said:
> ...



"Mandate" and "bailout," while both common nouns in English, have an otherwise tangential relationship.


----------



## dblack (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...


Split hairs all you like. The mandate is a huge gift to the industry. It essentially turns insurance companies into public utilities, with all the security that entails.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Kindly link to evidence that any health insurer has received a bailout.


----------



## dblack (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...


Kindly read the preceding post.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Kindly link to a source outside your own imagination where "mandate" is synonymous with "bailout."


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 21, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> [
> United Health Care isn't about health care, it's about profits.  F 'em, there are dozens more out there who will offer a product likely better than UHC, their business plan puts profit first and patient care a distance back - after all those co-pays, limits and denials of service for specious reasons.



I suppose they do put profits first.  Do you really think the govt is gonna put the patient first?  THINK


----------



## dblack (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...


Heh. Alright. Sit-n-spin if it floats your boat. Or inflates your stock prices. But ACA is a sellout to the insurance industry. Google Liz Fowler.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



You've posted that last bit multiple times already.  But at least you're no longer reinventing the English language...


----------



## Wry Catcher (Nov 21, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...



I do.  Do you really think?  I doubt it.


----------



## dblack (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...


Do you seriously not understand how a mandate amounts to a bailout? Hell, it's better than a bailout. It's perpetual guaranteed income.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

dblack said:


> Do you seriously not understand how a mandate amounts to a bailout?



Oh, now you're saying it "amounts to."

Tell you what: Decide what it is you want to say and stick to it.  Then be prepared to defend it.  Redefining it isn't helping your cause.


----------



## dblack (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Do you seriously not understand how a mandate amounts to a bailout?
> ...



Ok. I'll say this: If you don't see how ACA is boon to the insurance industry, then you are a fool. Or a shill for their lobbyists. What's your story?


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

dblack said:


> Ok. I'll say this: If you don't see how ACA is boon to the insurance industry...



Never said it wasn't.  That was part of Congress's fiddling with the original bill.

But in spite of the fiddling, it's a boon to the millions of people who now have access to affordable insurance and, through it, to health care.


----------



## dblack (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Ok. I'll say this: If you don't see how ACA is boon to the insurance industry...
> ...



Ok. Shill for the insurance lobby. Got it.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



You got nothing.   But I'd love to hear your convoluted "explanation" for drawing precisely the wrong conclusion.


----------



## dblack (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...


Default to troll.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Nov 21, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Ok. I'll say this: If you don't see how ACA is boon to the insurance industry...
> ...



High deductibles is not health care and if you bothers to read your link in the other thread you posted, the young and healthy are dropping obama care like everyone with a brain said they would.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

dblack said:


> Default to troll.



Well, if that's your choice...

Too bad, really.  I was hoping we could start with the original bill and have a good scrum over who changed what until the final legislation.

But I will remember your default position going forward.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 21, 2015)

bear513 said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



High deductibles are the result of patient choice.  Choose a bronze plan and you get low premiums and high deductibles.  If you're healthy, that's a roll of the dice you make by your own choice.  If you want a lower deductible, the trade-off is a higher premium.

The drop-off in new enrollments is in part due to those who were allowed to sign up after the deadline last year.  The rest are due to people who think they're getting away with something by paying the penalty and not having insurance.  For most of them, that may be true.  But they're all just one bad accident or undiagnosed medical condition from disaster.  Their choice.

My issue is with the smartasses who have families and opt out because they think they're "showing Obama."


----------



## dblack (Nov 22, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> Too bad, really.  I was hoping we could start with the original bill and have a good scrum over who changed what until the final legislation.



I don't give rat's ass "who changed what". The final legislation was shit, regardless of how it got that way. It should have never been voted into law. It's a sellout to the insurance industry, granting them permanent residency on the government gravy train. And I have no patience for shills selling it as something different.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Nov 22, 2015)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Too bad, really.  I was hoping we could start with the original bill and have a good scrum over who changed what until the final legislation.
> ...



The solution to your lack of patience is a single payer Medicare for all system.  But with any such change come consequences, something most ideologues never seem to understand.

For example, the insurance industry employs a lot of people, buys lots of TV, radio and print ads and has issued stock.


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 22, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> But in spite of the fiddling, it's a boon to the millions of people who now have access to affordable insurance and, through it, to health care.



HAHAHA.  Well sure when you take money from peter and give it to paul, that's a boon to paul.  THINK


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 22, 2015)

Wry Catcher said:


> The solution to your lack of patience is a single payer Medicare for all system. .



Your solution to everything is more govt even though govt has never done anything right.


----------



## ShootSpeeders (Nov 22, 2015)

Arianrhod said:


> The drop-off in new enrollments is in part due to those who were allowed to sign up after the deadline last year.  The rest are due to people who think they're getting away with something by paying the penalty and not having insurance.  For most of them, that may be true.  But they're all just one bad accident or undiagnosed medical condition from disaster.  Their choice.



Wrong.  The EMTALA act passed 30 years ago says everyone who shows up at a hospital ER must be treated.  People without insurance have gotten free health care for 30 years.   Obozo is so dumb he didn't know that. These was never any need to insure the  poor.


----------



## Arianrhod (Nov 22, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> Your solution to everything is more govt even though govt has never done anything right.



Never?  Never ever?  Never ever ever ever?  Are you old enough to drive?  Ever driven on an interstate?  /post



ShootSpeeders said:


> Wrong.  The EMTALA act passed 30 years ago says everyone who shows up at a hospital ER must be treated.  People without insurance have gotten free health care for 30 years.



Okay, let's see how smart you are (obviously not smart enough to notice that this has been explained numerous times, but anyway):

Can you figure out what used to happen when someone was treated at the ER and didn't pay?

That's right - the hospital had to cover those costs.  They might spend a small fortune on attorneys trying to get the moocher to pay up, but generally they ate the costs.

Can you guess what happened when too many people walked off without paying?

That's right.  Hospital costs went up.  And guess who paid for that?  Insurance companies or the patients themselves.

Can you guess what happened when insurers got hit with higher costs?

That's right.  They raised their rates on their customers.

Oh, and sometimes hospitals just went broke and shut down.

To you, this "system" makes sense.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Nov 22, 2015)

ShootSpeeders said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > The solution to your lack of patience is a single payer Medicare for all system. .
> ...



Repeating the RW meme _Gov't has never done anything right_ is on its face foolish and ridiculous.  That you parrot others thoughtlessly is a given, that you think you think is also ridiculous.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Feb 9, 2016)

ShootSpeeders said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > The solution to your lack of patience is a single payer Medicare for all system. .
> ...



It's really more big business.

After all, that is what government likes.

Screw the little guy.


----------



## Arianrhod (Feb 9, 2016)

So now that Aetna has bought UHC, I'd recommend a course in Investment 101 for those who expected a different outcome.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Feb 9, 2016)

Want to Cut Health Care Costs? Get Insurers out


----------



## dblack (Feb 10, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> So now that Aetna has bought UHC, I'd recommend a course in Investment 101 for those who expected a different outcome.



Let us know if you pass.


----------



## Arianrhod (Feb 10, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Want to Cut Health Care Costs? Get Insurers out



It's true that the confluence of Big Pharma, for-profit insurers, and healthcare providers has resulted in unchecked costs for decades and, while the PPACA was not the best solution, it was the beginning of checking those costs.

Start by denying insurers two of their favorite tricks - lifetime caps and denial for preexisting conditions - and you incentivize them to have a little chat with their friends in the pharma industry and their friends in hospital administration.

Can't turn that aircraft carrier around overnight, but costs will go down.


----------



## dblack (Feb 10, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> Sun Devil 92 said:
> 
> 
> > Want to Cut Health Care Costs? Get Insurers out
> ...



ACA attempts this, nominally, this by denying consumers their only trick - their right to refuse to do business with companies that are screwing them. It sets up citizens as involuntary pawns in a corporatist tug-o-war between government and insurance companies.


----------



## Arianrhod (Feb 10, 2016)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > Sun Devil 92 said:
> ...



It provides millions of Americans with affordable health insurance.


----------



## dblack (Feb 10, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



And forces them to pay for it, even if they don't think it's affordable, and don't want it.


----------



## Arianrhod (Feb 10, 2016)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Can you show us a time in the history of any type of insurance where people didn't have to pay for it?


----------



## dblack (Feb 10, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



That's an irrelevant question.

I can show you a time in history when they weren't for to buy health insurance from government approved vendors - ie before ACA was passed.


----------



## Arianrhod (Feb 10, 2016)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



Your belief that people should be given insurance for free is irrelevant?  Okay.


----------



## dblack (Feb 10, 2016)

Arianrhod said:


> dblack said:
> 
> 
> > Arianrhod said:
> ...



Yeah... listen, with all due respect (none), I've got some things to do, so let's move on to the part where it becomes overwhelmingly obvious you aren't going to offer anything other than headgames and talking points and I leave you with "Fuck off Troll", mkay?

Fuck off Troll.


----------



## Arianrhod (Feb 10, 2016)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



You're intent on forcing (see what I did there?) the word "forced" into every discussion in this forum.  SSDD, and you expect me to honor that?

Try discussing a topic seriously and you'll get serious discussion in return.  If you prefer to do this:







that's your choice.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (Feb 10, 2016)

dblack said:


> Arianrhod said:
> 
> 
> > dblack said:
> ...



I so enjoy the translations or "bending" that goes on with some posters.  I'd love to hear them discussing Thanksgiving dinner.  You would not be eating turkey and cranberries would be something else.

I keep asking you guys why you waste your time with her.


----------

