California!!

[OnePercenter]

So all the policies were/are "A" listed policies?

Don't act so stupid, dude.
People bought policies that fit their needs.

People can't be trusted to decide their own needs. That's what government is for.

Don't act so stupid, dude.
People bought policies that fit their needs.

People can't be trusted to decide their own needs. That's what government is for.

Apparently

Quick, without looking, what are the maximums on your insurance policy and who's underwriting the policy?

See, you CAN'T be trusted.

 

[Meister]

Don't act so stupid, dude.
People bought policies that fit their needs.

People can't be trusted to decide their own needs. That's what government is for.

People can't be trusted to decide their own needs. That's what government is for.

Apparently

Quick, without looking, what are the maximums on your insurance policy and who's underwriting the policy?

See, you CAN'T be trusted.

Oh wow man you got us good, real good. you da' man.
Get back when you're off your meds, ok?

By the way, nobody is believing your sig, "Unlike Limbaugh and Hannity, I'm a one percenter that speaks the truth, cause I've nothing to sell......"
You're IQ would prevent that from happening.

 

[OnePercenter]

People can't be trusted to decide their own needs. That's what government is for.

Apparently

Quick, without looking, what are the maximums on your insurance policy and who's underwriting the policy?

See, you CAN'T be trusted.

Oh wow man you got us good, real good. you da' man.
Get back when you're off your meds, ok?

By the way, nobody is believing your sig, "Unlike Limbaugh and Hannity, I'm a one percenter that speaks the truth, cause I've nothing to sell......"
You're IQ would prevent that from happening.

So the personal attack is because you don't know? Seems you do need help!

 

[Meister]

Quick, without looking, what are the maximums on your insurance policy and who's underwriting the policy?

See, you CAN'T be trusted.

Oh wow man you got us good, real good. you da' man.
Get back when you're off your meds, ok?

By the way, nobody is believing your sig, "Unlike Limbaugh and Hannity, I'm a one percenter that speaks the truth, cause I've nothing to sell......"
You're IQ would prevent that from happening.

So the personal attack is because you don't know? Seems you do need help!

truth bites doesn't it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So all the policies were/are "A" listed policies?

Don't act so stupid, dude.
People bought policies that fit their needs.

But the policies they bought, when push came failed, then the taxpayers ended up fitting the bill. A perfect example is State Farm and Florida. State Farm wanted taxpayers to reimburse them for losses during the 2003-2004 hurricane season. Didn't work, so State Farm non-renewed policies.

Tell the women in California that her policy, which covered her for years of cancer and paid out over a million dollars, that her policy failed her, and that is why she is better off with a new policy that doesn't have the same doctors, has higher premiums, and higher deductibles.

 

[Harry Dresden]

People can't be trusted to decide their own needs. That's what government is for.

Apparently

Quick, without looking, what are the maximums on your insurance policy and who's underwriting the policy?

See, you CAN'T be trusted.

Oh wow man you got us good, real good. you da' man.
Get back when you're off your meds, ok?

By the way, nobody is believing your sig, "Unlike Limbaugh and Hannity, I'm a one percenter that speaks the truth, cause I've nothing to sell......"
You're IQ would prevent that from happening.

he actually has that written down?.....most politicians say the same thing....TM's even says that .....

 

[dblack]

Used to be, providing medical coverage was an incentive to retain qualified, desirable employees...a "perk", if you will. Now it is supposed to be a mandatory requirement? How, exactly, did that evolve?

It "evolved" in the face of our failure to recognize that tax incentives, like those used to promote employer provided health insurance, are simply mandates in disguise.

So employee tax incentives are mandates?

Yes.

 

[dblack]

Don't act so stupid, dude.
People bought policies that fit their needs.

People can't be trusted to decide their own needs. That's what government is for.

People can't be trusted to decide their own needs. That's what government is for.

Apparently

Quick, without looking, what are the maximums on your insurance policy and who's underwriting the policy?

See, you CAN'T be trusted.

So, you at least acknowledge this as the core premise of your politics?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Provide medical insurance. I do, they should.

Used to be, providing medical coverage was an incentive to retain qualified, desirable employees...a "perk", if you will. Now it is supposed to be a mandatory requirement? How, exactly, did that evolve?

The real reason is that medical insurance used to be cheap. The good ole days before Reagan fucked with the HMO act.

That still doesn't quite explain how providing health insurance is an employer mandate? If they chose to provide health insurance benefits to employees when costs were reasonable, why does that mean such provisions should now be mandatory as prices skyrocket? Employees are always free to shop around and find a job that better suits their needs or desires. Sacrifice higher pay for job security or other benefits, that's how things used to work.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Don't act so stupid, dude.
People bought policies that fit their needs.

People can't be trusted to decide their own needs. That's what government is for.

Apparently

People cannot be trusted to decide what their needs are until they have been told. Nanny government is the only entity qualified to tell people what they need. Soon enough, Nanny government will be the only source to fill those 'needs'.

 

[OnePercenter]

Don't act so stupid, dude.
People bought policies that fit their needs.

But the policies they bought, when push came failed, then the taxpayers ended up fitting the bill. A perfect example is State Farm and Florida. State Farm wanted taxpayers to reimburse them for losses during the 2003-2004 hurricane season. Didn't work, so State Farm non-renewed policies.

Tell the women in California that her policy, which covered her for years of cancer and paid out over a million dollars, that her policy failed her, and that is why she is better off with a new policy that doesn't have the same doctors, has higher premiums, and higher deductibles.

Let's have some names and policy numbers so we can check.

 

[Vox]

Ahhh, just another part of the ACA that is unknown by many.

Why it should be unknown at this point I have no idea. Medicare has started tying some payments to the quality of care provided. That's a huge shift in an industry that's based largely on everyone being unaccountable.

People ought to know that their hospitals are getting safer and the quality of the care they're providing is improving, it's not a secret.

More hospitals improve quality of care | Healthcare Finance News

WASHINGTON | November 4, 2013
A larger number of hospitals are showing improvements in their quality of care said the Joint Commission in its annual report on quality and safety of hospitals.

Last week during a webcast detailing the results of its annual report, the Joint Commission said 1,099 Joint Commission-accredited hospitals were named in its report as Top Performer on Key Quality Measures hospitals, representing a 77 percent increase from last year.

Obamacare Incentives Slow Hospitals' Revolving Door - Bloomberg

Then Redd, like more than 600 other Mount Sinai patients over the past three years, was singled out as a high-risk patient and assigned to one of 27 social workers focused on keeping patients out of the hospital. Mount Sinai created the program after the Affordable Care Act set up an incentive system to provide hospitals extra money for keeping people healthy, and penalize them for having too many patients readmitted too soon.

Mount Sinai said the program reduced admissions 43 percent and cut emergency room visits 54 percent during a test run from September 2010 to May 2012. The decision to target high-risk patients is estimated to have saved $1.6 million in medical costs over a six-month period, the hospital said.

In Redd’s case, she said the program may have saved her life. Since May, when she started working with a hospital social worker, she has been admitted to Mount Sinai just once, is regularly going to dialysis and on the waiting list for a new kidney.

Obamacare Shows Hospital Savings as Patients Make Gains - Bloomberg

Less than five months before the Affordable Care Act fully kicks in, hospitals are improving care and saving millions of dollars with one of the least touted but potentially most effective provisions of the law.

While much of the focus on Obamacare has been on the government rush to open insurance exchanges by Oct. 1, 252 hospitals and physician groups across the U.S. have signed up to join the administration’s accountable care program, in which they share the financial risk of keeping patients healthy.

Under the program, hospitals and physician practices take responsibility for tracking and maintaining the health of elderly and disabled patients. If costs rise beyond an agreed upon level, hospitals may become responsible for reimbursing the government. If they cut the cost of care while maintaining quality, hospitals share in the savings. The government expects the savings may be as much as $1.9 billion from 2012 to 2015. Early indications suggest they are starting to add up.

You know that Mount Sinai is a huge teaching hospital and not every hospital is able to assign a personal intern to follow the non-compliant patient.

who is going to compel non-compliant patients to comply?

I already know what will happen in the smaller hospitals, but when it will happen nationwide, your ilk will scream rrrrracist bloody murder in a few years.

 

[OnePercenter]

It "evolved" in the face of our failure to recognize that tax incentives, like those used to promote employer provided health insurance, are simply mandates in disguise.

So employee tax incentives are mandates?

Yes.

A tax write-off is a mandate. Sure it is.

 

[Meister]

But the policies they bought, when push came failed, then the taxpayers ended up fitting the bill. A perfect example is State Farm and Florida. State Farm wanted taxpayers to reimburse them for losses during the 2003-2004 hurricane season. Didn't work, so State Farm non-renewed policies.

Tell the women in California that her policy, which covered her for years of cancer and paid out over a million dollars, that her policy failed her, and that is why she is better off with a new policy that doesn't have the same doctors, has higher premiums, and higher deductibles.

Let's have some names and policy numbers so we can check.

Names and policy numbers so "we" can check?????
Really?
Who would that be, you and greenbeard? Kinda full of yourself aren't you?

 

[dblack]

So employee tax incentives are mandates?

Yes.

A tax write-off is a mandate. Sure it is.

Yep, and the SC agrees. The individual mandate of the ACA provides the perfect case in point.

 

[OnePercenter]

Tell the women in California that her policy, which covered her for years of cancer and paid out over a million dollars, that her policy failed her, and that is why she is better off with a new policy that doesn't have the same doctors, has higher premiums, and higher deductibles.

Let's have some names and policy numbers so we can check.

Names and policy numbers so "we" can check?????
Really?
Who would that be, you and greenbeard? Kinda full of yourself aren't you?

It's called put up, or shut up.

 

[OnePercenter]

Yes.

A tax write-off is a mandate. Sure it is.

Yep, and the SC agrees. The individual mandate of the ACA provides the perfect case in point.

How would an individual mandate be a write-off?

 

[dblack]

A tax write-off is a mandate. Sure it is.

Yep, and the SC agrees. The individual mandate of the ACA provides the perfect case in point.

How would an individual mandate be a write-off?

Read Roberts' ACA decision. A tax 'penalty' for not doing something is exactly the same as a deduction for doing it. In either case, you pay less in taxes if you do as you're told.

Robert's realised that striking down the individual mandate would have undermined decades of tax incentives and stripped the federal government of the power to manipulate behavior via the tax code - and he simply didn't have the guts to do it.

 

[Meister]

Let's have some names and policy numbers so we can check.

Names and policy numbers so "we" can check?????
Really?
Who would that be, you and greenbeard? Kinda full of yourself aren't you?

It's called put up, or shut up.

No it's not, it's called deflection on your behalf.
The lady's story has been on several news outlets.

 

[OnePercenter]

Yep, and the SC agrees. The individual mandate of the ACA provides the perfect case in point.

How would an individual mandate be a write-off?

Read Roberts' ACA decision. A tax 'penalty' for not doing something is exactly the same as a deduction for doing it. In either case, you pay less in taxes if you do as you're told.

Robert's realised that striking down the individual mandate would have undermined decades of tax incentives and stripped the federal government of the power to manipulate behavior via the tax code - and he simply didn't have the guts to do it.

How would an individual mandate be a write-off? It's a simple question.