Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Some people go to college and need to be on insurance a bit longer. Some, like my assistant, have special needs kids who benefit greatly by the extended insurance stay.
Either way, it doesn't cost you a penny so you're "fricken stupid" for letting it bother you.
It costs him increase in taxes and increase in the cost of HIS insurance.
Not sure what you mean by taxes related to someone staying on your insurance.
As for the insurance going up...no. Lets say I had a daughter and her birthday was today; she turns 19. I'm not paying any more for her insurance than I was paying yesterday.
You're making a factually incorrect statement.
And there you have it.
The progressive way of thinking.
Is she simply naive or does she really think noone has any costs involved?
People just don't get it.
It is not rocket science to pass a law that states..."all insurance companies can no longer deny someone insurance due to pre existing conditions"
Likewise, it is not rocket science to pass a law that states..."all those that can not afford insurance must get government subsidies to allow for the purchase of insurance"
What makes those two things difficult to implement is the fact that both will result in extraordinarily higher costs to those that do NOT benefit from those initiatives.
And it is quite obvious that the ACA does not defeat that issue.
Okay.It costs him increase in taxes and increase in the cost of HIS insurance.
Not sure what you mean by taxes related to someone staying on your insurance.
As for the insurance going up...no. Lets say I had a daughter and her birthday was today; she turns 19. I'm not paying any more for her insurance than I was paying yesterday.
You're making a factually incorrect statement.
you just don't get it.
No....you are not paying anymore than yesterday.
How so?But someone who bought insurance today will pay more because of all of those that are now paying the same prmiums despite their 25 year olds being added to the policies.
and in time, as policies go up for renewal, so will everyone.
People just don't get it.
It is not rocket science to pass a law that states..."all insurance companies can no longer deny someone insurance due to pre existing conditions"
Likewise, it is not rocket science to pass a law that states..."all those that can not afford insurance must get government subsidies to allow for the purchase of insurance"
What makes those two things difficult to implement is the fact that both will result in extraordinarily higher costs to those that do NOT benefit from those initiatives.
And it is quite obvious that the ACA does not defeat that issue.
share the wealth, share the pain, and all dance around the may pole singing 'I'd like to buy the world a coke'
liberals do not live in the real world.
What would give you that impression?
New Obamacare Ad In Colorado Features Bros Doing A Keg Stand Update: The Bros Go Golfing!
Seriously, this is not a joke.
Update Another one featuring the bros.
1. People who need to obtain insurance primarily to comply with the mandate have until Februrary 15th to do so.
That's about 4 months away.
2. About half the states are running the exchanges themselves; people in those states are not even affected by problems with the national site.
"if you like your policy you can keep it"
"if you like your doctor you and keep him"
"ACA will save a family $2500/year"
"ACA will reduce the deficit"
LIES LIES LIES LIES.
Is she simply naive or does she really think noone has any costs involved?
People just don't get it.
It is not rocket science to pass a law that states..."all insurance companies can no longer deny someone insurance due to pre existing conditions"
Likewise, it is not rocket science to pass a law that states..."all those that can not afford insurance must get government subsidies to allow for the purchase of insurance"
What makes those two things difficult to implement is the fact that both will result in extraordinarily higher costs to those that do NOT benefit from those initiatives.
And it is quite obvious that the ACA does not defeat that issue.
share the wealth, share the pain, and all dance around the may pole singing 'I'd like to buy the world a coke'
liberals do not live in the real world.
It sounds like the major problem is the registration process. They have added a button on the homepage, "See Plans Now" so people can check the cost of the plans without going through registration. This will help a lot since most of the traffic has been people checking on the cost and details of the plans. I just tried it to check plan costs in a few states and it worked fine. Give it a try. Apparently, IT rushed to get this function on the site because it does not include the subsidies.Obama needs to fix the site and make sure his system works.
The success of this bill will make or break the democrats.
Is she simply naive or does she really think noone has any costs involved?
People just don't get it.
It is not rocket science to pass a law that states..."all insurance companies can no longer deny someone insurance due to pre existing conditions"
Likewise, it is not rocket science to pass a law that states..."all those that can not afford insurance must get government subsidies to allow for the purchase of insurance"
What makes those two things difficult to implement is the fact that both will result in extraordinarily higher costs to those that do NOT benefit from those initiatives.
And it is quite obvious that the ACA does not defeat that issue.
But you leave out things like the fact that insurance companies now have to get their medical loss ratios up to 85%, or refund the difference to their customers.
People have already received refund checks for that.
1. People who need to obtain insurance primarily to comply with the mandate have until Februrary 15th to do so.
That's about 4 months away.
2. About half the states are running the exchanges themselves; people in those states are not even affected by problems with the national site.
"if you like your policy you can keep it"
"if you like your doctor you and keep him"
"ACA will save a family $2500/year"
"ACA will reduce the deficit"
LIES LIES LIES LIES.
Your post has nothing to do with my post. Please grow up.
Okay.Not sure what you mean by taxes related to someone staying on your insurance.
As for the insurance going up...no. Lets say I had a daughter and her birthday was today; she turns 19. I'm not paying any more for her insurance than I was paying yesterday.
You're making a factually incorrect statement.
you just don't get it.
No....you are not paying anymore than yesterday.
How so?But someone who bought insurance today will pay more because of all of those that are now paying the same prmiums despite their 25 year olds being added to the policies.
The insurance companies are getting millions of more dollars because of this...8 more years of insurance premiums I otherwise wouldn't be paying.
Why would someone who may not be buying from the same company's policy go up or cost more to start with if the Insurance company has more policy holders?
If anything, it would seem as though the new policy you're talking about would go down which is why group insurance is more than individual policies--there are by definition more people in the group. I guess there could be some scenarios where you are buying from Humana and I'm buying from Aetna or Cigna, the prices will fluctuate depending on the overall size of the group.
and in time, as policies go up for renewal, so will everyone.
That I can see, every open enrollment period, the prices inch upward; sometimes 50 bucks per month as I recall, sometimes less.
Of course the real life real world positive stories about Obamacare, do the Obama haters around here post them?
Of course not.
A Staunch Republican Tries Obamacare ... And Discovers That It's Actually Pretty Awesome
"...Butch Matthews, a 61-year-old former small business owner from Little Rock, Arkansas. Matthews, a diehard Republican, was skeptical of Obamacare. But the new law has already allowed him to buy insurance that is both much better, and much cheaper, than the astronomically expensive pre-Obamacare plan he was clinging to from Blue Cross Blue Shield.
Matthews' old Blue Cross plan cost $1,069 a month and had a $10,000 deductible.
The plan he just bought on the Arkansas state exchange has a $0 premium (after the government subsidy he gets because of his low income level) and only a $750 deductible. It's also a "Silver" plan, which has much better benefits than the vastly more expensive "Bronze" plan he ditched.
Mukherjee asked Matthews whether he had any advice for fellow Republicans now that he has learned that Obamacare actually isn't that bad.
Here's what he had to say:
“I would tell them to learn more about it before they start talking bad about it....”
A Republican Discovers He Likes Obamacare - Business Insider
Okay.you just don't get it.
No....you are not paying anymore than yesterday.
How so?
The insurance companies are getting millions of more dollars because of this...8 more years of insurance premiums I otherwise wouldn't be paying.
Why would someone who may not be buying from the same company's policy go up or cost more to start with if the Insurance company has more policy holders?
If anything, it would seem as though the new policy you're talking about would go down which is why group insurance is more than individual policies--there are by definition more people in the group. I guess there could be some scenarios where you are buying from Humana and I'm buying from Aetna or Cigna, the prices will fluctuate depending on the overall size of the group.
and in time, as policies go up for renewal, so will everyone.
That I can see, every open enrollment period, the prices inch upward; sometimes 50 bucks per month as I recall, sometimes less.
Look at it this way.....
My 23 year old son had an option....buy his own insurance or risk it without buying insurance and hope he doesn't need it.
1)If he bought insurance, he would pay 2500 a year (arbitrary number)....he would likely benefit from about 500 after his deductible....for his annual visit and perhaps medication...so the insurance company profited 2000 off of him.
2)If he passed on insurance, the insurance company is a non factor.
Now?
3) He no longer pays the 2500.....and he is on my policy....and if he uses 500 as he did in example 1...that is a negative 500 to the insurance company for my policy premium has not changed yet for him being an addition
So when you compare 1 to 3....there is a total bottom line difference of 2500 to the insurance company.
Okay.
How so?
The insurance companies are getting millions of more dollars because of this...8 more years of insurance premiums I otherwise wouldn't be paying.
Why would someone who may not be buying from the same company's policy go up or cost more to start with if the Insurance company has more policy holders?
If anything, it would seem as though the new policy you're talking about would go down which is why group insurance is more than individual policies--there are by definition more people in the group. I guess there could be some scenarios where you are buying from Humana and I'm buying from Aetna or Cigna, the prices will fluctuate depending on the overall size of the group.
That I can see, every open enrollment period, the prices inch upward; sometimes 50 bucks per month as I recall, sometimes less.
Look at it this way.....
My 23 year old son had an option....buy his own insurance or risk it without buying insurance and hope he doesn't need it.
1)If he bought insurance, he would pay 2500 a year (arbitrary number)....he would likely benefit from about 500 after his deductible....for his annual visit and perhaps medication...so the insurance company profited 2000 off of him.
2)If he passed on insurance, the insurance company is a non factor.
Now?
3) He no longer pays the 2500.....and he is on my policy....and if he uses 500 as he did in example 1...that is a negative 500 to the insurance company for my policy premium has not changed yet for him being an addition
So when you compare 1 to 3....there is a total bottom line difference of 2500 to the insurance company.
So in #3, you're stating that you'er getting free insurance for you and him?
Most people--in fact every one I've ever met who has kids on their insurance--pays for them.
But if you're one of the few whose insurance is free for you and your family...I guess you have a point. I think most people pay for their kids being on their insurance though.
Nice that you're worried about the insurance company's profits though. Take heart, Obamacare will mean more people than ever will be on insurance. More than making up for the $2,500 hole you've forecasted.
Okay.
How so?
The insurance companies are getting millions of more dollars because of this...8 more years of insurance premiums I otherwise wouldn't be paying.
Why would someone who may not be buying from the same company's policy go up or cost more to start with if the Insurance company has more policy holders?
If anything, it would seem as though the new policy you're talking about would go down which is why group insurance is more than individual policies--there are by definition more people in the group. I guess there could be some scenarios where you are buying from Humana and I'm buying from Aetna or Cigna, the prices will fluctuate depending on the overall size of the group.
That I can see, every open enrollment period, the prices inch upward; sometimes 50 bucks per month as I recall, sometimes less.
Look at it this way.....
My 23 year old son had an option....buy his own insurance or risk it without buying insurance and hope he doesn't need it.
1)If he bought insurance, he would pay 2500 a year (arbitrary number)....he would likely benefit from about 500 after his deductible....for his annual visit and perhaps medication...so the insurance company profited 2000 off of him.
2)If he passed on insurance, the insurance company is a non factor.
Now?
3) He no longer pays the 2500.....and he is on my policy....and if he uses 500 as he did in example 1...that is a negative 500 to the insurance company for my policy premium has not changed yet for him being an addition
So when you compare 1 to 3....there is a total bottom line difference of 2500 to the insurance company.
So in #3, you're stating that you'er getting free insurance for you and him?
Most people--in fact every one I've ever met who has kids on their insurance--pays for them.
But if you're one of the few whose insurance is free for you and your family...I guess you have a point. I think most people pay for their kids being on their insurance though.
Nice that you're worried about the insurance company's profits though. Take heart, Obamacare will mean more people than ever will be on insurance. More than making up for the $2,500 hole you've forecasted.
The Tea Party shut down the govt in an attempt to get obozocare dropped and now even obozo admits his signature legislation is an internet nightmare. It's not gonna get fixed in time and Ted Cruz was 100% right in trying to stop it.
It is incredible the opposition to a program that will eventually help America's working classes. Simply incredible the can't do or won't do attitude of the privileged in America.
'Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare'
'UPDATE I re-reported a Fox News segment on Obamacare -- it was appallingly easy to see how it misleads the audience'
Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare - Salon.com
Meanwhile check out the poverty rates in the states most likely to fight care for their own citizens.
http://www.southerneducation.org/cmspages/getfile.aspx?guid=0bc70ce1-d375-4ff6-8340-f9b3452ee088
States with a Majority of Low Income Students in Public Schools: 2011
State Rate (Percent)
Mississippi 71
New Mexico 68
Louisiana 66
Oklahoma 61
Arkansas 60
Georgia 57
Kentucky 57
Florida 56
Tennessee 55
South Carolina 55
Alabama 55
California 54
West Virginia 51
Oregon 51
Nevada 51
North Carolina 50
Texas 50
America has become the land of the haves and the have nots.
These dingleberries are deathly afraid that by November of 2014, Americans will find that they like the ACA. And that they think that the major improvement would be a Universal Single Payer Health Care System based on an income tax on all income, at all levels.
It is incredible the opposition to a program that will eventually help America's working classes. Simply incredible the can't do or won't do attitude of the privileged in America.
'Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare'
'UPDATE I re-reported a Fox News segment on Obamacare -- it was appallingly easy to see how it misleads the audience'
Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare - Salon.com
Meanwhile check out the poverty rates in the states most likely to fight care for their own citizens.
http://www.southerneducation.org/cmspages/getfile.aspx?guid=0bc70ce1-d375-4ff6-8340-f9b3452ee088
States with a Majority of Low Income Students in Public Schools: 2011
State Rate (Percent)
Mississippi 71
New Mexico 68
Louisiana 66
Oklahoma 61
Arkansas 60
Georgia 57
Kentucky 57
Florida 56
Tennessee 55
South Carolina 55
Alabama 55
California 54
West Virginia 51
Oregon 51
Nevada 51
North Carolina 50
Texas 50
America has become the land of the haves and the have nots.
If young people and "students" are so concerned about health care, why aren't they excited about signing up? It appears that if something, such as this need to find affordable health care (which is a lie in itself), is SO big and popular, you wouldn't be looking to gimmicks in an attempt to coax them into buying into this program. You wouldn't have to turn to polls, find spokesmen, famous actors or artists, the plan (IF it was that good for Americans) would simply be able to sell itself. Yes Obama. Apple has a few glitches on their iPhones so there was no need to stop producing them and shut it down..... HOWEVER, Apple IS finding extensively long lines of young people just waiting to get their hands on one WITHOUT the need to produce any coaxing nudge from a celebrity. You simply can't boast the same results for THIS Health Care mess.
Polls and speeches - vs - "get your head out of the clouds" reality, are two TOTALLY different things.
