So, this is what passes for leadership, now?

Why should taxpayers bear the burden of an insurance company's shortfalls?
They aren't. Again, you demonstrate a lack of understanding of how the risk pools were suppose to work. It is the insurance companies that support one another. The way it was supposed to work, is that anything over a 80% profit margin got donated to a risk pool. Then anyone who made less than that 80% profit margin would be paid out of the pool to equalize them. Furthermore, the measure was only supposed to be temporary, while the insurance companies worked out the actuarial risk assessments for the new dynamics, and worked out their premiums based on the new dynamics.

Then Rubio, knowing full well that this one feature of the ACA, more than any other, would lead to the success of the measure, of course decided that the best thing to do for Republicans was break it. So, he forced through an amendment that set hard limits on the risk corridor distributions, destroying the safety net that insurance companies were promised while learning to function in the new market. The result, not surprisingly, was pull-outs of insurance providers in higher risk markets.

And, what do ya know? Republicans now point to all of the pull outs of insurance companies, calling it a failing of the ACA, conveniently forgetting that it was Rubio's amendment that is causing the panicked pull outs.

Interesting opinion, I don't agree with it but it is your opinion and I respect it.
 
If people work at it a little, they can keep weight down. People are lazy basically. Then when they're grossly overweight and start having serious problems like diabetes, knee replacement etc. this overloads the health care budgets. Then of course, our immigration policy of allowing the poor, needy, and unskilled from the third world to come here and get on health and welfare programs just so they can vote for the hillarys and obamas, is helping bankrupt us.

Again, the root of most of the chronic health problems in this country is sugar.

 
See, you have no clue how a law affects the industry

It didn't affect the industry, it affected the corporate profits of the industry who was skirting the law. That is what your link says.


you quote a law, don't read the details of the law and then make some really stupid comment.

NO. I quoted the link you provided. That is all I did. Then I provided you with my opinion of that, which is the opinion shared by the article you gave me, showing that the rule was in place to prevent companies from skirting around the law to avoid culpability, liability, etc. I only work with what you give me, so maybe you need to get your own shit together before going off on something that isn't what you're making it out to be.


The intent of the rule is good as I stated. The way they want to execute it is wrong and puts the burden on honest companies.

What burden? The burden of corporate responsibility. How awful.
 
See, you have no clue how a law affects the industry

It didn't affect the industry, it affected the corporate profits of the industry who was skirting the law. That is what your link says.


you quote a law, don't read the details of the law and then make some really stupid comment.

NO. I quoted the link you provided. That is all I did. Then I provided you with my opinion of that, which is the opinion shared by the article you gave me, showing that the rule was in place to prevent companies from skirting around the law to avoid culpability, liability, etc. I only work with what you give me, so maybe you need to get your own shit together before going off on something that isn't what you're making it out to be.


The intent of the rule is good as I stated. The way they want to execute it is wrong and puts the burden on honest companies.

What burden? The burden of corporate responsibility. How awful.

Again, they have delayed the rule because the current Secretary of Transportation thinks it needs to be looked at. I am glad reasonable people are there instead of a know nothing such as yourself.

Again, unless you know the affects of the rule and the implications, you have an uneducated opinion based on a paragraph, what an informed Derp you are!
 
If people work at it a little, they can keep weight down. People are lazy basically. Then when they're grossly overweight and start having serious problems like diabetes, knee replacement etc. this overloads the health care budgets. Then of course, our immigration policy of allowing the poor, needy, and unskilled from the third world to come here and get on health and welfare programs just so they can vote for the hillarys and obamas, is helping bankrupt us.

Again, the root of most of the chronic health problems in this country is sugar.



I'm not overweight because I watch what I eat. Same for my grandson. I don't let him indulge in all the fast foods that many America do. Yes, fast foods and a lot of the other crap put in our food preparations. It's not just sugar. It's pretty tough on low income folks who live in motels, rent rooms, or are homeless, I agree, since it's pretty hard to for them to prepare healthy meals. Still, the fatties I see in the stores riding around on golf carts while feasting on ice cream.... I was in a walmart in the early a.m. and saw some fairly young women stocking shelves. Most overweight and one on a battery driven cart. America has become lazy. Why should those who are responsible pay for the irresponsible?
 
By employing reading comprehension, which you apparently are incapable of. My comment was made after pointing out that you live in a delusional world, based on your claim that a period of time when 48 million Americans were uninsured was getting by just fine.

It's not my fault that you are incapable of understanding the words that you read.

Back in the 1950s most people got along without health insurance including my very own family. Medical care was cheaper back then of course.
yeah...it's never gonna be the 50's again. I'm pretty sure you know that..

We could practice some of what was happening in the '50s. We didn't have extremely overweight people in stores driving around on golf carts buying more of the kinds of food that made them so fat in the first place. In the last at least 30 or more years I haven't seen a kid mow a lawn or wash a car or walk anywhere. I'm 72 and seem in better shape than some people 25 years or even younger than me. America's eating habits and the sedentary practices of it's people add a lot to our problems. If a person eats and eats till he's a blimp till he needs a golf cart to get around, and people keep cranking out babies that they can't afford to raise, why should society have to take care of them?

I was 10 years old out picking strawberries, beans and cherries and making summer money. I had a paper route in the afternoon and rode my bicycle to deliver the papers. Took turns with my brothers to mow our lawn and our neighbors lawn because she was a widow. When we moved to the country, I milk cows, goats, bucked hay, chopped wood and the rest of the time I was outdoors playing hard.

Today 10 year olds can't go out and earn money. Lemonade stands have all but disappeared and now government over reach has banned them in most places. Our portions for food in America are huge, and lend to overeating. We way over use sugars and over process our foods. When my wife and I first got married, I was out washing my car, now we live in a neighborhood where the HOA doesn't allow us to wash cars in the driveway. WTF? We were healthier by far, we went to the doctor less, didn't have all the prescription medications with all the side effects that are worse than the actual problem. We ate balanced, not so much processed foods. The way cattle and chickens are raised, injected with steroids and antibiotics is absolutely criminal.

I am very conscious of the food I by, the ingredients, the process in which it is made. I buy mainly organic, of organic is no guarantee of healthy. Americans have a responsibility to themselves to educate themselves and eat properly and live a healthy lifestyle.

You delivered papers? I was the one who threw the big bundles of papers from the truck on to the paperboy's lawn early in the a. m. Course this was around 1960. There was always a buck to be made back then if you weren't lazy or your parents made sure you didn't grow up lazy.

My route was in 1970, it was pretty cool, it took a couple hours and I would always buy penny licorice at the little store. I delivered the afternoon paper, so I would meet the guy in front of our house.
 
Basically it is democrats and three RINOc#nts preventing a full repeal.

Technically it took three members of the US Senate to stand up and say NO! That took bravery, nothing less. Too bad the H. of Rep. has no Republican with the courage of the three women Senators.

All American citizens who support COTUS are democrats, they vote and thus engage in the democratic process which has been on going for two + centuries. Of course there were efforts by non democrats, some Democrats and some Republicans to suppress the vote, by reason of skin color, sex, property ownership or reducing the number of polling places, shortening their hours and moving them to strategic destinations.

Voter suppression is on going and despicable goal of the Republican leadership.
 
I'm not overweight because I watch what I eat. Same for my grandson. I don't let him indulge in all the fast foods that many America do. Yes, fast foods and a lot of the other crap put in our food preparations. It's not just sugar. It's pretty tough on low income folks who live in motels, rent rooms, or are homeless, I agree, since it's pretty hard to for them to prepare healthy meals. Still, the fatties I see in the stores riding around on golf carts while feasting on ice cream.... I was in a walmart in the early a.m. and saw some fairly young women stocking shelves. Most overweight and one on a battery driven cart. America has become lazy. Why should those who are responsible pay for the irresponsible?

So it sounds to me like you want to legislate behavior.

The point of insurance is to hedge risk. The larger the insurance pool, the lower the risk. This isn't rocket science.
 
Again, they have delayed the rule because the current Secretary of Transportation thinks it needs to be looked at. I am glad reasonable people are there instead of a know nothing such as yourself.

Ah yes, the Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, who just so happens to have been Bush the Dumber's Transportation Secretary for 8 years (not to mention is McConnell's wife). So there goes the laughable claim that Trump is anti-establishment, and that his policies are anti-establishment.


gain, unless you know the affects of the rule and the implications, you have an uneducated opinion based on a paragraph, what an informed Derp you are!

We know what the affects are. These companies have to have corporate responsibility. Again, how terrible for them. Wah wah.
 
Why should taxpayers bear the burden of an insurance company's shortfalls?
They aren't. Again, you demonstrate a lack of understanding of how the risk pools were suppose to work. It is the insurance companies that support one another. The way it was supposed to work, is that anything over a 80% profit margin got donated to a risk pool. Then anyone who made less than that 80% profit margin would be paid out of the pool to equalize them. Furthermore, the measure was only supposed to be temporary, while the insurance companies worked out the actuarial risk assessments for the new dynamics, and worked out their premiums based on the new dynamics.

Then Rubio, knowing full well that this one feature of the ACA, more than any other, would lead to the success of the measure, of course decided that the best thing to do for Republicans was break it. So, he forced through an amendment that set hard limits on the risk corridor distributions, destroying the safety net that insurance companies were promised while learning to function in the new market. The result, not surprisingly, was pull-outs of insurance providers in higher risk markets.

And, what do ya know? Republicans now point to all of the pull outs of insurance companies, calling it a failing of the ACA, conveniently forgetting that it was Rubio's amendment that is causing the panicked pull outs.

Interesting opinion, I don't agree with it but it is your opinion and I respect it.
It's not opinion. It's how the law was supposed to work.
 
If people work at it a little, they can keep weight down. People are lazy basically. Then when they're grossly overweight and start having serious problems like diabetes, knee replacement etc. this overloads the health care budgets. Then of course, our immigration policy of allowing the poor, needy, and unskilled from the third world to come here and get on health and welfare programs just so they can vote for the hillarys and obamas, is helping bankrupt us.

Again, the root of most of the chronic health problems in this country is sugar.



I just finished a salad of cucumber, tomato, avocado, with pepper and some garlic salt. The tomatoes provided enough juice so that I didn't need salad dressing. It may not be 100% about choices we make, but damn close.
 
If people work at it a little, they can keep weight down. People are lazy basically. Then when they're grossly overweight and start having serious problems like diabetes, knee replacement etc. this overloads the health care budgets. Then of course, our immigration policy of allowing the poor, needy, and unskilled from the third world to come here and get on health and welfare programs just so they can vote for the hillarys and obamas, is helping bankrupt us.

Again, the root of most of the chronic health problems in this country is sugar.



I just finished a salad of cucumber, tomato, avocado, with pepper and some garlic salt. The tomatoes provided enough juice so that I didn't need salad dressing. It may not be 100% about choices we make, but damn close.

Tell me. What, roughly, is your annual income? Yes. There is a reason for the question.
 

Forum List

Back
Top