The Death of a Presidency

[auditor0007]

Perhaps that is why you're losing this argument.

I'll tell you something; get really sick once, and spend some time in the hospital. You'll start understanding a lot better.

You're in luck! I've been in the hospital twice in the past two years. One was for a nervous breakdown, the other was for kidney stones. All of $11,000 in costs. I got the first paid for by filing for charity assistance. I am currently working on doing the same thing with my visit this past July.

You know what? Neither of those instances conveyed to me the need to buy government sponsored healthcare insurance.

I'm glad you got assistance. It's funny though how you follow a political ideology that demands self-reliance and then you count on others to bail you out. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they did. Not sure how that would have worked for you if the cost was $500,000, but that's another story. You do realize that a lot of people get hit with those types of bills and never can pay them, right?

Interesting that it only cost you $11,000 also. My late wife also had kidney stones, about twenty years ago. At that time, the cost was over $20,000, but hers were bad and she was in the hospital for seven days. Yours may have passed much easier and you may not have been in the hospital for more than a day or two.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There you have it. But 45 other states didn't see drops. While I'm happy that it at least worked for you, you may want to remain on your toes. This law is in serious danger of collapsing. If you're on a government sponsored insurance plan when it does, you'll lose that too.

In my state, premiums have jumped almost 170%. I would be paying an arm and a leg for even the most basic form of insurance under Obamacare.

Not much different here in Florida. And good luck getting back what you had. Delayed one year? really?

Only sensible course of action is to trash this abomination of a law.

You know, I hear so much bitching about how expensive all this insurance is, but I have a question for all of you. The fact is that we are paying $8500 per year per person in the US for healthcare. That is for every single person living here, regardless of their age or whether they are a legal citizen or not. Please tell me who you think pays for that when all of you expect to buy health insurance for $200 per month or less and have it cover all of your medical bills. Again, critical thinking comes into play. $200 per month does not come close to $8500 per year. I honestly do not understand how individuals who otherwise seem to be fairly intelligent are so out of touch with these numbers and how they affect us.

Let me guess, you think every penny of that comes from the government.

Fact is, most of it comes from people who have their insurance already. In fact, if we are to believe Obama, less than 5% of it is actually coming out of taxes to cover the rounding errors in the system.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Until people actually check out their exchange and find out they can get the same or better coverage for the same price or even save some money. Supposedly 5 million people have received cancellation notices, according to Fox News. 1.5 million have registered on the health exchanges, most all before the 5 million received their cancellation notices. This tells us one important fact; those who have received cancellations have not even checked out their exchange to see what is now available for them. Once they do check out their exchange, a lot of them are going to be in for a big surprise when they start to understand that they are getting a better policy for the same amount or less, and some will even be eligible for a subsidy that will further reduce how much it is going to cost them.

Now, there will be those who do end up paying more. The way it is set up is not perfect for everyone, but the fact is that more are going to benefit than be screwed. And I'm not talking out my ass here. I am one of those who is losing my insurance come the end of the year. I got my cancellation notice, and I've found a plan I am going to be very happy with. It is just slightly cheaper than what I had, and the benefits are comparable to what I had, and that is with no subsidy.

Let me guess. You went to Media Matters for your numbers.

Actually I'm basing it on what I have researched and seen personally for myself and others. I know it's not perfect and some are going to get hammered, but overall, most people are going to get good coverage for a fair price, and for many it will include some subsidies. But even without being eligible for any subsidies, I found a great plan that fits my needs and should lower my overall medical costs. The plan itself is just a bit cheaper than what I have now, but my deductible is going to double. This could cost me if I get sick, but despite having a couple of medical conditions, I am not likely to become seriously ill anytime in the near future. I don't even come close to my deductible now, so increasing it is not a big risk to me.

You know it from what you personally have researched?

You expect us to believe that you just happen to be one of the less than 1% of the population that actually managed to buy a new plan? Seriously?

Or, more likely, are you just lying, and the real fact is that you haven't actually looked at the numbers? Be honest, all you have is the lies the government made up before hand to sell this to the idiots.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Until people actually check out their exchange and find out they can get the same or better coverage for the same price or even save some money. Supposedly 5 million people have received cancellation notices, according to Fox News. 1.5 million have registered on the health exchanges, most all before the 5 million received their cancellation notices. This tells us one important fact; those who have received cancellations have not even checked out their exchange to see what is now available for them. Once they do check out their exchange, a lot of them are going to be in for a big surprise when they start to understand that they are getting a better policy for the same amount or less, and some will even be eligible for a subsidy that will further reduce how much it is going to cost them.

Now, there will be those who do end up paying more. The way it is set up is not perfect for everyone, but the fact is that more are going to benefit than be screwed. And I'm not talking out my ass here. I am one of those who is losing my insurance come the end of the year. I got my cancellation notice, and I've found a plan I am going to be very happy with. It is just slightly cheaper than what I had, and the benefits are comparable to what I had, and that is with no subsidy.

Check their exchange, Gracie? MY advice is to stay the Hell away from it and the 800 number and flaunt it...Civil Disobedience...WHAT good is a LAW that the POTUS willy-nilly changes on the fly for politics sake?

Folks? DO NOT COMPLY. Tell Obama and the Government outright to go fuck themselves.

Yea, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You guys have no clue what these plans look like on the exchanges. Your post proves you have no clue.

I know exactly what the plans look like on the exchange. Unlike you, I actually spent time on them, and can tell you exactly how screwed up they are, even in California, which is, allegedly, an example of an exchange done right.

I know that, whatever plan I get, it won't be any good outside this county, much less this state. Please, argue with me about how great the options are, I enjoy dealing with liars that haven't done half of what they claimed.

 

[auditor0007]

Younger people are the ones getting royally screwed because the law says that insurance companies cannot charge then a price that has anything to do with their age, general health, or lack of risk factors.

You do realize that if a young person gets his/her insurance through an employer, the rate is the same as for the oldest person working at that company, right? Yet you bitch about the young person who you think should pay almost nothing for their coverage while we charge a person near retirement more than their house payment.

You do realize that, if it actually works that way, you were lying about preexisting conditions, getting dropped from insurance polices, the inherent discrimination of making people who are sick pay more, and every other fucking lie you used to defend Obamacare since it came out?

That leads me to ask you, were you lying then, are you lying now, or is it both?

Not a lie at all, because the rules that cover employers who provide health insurance are completely different from the rules for the individual market. When HIPAA laws were passed, they stopped insurers from rejecting people for health insurance if they got their insurance through their employer. In some cases, those with pre-existing conditions could be excluded from coverage for their particular condition only, for one year. They would still be covered for anything else.

The problem was that HIPAA laws never addressed the individual market. This is why most healthy people could actually find a cheaper plan on the individual market, but if you got sick, they would do what they could to get rid of you. Now, they didn't just dump all sick people, but there were numerous instances of companies trying to purge their rolls of "sick people". In my personal case, I lost my insurance when I moved even though Anthem assured me I would be able to purchase a plan as close to the one I had for a comparable rate. My mistake was not getting it in writing. Once I applied, I was immediately denied.

As for the rest, anyone and everyone with a pre-existing condition could not purchase insurance on the individual market. If you had a pre-existing condition, then you would have to find a job that offered insurance.

Luckily, I was able to get insurance through the high risk pool once the ACA was enacted. The ironic thing is that the rates for the high risk pool are cheaper than most decent plans offered on the open market as of this past year. The even more ironic thing is that the new plan I will be purchasing is even cheaper but only by a couple of bucks, and that is with no subsidy.

Bottom line is there were no lies at all. Those in the individual market got a great deal if they were healthy, but get sick with anything, and you were not wanted.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Until people actually check out their exchange and find out they can get the same or better coverage for the same price or even save some money. Supposedly 5 million people have received cancellation notices, according to Fox News. 1.5 million have registered on the health exchanges, most all before the 5 million received their cancellation notices. This tells us one important fact; those who have received cancellations have not even checked out their exchange to see what is now available for them. Once they do check out their exchange, a lot of them are going to be in for a big surprise when they start to understand that they are getting a better policy for the same amount or less, and some will even be eligible for a subsidy that will further reduce how much it is going to cost them.

Now, there will be those who do end up paying more. The way it is set up is not perfect for everyone, but the fact is that more are going to benefit than be screwed. And I'm not talking out my ass here. I am one of those who is losing my insurance come the end of the year. I got my cancellation notice, and I've found a plan I am going to be very happy with. It is just slightly cheaper than what I had, and the benefits are comparable to what I had, and that is with no subsidy.

Your argument doesn't last past the first sentence. People won't find better insurance on the exchanges. Premiums are 41% higher under Obamacare. As I read to your second paragraph I notice that you say "the way it is set up is not perfect for anyone."

Sir, this law isn't perfect for anyone. Unless you live in any one of the five states that actually saw drops in premiums under Obamacare, you're a liar. Most of these people LIKED their insurance. They don't need to be coerced into perusing the exchanges. If you make the claim their insurance was "substandard," according to whom? You simply don't understand. It may work for you, but for 5 million others it didn't.

Have you ever had health insurance? If so, have you ever had to use it? Have you ever been fucked by an insurance company? At your age, my bet is that it's three "no's".

I have had insurance.

I have needed it.

And the only people that ever screwed me over with insurance were working for the government, not an insurance company. The part I really like is how, even though people are getting nice shiny new plans this year, they won't be able to keep them next year.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

[


I don't listen to Limbaugh either, Joe. I don't listen to Limbaugh or Hannity. Bill O'Reilly is decent but I rarely watch him either.

If some guy had a supposedly sufficient plan under Obamacare, and he loses it because the law suddenly deems it as 'substandard,' just what makes you think that won't happen with your employer's insurance plan? You've proven my point very succinctly.

He didn't stick it to anything, in fact he committed seppuku right there on national television this afternoon by allowing people to keep their insurance despite them not being sufficient under the new law.

You need to deal with it. By the way, who is "you all"?

It amazes me all these folks who claim they never listen to limbaugh and then repeat his talking points verbatim...

The point is, it was estimated before ACA that about 25 million people had plans that were substandard, the main glaring problem not being "maternity coverage", but the fact that these plans don't cover "Pre-existing conditions". This is not a problem with most group plans provided by employers. A co-worker of mine has to take daily shots for her arthritis and skin conditions, and frankly, no one has tried to disallow that even though she's shifted jobs a couple of times.

Now I know this is about the 20th time you predicted Obama's political demise since last year, but come on, guy, really?

It amazes me that you claim to be a progressive that hates Rush, but know his talking points well enough to see them everywhere.

Not.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I'll tell you something; get really sick once, and spend some time in the hospital. You'll start understanding a lot better.

You're in luck! I've been in the hospital twice in the past two years. One was for a nervous breakdown, the other was for kidney stones. All of $11,000 in costs. I got the first paid for by filing for charity assistance. I am currently working on doing the same thing with my visit this past July.

You know what? Neither of those instances conveyed to me the need to buy government sponsored healthcare insurance.

I'm glad you got assistance. It's funny though how you follow a political ideology that demands self-reliance and then you count on others to bail you out. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they did. Not sure how that would have worked for you if the cost was $500,000, but that's another story. You do realize that a lot of people get hit with those types of bills and never can pay them, right?

Interesting that it only cost you $11,000 also. My late wife also had kidney stones, about twenty years ago. At that time, the cost was over $20,000, but hers were bad and she was in the hospital for seven days. Yours may have passed much easier and you may not have been in the hospital for more than a day or two.

Tell me, have you ever been without a means to pay for your healthcare? No. Do you live under the poverty line like I do? I doubt it. I for the life of me cannot understand why you would begrudge me the only way I have of paying for these things. Live life in my shoes, auditor, then you can judge me. It's funny you lecture me about self reliance, when your ideologies steer you to advocate entitlement programs like Obamacare. Really?

 

[auditor0007]

Check their exchange, Gracie? MY advice is to stay the Hell away from it and the 800 number and flaunt it...Civil Disobedience...WHAT good is a LAW that the POTUS willy-nilly changes on the fly for politics sake?

Folks? DO NOT COMPLY. Tell Obama and the Government outright to go fuck themselves.

Yea, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You guys have no clue what these plans look like on the exchanges. Your post proves you have no clue.

I know exactly what the plans look like on the exchange. Unlike you, I actually spent time on them, and can tell you exactly how screwed up they are, even in California, which is, allegedly, an example of an exchange done right.

I know that, whatever plan I get, it won't be any good outside this county, much less this state. Please, argue with me about how great the options are, I enjoy dealing with liars that haven't done half of what they claimed.

You are correct that most plans do not offer coverage out of your home state, and I think that is a problem. They all cover emergency treatment, but there is a real question as to what that entails. If you suffer a heart attack and need immediate open heart surgery, will that be covered? I'm not certain. The plan I chose to purchase actually does have coverage out of state, but it comes with a $10,000 deductible. That to me is still a big plus because at my age, I'm now more concerned with the really big potential bills. As for plans being good outside of the country, I don't know how many actually were in the past.

See, I could actually discuss shit with you if you weren't such a jerk all the time. Of course you know that I am a liar, because nothing I say could possibly be true.

I've had to deal with insurance companies for years between my late wife's battle with cancer, having two sons born premature with one of them being in NICU for almost two months, and then my own health issues.

 

[auditor0007]

You're in luck! I've been in the hospital twice in the past two years. One was for a nervous breakdown, the other was for kidney stones. All of $11,000 in costs. I got the first paid for by filing for charity assistance. I am currently working on doing the same thing with my visit this past July.

You know what? Neither of those instances conveyed to me the need to buy government sponsored healthcare insurance.

I'm glad you got assistance. It's funny though how you follow a political ideology that demands self-reliance and then you count on others to bail you out. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they did. Not sure how that would have worked for you if the cost was $500,000, but that's another story. You do realize that a lot of people get hit with those types of bills and never can pay them, right?

Interesting that it only cost you $11,000 also. My late wife also had kidney stones, about twenty years ago. At that time, the cost was over $20,000, but hers were bad and she was in the hospital for seven days. Yours may have passed much easier and you may not have been in the hospital for more than a day or two.

Tell me, have you ever been without a means to pay for your healthcare? No. Do you live under the poverty line like I do? I doubt it. I for the life of me cannot understand why you would begrudge me the only way I have of paying for these things. Live life in my shoes, auditor, then you can judge me.

I'm just questioning your political ideology. You claim to be poor and want no help, but you end up accepting help anyway. If you live under the poverty line, then you can get Medicaid and your healthcare will be covered. There are reasons we have programs like Medicaid, so when you are having a rough time financially, you can get the help you need. Accepting help from programs like Medicaid is not a terrible thing, especially if your goal is to improve your situation down the road so you no longer have to rely on such programs.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You do realize that if a young person gets his/her insurance through an employer, the rate is the same as for the oldest person working at that company, right? Yet you bitch about the young person who you think should pay almost nothing for their coverage while we charge a person near retirement more than their house payment.

You do realize that, if it actually works that way, you were lying about preexisting conditions, getting dropped from insurance polices, the inherent discrimination of making people who are sick pay more, and every other fucking lie you used to defend Obamacare since it came out?

That leads me to ask you, were you lying then, are you lying now, or is it both?

Not a lie at all, because the rules that cover employers who provide health insurance are completely different from the rules for the individual market. When HIPAA laws were passed, they stopped insurers from rejecting people for health insurance if they got their insurance through their employer. In some cases, those with pre-existing conditions could be excluded from coverage for their particular condition only, for one year. They would still be covered for anything else.

The problem was that HIPAA laws never addressed the individual market. This is why most healthy people could actually find a cheaper plan on the individual market, but if you got sick, they would do what they could to get rid of you. Now, they didn't just dump all sick people, but there were numerous instances of companies trying to purge their rolls of "sick people". In my personal case, I lost my insurance when I moved even though Anthem assured me I would be able to purchase a plan as close to the one I had for a comparable rate. My mistake was not getting it in writing. Once I applied, I was immediately denied.

As for the rest, anyone and everyone with a pre-existing condition could not purchase insurance on the individual market. If you had a pre-existing condition, then you would have to find a job that offered insurance.

Luckily, I was able to get insurance through the high risk pool once the ACA was enacted. The ironic thing is that the rates for the high risk pool are cheaper than most decent plans offered on the open market as of this past year. The even more ironic thing is that the new plan I will be purchasing is even cheaper but only by a couple of bucks, and that is with no subsidy.

Bottom line is there were no lies at all. Those in the individual market got a great deal if they were healthy, but get sick with anything, and you were not wanted.

Excuse me? Do you always make shit up when you get caught saying stupid shit?

All HIPPA does is set standards for privacy on medical records and allow people to keep their insurance even if they lost their jobs, as long as they paid for it. It doesn't do a fucking thing that even approaches preventing insurers from charging based on a person's health. If it did, you wouldn't have needed to shove Obamacare down everyone's throats.

Did you mention high risk pools? Funny that, it turns out that Obamacare is screwing people in those over just as much as it is everyone else.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcmsdtFM9YA]FNC: People With Pre Existing Conditions Having Plans Canceled - YouTube[/ame]

Want to tell me again how you aren't lying? Right after you just lied about HIPPA? That should go over well.

 

[TemplarKormac]

See, I could actually discuss shit with you if you weren't such a jerk all the time. Of course you know that I am a liar, because nothing I say could possibly be true.

I've had to deal with insurance companies for years between my late wife's battle with cancer, having two sons born premature with one of them being in NICU for almost two months, and then my own health issues.

Oh brother. What did we just get through talking about? When you resort to name calling, it's a surefire sign your argument is weak.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yea, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You guys have no clue what these plans look like on the exchanges. Your post proves you have no clue.

I know exactly what the plans look like on the exchange. Unlike you, I actually spent time on them, and can tell you exactly how screwed up they are, even in California, which is, allegedly, an example of an exchange done right.

I know that, whatever plan I get, it won't be any good outside this county, much less this state. Please, argue with me about how great the options are, I enjoy dealing with liars that haven't done half of what they claimed.

You are correct that most plans do not offer coverage out of your home state, and I think that is a problem. They all cover emergency treatment, but there is a real question as to what that entails. If you suffer a heart attack and need immediate open heart surgery, will that be covered? I'm not certain. The plan I chose to purchase actually does have coverage out of state, but it comes with a $10,000 deductible. That to me is still a big plus because at my age, I'm now more concerned with the really big potential bills. As for plans being good outside of the country, I don't know how many actually were in the past.

See, I could actually discuss shit with you if you weren't such a jerk all the time. Of course you know that I am a liar, because nothing I say could possibly be true.

I've had to deal with insurance companies for years between my late wife's battle with cancer, having two sons born premature with one of them being in NICU for almost two months, and then my own health issues.

You can't read, can you?

The plans available in California don't even cover you if you travel inside the state, never mind out of it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I'm glad you got assistance. It's funny though how you follow a political ideology that demands self-reliance and then you count on others to bail you out. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they did. Not sure how that would have worked for you if the cost was $500,000, but that's another story. You do realize that a lot of people get hit with those types of bills and never can pay them, right?

Interesting that it only cost you $11,000 also. My late wife also had kidney stones, about twenty years ago. At that time, the cost was over $20,000, but hers were bad and she was in the hospital for seven days. Yours may have passed much easier and you may not have been in the hospital for more than a day or two.

Tell me, have you ever been without a means to pay for your healthcare? No. Do you live under the poverty line like I do? I doubt it. I for the life of me cannot understand why you would begrudge me the only way I have of paying for these things. Live life in my shoes, auditor, then you can judge me.

I'm just questioning your political ideology. You claim to be poor and want no help, but you end up accepting help anyway. If you live under the poverty line, then you can get Medicaid and your healthcare will be covered. There are reasons we have programs like Medicaid, so when you are having a rough time financially, you can get the help you need. Accepting help from programs like Medicaid is not a terrible thing, especially if your goal is to improve your situation down the road so you no longer have to rely on such programs.

Would you rather me be sued for the money? Because if I didn't pay or attempt to rectify the situation with the debt collectors, they would take me to court to get the money. I know I have $11,000 lying around here somewhere.

Perhaps if you were put in my shoes having to be desperate enough to ask for help in the first place, you would understand. My actions aren't dictated solely based on my political ideologies. I'll hear no more of it.

 

[auditor0007]

You're in luck! I've been in the hospital twice in the past two years. One was for a nervous breakdown, the other was for kidney stones. All of $11,000 in costs. I got the first paid for by filing for charity assistance. I am currently working on doing the same thing with my visit this past July.

You know what? Neither of those instances conveyed to me the need to buy government sponsored healthcare insurance.

I'm glad you got assistance. It's funny though how you follow a political ideology that demands self-reliance and then you count on others to bail you out. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they did. Not sure how that would have worked for you if the cost was $500,000, but that's another story. You do realize that a lot of people get hit with those types of bills and never can pay them, right?

Interesting that it only cost you $11,000 also. My late wife also had kidney stones, about twenty years ago. At that time, the cost was over $20,000, but hers were bad and she was in the hospital for seven days. Yours may have passed much easier and you may not have been in the hospital for more than a day or two.

Tell me, have you ever been without a means to pay for your healthcare? No. Do you live under the poverty line like I do? I doubt it. I for the life of me cannot understand why you would begrudge me the only way I have of paying for these things. Live life in my shoes, auditor, then you can judge me. It's funny you lecture me about self reliance, when your ideologies steer you to advocate entitlement programs like Obamacare. Really?

I'll tell you why I'm an advocate for Obamacare. I lost my insurance when I moved from Colorado to Ohio, all because I had a pre-existing condition. I had private insurance for years, but when I moved I was cut out. That is the first reason. The second reason is that I know how expensive healthcare is. Between my late wife, my two boys, and myself, we have wracked up over $1.75 million in medical bills. Thank goodness we had insurance. Because I really do understand how expensive it is, I also realize that a lot of good people just cannot afford insurance, even if they work full-time. We complain about lazy people taking advantage of welfare programs, but the truth is that the vast majority who receive public assistance work for a living. I know there are those who truly abuse the system, and I don't like them anymore than anyone else, but that doesn't mean we cut everyone who is trying off. Last of all, I do believe wholeheartedly that healthcare should be a right, and that a person should not have to worry if they are going to die because they cannot afford insurance. Yes, those without insurance will be treated for their illness, but they do not receive the same treatment. Without insurance, my late wife never would have been given a stem cell transplant, because it is just too expensive.

Supporting healthcare for all isn't just a moral issue, it's a common sense one. We don't know who will draw the short stick and need a great deal of medical care. Seeing to it that everyone has healthcare makes for a better society all around. People are healthier and if we concentrate our efforts on preventative care as much as some of those horrible socialized countries do, we might actually see some positive results. Those people who live in those countries with socialized medicine, they have longer life expectancy than we do. Yes, we have more murders and probably more die in car accidents, but they do it for half the cost. They have to be doing something right. In the end, healthier people are more productive at work and in life. It makes for a better society for all. It doesn't mean that everyone should make the same amount of money or any of that nonsense. It just means certain things should not only be for those who can afford it.

 

[auditor0007]

Tell me, have you ever been without a means to pay for your healthcare? No. Do you live under the poverty line like I do? I doubt it. I for the life of me cannot understand why you would begrudge me the only way I have of paying for these things. Live life in my shoes, auditor, then you can judge me.

I'm just questioning your political ideology. You claim to be poor and want no help, but you end up accepting help anyway. If you live under the poverty line, then you can get Medicaid and your healthcare will be covered. There are reasons we have programs like Medicaid, so when you are having a rough time financially, you can get the help you need. Accepting help from programs like Medicaid is not a terrible thing, especially if your goal is to improve your situation down the road so you no longer have to rely on such programs.

Would you rather me be sued for the money? Because if I didn't pay or attempt to rectify the situation with the debt collectors, they would take me to court to get the money. I know I have $11,000 lying around here somewhere.

Perhaps if you were put in my shoes having to be desperate enough to ask for help in the first place, you would understand. My actions aren't dictated solely based on my political ideologies. I'll hear no more of it.

I think you missed my point. I wasn't getting down on you for seeking assistance. I just questioned how you get down on so many others who seek similar assistance. You seem to believe that government assistance is just a handout but accepting charity is somehow different. I pretty much equate the two as being the same. Either way you need help and get help. My real point was in trying to point out to you that many people who are faced with high medical bills don't get the help you did, and they actually do end up having to file bankruptcy. I don't want you getting sued nor do I want anyone getting sued because they can't pay a medical bill. That to me is just wrong that we have people getting their lives turned upside down because they could not afford health insurance or worse yet, because they could afford it but were still denied because of a pre-existing condition.

 

[auditor0007]

Not much different here in Florida. And good luck getting back what you had. Delayed one year? really?

Only sensible course of action is to trash this abomination of a law.

You know, I hear so much bitching about how expensive all this insurance is, but I have a question for all of you. The fact is that we are paying $8500 per year per person in the US for healthcare. That is for every single person living here, regardless of their age or whether they are a legal citizen or not. Please tell me who you think pays for that when all of you expect to buy health insurance for $200 per month or less and have it cover all of your medical bills. Again, critical thinking comes into play. $200 per month does not come close to $8500 per year. I honestly do not understand how individuals who otherwise seem to be fairly intelligent are so out of touch with these numbers and how they affect us.

Let me guess, you think every penny of that comes from the government.

Fact is, most of it comes from people who have their insurance already. In fact, if we are to believe Obama, less than 5% of it is actually coming out of taxes to cover the rounding errors in the system.

You can't have it both ways.

Why would I think that? It seems to me that all of you who think we can spend $8500 per person and only think it should cost $200 per month believe it comes form the healthcare fairy.

The fact is that almost 45% of all heatlhcare spending comes from the govenrment, which of course is our tax money. The rest comes from the private sector of which 40% comes from private health insurance and the rest comes out of pocket in one form or another.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I'm just questioning your political ideology. You claim to be poor and want no help, but you end up accepting help anyway. If you live under the poverty line, then you can get Medicaid and your healthcare will be covered. There are reasons we have programs like Medicaid, so when you are having a rough time financially, you can get the help you need. Accepting help from programs like Medicaid is not a terrible thing, especially if your goal is to improve your situation down the road so you no longer have to rely on such programs.

Would you rather me be sued for the money? Because if I didn't pay or attempt to rectify the situation with the debt collectors, they would take me to court to get the money. I know I have $11,000 lying around here somewhere.

Perhaps if you were put in my shoes having to be desperate enough to ask for help in the first place, you would understand. My actions aren't dictated solely based on my political ideologies. I'll hear no more of it.

I think you missed my point. I wasn't getting down on you for seeking assistance. I just questioned how you get down on so many others who seek similar assistance. You seem to believe that government assistance is just a handout but accepting charity is somehow different.

No. People who are able and willing to get a job don't deserve to have things like Food Stamps and Welfare. I haven't touched them since I left my first job in 2007. Those are different things entirely. I can barely stay awake, but please don't lecture me about my ideologies. I had to go through a long process of mailing documents and exchanging information with this charity before they ever decided to consider me. In fact it's screening process is a lot stricter than what the government uses for Welfare and Food Stamps. So when I see some Tom, Dick and Harry taking advantage of things they don't need and are being incentivized by their government to be lazy, yes, I will look down on them.

Do you think me heartless? Good night.

 

[auditor0007]

Let me guess. You went to Media Matters for your numbers.

Actually I'm basing it on what I have researched and seen personally for myself and others. I know it's not perfect and some are going to get hammered, but overall, most people are going to get good coverage for a fair price, and for many it will include some subsidies. But even without being eligible for any subsidies, I found a great plan that fits my needs and should lower my overall medical costs. The plan itself is just a bit cheaper than what I have now, but my deductible is going to double. This could cost me if I get sick, but despite having a couple of medical conditions, I am not likely to become seriously ill anytime in the near future. I don't even come close to my deductible now, so increasing it is not a big risk to me.

You know it from what you personally have researched?

You expect us to believe that you just happen to be one of the less than 1% of the population that actually managed to buy a new plan? Seriously?

Or, more likely, are you just lying, and the real fact is that you haven't actually looked at the numbers? Be honest, all you have is the lies the government made up before hand to sell this to the idiots.

Yea, I'm just lying. I'm not going to purchase health insurance. After December 31st, I probably won't have a need for it anymore.

Because I am currently in the high risk pool, I knew my insurance coverage would be ending at the end of the year. I knew this last year, so yes, I know exactly what plan I am purchasing, but no I haven't actually made the payment yet. I will do so before the end of the month.

 

[auditor0007]

You do realize that, if it actually works that way, you were lying about preexisting conditions, getting dropped from insurance polices, the inherent discrimination of making people who are sick pay more, and every other fucking lie you used to defend Obamacare since it came out?

That leads me to ask you, were you lying then, are you lying now, or is it both?

Not a lie at all, because the rules that cover employers who provide health insurance are completely different from the rules for the individual market. When HIPAA laws were passed, they stopped insurers from rejecting people for health insurance if they got their insurance through their employer. In some cases, those with pre-existing conditions could be excluded from coverage for their particular condition only, for one year. They would still be covered for anything else.

The problem was that HIPAA laws never addressed the individual market. This is why most healthy people could actually find a cheaper plan on the individual market, but if you got sick, they would do what they could to get rid of you. Now, they didn't just dump all sick people, but there were numerous instances of companies trying to purge their rolls of "sick people". In my personal case, I lost my insurance when I moved even though Anthem assured me I would be able to purchase a plan as close to the one I had for a comparable rate. My mistake was not getting it in writing. Once I applied, I was immediately denied.

As for the rest, anyone and everyone with a pre-existing condition could not purchase insurance on the individual market. If you had a pre-existing condition, then you would have to find a job that offered insurance.

Luckily, I was able to get insurance through the high risk pool once the ACA was enacted. The ironic thing is that the rates for the high risk pool are cheaper than most decent plans offered on the open market as of this past year. The even more ironic thing is that the new plan I will be purchasing is even cheaper but only by a couple of bucks, and that is with no subsidy.

Bottom line is there were no lies at all. Those in the individual market got a great deal if they were healthy, but get sick with anything, and you were not wanted.

Excuse me? Do you always make shit up when you get caught saying stupid shit?

All HIPPA does is set standards for privacy on medical records and allow people to keep their insurance even if they lost their jobs, as long as they paid for it. It doesn't do a fucking thing that even approaches preventing insurers from charging based on a person's health. If it did, you wouldn't have needed to shove Obamacare down everyone's throats.

Did you mention high risk pools? Funny that, it turns out that Obamacare is screwing people in those over just as much as it is everyone else.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcmsdtFM9YA]FNC: People With Pre Existing Conditions Having Plans Canceled - YouTube[/ame]

Want to tell me again how you aren't lying? Right after you just lied about HIPPA? That should go over well.

So you are telling me HIPAA laws do not prevent insurers from denying coverage to employees with pre-existing conditions if the company they work for offers insurance to other employees?

Preexisting Condition Exclusions
The law defines a preexisting condition as one for which medical advice, diagnosis, care, or treatment was recommended or received during the 6-month period prior to an individual’s enrollment date (which is the earlier of the first day of health coverage or the first day of any waiting period for coverage).
Group health plans and issuers may not exclude an individual’s preexisting medical condition from coverage for more than 12 months (18 months for late enrollees) after an individual’s enrollment date.
Under HIPAA, a new employer’s plan must give individuals credit for the length of time they had prior continuous health coverage, without a break in coverage of 63 days or more, thereby reducing or eliminating the 12-month exclusion period (18 months for late enrollees).

http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/newsroom/fshipaa.html

It would help if you knew the laws surrounding HIPAA.