The only people who are LOSING HEALTH INSURANCE are the ones who CHOSE TO NOT BUY IT.

[debbiedowner]

You're smarter than the CBO?
That's awesome!
GOP Tax Plan Would Still Leave 13 Million Without Health Insurance, CBO Says

You are aware they can still buy insurance, correct? They just don't pay a penalty if they decide they don't want to buy insurance. In short, their freedom of choice has been restored.

The poor can't afford to buy insurance without the subsidies. Funding for the subsidies. comes from mandating that those who don't have insurance participate. That includes millenials who can afford it but think they do not need it. But when an accident or illness puts them in the ER they can't pay the bill. Some of the cost is passed on to the taxpayers but the hospital takes a financial hit too. Although the stupid uninsured MF who didn't forsee his trip to the hospital gets top notch treatment for free...his credit rating is ruined. Too bad the hospitals and the government doesn't sue those dumb MFs.
That mandate was the best thing since apple pie.

I'm not finished. Without Obamacare and. Subsidized insurance., it ought to be readily apparent that millions of people who couldn't otherwise afford health insurance will lose what they had under the PPACA. The impoverished uninsured will go back to the ER and we're back to the old system.

“Otherwise afford healthcare”

The deductibles and copays under Obamacare still makes it unaffordable to the poor and they still show up in the emergency rooms.

What exactly is your point?

You are very uninformed about the high deductibles and co pays for the poor. Get back to me after you google cost share reductions that insurance companies still have despite your orange turd.

 

[dcbl]

I thought democrats were all "pro-choice"

 

[debbiedowner]

Crap products forced upon the public rarely ends up well.

Indeed ^ ^ ^ And you will see on very short order that tax POS just rammed through by Republicans will go lots worse.

I did my calculation last night and I would have saved 6.7% on my taxes, then I went to a taxpro forum this morning and see I will be losing big time in my situation.

 

[DrLove]

I did my calculation last night and I would have saved 6.7% on my taxes, then I went to a taxpro forum this morning and see I will be losing big time in my situation.

This thing is is 1100 pages of crap, hastily tossed together by lobbyists - but the good news is that it will all be undone in 2020.

 

[debbiedowner]

I did my calculation last night and I would have saved 6.7% on my taxes, then I went to a taxpro forum this morning and see I will be losing big time in my situation.

This thing is is 1100 pages of crap, hastily tossed together by lobbyists - but the good news is that it will all be undone in 2020.

TaxProTalk.com • View forum - Taxation

 

[dblack]

We don't need a safety net.

But as an advanced society, we recognize that it's the right thing to do.

At least most of us do.

Then it shouldn't be a problem to create one without coercive mandates, eh?

Paying into Medicare is a mandate. Paying for Medicare Part B if you want a Supplement or a Medicare Advantage Plan is mandate.

I'd expand that whole system to all. An excellent blend of public safety net and dynamic free market competition and innovation.

So it depends on the nature of the mandate.
.

You seem to be missing (steering in a wide circle around) my point. If most people in an advanced society see the need for a safety net, or any other social program that they think is important, then they should be able to create that program through voluntary means. If most people really support their cause, there is no need to resort to laws forcing others to play along.

 

[Freewill]

So stop with the lies.

Premiums may go up for some but that shouldn't bother you unless you're a hypocrite who had no problem with the increases under Obamacare. And some of those increases were double or triple previous premiums.
Smart consumers will see a decline by opting out of Obamacare and getting into a co-op.
Bottom line is democrats created this disaster so whatever the outcome is in the end they have no one to blame but themselves.

How does one get into a co-op?

 

[Freewill]

The reason they may choose not too is because of cost. Buy healthcare or buy food, you choose which you would take.

 

[JQPublic1]

We don't need a safety net.

But as an advanced society, we recognize that it's the right thing to do.

At least most of us do.

Then it shouldn't be a problem to create one without coercive mandates, eh?

Paying into Medicare is a mandate. Paying for Medicare Part B if you want a Supplement or a Medicare Advantage Plan is mandate.

I'd expand that whole system to all. An excellent blend of public safety net and dynamic free market competition and innovation.

So it depends on the nature of the mandate.
.

You seem to be missing (steering in a wide circle around) my point. If most people in an advanced society see the need for a safety net, or any other social program that they think is important, then they should be able to create that program through voluntary means. If most people really support their cause, there is no need to resort to laws forcing others to play along.

Pertaining to the PPACA I could accept your
notion if uninsured middle classed people who could afford insurance were not treated
when they arrive at the ER.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So stop with the lies.

Premiums may go up for some but that shouldn't bother you unless you're a hypocrite who had no problem with the increases under Obamacare. And some of those increases were double or triple previous premiums.
Smart consumers will see a decline by opting out of Obamacare and getting into a co-op.
Bottom line is democrats created this disaster so whatever the outcome is in the end they have no one to blame but themselves.

How does one get into a co-op?

Depends on if it's a public or private one. Google the ones in your location.
The one I joined was open to the public and was very cheap compared to the mandated minimums of Obamacare.

 

[kwc57]

Crap products forced upon the public rarely ends up well.

Indeed ^ ^ ^ And you will see on very short order that tax POS just rammed through by Republicans will go lots worse.

When you start getting more money in your paycheck in February, would you kindly send it to me since you don't want it? Democrats pass Obamacare and the government forces you to buy a product you don't want. The Republicans pass a tax reform bill that puts more money in your pocket. Seems like you're a moron pulling for the wrong side.

 

[kwc57]

The poor can't afford to buy insurance without the subsidies. Funding for the subsidies. comes from mandating that those who don't have insurance participate. That includes millenials who can afford it but think they do not need it. But when an accident or illness puts them in the ER they can't pay the bill. Some of the cost is passed on to the taxpayers but the hospital takes a financial hit too. Although the stupid uninsured MF who didn't forsee his trip to the hospital gets top notch treatment for free...his credit rating is ruined. Too bad the hospitals and the government doesn't sue those dumb MFs.
That mandate was the best thing since apple pie.

I'm not finished. Without Obamacare and. Subsidized insurance., it ought to be readily apparent that millions of people who couldn't otherwise afford health insurance will lose what they had under the PPACA. The impoverished uninsured will go back to the ER and we're back to the old system.

“Otherwise afford healthcare”

The deductibles and copays under Obamacare still makes it unaffordable to the poor and they still show up in the emergency rooms.

What exactly is your point?

Some red states have sabatoged implementation of the PPACA and States with significant numbers of older sicker people saw insurers pull out of the markets. Some have only one provider now as a result. But as this link sbows thats not the case in 25 other states.
How States Have Sabotaged Obamacare

Those people in those states don’t want Obamacare of course they’re going to try and get rid of it. It’s unconstitutional

The poor people in those states want and need the PPACA. But their interests are nullified by the very people they helped to elect...IF they voted at all..or if their votes were counted. And the USSC said the PPACA is Constitutional... I'll take their opinion over yours any day.

The only reason the SCOTUS found Obamacare constitutional is because they said it was a tax........which the entire Obama admin, Dem Congress and DNC continually said it was NOT. Why do you morons sit at your master's feet believing the bullshit they keep feeding you. Had it not been a tax as Obama claimed, SCOTUS would have tossed it as unconstitutional.

 

[Freewill]

So stop with the lies.

Premiums may go up for some but that shouldn't bother you unless you're a hypocrite who had no problem with the increases under Obamacare. And some of those increases were double or triple previous premiums.
Smart consumers will see a decline by opting out of Obamacare and getting into a co-op.
Bottom line is democrats created this disaster so whatever the outcome is in the end they have no one to blame but themselves.

How does one get into a co-op?

Depends on if it's a public or private one. Google the ones in your location.
The one I joined was open to the public and was very cheap compared to the mandated minimums of Obamacare.

Google, co-op medical insurance?

 

[JQPublic1]

I'm not finished. Without Obamacare and. Subsidized insurance., it ought to be readily apparent that millions of people who couldn't otherwise afford health insurance will lose what they had under the PPACA. The impoverished uninsured will go back to the ER and we're back to the old system.

“Otherwise afford healthcare”

The deductibles and copays under Obamacare still makes it unaffordable to the poor and they still show up in the emergency rooms.

What exactly is your point?

Some red states have sabatoged implementation of the PPACA and States with significant numbers of older sicker people saw insurers pull out of the markets. Some have only one provider now as a result. But as this link sbows thats not the case in 25 other states.
How States Have Sabotaged Obamacare

Those people in those states don’t want Obamacare of course they’re going to try and get rid of it. It’s unconstitutional

The poor people in those states want and need the PPACA. But their interests are nullified by the very people they helped to elect...IF they voted at all..or if their votes were counted. And the USSC said the PPACA is Constitutional... I'll take their opinion over yours any day.

The only reason the SCOTUS found Obamacare constitutional is because they said it was a tax........which the entire Obama admin, Dem Congress and DNC continually said it was NOT. Why do you morons sit at your master's feet believing the bullshit they keep feeding you. Had it not been a tax as Obama claimed, SCOTUS would have tossed it as unconstitutional.

Look, crybaby. I don't give a rats azz about your shoulda/coulda/woulda BS. If the Supreme Court passed the mandate penalty as a tax...so be it. We go by their majority opinion so STFU.

 

[dblack]

We don't need a safety net.

But as an advanced society, we recognize that it's the right thing to do.

At least most of us do.

Then it shouldn't be a problem to create one without coercive mandates, eh?

Paying into Medicare is a mandate. Paying for Medicare Part B if you want a Supplement or a Medicare Advantage Plan is mandate.

I'd expand that whole system to all. An excellent blend of public safety net and dynamic free market competition and innovation.

So it depends on the nature of the mandate.
.

You seem to be missing (steering in a wide circle around) my point. If most people in an advanced society see the need for a safety net, or any other social program that they think is important, then they should be able to create that program through voluntary means. If most people really support their cause, there is no need to resort to laws forcing others to play along.

Pertaining to the PPACA I could accept your
notion if uninsured middle classed people who could afford insurance were not treated
when they arrive at the ER.

If you mean getting rid of EMTALA, that's a good idea. But if you mean government should prevent ERs from treating people who aren't insured, that's just as dumb as the original mandate. Society can work these kinds of problems out without a bunch of hare-brained laws polluting its moral center.

 

[JQPublic1]

You speak of morality even as the bitter dregs of scorn for indigents drips from your hateful lips. Thats what the EMTALA was designed for...not freeloaders that can afford insurance but who refuse to take responsibility for their own health. I say give indigents a
PHOTO ID that reflects their status so when they seek medical care they will be treated. Middle class freeloaders won't be able to get the ID, based on tax documents showing income, and will be the last to be treated if at all. Perhaps media accounts of how these bums are treated will send a message...get insured or perish...

.

 

[dblack]

You speak of morality even as the bitter dregs of scorn for indigents drips from your hateful lips.

WTF???

 

[EverCurious]

A bit of a rant here...

We're already forced to pay for auto insurance, that one at least makes some sense to me as the person who's at fault (insurance) has to reimburse the one who was damaged. (Or if you pay for full coverage, at a premium, you're covered no matter what.) Obviously the person not at fault shouldn't be hosed by some jackass - so in my mind that insurance is "protection" from unjust harm.

Health insurance doesn't make fucking sense though, neither does EMTALA.

Like, I choose to buy home insurance in case of flood, fire, earthquake. If I chose not to get these things I'm on my own to replace the damages; new home can be upwards of $500k, no one is going to help pay for that.

How about supplemental insurances; electronics insurance for if your gadget breaks (cell phones, hard drives, pretty much anything electronic, even vibrators these days lol) If you don't get it, no one helps pay for the replacement of said gadget. They have home appliance insurance, after market replacement if your washer goes out or whatever, same thing with cars too.

EMTALA is the original "de facto" national health insurance policy, by forcing hospitals to shoulder the costs of health care for illegals, criminals, and yea the poor too. We the people got a stealth tax in the form of crazy high medical costs...

You folks whine about the cost of medical care sky-rocketing, and you don't even understand /why/ that happened. Instead you cry that you /need/ insurance to afford health care, so you push health insurance and boom it sky-rockets too. You blame "greedy doctors." It's EMTALA, it's /always/ been EMTALA. And your reps have known it, they know damn well why medical prices are off the charts in America, but they're too chicken shit to tell you, too chicken shit to do what /needs/ to be done. REPEAL EMTALA!

In 2000, emergency physicians reported that 61% of their bad debt was related to EMTALA mandated care. For 27.7% of emergency physicians, EMTALA was the only source of bad debt. In utilizing the data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 1996-1998, it was determined that the percentage of total charges paid by Medicaid, Medicare, and the uninsured remained constant, while the mean reimbursement for privately insured patients declined from 77.7% to 65.7%. The MEPS data would suggest that the contribution of the commercial insurance companies to bad debt is increasing and that emergency physicians are less able to cost shift to offset the uncompensated care burden.

Fucking 2000 people, that's 17 damned years ago that we fucked up and made a bad policy that damages the entire nation. Instead of fixing it, you dumb shits add health insurance to the fuck up with ACA. Doubling down on the stupid...

Look at the chart and tell me what you see. EMTALA was passed in 1986:

I mean if you want to /really/ get into it, tie those sky rockets to immigration - because EMTALA is the de facto health insurance for illegal immigrants, they can't get "legal" medical care so they just jilt the hospitals, and thus leave the American people with the bill - and there's no damn reason for them to pay ever either. See hospitals /knew/ these non-paying folks were becoming detrimental to their shit so they stopped treating them; bleeding hearts cried and cried about them getting turned away and passed from hospital to hospital, so we got EMTALA. Check out this interactive chart at MPI (Migration Policy Institute) and note the correlation between immigration and health care cost increases, it's unmistakable - U.S. Immigrant Population and Share over Time, 1850-Present (They attempt to account for illegals and legals as a note.) EDIT > Site took forever to load all it's ads so here's a screen shot (the interactive stuff is interesting, but maybe not worth the time for some folks.)

What you can also note is that the costs for other health care didn't really go up, dental, home care, etc; only hospitals and physician care - only the ones that are hit by EMTALA.

(Note how prescription care started popping up in the mid 90s there? Can you guess why? GOVERNMENT FUCK UPs again. The mid-1990s saw a decade of rapid pharmaceutical growth in all countries. In the U.S., this was accompanied by expansions of coverage (including for prescription drugs) by the federal government, through such programs as the Children’s Health Insurance Program, Medicaid, and Medicare.)

Understand, I don't mind immigrants, my grandparents are immigrants (legal ones) and I don't particularly mind helping out poor Americans (charity medical care), however, it's the damned truth. Immigration costs /us/ so much money, legal or not honestly, and medical care is one of the BIGGEST costs that we American's ultimately end up shouldering because of immigration, and especially illegal immigration. Reference points between immigration and health care cost increases in above chart: In 1965 The Immigration and Naturalization Act passed (18M immigrants, 3 times the number admitted over the preceding 30 years - note the near immediate effect on health care costs) Between 1965 and 2000 we took in 5.7 Million immigrants. Those are just the /legal/ ones folks, the documented ones... In the 80s and 90s illegal immigration because a huge debate point (note Bill Clinton made many speeches and campaign promises about deporting illegals) In spite of the issues, it was agreed to enact the 1990 Immigration act we doubled our annual intake of /legal/ immigrants, and even granted amnesty to some 3M illegal immigrants. Today, I hear we're figuring some 43M legal and illegal immigrants in the country.

I know ya'll mean well, but god damn people, you're just hurting yourselves with this well-intentioned crap. Ya'll are literally pricing yourselves out of the things /you/ need to survive and be healthy in order to "help others." Pathological Altruism.

 

[Flash]

I whole-heartedly agree with the OP. All the kids from poor families that are losing their health insurance from CHIP need to get off their lazy asses and get a job cleaning chimneys.

Or their parents get off their fat pot smoking asses and start taking responsibility for their children's welfare.

 

[Flash]

The reason they may choose not too is because of cost. Buy healthcare or buy food, you choose which you would take.

Many of the welfare queens don't make choices between food and health care. They make choices between alcohol, drugs cigarettes or gambling and expect stupid bleeding heart Libtards to provide both their food and health care.

Of course if the idiots didn't elect Democrats with failed Liberal economic policies then there would be less poverty and more family income and then they wouldn't have to be on welfare, would they?