Trump’s Budget Is a Perfect Reflection of Republican Values

[Andylusion]

Just as the cartoon shows... you fought so hard to screw over the American people, and when you succeeded, now you are shocked we're not happy about being screwed over? How dumb are you people?

Statements like that are part of why substantive discourse doesn't generally happen on here. Regardless of what the outcome be of having passed the ACA, nobody "fought hard to screw over the American people." As long as one ascribes malicious intent to the people who passed that law, thus coming to the table with an adversarial, "they're out to get me" mindset, one will not be able to have a productive discussion about it.

The unavoidable fact is that millions of people who prior to the ACA did not have health insurance obtained health insurance, and vastly more people obtained it than lost it. (Information below is from a 2014 study.)

• Of the 40.7 million who were uninsured in 2013, 14.5 million gained coverage, but 5.2 million of the insured lost coverage, for a net gain in coverage of approximately 9.3 million. This represents a drop in the share of the population that is uninsured from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.
• Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million. New enrollees are primarily drawn from those who were uninsured in 2013, or those who had “other” forms of insurance, including Medicare, retiree health insurance, and other government plans.
• According to [Rand's] estimates, 3.9 million were covered through the state and federal marketplaces as of mid-March 2014. This figure does not fully capture the enrollment surge that occurred in late March.
• For most people the ACA has not changed their health insurance coverage. Among adults, 80 percent still had the same form of coverage in March 2014 as in September 2013.
• Of those who were previously uninsured but are now insured, 7.2 million gained ESI, 3.6 million are now covered by Medicaid, 1.4 million have signed up through a marketplace, while the remainder gained coverage through other sources.
• Our estimates suggest that about one-third of new marketplace enrollees were previously uninsured.
• Among the 7.8 million people who were enrolled in off-marketplace individual market plans in early 2014, 7.3 million were previously insured; 5.4 million were previously insured through an individual market plan.
• Less than one million who previously had individual market insurance transitioned to being uninsured. While we cannot tell if these people lost their insurance due to cancellation or because they simply felt the cost was too high, the overall number represents less than one percent of people between the ages of 18 and 64.

Moreover, from what I can tell, the hoopla about health insurance has to do only with the 20% of the population that purchases it on the open market. I think that because the rise in employer-based premiums has been comparatively small, most especially after the ACA's implementation. (See also: Private Health Insurance Premiums and Federal Policy)

​

Another thing the ACA does that benefits everyone is that it reduces the deficit and it keeps premiums lower than they otherwise would be.

• How Repealing Portions of the Affordable Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums
  
• Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act— CBO’s March 2015 Baseline
  
• Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the Affordable Care Act
  
• Here's how GOP repeal of Obamacare would swell the federal deficit
  
• Obamacare Is (Still) Fiscally Responsible Congress' scorekeeper confirms that the health care law will reduce deficits.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one thing: what one sees as the objectives of a nation's health care system.

• Some people think it's objective is to keep the citizenry as healthy as possible.
• Some people think it's objective is to have the best quality modes of care possible, without regard to who obtains that care when they need it.
• Some think it's to ensure a basic level of health status among the populace.
• Some think it's to make healthcare affordable (via insurance) for people who can afford the insurance, but not necessarily make it possible for everyone to obtain healthcare outside of emergency situations.

What are the objectives in your mind?

Having determined that you whole post is bullshit half way through it, I did not bother to read the rest of it.

Yes, well, when someone makes remarks like "[Democrats] fought so hard to screw over the American people," one knows one may as well have the conversation with a trained parrot.

I've been down this road with Andy before. He wants his multimillion dollar maximum benefit, zero deductible and copay insurance for free, and ACA did not do that, so he is pissed.

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

 

[usmbguest5318]

an understanding of how insurance works.

It is a form of risk management primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent, uncertain loss.

The word "contingent" means it's a chance action. Uncertain, means something there is no guarantee of happening.

Regardless, back to the definition of insurance.

"It is a form of risk management primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent, uncertain loss."

For property and casualty, that definition applies. It's quite possible that one won't ever make a claim against one's property insurance policy. For life and health, it does not.

• It is 100% certain that the insured's life will end and the insurer will have to pay, barring the death's being of a sort that's not covered.
• It is almost as certain that the insured will suffer a health ailment.

For life and health insurance, the only thing that's uncertain is when a qualifying claim event will occur.

When you say that now they are guaranteed issue.... yeah... who do you think is paying for that guaranteed issue?
We do. The premium payers. Where do you think the insurance companies get money from?

The great majority of it comes from earnings on invested capital. The capital is the money insured parties pay as premiums, but an insurance company cannot thrive on premiums alone. Indeed, but for the "float" associated with the time between receiving premiums and paying a claim, insurers would at best break even.

Not entirely true. There is no guarantee that I could not drop over dead right now, costing the insurance company nothing.

I'm not talking about life insurance. Death is a 100% guarantee. Even then though, level term insurance expires. So you can die after the insurance expires costing nothing. Which is why you can get level term insurance for a million dollars, and yet pay $30 to $50 a month for it.

Your point about invested float, is at the very best, irrelevant. Even your own link says very clearly:
"The insurance industry survives on premiums, but it thrives on float"

If the company "survives" on premiums, then my point stands. My point being that when you demand the insurance companies cover more, you are in effect demanding you yourself pay higher premiums.

"thriving" on float, means that investment returns are the icing on the cake. The bonus after making a profit.

I happen to look up Progressive's investor relation publication. On page 39, you can clearly see that premium revenue, is $22.4 Billion, while Investment income is only $478 Million.

What that means is that if a bunch of left-wingers get together and push through some feel-good legislation, that forces up costs on Progressive by just, let's say 5%. That would be almost a billion dollars. More than double the investment income. Which in turn would require Progressive to pass on those costs to the premium payers.

Which again... was my whole point. All that float crap, was irrelevant to the point. When you demand companies pay out more in insurance policies, you demand in effect, that they charge the consumer much higher premiums.

Which again, is exactly what we see. In 2006 I could get an insurance policy for $67 a month. Today the cheapest is $250.

"thriving" on float, means that investment returns are the icing on the cake. The bonus after making a profit.

Ahh, no. "Thriving" is the profit. I don't think you understand what "thrive" means. You should click the link.

If there was no profit, then how could they "survive" on premiums? A company can't "survive" without profit.

I don't think you know what thrive means. Try clicking on your own link, and reading it.

"to grow vigorously" Is it possible to grow in a non-'vigorous' way? Yes. I make $19k a year. I still put money into savings, and into investments. Would you call it a "vigorous" growth of savings and investments? Obviously not.

But it's still a profitable growth.

Besides that, I already posted the direct numbers, and they clearly show that float is not the majority, or even a super significant revenue stream, relative to premiums.

If your claim was even remotely true, then we would expect that as costs mandated by the government wet up, that competition by the insurance companies would force premiums to stay low, and insurance companies to use the revenue from the float to offset costs.

Of course that is not happening, because the float revenue is more like a small bonus, rather than a significant and stable revenue stream.

Which is another problem, is that like with all investments, the revenue from them is not stable. Some years my portfolio has increased by 20%. Most years, it's a small increase. And a few years, it's lost money. There is no way any company is going to craft their premium costs, around a revenue stream that is not stable.

Honestly, this is getting childish. You are trying to make your entire point, wrapped around how you think the world "flourish" should be interpreted, when I already posted the raw numbers from a companies official investor relations page? Do you not see how childish that is? Can you not move on to something else?

You would have been better off delivering a lamentation rather than that pitiful explanation you just did.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Just as the cartoon shows... you fought so hard to screw over the American people, and when you succeeded, now you are shocked we're not happy about being screwed over? How dumb are you people?

Statements like that are part of why substantive discourse doesn't generally happen on here. Regardless of what the outcome be of having passed the ACA, nobody "fought hard to screw over the American people." As long as one ascribes malicious intent to the people who passed that law, thus coming to the table with an adversarial, "they're out to get me" mindset, one will not be able to have a productive discussion about it.

The unavoidable fact is that millions of people who prior to the ACA did not have health insurance obtained health insurance, and vastly more people obtained it than lost it. (Information below is from a 2014 study.)

• Of the 40.7 million who were uninsured in 2013, 14.5 million gained coverage, but 5.2 million of the insured lost coverage, for a net gain in coverage of approximately 9.3 million. This represents a drop in the share of the population that is uninsured from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.
• Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million. New enrollees are primarily drawn from those who were uninsured in 2013, or those who had “other” forms of insurance, including Medicare, retiree health insurance, and other government plans.
• According to [Rand's] estimates, 3.9 million were covered through the state and federal marketplaces as of mid-March 2014. This figure does not fully capture the enrollment surge that occurred in late March.
• For most people the ACA has not changed their health insurance coverage. Among adults, 80 percent still had the same form of coverage in March 2014 as in September 2013.
• Of those who were previously uninsured but are now insured, 7.2 million gained ESI, 3.6 million are now covered by Medicaid, 1.4 million have signed up through a marketplace, while the remainder gained coverage through other sources.
• Our estimates suggest that about one-third of new marketplace enrollees were previously uninsured.
• Among the 7.8 million people who were enrolled in off-marketplace individual market plans in early 2014, 7.3 million were previously insured; 5.4 million were previously insured through an individual market plan.
• Less than one million who previously had individual market insurance transitioned to being uninsured. While we cannot tell if these people lost their insurance due to cancellation or because they simply felt the cost was too high, the overall number represents less than one percent of people between the ages of 18 and 64.

Moreover, from what I can tell, the hoopla about health insurance has to do only with the 20% of the population that purchases it on the open market. I think that because the rise in employer-based premiums has been comparatively small, most especially after the ACA's implementation. (See also: Private Health Insurance Premiums and Federal Policy)

​

Another thing the ACA does that benefits everyone is that it reduces the deficit and it keeps premiums lower than they otherwise would be.

• How Repealing Portions of the Affordable Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums
  
• Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act— CBO’s March 2015 Baseline
  
• Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the Affordable Care Act
  
• Here's how GOP repeal of Obamacare would swell the federal deficit
  
• Obamacare Is (Still) Fiscally Responsible Congress' scorekeeper confirms that the health care law will reduce deficits.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one thing: what one sees as the objectives of a nation's health care system.

• Some people think it's objective is to keep the citizenry as healthy as possible.
• Some people think it's objective is to have the best quality modes of care possible, without regard to who obtains that care when they need it.
• Some think it's to ensure a basic level of health status among the populace.
• Some think it's to make healthcare affordable (via insurance) for people who can afford the insurance, but not necessarily make it possible for everyone to obtain healthcare outside of emergency situations.

What are the objectives in your mind?

Having determined that you whole post is bullshit half way through it, I did not bother to read the rest of it.

Yes, well, when someone makes remarks like "[Democrats] fought so hard to screw over the American people," one knows one may as well have the conversation with a trained parrot.

I've been down this road with Andy before. He wants his multimillion dollar maximum benefit, zero deductible and copay insurance for free, and ACA did not do that, so he is pissed.

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

 

[Andylusion]

Just as the cartoon shows... you fought so hard to screw over the American people, and when you succeeded, now you are shocked we're not happy about being screwed over? How dumb are you people?

Statements like that are part of why substantive discourse doesn't generally happen on here. Regardless of what the outcome be of having passed the ACA, nobody "fought hard to screw over the American people." As long as one ascribes malicious intent to the people who passed that law, thus coming to the table with an adversarial, "they're out to get me" mindset, one will not be able to have a productive discussion about it.

The unavoidable fact is that millions of people who prior to the ACA did not have health insurance obtained health insurance, and vastly more people obtained it than lost it. (Information below is from a 2014 study.)

• Of the 40.7 million who were uninsured in 2013, 14.5 million gained coverage, but 5.2 million of the insured lost coverage, for a net gain in coverage of approximately 9.3 million. This represents a drop in the share of the population that is uninsured from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.
• Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million. New enrollees are primarily drawn from those who were uninsured in 2013, or those who had “other” forms of insurance, including Medicare, retiree health insurance, and other government plans.
• According to [Rand's] estimates, 3.9 million were covered through the state and federal marketplaces as of mid-March 2014. This figure does not fully capture the enrollment surge that occurred in late March.
• For most people the ACA has not changed their health insurance coverage. Among adults, 80 percent still had the same form of coverage in March 2014 as in September 2013.
• Of those who were previously uninsured but are now insured, 7.2 million gained ESI, 3.6 million are now covered by Medicaid, 1.4 million have signed up through a marketplace, while the remainder gained coverage through other sources.
• Our estimates suggest that about one-third of new marketplace enrollees were previously uninsured.
• Among the 7.8 million people who were enrolled in off-marketplace individual market plans in early 2014, 7.3 million were previously insured; 5.4 million were previously insured through an individual market plan.
• Less than one million who previously had individual market insurance transitioned to being uninsured. While we cannot tell if these people lost their insurance due to cancellation or because they simply felt the cost was too high, the overall number represents less than one percent of people between the ages of 18 and 64.

Moreover, from what I can tell, the hoopla about health insurance has to do only with the 20% of the population that purchases it on the open market. I think that because the rise in employer-based premiums has been comparatively small, most especially after the ACA's implementation. (See also: Private Health Insurance Premiums and Federal Policy)

​

Another thing the ACA does that benefits everyone is that it reduces the deficit and it keeps premiums lower than they otherwise would be.

• How Repealing Portions of the Affordable Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums
  
• Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act— CBO’s March 2015 Baseline
  
• Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the Affordable Care Act
  
• Here's how GOP repeal of Obamacare would swell the federal deficit
  
• Obamacare Is (Still) Fiscally Responsible Congress' scorekeeper confirms that the health care law will reduce deficits.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one thing: what one sees as the objectives of a nation's health care system.

• Some people think it's objective is to keep the citizenry as healthy as possible.
• Some people think it's objective is to have the best quality modes of care possible, without regard to who obtains that care when they need it.
• Some think it's to ensure a basic level of health status among the populace.
• Some think it's to make healthcare affordable (via insurance) for people who can afford the insurance, but not necessarily make it possible for everyone to obtain healthcare outside of emergency situations.

What are the objectives in your mind?

Having determined that you whole post is bullshit half way through it, I did not bother to read the rest of it.

Yes, well, when someone makes remarks like "[Democrats] fought so hard to screw over the American people," one knows one may as well have the conversation with a trained parrot.

I've been down this road with Andy before. He wants his multimillion dollar maximum benefit, zero deductible and copay insurance for free, and ACA did not do that, so he is pissed.

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

Walmart pays way better than many places.

And they haven't treated me badly.

Moreover, I've applied for jobs in the past two years, that don't offer insurance to anyone, because the cost now under the "Affordable" care act, is too costly. I was told by one employer straight up "Insurance is too expensive now, so we don't offer any at all".

Another example of you screwing over the working people, and claiming we should appreciate it.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Just as the cartoon shows... you fought so hard to screw over the American people, and when you succeeded, now you are shocked we're not happy about being screwed over? How dumb are you people?

Statements like that are part of why substantive discourse doesn't generally happen on here. Regardless of what the outcome be of having passed the ACA, nobody "fought hard to screw over the American people." As long as one ascribes malicious intent to the people who passed that law, thus coming to the table with an adversarial, "they're out to get me" mindset, one will not be able to have a productive discussion about it.

The unavoidable fact is that millions of people who prior to the ACA did not have health insurance obtained health insurance, and vastly more people obtained it than lost it. (Information below is from a 2014 study.)

• Of the 40.7 million who were uninsured in 2013, 14.5 million gained coverage, but 5.2 million of the insured lost coverage, for a net gain in coverage of approximately 9.3 million. This represents a drop in the share of the population that is uninsured from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.
• Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million. New enrollees are primarily drawn from those who were uninsured in 2013, or those who had “other” forms of insurance, including Medicare, retiree health insurance, and other government plans.
• According to [Rand's] estimates, 3.9 million were covered through the state and federal marketplaces as of mid-March 2014. This figure does not fully capture the enrollment surge that occurred in late March.
• For most people the ACA has not changed their health insurance coverage. Among adults, 80 percent still had the same form of coverage in March 2014 as in September 2013.
• Of those who were previously uninsured but are now insured, 7.2 million gained ESI, 3.6 million are now covered by Medicaid, 1.4 million have signed up through a marketplace, while the remainder gained coverage through other sources.
• Our estimates suggest that about one-third of new marketplace enrollees were previously uninsured.
• Among the 7.8 million people who were enrolled in off-marketplace individual market plans in early 2014, 7.3 million were previously insured; 5.4 million were previously insured through an individual market plan.
• Less than one million who previously had individual market insurance transitioned to being uninsured. While we cannot tell if these people lost their insurance due to cancellation or because they simply felt the cost was too high, the overall number represents less than one percent of people between the ages of 18 and 64.

Moreover, from what I can tell, the hoopla about health insurance has to do only with the 20% of the population that purchases it on the open market. I think that because the rise in employer-based premiums has been comparatively small, most especially after the ACA's implementation. (See also: Private Health Insurance Premiums and Federal Policy)

​

Another thing the ACA does that benefits everyone is that it reduces the deficit and it keeps premiums lower than they otherwise would be.

• How Repealing Portions of the Affordable Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums
  
• Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act— CBO’s March 2015 Baseline
  
• Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the Affordable Care Act
  
• Here's how GOP repeal of Obamacare would swell the federal deficit
  
• Obamacare Is (Still) Fiscally Responsible Congress' scorekeeper confirms that the health care law will reduce deficits.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one thing: what one sees as the objectives of a nation's health care system.

• Some people think it's objective is to keep the citizenry as healthy as possible.
• Some people think it's objective is to have the best quality modes of care possible, without regard to who obtains that care when they need it.
• Some think it's to ensure a basic level of health status among the populace.
• Some think it's to make healthcare affordable (via insurance) for people who can afford the insurance, but not necessarily make it possible for everyone to obtain healthcare outside of emergency situations.

What are the objectives in your mind?

Having determined that you whole post is bullshit half way through it, I did not bother to read the rest of it.

Yes, well, when someone makes remarks like "[Democrats] fought so hard to screw over the American people," one knows one may as well have the conversation with a trained parrot.

I've been down this road with Andy before. He wants his multimillion dollar maximum benefit, zero deductible and copay insurance for free, and ACA did not do that, so he is pissed.

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend

Well, it is, provided one in such a situation avails themselves fully of the opportunity the nation gives them. If they don't do so, however, they are f*cked. As much as a I recognize that's so, that doesn't mean I have a problem with it.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Trump Rubes deserve the sodomy they deserve

Robert Reich: 13 Ways Trump Has Screwed Over His Own Voters

 

[usmbguest5318]

Just as the cartoon shows... you fought so hard to screw over the American people, and when you succeeded, now you are shocked we're not happy about being screwed over? How dumb are you people?

Statements like that are part of why substantive discourse doesn't generally happen on here. Regardless of what the outcome be of having passed the ACA, nobody "fought hard to screw over the American people." As long as one ascribes malicious intent to the people who passed that law, thus coming to the table with an adversarial, "they're out to get me" mindset, one will not be able to have a productive discussion about it.

The unavoidable fact is that millions of people who prior to the ACA did not have health insurance obtained health insurance, and vastly more people obtained it than lost it. (Information below is from a 2014 study.)

• Of the 40.7 million who were uninsured in 2013, 14.5 million gained coverage, but 5.2 million of the insured lost coverage, for a net gain in coverage of approximately 9.3 million. This represents a drop in the share of the population that is uninsured from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.
• Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million. New enrollees are primarily drawn from those who were uninsured in 2013, or those who had “other” forms of insurance, including Medicare, retiree health insurance, and other government plans.
• According to [Rand's] estimates, 3.9 million were covered through the state and federal marketplaces as of mid-March 2014. This figure does not fully capture the enrollment surge that occurred in late March.
• For most people the ACA has not changed their health insurance coverage. Among adults, 80 percent still had the same form of coverage in March 2014 as in September 2013.
• Of those who were previously uninsured but are now insured, 7.2 million gained ESI, 3.6 million are now covered by Medicaid, 1.4 million have signed up through a marketplace, while the remainder gained coverage through other sources.
• Our estimates suggest that about one-third of new marketplace enrollees were previously uninsured.
• Among the 7.8 million people who were enrolled in off-marketplace individual market plans in early 2014, 7.3 million were previously insured; 5.4 million were previously insured through an individual market plan.
• Less than one million who previously had individual market insurance transitioned to being uninsured. While we cannot tell if these people lost their insurance due to cancellation or because they simply felt the cost was too high, the overall number represents less than one percent of people between the ages of 18 and 64.

Moreover, from what I can tell, the hoopla about health insurance has to do only with the 20% of the population that purchases it on the open market. I think that because the rise in employer-based premiums has been comparatively small, most especially after the ACA's implementation. (See also: Private Health Insurance Premiums and Federal Policy)

​

Another thing the ACA does that benefits everyone is that it reduces the deficit and it keeps premiums lower than they otherwise would be.

• How Repealing Portions of the Affordable Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums
  
• Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act— CBO’s March 2015 Baseline
  
• Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the Affordable Care Act
  
• Here's how GOP repeal of Obamacare would swell the federal deficit
  
• Obamacare Is (Still) Fiscally Responsible Congress' scorekeeper confirms that the health care law will reduce deficits.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one thing: what one sees as the objectives of a nation's health care system.

• Some people think it's objective is to keep the citizenry as healthy as possible.
• Some people think it's objective is to have the best quality modes of care possible, without regard to who obtains that care when they need it.
• Some think it's to ensure a basic level of health status among the populace.
• Some think it's to make healthcare affordable (via insurance) for people who can afford the insurance, but not necessarily make it possible for everyone to obtain healthcare outside of emergency situations.

What are the objectives in your mind?

Having determined that you whole post is bullshit half way through it, I did not bother to read the rest of it.

Yes, well, when someone makes remarks like "[Democrats] fought so hard to screw over the American people," one knows one may as well have the conversation with a trained parrot.

I've been down this road with Andy before. He wants his multimillion dollar maximum benefit, zero deductible and copay insurance for free, and ACA did not do that, so he is pissed.

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage

• Walmart raises pay well above minimum wage
  
• Walmart increasing wages; union says it's all show

I suspect Walmart sees the inevitability of the minimum wages paid (be they legislated or not) going to something between $12 and $15 per hour. I suspect they have increased pay rates for a variety of reasons:

• To create goodwill among the general public
• Turnover -- There are multiple strategic/tactical bases related to turnover, and I'm not privy to Walmart executives' internal strategy documentation or discussions; thus I have to wait and see how they are applying/combining the strategies.
  • Because the turnover rates at Walmart are high enough (~45%) that the company can increase existing workers' pay, be able to publicly claim they have increased wages as they have over the past couple years, and then hire new workers at far lower wage rates.
  • Higher wage paying competitors experience materially lower turnover rates, so Walmart may be experimenting to determine what is the optimal balance between higher wages and lower turnover.
    • Illustration of the cost of worker turnover:
      • Costco’s pays higher wages than Walmart; thus cursorily Costco appears to have higher personnel costs, but the higher wages have an offsetting cost-containment effect: Turnover is unusually low, at 17% overall and just 6% after one year’s employment. In contrast, turnover at Wal-Mart is 44% a year, close to the industry average. In skilled and semi-skilled jobs, the fully loaded cost of replacing a worker who leaves (excluding lost productivity) is typically 1.5 to 2.5 times the worker’s annual salary. To be conservative, let’s assume that the total cost of replacing an hourly employee at Costco or Walmart is only 60% of his or her annual salary.
        
        If a Costco employee quits, the cost of replacing him or her is therefore $21,216. If a Walmart employee leaves, the cost is $12,617. At first glance, it may seem that the low-wage approach at Walmart would result in lower turnover costs. By this calculation, the total annual direct employment cost (i.e., not counting productivity losses attributed to worker turnover) to Costco of employee churn is $244 million, whereas the total annual cost to Walmart is $612 million. That’s $5,274 per Walmart employee, versus $3,628 per Costco employee.

 

[Andylusion]

Just as the cartoon shows... you fought so hard to screw over the American people, and when you succeeded, now you are shocked we're not happy about being screwed over? How dumb are you people?

Statements like that are part of why substantive discourse doesn't generally happen on here. Regardless of what the outcome be of having passed the ACA, nobody "fought hard to screw over the American people." As long as one ascribes malicious intent to the people who passed that law, thus coming to the table with an adversarial, "they're out to get me" mindset, one will not be able to have a productive discussion about it.

The unavoidable fact is that millions of people who prior to the ACA did not have health insurance obtained health insurance, and vastly more people obtained it than lost it. (Information below is from a 2014 study.)

• Of the 40.7 million who were uninsured in 2013, 14.5 million gained coverage, but 5.2 million of the insured lost coverage, for a net gain in coverage of approximately 9.3 million. This represents a drop in the share of the population that is uninsured from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.
• Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million. New enrollees are primarily drawn from those who were uninsured in 2013, or those who had “other” forms of insurance, including Medicare, retiree health insurance, and other government plans.
• According to [Rand's] estimates, 3.9 million were covered through the state and federal marketplaces as of mid-March 2014. This figure does not fully capture the enrollment surge that occurred in late March.
• For most people the ACA has not changed their health insurance coverage. Among adults, 80 percent still had the same form of coverage in March 2014 as in September 2013.
• Of those who were previously uninsured but are now insured, 7.2 million gained ESI, 3.6 million are now covered by Medicaid, 1.4 million have signed up through a marketplace, while the remainder gained coverage through other sources.
• Our estimates suggest that about one-third of new marketplace enrollees were previously uninsured.
• Among the 7.8 million people who were enrolled in off-marketplace individual market plans in early 2014, 7.3 million were previously insured; 5.4 million were previously insured through an individual market plan.
• Less than one million who previously had individual market insurance transitioned to being uninsured. While we cannot tell if these people lost their insurance due to cancellation or because they simply felt the cost was too high, the overall number represents less than one percent of people between the ages of 18 and 64.

Moreover, from what I can tell, the hoopla about health insurance has to do only with the 20% of the population that purchases it on the open market. I think that because the rise in employer-based premiums has been comparatively small, most especially after the ACA's implementation. (See also: Private Health Insurance Premiums and Federal Policy)

​

Another thing the ACA does that benefits everyone is that it reduces the deficit and it keeps premiums lower than they otherwise would be.

• How Repealing Portions of the Affordable Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums
  
• Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act— CBO’s March 2015 Baseline
  
• Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the Affordable Care Act
  
• Here's how GOP repeal of Obamacare would swell the federal deficit
  
• Obamacare Is (Still) Fiscally Responsible Congress' scorekeeper confirms that the health care law will reduce deficits.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one thing: what one sees as the objectives of a nation's health care system.

• Some people think it's objective is to keep the citizenry as healthy as possible.
• Some people think it's objective is to have the best quality modes of care possible, without regard to who obtains that care when they need it.
• Some think it's to ensure a basic level of health status among the populace.
• Some think it's to make healthcare affordable (via insurance) for people who can afford the insurance, but not necessarily make it possible for everyone to obtain healthcare outside of emergency situations.

What are the objectives in your mind?

Having determined that you whole post is bullshit half way through it, I did not bother to read the rest of it.

Yes, well, when someone makes remarks like "[Democrats] fought so hard to screw over the American people," one knows one may as well have the conversation with a trained parrot.

I've been down this road with Andy before. He wants his multimillion dollar maximum benefit, zero deductible and copay insurance for free, and ACA did not do that, so he is pissed.

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

I've been to Europe. I've seen how people live there. I have friends who live there.

I live better from our "lowest socio-economical rung in society" than some of the middle class does over there.

Yes, Capitalism is my friend. I have a good life.

And here's the key difference.

In a socialist society, you are born poor, you live poor, and you die poor. No hope. No future. Everything is equal. Everything is static. You can't move up because there is no "up" to move to.

If I wanted to.... I could easily double my income. I've been offered numerous chances to move up. Numerous. I had a district manager tell me he was going to offer me a store manager position, where I would earn just under $100,000 a year.

I turned it down. I was happy where I was. I didn't want to earn more.

The problem I have with people like you, is that you screw us over, and then complain we're not living our lives the way you deem we should.

I was perfectly fine paying for my own insurance, when I could get an insurance policy for $67 a month. Perfectly affordable for my income range.

But arrogant people, who think they know better than I do, what is good for me, destroyed my insurance policy, and then claim I should be grateful to them for it?

Stay out of my life. Stop screwing over the working people, and claiming we should like it.

 

[danielpalos]

nothing but complaints and repeal, instead of any better solutions at lower cost.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Just as the cartoon shows... you fought so hard to screw over the American people, and when you succeeded, now you are shocked we're not happy about being screwed over? How dumb are you people?

Statements like that are part of why substantive discourse doesn't generally happen on here. Regardless of what the outcome be of having passed the ACA, nobody "fought hard to screw over the American people." As long as one ascribes malicious intent to the people who passed that law, thus coming to the table with an adversarial, "they're out to get me" mindset, one will not be able to have a productive discussion about it.

The unavoidable fact is that millions of people who prior to the ACA did not have health insurance obtained health insurance, and vastly more people obtained it than lost it. (Information below is from a 2014 study.)

• Of the 40.7 million who were uninsured in 2013, 14.5 million gained coverage, but 5.2 million of the insured lost coverage, for a net gain in coverage of approximately 9.3 million. This represents a drop in the share of the population that is uninsured from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.
• Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million. New enrollees are primarily drawn from those who were uninsured in 2013, or those who had “other” forms of insurance, including Medicare, retiree health insurance, and other government plans.
• According to [Rand's] estimates, 3.9 million were covered through the state and federal marketplaces as of mid-March 2014. This figure does not fully capture the enrollment surge that occurred in late March.
• For most people the ACA has not changed their health insurance coverage. Among adults, 80 percent still had the same form of coverage in March 2014 as in September 2013.
• Of those who were previously uninsured but are now insured, 7.2 million gained ESI, 3.6 million are now covered by Medicaid, 1.4 million have signed up through a marketplace, while the remainder gained coverage through other sources.
• Our estimates suggest that about one-third of new marketplace enrollees were previously uninsured.
• Among the 7.8 million people who were enrolled in off-marketplace individual market plans in early 2014, 7.3 million were previously insured; 5.4 million were previously insured through an individual market plan.
• Less than one million who previously had individual market insurance transitioned to being uninsured. While we cannot tell if these people lost their insurance due to cancellation or because they simply felt the cost was too high, the overall number represents less than one percent of people between the ages of 18 and 64.

Moreover, from what I can tell, the hoopla about health insurance has to do only with the 20% of the population that purchases it on the open market. I think that because the rise in employer-based premiums has been comparatively small, most especially after the ACA's implementation. (See also: Private Health Insurance Premiums and Federal Policy)

​

Another thing the ACA does that benefits everyone is that it reduces the deficit and it keeps premiums lower than they otherwise would be.

• How Repealing Portions of the Affordable Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums
  
• Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act— CBO’s March 2015 Baseline
  
• Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the Affordable Care Act
  
• Here's how GOP repeal of Obamacare would swell the federal deficit
  
• Obamacare Is (Still) Fiscally Responsible Congress' scorekeeper confirms that the health care law will reduce deficits.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one thing: what one sees as the objectives of a nation's health care system.

• Some people think it's objective is to keep the citizenry as healthy as possible.
• Some people think it's objective is to have the best quality modes of care possible, without regard to who obtains that care when they need it.
• Some think it's to ensure a basic level of health status among the populace.
• Some think it's to make healthcare affordable (via insurance) for people who can afford the insurance, but not necessarily make it possible for everyone to obtain healthcare outside of emergency situations.

What are the objectives in your mind?

Having determined that you whole post is bullshit half way through it, I did not bother to read the rest of it.

Yes, well, when someone makes remarks like "[Democrats] fought so hard to screw over the American people," one knows one may as well have the conversation with a trained parrot.

I've been down this road with Andy before. He wants his multimillion dollar maximum benefit, zero deductible and copay insurance for free, and ACA did not do that, so he is pissed.

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

Walmart pays way better than many places.

And they haven't treated me badly.

Moreover, I've applied for jobs in the past two years, that don't offer insurance to anyone, because the cost now under the "Affordable" care act, is too costly. I was told by one employer straight up "Insurance is too expensive now, so we don't offer any at all".

Another example of you screwing over the working people, and claiming we should appreciate it.

Right, Andy. The cost of health insurance never went up until ACA was passed. When I used to rate group health insurance for a living, I added in an inflation factor of 26% per year during the Carter years, not because our claims costs were going up, but just because I could get away with it!

 

[Vandalshandle]

"I was perfectly fine paying for my own insurance, when I could get an insurance policy for $67 a month. Perfectly affordable for my income range."

And, Andy, I remember when I could buy a new car for $2,000, bacon was under $1.00 per pound, and ground beef was $.33 cents per pound. The difference between you and I is that I don't go around looking for somebody to blame that those days are gone. I went through college at night, while working full time during the day, and was making 5 times what my dad had made in his best year, before I was 35. You, however, don't want to change your lifestyle. You would rather blame me for your problems. Andy, the first health insurance policy I ever rated was in May, 1966.0Iit provided for $20 per day hospital room and board, and $200 surgical, $5 per doctor's visit, and a $5,000 lifetime major medical benefit, and the rate was less than $25 per month. I am sure that if you were me, you would whine about that ad nauseum, and blame anonymous people on message boards that you can't get that any more. I would take that $100,000 job, if I were you, Andy.

 

[Andylusion]

Statements like that are part of why substantive discourse doesn't generally happen on here. Regardless of what the outcome be of having passed the ACA, nobody "fought hard to screw over the American people." As long as one ascribes malicious intent to the people who passed that law, thus coming to the table with an adversarial, "they're out to get me" mindset, one will not be able to have a productive discussion about it.

The unavoidable fact is that millions of people who prior to the ACA did not have health insurance obtained health insurance, and vastly more people obtained it than lost it. (Information below is from a 2014 study.)

• Of the 40.7 million who were uninsured in 2013, 14.5 million gained coverage, but 5.2 million of the insured lost coverage, for a net gain in coverage of approximately 9.3 million. This represents a drop in the share of the population that is uninsured from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.
• Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million. New enrollees are primarily drawn from those who were uninsured in 2013, or those who had “other” forms of insurance, including Medicare, retiree health insurance, and other government plans.
• According to [Rand's] estimates, 3.9 million were covered through the state and federal marketplaces as of mid-March 2014. This figure does not fully capture the enrollment surge that occurred in late March.
• For most people the ACA has not changed their health insurance coverage. Among adults, 80 percent still had the same form of coverage in March 2014 as in September 2013.
• Of those who were previously uninsured but are now insured, 7.2 million gained ESI, 3.6 million are now covered by Medicaid, 1.4 million have signed up through a marketplace, while the remainder gained coverage through other sources.
• Our estimates suggest that about one-third of new marketplace enrollees were previously uninsured.
• Among the 7.8 million people who were enrolled in off-marketplace individual market plans in early 2014, 7.3 million were previously insured; 5.4 million were previously insured through an individual market plan.
• Less than one million who previously had individual market insurance transitioned to being uninsured. While we cannot tell if these people lost their insurance due to cancellation or because they simply felt the cost was too high, the overall number represents less than one percent of people between the ages of 18 and 64.

Moreover, from what I can tell, the hoopla about health insurance has to do only with the 20% of the population that purchases it on the open market. I think that because the rise in employer-based premiums has been comparatively small, most especially after the ACA's implementation. (See also: Private Health Insurance Premiums and Federal Policy)

​

Another thing the ACA does that benefits everyone is that it reduces the deficit and it keeps premiums lower than they otherwise would be.

• How Repealing Portions of the Affordable Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums
  
• Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act— CBO’s March 2015 Baseline
  
• Estimating the Budgetary Effects of the Affordable Care Act
  
• Here's how GOP repeal of Obamacare would swell the federal deficit
  
• Obamacare Is (Still) Fiscally Responsible Congress' scorekeeper confirms that the health care law will reduce deficits.

At the end of the day, it comes down to one thing: what one sees as the objectives of a nation's health care system.

• Some people think it's objective is to keep the citizenry as healthy as possible.
• Some people think it's objective is to have the best quality modes of care possible, without regard to who obtains that care when they need it.
• Some think it's to ensure a basic level of health status among the populace.
• Some think it's to make healthcare affordable (via insurance) for people who can afford the insurance, but not necessarily make it possible for everyone to obtain healthcare outside of emergency situations.

What are the objectives in your mind?

Yes, well, when someone makes remarks like "[Democrats] fought so hard to screw over the American people," one knows one may as well have the conversation with a trained parrot.

I've been down this road with Andy before. He wants his multimillion dollar maximum benefit, zero deductible and copay insurance for free, and ACA did not do that, so he is pissed.

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

Walmart pays way better than many places.

And they haven't treated me badly.

Moreover, I've applied for jobs in the past two years, that don't offer insurance to anyone, because the cost now under the "Affordable" care act, is too costly. I was told by one employer straight up "Insurance is too expensive now, so we don't offer any at all".

Another example of you screwing over the working people, and claiming we should appreciate it.

Right, Andy. The cost of health insurance never went up until ACA was passed. When I used to rate group health insurance for a living, I added in an inflation factor of 26% per year during the Carter years, not because our claims costs were going up, but just because I could get away with it!

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

That is far worse than anything before.

 

[Andylusion]

"I was perfectly fine paying for my own insurance, when I could get an insurance policy for $67 a month. Perfectly affordable for my income range."

And, Andy, I remember when I could buy a new car for $2,000, bacon was under $1.00 per pound, and ground beef was $.33 cents per pound. The difference between you and I is that I don't go around looking for somebody to blame that those days are gone. I went through college at night, while working full time during the day, and was making 5 times what my dad had made in his best year, before I was 35. You, however, don't want to change your lifestyle. You would rather blame me for your problems. Andy, the first health insurance policy I ever rated was in May, 1966.0Iit provided for $20 per day hospital room and board, and $200 surgical, $5 per doctor's visit, and a $5,000 lifetime major medical benefit, and the rate was less than $25 per month. I am sure that if you were me, you would whine about that ad nauseum, and blame anonymous people on message boards that you can't get that any more. I would take that $100,000 job, if I were you, Andy.

No, the difference between you and me is that I didn't cause the cost of those things to change. YOU with your bad policies did cause the cost of health insurance to change.

I'm not at fault for the cost of a car going up over several decades.

You *ARE* at fault for the cost of insurance quadrupling in a few years.

The difference between you and me, is you blame others who are victimized by your bad policies that you supported. I don't.

The difference between you and me, is when I'm confronted by contradictory facts to positions I hold, I consider those facts and change my position accordingly.

When you are confronted with contradictory facts, you blame me, and then make up that I am simply demanding free insurance.

I would take that $100,000 job, if I were you, Andy.

Why should I be forced into a job I don't want, to earn money that (without your policy choices) I wouldn't need.... just because you feel like you should dictate my life?

 

[Vandalshandle]

"I was perfectly fine paying for my own insurance, when I could get an insurance policy for $67 a month. Perfectly affordable for my income range."

And, Andy, I remember when I could buy a new car for $2,000, bacon was under $1.00 per pound, and ground beef was $.33 cents per pound. The difference between you and I is that I don't go around looking for somebody to blame that those days are gone. I went through college at night, while working full time during the day, and was making 5 times what my dad had made in his best year, before I was 35. You, however, don't want to change your lifestyle. You would rather blame me for your problems. Andy, the first health insurance policy I ever rated was in May, 1966.0Iit provided for $20 per day hospital room and board, and $200 surgical, $5 per doctor's visit, and a $5,000 lifetime major medical benefit, and the rate was less than $25 per month. I am sure that if you were me, you would whine about that ad nauseum, and blame anonymous people on message boards that you can't get that any more. I would take that $100,000 job, if I were you, Andy.

No, the difference between you and me is that I didn't cause the cost of those things to change. YOU with your bad policies did cause the cost of health insurance to change.

I'm not at fault for the cost of a car going up over several decades.

You *ARE* at fault for the cost of insurance quadrupling in a few years.

The difference between you and me, is you blame others who are victimized by your bad policies that you supported. I don't.

The difference between you and me, is when I'm confronted by contradictory facts to positions I hold, I consider those facts and change my position accordingly.

When you are confronted with contradictory facts, you blame me, and then make up that I am simply demanding free insurance.

I would take that $100,000 job, if I were you, Andy.

Why should I be forced into a job I don't want, to earn money that (without your policy choices) I wouldn't need.... just because you feel like you should dictate my life?

Tell me all about it 50 years from now, when a motor scooter will cost $35,000.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I've been down this road with Andy before. He wants his multimillion dollar maximum benefit, zero deductible and copay insurance for free, and ACA did not do that, so he is pissed.

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

Walmart pays way better than many places.

And they haven't treated me badly.

Moreover, I've applied for jobs in the past two years, that don't offer insurance to anyone, because the cost now under the "Affordable" care act, is too costly. I was told by one employer straight up "Insurance is too expensive now, so we don't offer any at all".

Another example of you screwing over the working people, and claiming we should appreciate it.

Right, Andy. The cost of health insurance never went up until ACA was passed. When I used to rate group health insurance for a living, I added in an inflation factor of 26% per year during the Carter years, not because our claims costs were going up, but just because I could get away with it!

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

That is far worse than anything before.

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

While the increase is material, the fact of the matter is that if the sums you used to pay and what you pay now are either (1) your share of an employer subsidized/sponsored/provided family health insurance policy, or (2) what you must pay for an open market family health insurance policy, you were then and continue now to pay markedly less than the average for such a plan. Indeed, in 2008, such a plan, before any employer subsidy or other out of pocket cost reductions an insured party might have received, averaged ~$12K/year. For single rather than family policies, annual premiums in 2007 ranged from $1,163 for persons under age 18 up to $5,090 for persons aged 60-64.

You're paying whatever you're paying, but the fact is that then and now, you are getting a very good price on your health insurance.

 

[Andylusion]

Sigh......... This is why the left-wing is always considered to be childish idiots.

You people just make up stuff. No facts. No truth. Just make up false allegations against everyone that gives a different opinion than you.

Can I do that? Is that the debate standard now? You just want to destroy the working people of this country, with socialist policies that have destroyed every country that has ever tried them. You people won't be happen until we have food riots like Venezuela, and that's your goal. You hate the working people, and will do anything to harm them.

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

Walmart pays way better than many places.

And they haven't treated me badly.

Moreover, I've applied for jobs in the past two years, that don't offer insurance to anyone, because the cost now under the "Affordable" care act, is too costly. I was told by one employer straight up "Insurance is too expensive now, so we don't offer any at all".

Another example of you screwing over the working people, and claiming we should appreciate it.

Right, Andy. The cost of health insurance never went up until ACA was passed. When I used to rate group health insurance for a living, I added in an inflation factor of 26% per year during the Carter years, not because our claims costs were going up, but just because I could get away with it!

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

That is far worse than anything before.

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

While the increase is material, the fact of the matter is that if the sums you used to pay and what you pay now are either (1) your share of an employer subsidized/sponsored/provided family health insurance policy, or (2) what you must pay for an open market family health insurance policy, you were then and continue now to pay markedly less than the average for such a plan. Indeed, in 2008, such a plan, before any employer subsidy or other out of pocket cost reductions an insured party might have received, averaged ~$12K/year. For single rather than family policies, annual premiums in 2007 ranged from $1,163 for persons under age 18 up to $5,090 for persons aged 60-64.

You're paying whatever you're paying, but the fact is that then and now, you are getting a very good price on your health insurance.

Well, the bottom line is, NOW... I'm not paying it. I can't afford it, so I'm not going to. You are going to pay my bills, and it's no ones fault but your own.

If you are ok with that... ok. But don't blame me for a situation you created.

 

[American_Jihad]

It's hard to feel sorry of idiots like James Walker. How can people be so fucking gullible? Trump had flashing neon lights showing what a con man he was. They deserve their Pussy Grabber - the rest of us don't.

You had your POS, so stfu gullible fool...

 

[Vandalshandle]

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

Walmart pays way better than many places.

And they haven't treated me badly.

Moreover, I've applied for jobs in the past two years, that don't offer insurance to anyone, because the cost now under the "Affordable" care act, is too costly. I was told by one employer straight up "Insurance is too expensive now, so we don't offer any at all".

Another example of you screwing over the working people, and claiming we should appreciate it.

Right, Andy. The cost of health insurance never went up until ACA was passed. When I used to rate group health insurance for a living, I added in an inflation factor of 26% per year during the Carter years, not because our claims costs were going up, but just because I could get away with it!

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

That is far worse than anything before.

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

While the increase is material, the fact of the matter is that if the sums you used to pay and what you pay now are either (1) your share of an employer subsidized/sponsored/provided family health insurance policy, or (2) what you must pay for an open market family health insurance policy, you were then and continue now to pay markedly less than the average for such a plan. Indeed, in 2008, such a plan, before any employer subsidy or other out of pocket cost reductions an insured party might have received, averaged ~$12K/year. For single rather than family policies, annual premiums in 2007 ranged from $1,163 for persons under age 18 up to $5,090 for persons aged 60-64.

You're paying whatever you're paying, but the fact is that then and now, you are getting a very good price on your health insurance.

Well, the bottom line is, NOW... I'm not paying it. I can't afford it, so I'm not going to. You are going to pay my bills, and it's no ones fault but your own.

If you are ok with that... ok. But don't blame me for a situation you created.

I feel so guilty that you are turning down the opportunity to accept a job that would have paid you enough to carry your own weight in the world.....[sigh]

 

[usmbguest5318]

Right, Andy. if you are in the lowest socio-economical rung in society, capitalism is your friend! They'll never treat you badly! They will see that you you have a job at Walmart at the lowest legal wage, for 29 1/2 hours per week (to avoid having to give you insurance that they give to full time employees). They will call you an "associate", and allow you to take a bathroom break twice a day!

Walmart pays way better than many places.

And they haven't treated me badly.

Moreover, I've applied for jobs in the past two years, that don't offer insurance to anyone, because the cost now under the "Affordable" care act, is too costly. I was told by one employer straight up "Insurance is too expensive now, so we don't offer any at all".

Another example of you screwing over the working people, and claiming we should appreciate it.

Right, Andy. The cost of health insurance never went up until ACA was passed. When I used to rate group health insurance for a living, I added in an inflation factor of 26% per year during the Carter years, not because our claims costs were going up, but just because I could get away with it!

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

That is far worse than anything before.

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

While the increase is material, the fact of the matter is that if the sums you used to pay and what you pay now are either (1) your share of an employer subsidized/sponsored/provided family health insurance policy, or (2) what you must pay for an open market family health insurance policy, you were then and continue now to pay markedly less than the average for such a plan. Indeed, in 2008, such a plan, before any employer subsidy or other out of pocket cost reductions an insured party might have received, averaged ~$12K/year. For single rather than family policies, annual premiums in 2007 ranged from $1,163 for persons under age 18 up to $5,090 for persons aged 60-64.

You're paying whatever you're paying, but the fact is that then and now, you are getting a very good price on your health insurance.

Well, the bottom line is, NOW... I'm not paying it. I can't afford it, so I'm not going to. You are going to pay my bills, and it's no ones fault but your own.

If you are ok with that... ok. But don't blame me for a situation you created.

Well, the bottom line is, NOW... I'm not paying it. I can't afford it, so I'm not going to.

That, unlike the tonal theme you earlier "rocked," I can accept as accurate.

You are going to pay my bills, and it's no ones fault but your own. If you are ok with that...

If you mean that my taxes will in part subsidize you and others, well, that is what it is. As much as I won't complain on a personal level about paying less federal income tax, I think my tax dollars are better spent helping you and other of my countrymen who need the money to subsist rather than a variety of other ways in which those same tax dollars may instead be spent.

 

[Andylusion]

Walmart pays way better than many places.

And they haven't treated me badly.

Moreover, I've applied for jobs in the past two years, that don't offer insurance to anyone, because the cost now under the "Affordable" care act, is too costly. I was told by one employer straight up "Insurance is too expensive now, so we don't offer any at all".

Another example of you screwing over the working people, and claiming we should appreciate it.

Right, Andy. The cost of health insurance never went up until ACA was passed. When I used to rate group health insurance for a living, I added in an inflation factor of 26% per year during the Carter years, not because our claims costs were going up, but just because I could get away with it!

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

That is far worse than anything before.

2006 premium was $67 a month.
2014 premium was $250 a month.

While the increase is material, the fact of the matter is that if the sums you used to pay and what you pay now are either (1) your share of an employer subsidized/sponsored/provided family health insurance policy, or (2) what you must pay for an open market family health insurance policy, you were then and continue now to pay markedly less than the average for such a plan. Indeed, in 2008, such a plan, before any employer subsidy or other out of pocket cost reductions an insured party might have received, averaged ~$12K/year. For single rather than family policies, annual premiums in 2007 ranged from $1,163 for persons under age 18 up to $5,090 for persons aged 60-64.

You're paying whatever you're paying, but the fact is that then and now, you are getting a very good price on your health insurance.

Well, the bottom line is, NOW... I'm not paying it. I can't afford it, so I'm not going to. You are going to pay my bills, and it's no ones fault but your own.

If you are ok with that... ok. But don't blame me for a situation you created.

I feel so guilty that you are turning down the opportunity to accept a job that would have paid you enough to carry your own weight in the world.....[sigh]

I carried my own weight, and paid 100% of my insurance BEFORE you jacked up my insurance.

Of course I'm not going to feel the slightest bit of remorse that I'm making you pay for my insurance, after YOU caused it to be affordable.

This is why you people are such a joke.

Leftards: "You were paying your own way... so I jacked up your prices until you couldn't afford them, and now you should feel guilty that you can't 'pull your own weight' anymore."

Nah. Screw you. Besides, according to left-wing ideology, I'm the poor and deserve help. Since you are the rich, and can afford your own insurance, then it's your duty to subsidize me. I expect you to pay full taxes, and start working for my benefit sucker. Chop chop boy. We're waiting for what you said we're "entitled" to. Work hard, so I don't have to. In fact, I think I'm going to cut back my hours, and go part time. Since I'm not paying for health insurance, I don't need to work as much to pay my bills.

Have a good day at work buddy! OH.... right... "thank you"