Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Lawmakers exempt from Obamacare

Health Care Obamacare 2013 Exemptions for Congress

  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#21 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 05:42 PM

View PostKota, on 02 August 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

Thanks OK sweetheart, I know exactly where it is located in the bill.

While businesses might have something to gain the employees get the royal screw job!
How so sweetie pie? Many of those with no insure will have the price covered and others will get a percentage covered, which a lot better than what they have now...nothing and God help them if they get really sick.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#22 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 06:10 PM

Most small businesses have never supplied health insurance.  I've had good jobs in my life [prior to working for myself] and for good companies, but only one of them provided health insurance.  Hell only one supplied a retirement plan.  The one that did offer it was a union job [Teamsters].  

People talk as if small businesses have always provided it and now suddenly they will drop it.  That's just not true for small businesses. Very few offer it at all.  That's why there are so many uninsured among "employed" people.  

Hell, even large corporations wouldn't supply it if they didn't want to sweeten the pot perk wise to get and keep good employees.  The other businesses that DO supply it, and have supplied it for a long time, have a unionized work force, and the unions won it in union contracts.  

No business is going to drop coverage if the market driven reasons to keep it still exist.  Large corporations will still offer it in a benie's package to keep and attract a workforce [at least until labor becomes so competitive that they won't have to, and that will very likely happen due to the unemployment].  If they do drop it, it won't just be because of the ACA, it will also be driven by the plentiful labor force.  

Most small businesses already don't offer coverage, they will continue to NOT offer it.  

Unions will continue to negotiate for coverage until the last union is busted, and then those industries will drop coverage as well.  NOT because of Obamacare, but because of a bottom line.  To think otherwise is just naive, or so overly partisan that one doesn't understand the basic economics of the marketplace.  No business would have ever offered it unless there were market driven reasons TO provide it.  No one was just forking out the money for employees out of the goodness of their cold capitalistic heart.  No one.

And that's what gets forgotten in this damn Health Care discussion.  The focus is on employers offering health care as if that were the norm.  It isn't.  The ACA is designed so that people can get coverage in exchanges below the cost of an individual policy.  The reason for this is because there are more people employed without coverage than there are employed and covered.

Raise of hand, who here has coverage from an employer?  

So basically, all this fuss over dropped coverage is about a small percentage of the population Vs. the uninsured workers.  A small  percentage that will probably be well able to covert their coverage if they are dropped.  All this drama over that, and to hell with the exchanges so uninsured people can find decent coverage at a decent rate.  Have I got that right?

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#23 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 06:35 PM

Quote

But I'm still curious, what do you think Obamacare is? When you talk about Obamacare, what do you (and anyone else who is reading) envision it to be? Do you see it as a single entity? What does it involve?
Are they supposed to sit down and write an essay just for you? The morons who passed the law didn't even read the thing, and here you are trying to call out the opposition for their "ignorance". :rolleyes: If you wanna ask a big 'ol grandstanding question,(and then repeat it ad nauseum) at least try to make it relevant. Like maybe why they have a problem with Obamacare? Defining this idiotic and unnecessary clusterf**k to your satisfaction, is as pointless as it is futile.

Honestly, even discussing this impending disaster with people who aren't bothered in the least by the level of deceit involved in it's passing is inadvisable. I'd say the catastrophic end results end results could potentially change some minds, but the religious left are already successfully ignoring reduced work hours, shadowy government waivers and drastically increased premiums. So I for one will take a pass on adding additional pre-dismissed information to the mix. Obama the Lyin' King has spoken...and that's that.
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#24 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 07:27 PM

View Postscherzo, on 02 August 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

Quote

But I'm still curious, what do you think Obamacare is? When you talk about Obamacare, what do you (and anyone else who is reading) envision it to be? Do you see it as a single entity? What does it involve?
Are they supposed to sit down and write an essay just for you? The morons who passed the law didn't even read the thing, and here you are trying to call out the opposition for their "ignorance". :rolleyes: If you wanna ask a big 'ol grandstanding question,(and then repeat it ad nauseum) at least try to make it relevant. Like maybe why they have a problem with Obamacare? Defining this idiotic and unnecessary clusterf**k to your satisfaction, is as pointless as it is futile.

Honestly, even discussing this impending disaster with people who aren't bothered in the least by the level of deceit involved in it's passing is inadvisable. I'd say the catastrophic end results end results could potentially change some minds, but the religious left are already successfully ignoring reduced work hours, shadowy government waivers and drastically increased premiums. So I for one will take a pass on adding additional pre-dismissed information to the mix. Obama the Lyin' King has spoken...and that's that.

I knew I could count on you.... to be consistent.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#25 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 08:41 PM

View PostSpectacles, on 02 August 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:


But I'm still curious, what do you think Obamacare is? When you talk about Obamacare, what do you (and anyone else who is reading) envision it to be? Do you see it as a single entity? What does it involve?

I see it as Government controlled Healthcare. I see it as the Government deciding what healthcare you get, what doctors you can have, what treatments you can have. Basically I see it as Big Brother on Steroids, while smoking crack.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#26 Balderdash

Balderdash
  • Islander
  • 5,729 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 08:59 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 02 August 2013 - 08:41 PM, said:

View PostSpectacles, on 02 August 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

But I'm still curious, what do you think Obamacare is? When you talk about Obamacare, what do you (and anyone else who is reading) envision it to be? Do you see it as a single entity? What does it involve?

I see it as Government controlled Healthcare. I see it as the Government deciding what healthcare you get, what doctors you can have, what treatments you can have. Basically I see it as Big Brother on Steroids, while smoking crack.

You should definitely read the actual document.

Another Democrat leaning Independent that has to search for truth because it can't be found on Fox News OR MSNBC.



"Being gay is not a Western invention, it is a human reality"  by HRC


#27 Dev F

Dev F

    Straighten your pope hat!

  • Islander
  • 3,757 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 09:00 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 02 August 2013 - 08:41 PM, said:

I see it as Government controlled Healthcare. I see it as the Government deciding what healthcare you get, what doctors you can have, what treatments you can have. Basically I see it as Big Brother on Steroids, while smoking crack.
But that's exactly Specs' point, because none of that is actually true. Each state will provide an exchange system through which private insurance is sold in a more transparent and competitive environment in the hopes of bringing down prices. Aside from some general guidelines that provide more options to consumers, like prohibiting insurers from discriminating on the basis of preexisting conditions, the government isn't even in control of the insurance policies, let alone the healthcare those polices pay for. What gives you the impression that they will be involved in mandating your doctor or your treatment?

#28 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 09:10 PM

Quote

LoTS: I see it as Government controlled Healthcare. I see it as the Government deciding what healthcare you get, what doctors you can have, what treatments you can have.

Thanks for responding, LoTS--and civilly. :)

How do you see the government doing all of that? And to whom?

Here's how I understand Obamacare affects people:

1. Those who are insured through their workplace are affected only by new regulations that benefit the consumers. Insurers can no longer deny coverage because of pre-existing conditions; adult children up to 26 can remain on their parents' insurance plans; preventive screenings like mammograms must be fully paid for by insurers, etc. Most people have insurance through their employment. Therefore for most people, life goes on as before. It's just that their insurance companies have to provide more services than they normally do.

2. Uninsured people will be soon able to go online and choose from private insurance companies that participate in their state's health insurance exchange. If you make less than 400% the rate of poverty (around $46,000 a year for an individual), the government will subsidize some portion of your insurance costs so that those costs don't exceed a certain percent of your income.

At no point does the government decide what healthcare you get, what doctors you can have, what treatments you can have. Good ol' insurance companies will be doing that--just like they do now, but the government has intervened and put a stop to some practices that screwed people over--like cutting people off insurance when they needed it most. They can no longer do that.

Does all of this still sound like what you thought Obamacare was? Which part?
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#29 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,810 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 09:53 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 02 August 2013 - 08:41 PM, said:

View PostSpectacles, on 02 August 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

But I'm still curious, what do you think Obamacare is? When you talk about Obamacare, what do you (and anyone else who is reading) envision it to be? Do you see it as a single entity? What does it involve?

I see it as Government controlled Healthcare. I see it as the Government deciding what healthcare you get, what doctors you can have, what treatments you can have. Basically I see it as Big Brother on Steroids, while smoking crack.

Even if this were true, and it's not btw, but if it were true, Insurance companies already decide what services you can have and which ones they will deny.  They have been doing that for a very long time.  I don't quite get the difference between a government bureaucrat and a corporate bureaucrat making these decisions.  If it were true, and again it isn't, ALL insurance companies decide what services people can have.  You couldn't even change companies and get a better deal.

And, Insurance companies will still be making the decisions under Obamacare.  Honest.

These points really shouldn't be consuming our time any more.  The real issues are going to be implementation and administration of the law.  Will that work?  Will this bring down costs and make companies more competitive?  Will health care actually be affordable for those currently uninsured?  The answers to these questions will determine the success or failure of the law.  The question really isn't the government making decisions about health care.  Insurance companies will still be doing that, just like they always have.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#30 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 10:42 PM

Quote

Even if this were true, and it's not btw, but if it were true, Insurance companies already decide what services you can have and which ones they will deny.  They have been doing that for a very long time.  I don't quite get the difference between a government bureaucrat and a corporate bureaucrat making these decisions.
Corporate number crunchers do not have the authority of government. A patient has no where to turn if government has absolute control of his healthcare and denies treatment under their own ironclad regulations. A variety of options exists if there is a dispute between a patient and private insurance including lawsuits. Furthermore, no private insurance company can fine my a$$ for not purchasing their product.

Quote

1. Those who are insured through their workplace are affected only by new regulations that benefit the consumers. Insurers can no longer deny coverage because of pre-existing conditions; adult children up to 26 can remain on their parents' insurance plans; preventive screenings like mammograms must be fully paid for by insurers, etc. Most people have insurance through their employment. Therefore for most people, life goes on as before. It's just that their insurance companies have to provide more services than they normally do.

2. Uninsured people will be soon able to go online and choose from private insurance companies that participate in their state's health insurance exchange. If you make less than 400% the rate of poverty (around $46,000 a year for an individual), the government will subsidize some portion of your insurance costs so that those costs don't exceed a certain percent of your income.
What's funny is...even served up with infomercial-ready rah rah enthusiasm, these Obamacare bullet points grate. The casual endorsement of wealth redistribution, and utter disregard for the Constitutionality, or actual consequences of this government action, would make me physically ill even if we weren't already seeing the negative fallout. Everything the "crazy-rightwing" was saying about Obummercare even before it's passage is happening as we speak, and yet we're all still supposed to put our trust in the Community Organizer and Chief's boundless wisdom. Sorry folks...this is about as "civil" as it's gonna get on this grotesque subject.
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#31 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 03 August 2013 - 02:38 AM

View PostSpectacles, on 02 August 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

Quote

LoTS: I see it as Government controlled Healthcare. I see it as the Government deciding what healthcare you get, what doctors you can have, what treatments you can have.

Thanks for responding, LoTS--and civilly. :)

How do you see the government doing all of that? And to whom?

Here's how I understand Obamacare affects people:

1. Those who are insured through their workplace are affected only by new regulations that benefit the consumers. Insurers can no longer deny coverage because of pre-existing conditions; adult children up to 26 can remain on their parents' insurance plans; preventive screenings like mammograms must be fully paid for by insurers, etc. Most people have insurance through their employment. Therefore for most people, life goes on as before. It's just that their insurance companies have to provide more services than they normally do.

2. Uninsured people will be soon able to go online and choose from private insurance companies that participate in their state's health insurance exchange. If you make less than 400% the rate of poverty (around $46,000 a year for an individual), the government will subsidize some portion of your insurance costs so that those costs don't exceed a certain percent of your income.

At no point does the government decide what healthcare you get, what doctors you can have, what treatments you can have. Good ol' insurance companies will be doing that--just like they do now, but the government has intervened and put a stop to some practices that screwed people over--like cutting people off insurance when they needed it most. They can no longer do that.

Does all of this still sound like what you thought Obamacare was? Which part?

No that doesn't sound like what I thought it would be. However, here's the rub. If someone is uninsured, chances are they can't afford health insurance...regardless of the price. Now along comes Obamacare requiring they get insurance. Not even going to go into the whole: "Government telling you to buy something" aspect of it. So, if someone who is poor is just barely getting by, where does the government think these poor uninsured are going to find the money for insurance, even at a discounted price?

As for reading the actual law....LMAO. If I'm going to read a 900+ page document, that probably reads like a medical text book...the government had better pay me like 10 dollar a page.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#32 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 03 August 2013 - 06:28 AM

If you're that poor, you qualify for Medicaid.  If you make too much for that, but you're still low income, the government will subsidize the cost of your health insurance.  

But everybody else needs to get insured so the rest of us don't keep paying for their emergency room visits.  It's as simple as that - and it's working.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#33 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 03 August 2013 - 07:33 AM

Quote

Scherzo: A patient has no where to turn if government has absolute control of his healthcare and denies treatment under their own ironclad regulations.

We agree on something! Where we disagree is that this is a reality outside the rightwing bubble. But, OK, show me how Obamacare tosses the keys to my healthcare to the government and I'll concede.
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#34 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 03 August 2013 - 07:43 AM

Isn't it ironic when far right sorts complain about government supposedly limiting their healthcare choices under Obamacare - which is not happening - while simultaneously supporting politicians and parties that actually ARE limiting healthcare choices - aggressively - at the state level?  

Forced ultrasound, anyone?  

Didn't think so.

Edited by BklnScott, 03 August 2013 - 07:43 AM.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#35 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 03 August 2013 - 07:43 AM

Quote

LoTS: If someone is uninsured, chances are they can't afford health insurance...regardless of the price. Now along comes Obamacare requiring they get insurance. Not even going to go into the whole: "Government telling you to buy something" aspect of it. So, if someone who is poor is just barely getting by, where does the government think these poor uninsured are going to find the money for insurance, even at a discounted price?

I understand that concern. Even with Obamacare subsidies, some people are now going to have to budget for insurance premiums--people who are already struggling. But, as Scott points out, those for whom it would be a major hardship will be directed to Medicaid, as they would now.

All Obamacare does is (1) add consumer protection regulations to health insurance and (2) provide more affordable (than the current system) choices of private insurance plans through the Marketplace for those who are uninsured. To help with the affordable part, the government will subsidize premiums for folks making 46,000 a year or less.

I started a new thread with a link to a site you where you can find pretty much all the answers to how this might affect you and your loved ones.
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#36 Themis

Themis
  • Islander
  • 6,544 posts

Posted 03 August 2013 - 08:24 AM

A patient with lots of $$ can do just what they've always done and what they do in the UK - go to a doctor or have a procedure at their own expense.

A patient without lots of $$ can at least get health care.

Not sure about the Medicaid part, tho.  That's state by state, and so far Tennessee hasn't expanded Medicaid.
Cats will never be extinct!

#37 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 03 August 2013 - 11:09 AM

Quote

I see it as Government controlled Healthcare. I see it as the Government deciding what healthcare you get, what doctors you can have, what treatments you can have. Basically I see it as Big Brother on Steroids, while smoking crack.
    This is healthcare via insurance co ops to help bring down the costs for individual consumers who right now are getting horrible rates offered to them because they are individuals, not a pool of consumers banded together getting a lower rate and negotiated rates and coverages. As an individual insurance buyer, you're totally screwed with rates that are simply unaffordable. So many just go without and pray they don't have a serious medical issue because they will be BROKE and losing everything. Along with this insurance co ops, there's rules in place that make almost all our premiums go to actually providing healthcare (85 percent I believe). It's not a perfect system but it let's Americans pick their coverage and in many cases helps pay for it.
    Posted Image
    Posted Image

    #38 FarscapeOne

    FarscapeOne
    • Islander
    • 3,927 posts

    Posted 04 August 2013 - 12:32 AM

    So a full time work week is considered 30 hours now?  That explains why when I started my job a year a half ago that full time was 30 some hours.  40 hours was always the measure for a full time week.  So does this mean that companies now can tell you only a maximum of 30 hours because over that is overtime?  Because if that's the case, then that means everyone will be getting paid far less and people will HAVE to have two jobs just to barely make ends meet.

    #39 FarscapeOne

    FarscapeOne
    • Islander
    • 3,927 posts

    Posted 04 August 2013 - 12:40 AM

    In any event, I have not liked Obamacare since day one because if you choose not to have insurance, like say because you never go to a doctor or take medicines of any kind, then you are fined.  In other words, they're forcing you to get it.  Yet another thing government has control over, and they have WAY too much control over our lives already.  Secondly, and probably most importantly... it's HOW they brought this into existence.  "You have to sign for this and agree to it without looking at it before we allow you to read it" is basically what Obama had them do.  Why the hell would ANYONE sign a contract or agreement without reading its contents first?  ESPECIALLY about something that is so important.  The only reason you do something like that is because there is mischievous plans inside them.  If it REALLY is for the benefit of all Americans, why not have everything in full disclosure to the lawmakers who signed off on them?  If something is made in good faith and there is really nothing wrong about it, why be so secretive about it?

    #40 Spectacles

    Spectacles
    • Awaiting Authorisation
    • 9,632 posts

    Posted 04 August 2013 - 07:04 AM

    I really understand your resentment of the first point. Unfortunately, this is the way Romneycare and other "non-socialist" health insurance plans work, and these are the model of the PPACA.

    In exchange for consumer protection regulations, the deal is that insurers get larger pools. This is the only way they could agree to regulations that improve insurance but cost them dough.

    A simpler solution, but one that would have put a lot of insurance companies out of business, would have been to offer a Medicare-for-all style public option to compete with private insurance. But socialism.

    Quote

    Farscape One: Secondly, and probably most importantly... it's HOW they brought this into existence.  "You have to sign for this and agree to it without looking at it before we allow you to read it" is basically what Obama had them do.  Why the hell would ANYONE sign a contract or agreement without reading its contents first?

    I know that's what the alarmists are saying happened, but it didn't. This bill was written by Senators in committee for months. Its details were debated publicly the entire time. No one who voted for it was surprised by its contents. Nothing was slipped past them. Every plank was hammered out publicly. If you just go to OT posts from summer-fall 2009, you'll see we did a fair amount of discussing the details back then--and that several of us were not happy campers because it looked like the public option was not going to survive.
    "Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

    "Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman



    Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Health Care, Obamacare, 2013, Exemptions for Congress

    0 user(s) are browsing this forum

    0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users