Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Obamacare


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Obamacare Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Obamacare - 5/20/2015 10:59:54 AM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/20/health-insurance-deductibles_n_7337406.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

I think all of us will agree that the number of insured has gone up. This article says at the price of us not getting our meds or seeing the Dr because of Co-Pays.

I read the report it seems to pretty much hold true.

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9174.html
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 11:08:48 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
The rand report data was from a study conducted from 1971 thru 1982. the allusion to Obamacare does not seem appropriate.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 11:25:29 AM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
True, but to me with co-pays going up under Obamacare, wouldn't the same hold basically true? Seems to me in theory it would.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 11:47:22 AM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

True, but to me with co-pays going up under Obamacare, wouldn't the same hold basically true? Seems to me in theory it would.

A you don't have insurance

B thanks to ACA you have insurance

C since you have to pay for things you don't need have huge deductibles and large co-pays you can't afford to go to the doctor

D what have you gained?

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 11:50:03 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
one step closer to making the regressives bite into nationalised single payer.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 1:46:46 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
Otter I think that is the goal of Obama and his cronies. End privitization and nationalize not only healthcare but all business.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 1:55:23 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
I guess that is fine with me, it isnt working out so well to give our country away to other countries.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/20/2015 2:01:44 PM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 2:01:53 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
The Dems have introduced it twiice http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Health_Care_Act

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 2:19:49 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Yeah, and the country destroyers wont have it, rather give our country to china, japan, and so on.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 2:22:49 PM   
Arturas


Posts: 3245
Status: offline
"YES WE CAN!"

_____________________________

"We master Our world."

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 2:28:01 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
But so many say, no we want to destroy the country instead of can.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Obamacare - 5/20/2015 6:36:39 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

"YES WE CAN!"


We can go broke

quote:


Hawaii Obamacare Enrolls ZERO People During Special Enrollment Period

The numbers are in: Hawaii’s Obamacare Exchange enrolled a grand total of ZERO — yes, zero people during its special enrollment period.

The Obama administration had implemented the special enrollment period from March 15 - April 30 to assist individuals who were unaware they would face a tax penalty for not having “qualifying” health insurance. In all, less than 250,000 individuals decided to enroll nationwide meaning that millions of Americans would rather pay the tax than enroll in Obamacare.

While Hawaii enrolled zero individuals and is the worst performing state, it is not alone. Vermont signed up only 97 households, while Rhode Island enrolled just 25 households.

Hawaii’s dismal performance should not be surprising. The website cost taxpayers $205 million but could only enroll 8,592 individuals in year one. Cost to taxpayers per enroll: $23,899.

The state legislature recently rejected a $28 million bailout for the website meaning that a contingency plan to dismantle the exchange and migrate to the federal exchange will be implemented immediately. Unfortunately, taxpayers are not off the hook yet as it is expected that moving to the federally run healthcare.gov will cost $30 million.


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Obamacare - 5/21/2015 5:16:10 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/health-care/health-care-challenge-blog/article20696283.html

Update Wednesday, May 13: After this story went viral Tuesday, donors have contributed thousands for Lang’s operation. Most are self-identified liberals and Affordable Care Act supporters urging him to change his views. Read more.

To start a lively discussion of America’s health care system, let’s consider who’s responsible for saving the sight of Luis Lang.

Lang, a 49-year-old resident of Fort Mill, S.C., has bleeding in his eyes and a partially detached retina caused by diabetes.

“He will lose his eyesight if he doesn’t get care. He will go blind,” said Dr. Malcolm Edwards, the Lancaster ophthalmologist who examined Lang.

Lang is a self-employed handyman who works with banks and the federal government on maintaining foreclosed properties. He has done well enough that his wife, Mary, hasn’t had to work. They live in a 3,300-square-foot home in the Legacy Park subdivision valued at more than $300,000.

But he has never bought insurance. Instead, he says, he prided himself on paying his own medical bills.

That worked while he and his wife were relatively healthy. But after 10 days of an unrelenting headache, Lang went to the emergency room on Feb. 25. He says he was told he’d suffered several ministrokes. He ran up $9,000 in bills and exhausted his savings. Meanwhile, his vision worsened, and he can’t work, he says.

That’s when he turned to the Affordable Care Act exchange. Lang learned two things: First, 2015 enrollment had closed earlier that month. And second, because his income has dried up, he earns too little to get a federal subsidy to buy a private policy.

Lang, a Republican, says he knew the act required him to get coverage, but he chose not to do so. But he thought help would be available in an emergency. He and his wife blame President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats for passing a complex and flawed bill.

“(My husband) should be at the front of the line, because he doesn’t work and because he has medical issues,” Mary Lang said last week. “We call it the Not Fair Health Care Act.”

Anyone who’s remotely familiar with insurance knows there’s no system that lets people skip payments while they’re healthy and cash in when they get sick. Public systems tax everyone. Private ones rely on the premiums of the well to cover the costs of those who are ailing.

And Democrats might point out that the ACA was designed to provide Medicaid coverage for people whose income falls below the poverty line. The federal government pays 100 percent of the ACA expansion to cover low-income, able-bodied adults, but 21 Republican-led states, including North Carolina and South Carolina, declined to participate.

For now, Lang qualifies only for a South Carolina Medicaid plan that covers checkups and family planning. The aged (65 and older), blind and disabled get more extensive coverage. Lang says he hasn’t applied for Social Security disability benefits because it takes too long.

The S.C. Department of Health and Human Services is still reviewing whether he might qualify through a vocational rehabilitation program. If so – and if he can find a surgeon who takes Medicaid – South Carolina taxpayers will share the cost with the federal government.

Last week, Lang went back to Dr. Edwards, who had previously provided injections to control the bleeding in his eyes at a discounted rate. That’s when he learned that his problem had worsened, including the detached retina.

“He’s in a very bad situation,” Edwards said after Lang signed a privacy release. “The longer he waits, the poorer his results will be.”

Edwards said he would provide care at no cost, but Lang now requires surgery and follow-up treatment that is beyond his expertise. His Eye & Laser Center has a network of specialists who work on a sliding scale and organizations that sometimes help with donations. But Lang requires such extensive and ongoing work that there’s no way to guarantee there won’t be significant bills, Edwards said.

Lang says he has called charities that work with diabetes and blindness, but he doesn’t seem to fit anyone’s cause. “I’m either too young or too old,” said Lang, who has launched a GoFundMe.com page in hopes of garnering donations.

There’s a lot of talk about personal responsibility in health care reform, so it’s probably fair to note that Lang is a smoker who has, by his own account, been inconsistent in his efforts to control his diabetes. Edwards says it’s not uncommon to see patients who don’t take the treatment regimen seriously until they’re facing major problems. Bleeding in the blood vessels of the eyes often foretells similar problems with the kidneys and feet, he said.

When I started covering health care last summer, Newsday columnist Lane Filler wrote a column that was striking in its candor. He argued for employers to get out of the health insurance business, shift the money they spend on premiums into employee wages and give everyone the freedom to decide whether they’ll spend it on insurance.

“If I were just free, I could buy no health insurance, instead banking the money to pay medical bills as they came due,” Filler wrote. “But ‘just free’ societies must have onerous consequences for the imprudent and the unlucky. If we want to be allowed to buy health insurance or not, we must be willing to let folks who choose wrong be bankrupted by medical bills. Worse, we must be willing to let them die for lack of care, and listen to them wail from the gutters.”

That kind of argument can be easy to defend in an intellectual debate and hard to hold on to when you’re face to face with someone who’s going to die – or go blind – when they could be saved.

On the other side, you have single-payer advocates who say it’s time to stop arguing over who deserves to be denied coverage or care. Instead, they say, it’s time to treat health care like fire and police protection: Tax everyone and provide the aid when it’s needed.

Lang’s story drew national attention after it was posted on charlotteobserver.com Tuesday morning. Liberal bloggers across the country blasted him for blaming Obama for problems created by his own actions and South Carolina legislators. His fundraising page, which had gotten no donations in the first 24 days, raised more than $2,000 in the first 11 hours after the post went online. Most of it was small amounts from self-identified liberals and ACA supporters, who urged him to change his views.

“You’re a poster child for what you claim to be against, and like most of the donors here, I don’t believe ANYone deserves to suffer without proper medical care,” wrote Andrew Knight, who gave $5. “I wish you all the best. I hope you’ll come to see ACA and healthcare for all as a basic right.”

A staffer with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services emailed the Observer to say Lang’s case had been “discussed here in DC at a fairly high level” in hopes of finding a solution. If the family income were to rise above the poverty level ($15,730 for a couple), he could qualify for special enrollment, the staffer said.

For Lang’s doctor, the overwhelming feeling is frustration at knowing that one of his patients could lose his sight for lack of a way to pay for care that’s readily available in modern American society.

“That’s probably the worst thing that can happen to someone outside of death,” Edwards said. And he added that if Lang doesn’t get help now, he’s likely to end up dependent on the government: “It’s extremely costly to let a person go blind.”

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/health-care/health-care-challenge-blog/article20696283.html#storylink=cpy





http://www.gofundme.com/s78e9w

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/contributors/2015/05/18/obamacare-luis-lang-gofundme/27522079/

http://crooksandliars.com/2015/05/maybe-jebs-apple-watch-can-operate-luis

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Obamacare - 5/21/2015 3:32:20 PM   
MercTech


Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline
Yep, mandatory insurance in no way means you can get health care any more than mandatory vehicle insurance means you can get your car repaired.

Apples and oranges.

But, what a windfall for the health insurance companies that force high dollar policies that will never pay much, if anything, out for health care.

We need health care reform; not a pork barrel for insurance companies.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Obamacare - 5/21/2015 4:29:27 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
Yep, mandatory insurance in no way means you can get health care any more than mandatory vehicle insurance means you can get your car repaired.


Under the rules of the ACA, you are not required to obtain insurance. Who ever told you otherwise is lying. However, not having health insurance can be bad for two reasions: When you need it, you might be outside the 'sign up window' for health insurance. That will cost you quite a bit 'out of pocket' until you can sign up. The second is you are required to pay a dollar amount based upon either X% of your total household income, or $Y amount of money per adult and half that for every child under the age of 18.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
Apples and oranges.


If your considered the human body just a biological mechanical concept, your concept would work.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
But, what a windfall for the health insurance companies that force high dollar policies that will never pay much, if anything, out for health care.


You can thank the GOP/TP and their supporters for keeping capitalism alive and well in the United States. That's what happens when you vote Republican or Tea Party.....

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
We need health care reform; not a pork barrel for insurance companies.


Most Americans, once they examine the ACA fully either wish it 'as is' or 'improved upon'. I've read the law; there are many areas that improvements could be made. Unfortunately we have many uniformed individuals that are easily manipulated due to fears and plain ignorance. You ask twenty conservatives on here to explain the ACA to you; and then ask me. I will exaplain the ACA with a pile of information. An I'll give you plenty of good information with locations on the web to which you can gain even further amounts of information. Then sit back and weigh who gave you the best information. Conservatives are told what to think and say; I go an research it myself.


(in reply to MercTech)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Obamacare - 5/21/2015 6:48:27 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
You know what I hate about the law is it takes the SHOULD away. It requires you to pay money one way or ther other - preiums or extra taxes and in reality for the majority both. Everyone SHOULD have health care. You will never get an argument from me about that. It is the other that I object to.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Obamacare - 5/21/2015 6:53:36 PM   
ExiledTyrant


Posts: 4547
Joined: 12/9/2013
From: Exiled
Status: offline
Out of curiosity, is there a federal entity that controls and regulates insurance companies?

_____________________________

Gnothi Seauton
To lead, first follow: Aurelius, Epictetus, Descartes, Sun Tzu, to name a few.

Semper fidelis (which sometimes feels like a burden)

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Obamacare - 5/21/2015 7:01:26 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3680
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant

Out of curiosity, is there a federal entity that controls and regulates insurance companies?


Nope. Regulation is left up to the states.

(in reply to ExiledTyrant)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Obamacare - 5/21/2015 9:34:42 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV


quote:

ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant

Out of curiosity, is there a federal entity that controls and regulates insurance companies?


Nope. Regulation is left up to the states.


California has an insurance commisoner. When a lot of policies went up nation wide, ours really didn't because we've been paying massive high costs due to nazi leftist insurance politicians for years. I've been sorta gloating about that while I watch the rest of all of you catch up with us and the higher costs. For instance I ha a friend in Oregon paying less than half I was paying. Well, it's pretty much parity now.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Obamacare - 5/22/2015 1:41:48 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
You know what I hate about the law is it takes the SHOULD away. It requires you to pay money one way or ther other - preiums or extra taxes and in reality for the majority both. Everyone SHOULD have health care. You will never get an argument from me about that. It is the other that I object to.


I agree that everyone should have healthcare. Unforuntately we have people shouting that 'socialism is evil'. Why is that? Because they look at the negative moments in time when some dictator used the concept to advance their own ends. And ignore the instances in which socialism has been used (like the Scandinavian countries). A people afraid to have their views challenges, I suppose.

Others state that capitalism should be the driving force for healthcare. That it forces improvements, cuts costs, and is better for everyone. Its not better for everyone. Becomes more obvious the further away from the concept of 'rich' one gets. It doesn't force improvements; Medicaid has a smaller overhead than all the private owned insurance companies. Its hard to compete when the 'ceo' and upper level management in the government make anywhere from 1/10th to 1/500th what private company CEO's and upper management make in a year.

The purpose of ACA was to force companies to spend at least 85% of every dollar on patients. A measure INTENSELY fought over by the Republicans and Tea Party. Supporters of the Republicans I can understand; they want money regardless of how or why. Tea Parties are heavily manipulated to think and do things for the GOP (they are the bitches of the GOP...). Before the ACA, patients were lucky if even 65% of each dollar went towards patients. One of many reasons the GOP wishes to destroy the ACA.

The part that I dislike is the types of plan levels: bronze, silver, gold, and platinum. I understand why they created the tier system. Helps standardize concepts within policies. I think it should have been expanded to eight rather than just four. Trust me when I say the reason for the government to make four tiers was more to help the judicial branch from pulling out its hair and not have to 'legislate from the bench'. Before hand policies were so different in scale and concept that in court cases, it was very hard if not impossible to find an 'industry standard' for anything. Judges in our system of government wish to keep rulings steady and agreeable. Now if there is a ruling that effects a silver plan, it can effect all silver plans. This helps everyone in the long run.

The President's original bill was to change things to the more efficient single payer system (fianncially speaking). It would have helped people like you and me and about 99% of other US Citizens. But the GOP serves the 1%.....


(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Obamacare Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.076