Heeeeeeere's Obamacare!

[balrog666]

I just heard a few kids (laborers) talking about the new plans. They're saying "screw it, pay the fine. it's cheaper".

I asked them about it and apparently the fine is around $100 going up to a max of $700. I'm no math genius but, to someone young and invincible, this is a no brainier

I did ask them if they worried about getting hurt. I was not surprised when the said "you have workmans comp, right"

BTW: My comp coverage is going up too.

Young, healthy people with no assets have no financial interest in "insuring" their assets.

Why is that difficult to accept?

 

[MattusMaximus]

time line of the ACA from 2010 on. Look how much has been done without issue and tell me it's time to throw the baby out with the bath water, the consequences of which are:

Children with pre-existing conditions can be dropped

Kids over 18 can be dropped

Lifetime limits return

Arbitrary cancelation returns

Prescription drug discounts for seniors go away

small business tax credit goes away

Free preventive services for seniors go away

New preventive services for women go away

And those are just some of the highlights of what we do away with if we get rid of the ACA. What's the plan after that? Anybody got one? Cause every time I ask what the alternative plan is from the right I get crickets.

But... but... the website is glitchy, so...

REPEAL OBAMACARE NOW!!!11!1

 

[balrog666]

Young, healthy people with no financial assests aren't falling for it!!


REPEAL OBAMACARE NOW!!!11!1

 

[Fudbucker]

Young, healthy people with no financial assests aren't falling for it!!


REPEAL OBAMACARE NOW!!!11!1

What about parents in their late 20's and early 30's, just starting a family and making $40 or $50k a year? There are A LOT of those households out there, they need insurance, and the subsidies are sweet. Is it your claim that that demographic group drives insurance costs up???

In my 20's I didn't care so much about insurance. When I had kids in my late 20's, I started to care. The ACA will be a popular program. If someone had dangled $5,000 worth of subsidies in front of me, I would have snapped at the chance for decent affordable insurance.

 

[Robrob]

Because it's none of your darn business

I don't share my income information with my closest friends, let alone with strangers on the interwebs. Income and wealth pretty serious parts of most arguments around social policy. They play into many assumptions that people make, and often strongly affect how people treat you. I prefer to interact based on the strength of my ideas and the character of my posts.

Well said.

And quite paranoid. The idea that anyone gives a rat's ass what you claim to make (or not make) over the internet is ridiculous.

Young, healthy people with no assets have no financial interest in "insuring" their assets.

Why is that difficult to accept?

Why do you not understand how "insurance" works? Public or private, it functions the same. Strange someone as knowledgeable as you would be confused by this, over and over again...

 

[xjx388]

And quite paranoid. The idea that anyone gives a rat's ass what you claim to make (or not make) over the internet is ridiculous.

It doesn't take much information to be personally identified on the internet. If the figure is high enough, it could certainly attract the wrong element to you. Not paranoia; just reality.

Why do you not understand how "insurance" works? Public or private, it functions the same. Strange someone as knowledgeable as you would be confused by this, over and over again...

I think he's saying that the young and healthy won't buy into the insurance in the first place; they'd rather take the penalty at this point. If they don't buy it, they don't contribute to the risk pool.

 

[Newtons Bit]

And quite paranoid. The idea that anyone gives a rat's ass what you claim to make (or not make) over the internet is ridiculous.

That's a statement that flies in face of the facts of this thread. Emily Cat's post was in a response to a person demanding to know my personal income.

 

[balrog666]

It doesn't take much information to be personally identified on the internet. If the figure is high enough, it could certainly attract the wrong element to you. Not paranoia; just reality.



I think he's saying that the young and healthy won't buy into the insurance in the first place; they'd rather take the penalty at this point. If they don't buy it, they don't contribute to the risk pool.

Yes, of course.

If I was 25 with no real assets, no savings, maybe even lots of student loan debt or credit card debt, just what assets am I "insuring" by signing up for PelosiCare? What additional financial ruin could be I facing if I am already broke or deep in debt?


As for young families, they tend to want protection from losing their earning power (e.g., life insurance), not insurance to preserve financial assets they don't have.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Young, healthy people with no financial assests aren't falling for it!!

REPEAL OBAMACARE NOW!!!11!1

What do you propose in its place?

 

[elbe]

...PelosiCare...

Is this a new thing? Can't we just call it what it is, the Heritage plan?

 

[Virus]

More people have lost insurance than gained it under Obamacare.

Since the total number of enrollees is like, two or something. Nobody knows. Even loyal Democrats aren't allowed to know.

 

[DavidJames]

More people have lost insurance than gained it under Obamacare. [/URL]

If your attention span allows, you should read the entire article. It portrays a pretty balanced view and perspective, unlike your sensationalized post. But I guess that was the point.

 

[Unabogie]

More people have lost insurance than gained it under Obamacare.

Since the total number of enrollees is like, two or something. Nobody knows. Even loyal Democrats aren't allowed to know.

My wife got one. Since she's on the Oregon version of COBRA, we were paying a very high rate for a mediocre plan. That plan is being discontinued, and thanks to the ACA she can now get a much better plan for much less money.

Thanks, Obama!

(or was that not your intention in posting such a misleading headline)

 

[DGM]

Young, healthy people with no assets have no financial interest in "insuring" their assets.

Why is that difficult to accept?

It's not to me. Problem is, it's where the money to offset the sick and elderly is coming from.

 

[eeyore1954]

If your attention span allows, you should read the entire article. It portrays a pretty balanced view and perspective, unlike your sensationalized post. But I guess that was the point.

Was his his post wrong? From the article I would say it appears correct at least at this early stage.

Health plans are sending hundreds of thousands of cancellation letters to people who buy their own coverage, frustrating some consumers who want to keep what they have and forcing others to buy more costly policies.

By all accounts, the new policies will offer consumers better coverage, in some cases, for comparable cost -- especially after the inclusion of federal subsidies for those who qualify.

“I don’t feel like I need to change, but I have to,” said Jeff Learned, a television editor in Los Angeles, who must find a new plan for his teenage daughter, who has a health condition that has required multiple surgeries.

She said some policyholders who may have faced limited coverage for their medical conditions will get new plans with “richer benefits” and the policies “in most cases, will be at a lower rate.”

Blue Shield of California sent roughly 119,000 cancellation notices out in mid-September, about 60 percent of its individual business. About two-thirds of those policyholders will see rate increases in their new policies, said spokesman Steve Shivinsky.

Overall from the article I do not see where his post was wrong. A lot of people will not be able to keep the insurance they had and were happy with and a lot of them will see increases.

 

[balrog666]

It's not to me. Problem is, it's where the money to offset the sick and elderly is coming from.

Did anyone actually believe that was going to happen?

 

[DGM]

Did anyone actually believe that was going to happen?

Is that a rhetorical question? It's the basis for the ACA.

 

[Emily's Cat]

And quite paranoid. The idea that anyone gives a rat's ass what you claim to make (or not make) over the internet is ridiculous.

Really? How much money do you make? How much money did your parent's have? Did you have a privileged childhood? Tell me about yourself.

Because it's none of your darn business

I don't share my income information with my closest friends, let alone with strangers on the interwebs. Income and wealth pretty serious parts of most arguments around social policy. They play into many assumptions that people make, and often strongly affect how people treat you. I prefer to interact based on the strength of my ideas and the character of my posts.

You might think it's paranoid... but you might also think it's paranoid if I don't wish to disclose any medical conditions I might have. Your opinion of it being paranoid, however, doesn't give you any right to my personal information. And I think I have a valid point with respect to assumptions people make based in income and wealth.

For example: If I were to tell you that I grew up as a poor inner-city child, with no money, and that I currently work for minimum wage and just barely scrape by... you are likely to assume that I am relatively uneducated, more likely to make poor financial decisions, and that I would appreciate your pity and support programs that would benefit me personally, etc.

If, on the other hand, I were to tell you that I grew up in a wealthy neighborhood and now make $250K per year, then you might assume that I am well educated, more financially savvy, and that I'm too privileged to understand the plight of a poor person, that I am insensitive to their needs, etc.

I prefer not to allow any assumptions of that nature to be made about me, and I prefer not to have questions of wealth or privilege color how you read my posts and how you receive my ideas.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Is that a rhetorical question? It's the basis for the ACA.

Care for the sick and elderly was the basis for ACA? And here I thought it was for the uninsured...

 

[DGM]

Care for the sick and elderly was the basis for ACA? And here I thought it was for the uninsured...

Actually it's more like the un-insurable and the ones that need subsidies.