• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Heeeeeeere's Obamacare!

DDWW said:
From Drudge this morning, referencing CNN, Senator Harry Reid has exempted some of his staff from Obamacare.

All animals are created equal....just some are more equal than others.

DD (and it just gets better and better) WW
Click to expand...

I know the GOP likes to play 3-D chess with politics, but in reality it's just 2-D chess with half the pieces missing. While this doesn't ever surprise me, what does is how many folks fall for the GOP turds left and right.

It really makes me think people are too darn lazy to look behind the curtain. It's as if people choose to take this crap with an open mouth, and then asking for more even after they've discovered that it is indeed, crap.

To say this story is BS is short changing what really needs to be said. It's not just this story, but the entire narrative. From the very start, it is nothing but ham-fisted politics, with entirely undeserved success in political rhetoric.

So to throw this out there just one more time, because I'm so sick and tired to people being too lazy to look things up and try to remember stuff:

EVERYONE with a qualified health insurance plan is EXEMPT from "ObamaCare", by which we now refer to the EXCHANGES setup by the PPACA law. This includes those who have their insurance through their jobs, those that have retired and get Medicare, those who are too damn poor and have to receive Medicaid. This is how the law was intended.

And for the vast majority it still is. Except that Congressional staffers are forced to do something NONE of the rest of us are: drop their qualified employer provided health insurance plans and get coverage from the exchanges, WITHOUT subsidies, regardless of their income.

No one, not ONE of us is given this ◊◊◊◊ sandwich. Literally EVERYONE in this country got a BETTER deal from the PPACA than the Congressional staffers. EVERY. LAST. ONE. OF. US.


There. I feel better now. Get back to your daily routines of not understanding the world around you.
 
theprestige said:
Isn't that kind of the hidden genius of the ACA: people who don't have care will continue to receive the same services they always have, at the same cost to society?
Click to expand...

The fines are there to address the 'Free Rider' dilemma. They aren't just punitive, but actually help finance care for those who continue to not have insurance.
 
AlaskaBushPilot said:
Word games. I see you are an apologist. I know exactly how this is working.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not an apologist. I am a tell-the-truthist. I'm an actuary. I won't pander to your propaganda, and I won't jump on your bandwagon. If you want to discuss reality, and how these things actually work, I'm more than happy to do so. If you wish, however, to hyperbolize and coat things in emotive language to support an agenda, I will not engage in that.
 
daenku32 said:
I know the GOP likes to play 3-D chess with politics, but in reality it's just 2-D chess with half the pieces missing. While this doesn't ever surprise me, what does is how many folks fall for the GOP turds left and right.

It really makes me think people are too darn lazy to look behind the curtain. It's as if people choose to take this crap with an open mouth, and then asking for more even after they've discovered that it is indeed, crap.

To say this story is BS is short changing what really needs to be said. It's not just this story, but the entire narrative. From the very start, it is nothing but ham-fisted politics, with entirely undeserved success in political rhetoric.

So to throw this out there just one more time, because I'm so sick and tired to people being too lazy to look things up and try to remember stuff:

EVERYONE with a qualified health insurance plan is EXEMPT from "ObamaCare", by which we now refer to the EXCHANGES setup by the PPACA law. This includes those who have their insurance through their jobs, those that have retired and get Medicare, those who are too damn poor and have to receive Medicaid. This is how the law was intended.

And for the vast majority it still is. Except that Congressional staffers are forced to do something NONE of the rest of us are: drop their qualified employer provided health insurance plans and get coverage from the exchanges, WITHOUT subsidies, regardless of their income.

No one, not ONE of us is given this ◊◊◊◊ sandwich. Literally EVERYONE in this country got a BETTER deal from the PPACA than the Congressional staffers. EVERY. LAST. ONE. OF. US.


There. I feel better now. Get back to your daily routines of not understanding the world around you.
Click to expand...

Are you sure it is without subsidies?
 
Emily Cat said:
No, I'm not an apologist. I am a tell-the-truthist. I'm an actuary. I won't pander to your propaganda, and I won't jump on your bandwagon. If you want to discuss reality, and how these things actually work, I'm more than happy to do so. If you wish, however, to hyperbolize and coat things in emotive language to support an agenda, I will not engage in that.
Click to expand...

You just engaged in that in this very post. Saying that you'd prefer to "discuss reality" is nothing if not coating things in emotive language to support an agenda.
 
sir drinks-a-lot said:
You just engaged in that in this very post. Saying that you'd prefer to "discuss reality" is nothing if not coating things in emotive language to support an agenda.
Click to expand...

Emily Cat, welcome to the wonderful world of actually trying to argue with some of these more strident right-wingers. They make baseless, emotive arguments; you counter them with fact-based responses; and they accuse you of having an agenda. They seem to love playing the victim.

Next thing they'll be accusing you of supporting the "liberal agenda" or, even better, being an "Obamacare shill" :rolleyes:
 
theprestige said:
The second is a "status quo" question. If a person doesn't have coverage today, and they get sick, who pays for their care? If they don't buy coverage under the ACA, and they get sick, who pays for their care? Are the answers to those two questions substantially different? Other than the fine, what really changes for those who don't have care under the new law? Do ERs get to turn them away? Do clinics get to run a credit check before providing service? Do collection agencies get to use strongarm tactics? Do creditors get privileged positions in bankruptcy? Or does care get provided as before?
Click to expand...

Since the ACA isn't a true UHC system, if people without insurance get sick, it pretty much works the same as now: they can go to the ER so it's likely covered, but if they have longer-term care they have to pay for it out-of-pocket. So... yeah, financial ruin if you, say, get cancer.

Oh, and on top of that they'll have to pay the fines. But boy they'll sure have stuck it to Obama! :rolleyes:
 
Not sure if I already wrote this, but I finally got in.

But...

In my situation it seems useless or at best to intimidating. I am looking for a new job, and many very clinics don't offer health insurance. So I am looking to see what my situation will look like if I get a job at one of those places.

But they want you to fill out an application first, including where you work and contact information for that company. And then you have to sign everything is accurate. I am hesitant to go forward at that point.

They have links to the Kaiser estimator and the non-adjusted costs of plans in my area, but those aren't exactly confidence inspiring.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Not sure if I already wrote this, but I finally got in.

But...

In my situation it seems useless or at best to intimidating. I am looking for a new job, and many very clinics don't offer health insurance. So I am looking to see what my situation will look like if I get a job at one of those places.

But they want you to fill out an application first, including where you work and contact information for that company. And then you have to sign everything is accurate. I am hesitant to go forward at that point.

They have links to the Kaiser estimator and the non-adjusted costs of plans in my area, but those aren't exactly confidence inspiring.
Click to expand...

If you're unemployed and have no income than Obamacare really isn't what you should be looking it, unless I'm confused. If you're going to be unemployed for a long period of time I would go through Medicaid. If you know you're going to be employed soon then I would absolutely wait to apply for anything at this point. You have no idea what you're income will be, and no idea what your subsidies would be, therefore you could run into a situation where you see prices and it looks WAY too expensive.
 
plague311 said:
If you're unemployed and have no income than Obamacare really isn't what you should be looking it, unless I'm confused. If you're going to be unemployed for a long period of time I would go through Medicaid. If you know you're going to be employed soon then I would absolutely wait to apply for anything at this point. You have no idea what you're income will be, and no idea what your subsidies would be, therefore you could run into a situation where you see prices and it looks WAY too expensive.
Click to expand...
I would think if you are unemployed you should apply for medicaid. When you become employed you should notify your state. I believe transitional medicaid should allow you to keep it for a period of time after your income increases. Here is information about it for my state (NY).
http://newyork.earnbenefits.org/page.php?pageID=95
 
After going through the "forgot password" and "forgot user name" links several times I was suddenly able to log in finally. Spent half an hour filling out confusing questions on income and such (the site assumes you have a steady income and get an identical paycheck at regular intervals, which is not my case at all!) I finally get to the "see results" page, except that this requires a popup. So I had to turn off my popup blocker, which reloads the page and "poof" everything I entered disappeared into the ether. And yes, all info was supposedly saved prior to doing that. :mad:
 
MattusMaximus said:
Emily Cat, welcome to the wonderful world of actually trying to argue with some of these more strident right-wingers. They make baseless, emotive arguments; you counter them with fact-based responses; and they accuse you of having an agenda. They seem to love playing the victim.

Next thing they'll be accusing you of supporting the "liberal agenda" or, even better, being an "Obamacare shill" :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

What's really entertaining about this is that I tend slightly more toward the conservative side on fiscal issues myself... so I really don't know where that's going to leave me. At the end of the day I consider myself a risk-averse pragmatist with a heavy amount of skepticism about pretty much everything, but a willingness to consider most ideas, but an unwillingness to swallow hogs unchewed ;)
 
Emily Cat said:
What's really entertaining about this is that I tend slightly more toward the conservative side on fiscal issues myself... so I really don't know where that's going to leave me. At the end of the day I consider myself a risk-averse pragmatist with a heavy amount of skepticism about pretty much everything, but a willingness to consider most ideas, but an unwillingness to swallow hogs unchewed ;)
Click to expand...


And that's why we love you. [Insert Smoochity-smooch-smilie here] ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom