Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Romney opposes Obamacare, even the parts no one else seems to have an issue with   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 175
    More: Obvious, obamacare, Democrats, Stephanie Cutter, pre-existing condition, defined benefit, romney, U.S. Supreme Court, Mitt Romney  
•       •       •

1491 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Jun 2012 at 10:22 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



175 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-06-14 10:07:46 AM  
I'm sorry GOP, your efforts to smear the affordable care act as "Obamacare" is going to backfire badly and give the blark muslin usurper a name that people will use for years to come to represent their ability to go to the hospital without going broke.

Good job!
 
2012-06-14 10:17:06 AM  

Endrick: I'm sorry GOP, your efforts to smear the affordable care act as "Obamacare" is going to backfire badly and give the blark muslin usurper a name that people will use for years to come to represent their ability to go to the hospital without going broke.

Good job!


imagine if medicare were called "johnsoncare." wait, scratch that...
 
2012-06-14 10:17:53 AM  
Maybe if he opposes Obamacare enough, he'll seem acceptably conservative to the 27%ers.
 
2012-06-14 10:19:09 AM  
Yeah, they're going to replace it with Repuplicare...

Republicare can be summed up with one sentence:

"I got mine, so fark you."
 
2012-06-14 10:25:33 AM  
FTA: only Americans who have had constant, uninterrupted insurance coverage should be guaranteed access to a health plan, regardless of any pre-existing conditions.

To get health insurance, you need to have health insurance.

But to have health insurance, you need to have gotten health insurance...

Therefore, to have health insurance, you need health insurROMNEYBOT EXPERIENCED A CRITICAL ERROR AND NEEDS TO SHUT DOWN
 
2012-06-14 10:25:52 AM  

FlashHarry: Endrick: I'm sorry GOP, your efforts to smear the affordable care act as "Obamacare" is going to backfire badly and give the blark muslin usurper a name that people will use for years to come to represent their ability to go to the hospital without going broke.

Good job!

imagine if medicare were called "johnsoncare." wait, scratch that...


I've been told proper johnsoncare does NOT involve scratching that, and I'll have to go get an ointment.
 
2012-06-14 10:27:00 AM  
I'm curious how the unleashing the magical powers of the free market will help people with pre-existing conditions purchase adequate health insurance when it already miserably fails to do so.
 
2012-06-14 10:27:40 AM  

Sock Ruh Tease: only Americans who have had constant, uninterrupted insurance coverage should be guaranteed access to a health plan, regardless of any pre-existing conditions.


....Lose your job? fark you peasant. You should have been smart enough not to work at a company that Bain Capital targeted for destruction.
 
2012-06-14 10:29:44 AM  

Sock Ruh Tease: FTA: only Americans who have had constant, uninterrupted insurance coverage should be guaranteed access to a health plan, regardless of any pre-existing conditions.

To get health insurance, you need to have health insurance.

But to have health insurance, you need to have gotten health insurance...

Therefore, to have health insurance, you need health insurROMNEYBOT EXPERIENCED A CRITICAL ERROR AND NEEDS TO SHUT DOWN


Please. Any robot the GOP ran would have to be built with Paradox absorbing crumple zones. It's necessary to support the Rovian Spin Generator and the Republican business model.
 
2012-06-14 10:30:08 AM  
"You know, regardless of what they do, it's going to be up to the next president to either repeal and replace Obamacare or to replace Obamacare," Romney told a crowd in Orlando on Tuesday.

All right, who's responsible for writing this code now? This is very, very sloppy work, and it just won't do for our first Robot President. I expect to not see shiat like this anymore, or people will be looking for new jobs. Got it?
 
2012-06-14 10:32:13 AM  
Rmoney shamelessly supports big business regardless of any moral implications. You don't make money by letting children live.
 
2012-06-14 10:32:14 AM  

Sock Ruh Tease: FTA: only Americans who have had constant, uninterrupted insurance coverage should be guaranteed access to a health plan, regardless of any pre-existing conditions.

To get health insurance, you need to have health insurance.

But to have health insurance, you need to have gotten health insurance...

Therefore, to have health insurance, you need health insurROMNEYBOT EXPERIENCED A CRITICAL ERROR AND NEEDS TO SHUT DOWN


Yo dawg, we heard you want health insurance. So we decided that before you get health insurance that you'll need health insurance. That way, you can have healthy insurance while you have health insurance!
 
2012-06-14 10:32:40 AM  
Romney's position - protecting people with pre-existing conditions so long as they've always had insurance - has been law since 1996, experts say. It does not immediately address people who have never had private health insurance, or who have had insurance but spent some time without, often because of financial circumstances and unemployment.


So despite what he claims, he has just told us that he doesn't give a flying fark about the unemployed? Anyone else pick that up?

What a prick.
 
2012-06-14 10:32:43 AM  
"You know, regardless of what they do, it's going to be up to the next president to either repeal and replace Obamacare or to replace Obamacare," Romney told a crowd in Orlando on Tuesday.

Actually, I'm pretty sure it will be Congress. I don't think the President has that power. And since it's federal law, ANY Congress will have the power to do that, if they want to touch the third rail.

Serious Black: I'm curious how the unleashing the magical powers of the free market will help people with pre-existing conditions purchase adequate health insurance when it already miserably fails to do so.


"reforms that empower states to make high risk pools more accessible by using cost reducing methods like risk adjustment and reinsurance". Gawd, don't you understand anything? Risk adjustment and reinsurance will make it all cheaper, and everyone will be able to afford their own healthcare.
 
2012-06-14 10:33:33 AM  
F*ck you, too, Mitt
 
2012-06-14 10:34:03 AM  

Serious Black: I'm curious how the unleashing the magical powers of the free market will help people with pre-existing conditions purchase adequate health insurance when it already miserably fails to do so.


You could say that about virtually any republican policy anymore.

"I'm curious how sending troops to the middle of the farking desert to fight Arabs is going to create stability in the region when all it's done every other time is create anti-American despotic regimes".

"I'm curious how further cutting back government spending in a recession is going to improve the economy when every other time we've done it, it just made things worse"

"I'm curious how more tax cuts for the rich and big business is going to improve the economy this time when every other time we did it they just squirreled it away or used it for stock repurchase programs".
 
2012-06-14 10:34:37 AM  

Citrate1007: You don't make money by letting children live.


So Romneybot will be able to make the necessary calculations to find the true value of a human life?
 
2012-06-14 10:35:21 AM  

Mikey1969: Romney's position - protecting people with pre-existing conditions so long as they've always had insurance - has been law since 1996, experts say. It does not immediately address people who have never had private health insurance, or who have had insurance but spent some time without, often because of financial circumstances and unemployment.


So despite what he claims, he has just told us that he doesn't give a flying fark about the unemployed? Anyone else pick that up?

What a prick.


What sort of people have always had uninterrupted coverage from health insurance? Lucky people with decades-long careers at the same company, and those who can afford coverage on the private market, i.e. the wealthy. Romney's not saying he doesn't give a flying fark about the unemployed (though this is clearly true), he's saying that the only people who should have access to health insurance regardless of pre-existing conditions are rich people.
 
2012-06-14 10:35:25 AM  

Aar1012: Citrate1007: You don't make money by letting children live.

So Romneybot will be able to make the necessary calculations to find the true value of a human life?


He'll likely set up some sort of panel to do that
 
2012-06-14 10:35:35 AM  
"Governor Romney supports reforms to protect those with pre-existing conditions from being denied access to a health plan while they have continuous coverage,"

So he thinks that insurance companies should not be able to deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions ONLY if you already had insurance before you had the condition. Does he even understand WTF pre-existing even means?
 
2012-06-14 10:35:50 AM  
Romney opposes Romneycare?

What a douche. And a liar.
 
2012-06-14 10:36:29 AM  

Splinshints: Serious Black: I'm curious how the unleashing the magical powers of the free market will help people with pre-existing conditions purchase adequate health insurance when it already miserably fails to do so.

You could say that about virtually any republican policy anymore.

"I'm curious how sending troops to the middle of the farking desert to fight Arabs is going to create stability in the region when all it's done every other time is create anti-American despotic regimes".

"I'm curious how further cutting back government spending in a recession is going to improve the economy when every other time we've done it, it just made things worse"

"I'm curious how more tax cuts for the rich and big business is going to improve the economy this time when every other time we did it they just squirreled it away or used it for stock repurchase programs".


It could be argued that Republicans have been actively trying to destroy America for a while now, but that would imply many of our elected officials have a goal besides enriching themselves and their friends.
 
2012-06-14 10:36:29 AM  

Karac: "Governor Romney supports reforms to protect those with pre-existing conditions from being denied access to a health plan while they have continuous coverage,"

So he thinks that insurance companies should not be able to deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions ONLY if you already had insurance before you had the condition. Does he even understand WTF pre-existing even means?


Yeah. He just doesn't CARE.
 
2012-06-14 10:36:40 AM  

Citrate1007: Rmoney shamelessly supports big business regardless of any moral implications. You don't make money by letting children live.


Unless you're a baby-food manufacturer. Then it's pretty obligatory to a successful business model.
 
2012-06-14 10:37:54 AM  

palelizard: "You know, regardless of what they do, it's going to be up to the next president to either repeal and replace Obamacare or to replace Obamacare," Romney told a crowd in Orlando on Tuesday.

Actually, I'm pretty sure it will be Congress. I don't think the President has that power. And since it's federal law, ANY Congress will have the power to do that, if they want to touch the third rail.


Well if that were true then why is it "Obamacare". It's almost as if the hatred directed at the man had something to do with things beyond his administrative policies...
 
2012-06-14 10:38:10 AM  
Yea, as someone with a pre-existing condition facing a nice out-of-pocket equivalent to 3 months of paychecks when I get booted off my parents plan, I wholeheartedly endorse the "Fark the GOP in the ass with a red hot poker" plan.
 
2012-06-14 10:38:14 AM  

Aar1012: Sock Ruh Tease: FTA: only Americans who have had constant, uninterrupted insurance coverage should be guaranteed access to a health plan, regardless of any pre-existing conditions.

To get health insurance, you need to have health insurance.

But to have health insurance, you need to have gotten health insurance...

Therefore, to have health insurance, you need health insurROMNEYBOT EXPERIENCED A CRITICAL ERROR AND NEEDS TO SHUT DOWN

Yo dawg, we heard you want health insurance. So we decided that before you get health insurance that you'll need health insurance. That way, you can have healthy insurance while you have health insurance!


He's trying to create a market for health insurance insurance: you pay a premium to a company who, in the event you lose your coverage, will buy coverage for you. The coverage they buy doesn't actually cover anything medical, but you get to say you had health insurance.

// I actually think some in the GOP/business community would run with this idea
// PATENT PENDING
 
2012-06-14 10:38:18 AM  
If Obama came out in support of breathing oxygen, Romney would oppose it.
 
2012-06-14 10:38:30 AM  
j.wigflip.com

/This is literally his horse by the way
 
2012-06-14 10:38:33 AM  

palelizard: Citrate1007: Rmoney shamelessly supports big business regardless of any moral implications. You don't make money by letting children live.

Unless you're a baby-food manufacturer. Then it's pretty obligatory to a successful business model.


Not in China.
 
2012-06-14 10:38:41 AM  

Serious Black: I'm curious how the unleashing the magical powers of the free market will help people with pre-existing conditions purchase adequate health insurance when it already miserably fails to do so.


The same way churches will take care of the poor if we eliminate all government aid to the poor, despite their at-least-2000-year-long record of failure at the task.
 
2012-06-14 10:39:01 AM  
Can he explain the difference being continually insured makes?
 
2012-06-14 10:40:06 AM  

ghare: Romney opposes Romneycare?

What a douche. And a liar.



I think the problem is that he doesn't actually see an issue with it, so he is unable to separate the good from the bad in his mind. He just thinks 'they hate it' so he is opposing it.
 
2012-06-14 10:40:42 AM  

palelizard: Serious Black: I'm curious how the unleashing the magical powers of the free market will help people with pre-existing conditions purchase adequate health insurance when it already miserably fails to do so.

"reforms that empower states to make high risk pools more accessible by using cost reducing methods like risk adjustment and reinsurance". Gawd, don't you understand anything? Risk adjustment and reinsurance will make it all cheaper, and everyone will be able to afford their own healthcare.


Man, I am getting a shiat-ton of mileage out of this article lately.

There's a very good reason people with pre-existing conditions are frequently denied coverage outright rather than simply charged an exorbitant price for coverage. They have too much knowledge about how much the treatments for their condition cost. That means they, better than anyone, can figure out whether the insurance policy a company offers to them is worth the price regardless of what that price is. There is simply no way to make plans for sick people actuarially sound. This is actually what happened with the PCIPs created by ObamaCares to bridge the gap until 2014: the people who knew their health care would cost more than the cost of the insurance plan bought coverage, and the people who knew it would cost less stayed out of the pool. That's why the average per capita cost of these pools was more than double what HHS actuaries originally predicted.

/note, I was not addressing this to you specifically
 
2012-06-14 10:41:08 AM  

Aar1012: Citrate1007: You don't make money by letting children live.

So Romneybot will be able to make the necessary calculations to find the true value of a human life?


Not a definitive value, but definitely a confidence interval. Actuarial science is really just a lot of math. Now, that value is going to be individually tailored like a good suit, and I'm guessing the net worth of the individual at present is going to have a solid impact. After all, isn't the life of a wealthy business-owner and job creator worth more than that of a homeless bum? And you can think I meant "worth more to society" if you want.
 
2012-06-14 10:41:44 AM  
Romney is a scumbag. Anyone who protests in favor of war that they are exempt from has no place governing others.
 
2012-06-14 10:43:38 AM  
Hmmm... I thought that Mitt's AI routines would be adjusted to be more centrist for the general election. It seems odd that he's looking to go the other way. I wonder if it's an oversight or they have to flash his BIOS and do a clean install.
 
2012-06-14 10:44:33 AM  
B-b-b-but Mandate
 
2012-06-14 10:44:35 AM  
Romney liked Obamacare when he enacted the EXACT SAME PROGRAM in Massachusetts.
 
2012-06-14 10:45:23 AM  
People rip Romney as if he is saying this to support big businesses.

Big businesses make out big-time from Obamacare, why do you think the largest health insurers got behind it? They're going to make a killing as millions are forced to buy insurance and all of their smaller, better competition goes under because the smaller insurers can't hit the magic medical loss ratio number.

So are the EMR companies (they already have).
 
2012-06-14 10:46:01 AM  

Serious Black: the people who knew their health care would cost more than the cost of the insurance plan bought coverage, and the people who knew it would cost less stayed out of the pool.


Which is why the Heritage Foundation, Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole, Lamar Alexander, and a whole host of other right-wing thinkers proposed a rather ugly but semi-functional solution to that problem...
 
2012-06-14 10:46:31 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Aar1012: Citrate1007: You don't make money by letting children live.

So Romneybot will be able to make the necessary calculations to find the true value of a human life?

He'll likely set up some sort of panel to do that


But what denomitation will Romney base it on? The US Dollar or votes?

A Fetus might only be worth about $1000 but, in some areas, it might be 10,000 votes.

A job creator might only be worth about ten votes but could be worth millions in US dollars.

Do you see the difficulty facing Romneybot? The only real simple value, in his eyes, is a homeless person - $1 or 1 vote.
 
2012-06-14 10:46:36 AM  

highbrow45: Can he explain the difference being continually insured makes?


OK, here's how I undertstand his position.

If you've been working at a company that offered insurance, or you've been buying it privately for a few years, then if you find out you just got cancer, they can't deny your coverage because you've been continually insuranced (ignore the fact that the cancer wasn't actually pre-existing, he's on a roll).

Now lets say another six months go by and you get laid off. If you keep your insurance (not sure how you would do that if you got it through your job, again - rolling), then the insurance company has to keep providing coverage. But if you were to ever NOT have insurance, then when you go to get a new plan, they could deny it for the (now) pre-existing cancer because there was a period where you did not have coverage.

In short, he wants to go back to exactly the same state pre-Obamacare regarding pre-existing conditions and getting insurance. He just doesn't want to actually come out and say that so he's trying a new 'continual insurance' buzzword to fool the great unwashed.
 
2012-06-14 10:46:51 AM  

vernonFL: Romney liked Obamacare when he enacted the EXACT SAME PROGRAM in Massachusetts.


But evil liberals held a gun to his head and forced him to sign that legislation AGAINST HIS WILL!

/or some such bullshiat
 
2012-06-14 10:48:01 AM  

Sock Ruh Tease: FTA: only Americans who have had constant, uninterrupted insurance coverage should be guaranteed access to a health plan, regardless of any pre-existing conditions.

To get health insurance, you need to have health insurance.

But to have health insurance, you need to have gotten health insurance...

Therefore, to have health insurance, you need health insurROMNEYBOT EXPERIENCED A CRITICAL ERROR AND NEEDS TO SHUT DOWN



Republicans have already fixed that little error on other subjects.

Hey, so I hear you want a job? Well to get this entry-level position, you need a couple years experience in the related field. To get that experience, you need this entry-level position. Why don't you work for free for a couple years and we might hire you after that.


So for health-insurance, from now on, we'll just need to pay into the system for a few years before they start covering us.
 
2012-06-14 10:49:25 AM  

YoungSwedishBlonde: Yea, as someone with a pre-existing condition facing a nice out-of-pocket equivalent to 3 months of paychecks when I get booted off my parents plan, I wholeheartedly endorse the "Fark the GOP in the ass with a red hot poker" plan.


This
 
2012-06-14 10:50:06 AM  

Citrate1007: Well if that were true then why is it "Obamacare". It's almost as if the hatred directed at the man had something to do with things beyond his administrative policies...


I believe it stems from the arugala incident. It's a little known but very important fact the iceberg lettuce lobby is extremely powerful, and when they teamed up with the yellow mustard faction, it was all over but for the crying.

Citrate1007: Not in China.


They're on the other side of the world, it's well known people on the other side of the world do things backwards. That's why Australian toilets flush upwards.
 
2012-06-14 10:52:45 AM  
FTFA: "But you don't want everyone saying, 'I'm going to get back until I get sick,' and then go buy insurance."

If only there were some kind of mandate to prevent an individual from doing that.
 
2012-06-14 10:53:18 AM  

Lawnchair: Serious Black: the people who knew their health care would cost more than the cost of the insurance plan bought coverage, and the people who knew it would cost less stayed out of the pool.

Which is why the Heritage Foundation, Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole, Lamar Alexander, and a whole host of other right-wing thinkers proposed a rather ugly but semi-functional solution to that problem...


You mean that dirty pinko Commie socialist authoritarian collectivist freedom-crushing anti-American individual mandate? Yeah, I'm kind of familiar with that...
 
2012-06-14 10:54:53 AM  
ROMNEY: "Well, we'll look at circumstance where someone was ill, and hasn't been insured so far. But people have had the chance to be insured. If you're working at an auto business, for instance."

LENO: "Right."

ROMNEY: "The companies carry insurance. They insure all their employees."


This is what Romneybot actually believes.

LENO: "What about pre-existing conditions in children? That - I mean, I know people who could not get insurance up until this Obamacare and now they're covered. Their pre-existing condition is covered. ...It seems like children and people with pre-existing conditions should be covered."

ROMNEY: "Yeah. Well, people who have been continuously insured, let's say someone's had a job for a while but insured, then they get real sick and they happen to lose a job, or change jobs, they find, gosh, I've got a pre-existing condition, I can't get insured. I'd say, no, no no. As long as you've been continuously insured, you ought to be able to get insurance going forward. See, you have to take that problem away. You have to make sure the legislation doesn't allow insurance companies to reject people."


Note... Romney won't even farking answer the part about children *born* with 'pre-existing conditions'.

/ Also, when you are getting shown up as a douche by Jay frekking Leno, you are indeed a high-grade douche.
 
2012-06-14 10:58:49 AM  

Serious Black: There's a very good reason people with pre-existing conditions are frequently denied coverage outright rather than simply charged an exorbitant price for coverage...


I think the whole thing is, mathematically, one of the strongest arguments for a functional but minimum-standard single-payer system. Even Milton Friedman's economics says the government should step in when it's not profitable for a private industry to do something and that something benefits the whole of the country (other examples being national parks and highways). Clearly, healthcare services are going to benefit everyone, and the fact of the matter is an insurer makes its profits when services aren't provided.
 
2012-06-14 10:59:57 AM  
It could be argued that Republicans have been actively trying to destroy America for a while now, but that would imply many of our elected officials have a goal besides enriching themselves and their friends.


Listen, I've lived in Chicago for 40 years and the Democrats here have done things to enrich themselves and friends that are so corrupt, sick and twisted that one can hardly believe it.

/thats the joke
//ugh
 
2012-06-14 11:00:08 AM  

qorkfiend: What sort of people have always had uninterrupted coverage from health insurance? Lucky people with decades-long careers at the same company, and those who can afford coverage on the private market, i.e. the wealthy.


Yeah, I've gotten lucky because my wife and I both have decent jobs, but "uninterrupted"? She got her job 4 years ago, and before that I had insurance through my job here, but I had only worked here a year and a half before that. Our coverage was "interrupted" when I moved here, it was interrupted by a month of looking for work, and then the 3 month probation period before bennies kick in.

On a side note, my wife's job was awesome... Bennies kicked in the first day of the first full month she worked there, no probation period. In other words, she started on like March 27 or so, and she had insurance coverage by April 1. Not only that, but it's actually pretty nice insurace, so we lucked out big time.
 
2012-06-14 11:02:35 AM  
Romney opposes Obamacare, even the parts no one else seems to have an issue with

FTFY
 
2012-06-14 11:03:03 AM  

Urine The Money: It could be argued that Republicans have been actively trying to destroy America for a while now, but that would imply many of our elected officials have a goal besides enriching themselves and their friends.


Listen, I've lived in Chicago for 40 years and the Democrats here have done things to enrich themselves and friends that are so corrupt, sick and twisted that one can hardly believe it.

/thats the joke
//ugh


Note the subtle differences between "Chicago" and "America."
 
2012-06-14 11:07:39 AM  

palelizard: Serious Black: There's a very good reason people with pre-existing conditions are frequently denied coverage outright rather than simply charged an exorbitant price for coverage...

I think the whole thing is, mathematically, one of the strongest arguments for a functional but minimum-standard single-payer system. Even Milton Friedman's economics says the government should step in when it's not profitable for a private industry to do something and that something benefits the whole of the country (other examples being national parks and highways). Clearly, healthcare services are going to benefit everyone, and the fact of the matter is an insurer makes its profits when services aren't provided.


You know the GOP has gone off the deep end when even hard right-wingers like Friedman and Hayek likely wouldn't support their policies.
 
2012-06-14 11:09:00 AM  
Romneybot algorithm #101:

Target: Obama
Previously successful tactics: be contrary to anything he says
Divisive issue: Healthcare

Conclusion: make statements saying everything about Obamacare is bad, even if it's good
 
2012-06-14 11:10:40 AM  

Serious Black: palelizard: Serious Black: There's a very good reason people with pre-existing conditions are frequently denied coverage outright rather than simply charged an exorbitant price for coverage...

I think the whole thing is, mathematically, one of the strongest arguments for a functional but minimum-standard single-payer system. Even Milton Friedman's economics says the government should step in when it's not profitable for a private industry to do something and that something benefits the whole of the country (other examples being national parks and highways). Clearly, healthcare services are going to benefit everyone, and the fact of the matter is an insurer makes its profits when services aren't provided.

You know the GOP has gone off the deep end when even hard right-wingers like Friedman and Hayek likely wouldn't support their policies.


Good! The GOP can purify itself of RINOs and then nothing can stop the party's plan to institute the supply side lessons of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
 
2012-06-14 11:12:19 AM  

Lawnchair: Note... Romney won't even farking answer the part about children *born* with 'pre-existing conditions'.


My niece who was born with Down syndrome and a hole in her heart. Luckily, my brother works for Boeing and they have a decent health insurance plan for their employees, but if he didn't...well, let's just say that there would be a charity can in every local Dairy Queen with her picture on it asking for donations.
 
2012-06-14 11:13:42 AM  
What I take away from this is the problem fof calling it "insurance"

Just as I can't call up State Farm today and ask to buy flood insurance and then submit a claim for a flood that occured last week. What do you do with people who didn't buy insurance for what ever reason in the past and now want it because they've discovered they're ill? Are you going to force a private company to pay claims on that? How could that company ever stay in business?

So you force everyone to buy insurance....well, thats argueably uncostitutional.

What Romenyis trying to do is set up Goverment pools to fund these cases. It's viable. Maybe not optimal but viable.

What kills me....(some pun inteneded) I don't see an aswer other than setting up Goverment run hospitals akin to goverment schools. (Yea, you can go private if you want to pay jsut like schools) Unfortunaly I see the level of public health care falling to the same levels of public education. Yikes.

Inovation and adancement are always going to come from the privatge sector....but if you force the private sector to take on and cover things such as prexisting conditions, they can't survive.

a catch 22 it seems
 
2012-06-14 11:14:58 AM  

Mikey1969: qorkfiend: What sort of people have always had uninterrupted coverage from health insurance? Lucky people with decades-long careers at the same company, and those who can afford coverage on the private market, i.e. the wealthy.

Yeah, I've gotten lucky because my wife and I both have decent jobs, but "uninterrupted"? She got her job 4 years ago, and before that I had insurance through my job here, but I had only worked here a year and a half before that. Our coverage was "interrupted" when I moved here, it was interrupted by a month of looking for work, and then the 3 month probation period before bennies kick in.

On a side note, my wife's job was awesome... Bennies kicked in the first day of the first full month she worked there, no probation period. In other words, she started on like March 27 or so, and she had insurance coverage by April 1. Not only that, but it's actually pretty nice insurace, so we lucked out big time.


I'm glad for you, but you're pretty much making the case for why the US health system sucks... the fact that you have coverage when you need it is based on "lucking out big time".

Its brutal that the GOP thinks the current system is just fine.
... have a pre-existing condition, you're screwed.
... get layed off an unable to afford paying insurance, you're screwed.

But why should Romney care. Hes got enough money to pay for his health care for him, ann, their horse, their kids, their grandkids, and any sister wives or mistresses that may arise. As well, it looks like 50.1% of the population is going to be stupid enough to vote for him despite his stated plans for screwing all non-millionaires. From his perspective, if America is stupid enough to elect him, they deserve whatever he gives them.
 
2012-06-14 11:15:13 AM  

2 grams: What I take away from this is the problem fof calling it "insurance"

Just as I can't call up State Farm today and ask to buy flood insurance and then submit a claim for a flood that occured last week. What do you do with people who didn't buy insurance for what ever reason in the past and now want it because they've discovered they're ill? Are you going to force a private company to pay claims on that? How could that company ever stay in business?

So you force everyone to buy insurance....well, thats argueably uncostitutional.

What Romenyis trying to do is set up Goverment pools to fund these cases. It's viable. Maybe not optimal but viable.

What kills me....(some pun inteneded) I don't see an aswer other than setting up Goverment run hospitals akin to goverment schools. (Yea, you can go private if you want to pay jsut like schools) Unfortunaly I see the level of public health care falling to the same levels of public education. Yikes.

Inovation and adancement are always going to come from the privatge sector....but if you force the private sector to take on and cover things such as prexisting conditions, they can't survive.

a catch 22 it seems


Not only are high-risk pools not optimal, but they aren't viable either.
 
2012-06-14 11:18:40 AM  
Does he oppose the parts that he signed into law in the state of Mass.?
 
2012-06-14 11:20:53 AM  

keylock71: Yeah, they're going to replace it with Repuplicare...

Republicare can be summed up with one sentence:

"I got mine, so fark you."


I thought the slogan would be, "If you're not rich don't get sick, otherwise you're farked."
 
2012-06-14 11:21:47 AM  

LincolnLogolas: Does he oppose the parts that he signed into law in the state of Mass.?


He does, actually. How, you ask? Why don't you go and look over the 4.5 million lines of code his current campaign software suite runs and tell us how... it doesn't make much sense.
 
2012-06-14 11:23:15 AM  

LincolnLogolas: Does he oppose the parts that he signed into law in the state of Mass.?


No, see, Massachusetts is a state. It's okay if a state regulates economic inactivity and forces you to purchase a product on the free market.

When it's the federal government doing it, it's an utter abrogation of our rights.

Learn yourself a book sometime.
 
2012-06-14 11:24:04 AM  

LincolnLogolas: Does he oppose the parts that he signed into law in the state of Mass.?


Candidate Romney does not believe that the actions of Governor Romney are a good gauge on how Candidate Romney will run the county* and that to use those to attack him is unfair in the election and shows the desperation of the Obama campaign

(*unless the actions of Governor Romney will be beneficial to Candidate Romney**)
((**Offer not always valid in the US))
 
2012-06-14 11:24:16 AM  

hillbillypharmacist: LincolnLogolas: Does he oppose the parts that he signed into law in the state of Mass.?

No, see, Massachusetts is a state. It's okay if a state regulates economic inactivity and forces you to purchase a product on the free market.

When it's the federal government doing it, it's an utter abrogation of our rights.

Learn yourself a book sometime.


sadly, this is what republicans believe.
 
2012-06-14 11:25:32 AM  

LincolnLogolas: Does he oppose the parts that he signed into law in the state of Mass.?


Yes!
 
2012-06-14 11:25:37 AM  

Mikey1969: qorkfiend: What sort of people have always had uninterrupted coverage from health insurance? Lucky people with decades-long careers at the same company, and those who can afford coverage on the private market, i.e. the wealthy.

Yeah, I've gotten lucky because my wife and I both have decent jobs, but "uninterrupted"? She got her job 4 years ago, and before that I had insurance through my job here, but I had only worked here a year and a half before that. Our coverage was "interrupted" when I moved here, it was interrupted by a month of looking for work, and then the 3 month probation period before bennies kick in.

On a side note, my wife's job was awesome... Bennies kicked in the first day of the first full month she worked there, no probation period. In other words, she started on like March 27 or so, and she had insurance coverage by April 1. Not only that, but it's actually pretty nice insurace, so we lucked out big time.


Good for you both, but so messed up that "luck" determines whether or not somebody gets medical care.
 
2012-06-14 11:26:03 AM  

FlashHarry: hillbillypharmacist: LincolnLogolas: Does he oppose the parts that he signed into law in the state of Mass.?

No, see, Massachusetts is a state. It's okay if a state regulates economic inactivity and forces you to purchase a product on the free market.

When it's the federal government doing it, it's an utter abrogation of our rights.

Learn yourself a book sometime.

sadly, this is what republicans believe.


No it isn't. A republican would never recommend learning from a book.
 
2012-06-14 11:30:05 AM  
Anyone who doesn't have a problem with covering preexisting conditions, but has a problem with the mandate is either stupid or intellectually dishonest.

"I like dat horseless carriage o' yours, but I don't like that grumbly thing in the front. Whatchu call it again? The engine?"
 
2012-06-14 11:30:38 AM  

Aar1012: FlashHarry: hillbillypharmacist: LincolnLogolas: Does he oppose the parts that he signed into law in the state of Mass.?

No, see, Massachusetts is a state. It's okay if a state regulates economic inactivity and forces you to purchase a product on the free market.

When it's the federal government doing it, it's an utter abrogation of our rights.

Learn yourself a book sometime.

sadly, this is what republicans believe.

No it isn't. A republican would never recommend learning from a book that isn't the Prosperity Gospel.


FTFY.
 
2012-06-14 11:31:31 AM  

Aar1012: FlashHarry: hillbillypharmacist: LincolnLogolas: Does he oppose the parts that he signed into law in the state of Mass.?

No, see, Massachusetts is a state. It's okay if a state regulates economic inactivity and forces you to purchase a product on the free market.

When it's the federal government doing it, it's an utter abrogation of our rights.

Learn yourself a book sometime.

sadly, this is what republicans believe.

No it isn't. A republican would never recommend learning from a book.


Well, a Book, yes. A book, no.

Books and Deities (but only the One True One, or in His Tripartite Form) of any import get capitalized, the rest get burnt.
 
2012-06-14 11:31:44 AM  
Some things to consider:

See the fable of the the Ant and the Grasshopper Link

Insurance companies like "Ants". People who continuously have some form of insurance are responsible and should be covered for all conditions.

People who don't have continuous coverage are "Grasshoppers". They don't get insurance until they are sick. Then they expect the insurance company's customers to pay for their illness even though they have not been paying into the risk pool for it (thus raising premiums for all). Is that fair?

Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few. Also, one can buy COBRA or Continuation (depending on the size of the company one is leaving) to keep their coverage continuous.

It is not all as evil as it looks.
 
2012-06-14 11:33:41 AM  

Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Some things to consider:

See the fable of the the Ant and the Grasshopper Link

Insurance companies like "Ants". People who continuously have some form of insurance are responsible and should be covered for all conditions.

People who don't have continuous coverage are "Grasshoppers". They don't get insurance until they are sick. Then they expect the insurance company's customers to pay for their illness even though they have not been paying into the risk pool for it (thus raising premiums for all). Is that fair?

Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few. Also, one can buy COBRA or Continuation (depending on the size of the company one is leaving) to keep their coverage continuous.

It is not all as evil as it looks.


Go away, Mitt
 
2012-06-14 11:35:00 AM  

WhoIsNotInMyKitchen: I'm glad for you, but you're pretty much making the case for why the US health system sucks... the fact that you have coverage when you need it is based on "lucking out big time".


Yep... The other thing that's broken is that the health insurance companies just ignore the laws anyway. I have back issues, and see a chiropractor semi-regularly. The one I went to see before I moved from AZ told me he gave a discount for paying cash. We went through with getting my initial care covered, he got 17 visits or something pre-approved. I can't remember if it's a federal law or an AZ state one, but the insurance companies have to pay or deny a claim within 30 days of billing. SInce it was pre-approved, it should have been a breeze. A year later, when I was just paying cash, he showed me why he doesn't like insurance. He was STILL trying to get the insurance company to pay up. A full year later. We pay out the ass, and the medical people provide the service, but they get screwed over by the insurance companies, and as a result, charge more so they can make money while they are battling with the Ins Companies.
 
2012-06-14 11:35:47 AM  

Wendy's Chili: Anyone who doesn't have a problem with covering preexisting conditions, but has a problem with the mandate is either stupid or intellectually dishonest.

"I like dat horseless carriage o' yours, but I don't like that grumbly thing in the front. Whatchu call it again? The engine?"


Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done.
 
2012-06-14 11:37:15 AM  

Ned Stark: Wendy's Chili: Anyone who doesn't have a problem with covering preexisting conditions, but has a problem with the mandate is either stupid or intellectually dishonest.

"I like dat horseless carriage o' yours, but I don't like that grumbly thing in the front. Whatchu call it again? The engine?"

Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done.


...there isn't, without a public option.
 
2012-06-14 11:41:14 AM  

Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few.


Cold comfort when 62% of unemployed people take longer than 15 weeks to find another job.
 
2012-06-14 11:41:51 AM  

Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Insurance companies like "Ants". People who continuously have some form of insurance are responsible and should be covered for all conditions.

People who don't have continuous coverage are "Grasshoppers". They don't get insurance until they are sick. Then they expect the insurance company's customers to pay for their illness even though they have not been paying into the risk pool for it (thus raising premiums for all). Is that fair?


Hence the point of the individual mandate; stop people from being grasshoppers and make them all ants.

Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few. Also, one can buy COBRA or Continuation (depending on the size of the company one is leaving) to keep their coverage continuous.

My individual insurance through my employer currently costs myself about $100 a month and my employer about $300 a month (yes, it's a very good deal). If I were to be fired and I wanted to continue my coverage through COBRA, I would have to pick up the employer's tab in addition to mine, so I would be paying about $400 a month. How the hell am I supposed to pay for all that when I just lost my primary/sole source of income?
 
2012-06-14 11:42:13 AM  

sweetmelissa31: [j.wigflip.com image 500x365]

/This is literally his horse by the way


Look at his horse. His horse is amazing.
 
2012-06-14 11:42:56 AM  
At least in new York, uninterrupted includes up to a three (?) month gap in insurance to handle things like being between jobs. You can also wait up until three months after losing your insurance to get cobra, but you would have to pay the previous months also as if you had it from day one.
 
2012-06-14 11:42:59 AM  

Ned Stark: Wendy's Chili: Anyone who doesn't have a problem with covering preexisting conditions, but has a problem with the mandate is either stupid or intellectually dishonest.

"I like dat horseless carriage o' yours, but I don't like that grumbly thing in the front. Whatchu call it again? The engine?"

Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done.


Not without soshulism.
 
2012-06-14 11:46:50 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Some things to consider:

See the fable of the the Ant and the Grasshopper Link

Insurance companies like "Ants". People who continuously have some form of insurance are responsible and should be covered for all conditions.

People who don't have continuous coverage are "Grasshoppers". They don't get insurance until they are sick. Then they expect the insurance company's customers to pay for their illness even though they have not been paying into the risk pool for it (thus raising premiums for all). Is that fair?

Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few. Also, one can buy COBRA or Continuation (depending on the size of the company one is leaving) to keep their coverage continuous.

It is not all as evil as it looks.

Go away, Mitt


Nope. Voted for Fartbongo. Will do it again in November.

Next!
 
2012-06-14 11:48:44 AM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few.

Cold comfort when 62% of unemployed people take longer than 15 weeks to find another job.


Well, there is that COBRA/Continuation thing you left out.
 
2012-06-14 11:51:08 AM  

qorkfiend: Ned Stark: Wendy's Chili: Anyone who doesn't have a problem with covering preexisting conditions, but has a problem with the mandate is either stupid or intellectually dishonest.

"I like dat horseless carriage o' yours, but I don't like that grumbly thing in the front. Whatchu call it again? The engine?"

Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done.

...there isn't, without a public option.


...And?
 
2012-06-14 11:51:38 AM  

Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Well, there is that COBRA/Continuation thing you left out.


Which is very easy to afford when you have no source of income. I left it out because it's meaningless. When I try to figure out how to clean the dog sh*t out of my yard, I typically leave "backhoe" out of the equation because it's beyond my means. I'm funny like that.
 
2012-06-14 11:52:04 AM  

Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Nope. Voted for Fartbongo. Will do it again in November.

Next!


Seriously... I do think there are a few flaws in your logic; several of which have been pointed out above. Have you ever been unemployed? For an extended period of time? Yes, the things you describe are available, but I don't think you understand that unemployment doesn't pay that much (if you can get it: I couldn't), and food and rent can take precedence over insurance premiums.
More people than ever have gaps in their coverage now. If we follow that path, the burden on emergency rooms is going to increase dramatically along with the costs to taxpayers
 
2012-06-14 11:52:10 AM  

Serious Black: Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Insurance companies like "Ants". People who continuously have some form of insurance are responsible and should be covered for all conditions.

People who don't have continuous coverage are "Grasshoppers". They don't get insurance until they are sick. Then they expect the insurance company's customers to pay for their illness even though they have not been paying into the risk pool for it (thus raising premiums for all). Is that fair?

Hence the point of the individual mandate; stop people from being grasshoppers and make them all ants.

Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few. Also, one can buy COBRA or Continuation (depending on the size of the company one is leaving) to keep their coverage continuous.

My individual insurance through my employer currently costs myself about $100 a month and my employer about $300 a month (yes, it's a very good deal). If I were to be fired and I wanted to continue my coverage through COBRA, I would have to pick up the employer's tab in addition to mine, so I would be paying about $400 a month. How the hell am I supposed to pay for all that when I just lost my primary/sole source of income?


I agree. THERE is something that needs some reform. Maybe some form of Medicare for folks between jobs?
 
2012-06-14 11:55:13 AM  

Ned Stark: qorkfiend: Ned Stark: Wendy's Chili: Anyone who doesn't have a problem with covering preexisting conditions, but has a problem with the mandate is either stupid or intellectually dishonest.

"I like dat horseless carriage o' yours, but I don't like that grumbly thing in the front. Whatchu call it again? The engine?"

Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done.

...there isn't, without a public option.

...And?


...and we don't have a public option.
 
2012-06-14 11:56:58 AM  

2 grams: What Romenyis trying to do is set up Goverment pools to fund these cases. It's viable. Maybe not optimal but viable.


Privatize the parts that are profitable. Socialize the cost centers. That fraking works out great every time.
 
2012-06-14 11:57:03 AM  

HeartBurnKid: sweetmelissa31: [j.wigflip.com image 500x365]

/This is literally his horse by the way

Look at his horse. His horse is amazing.


www.eurodressage.com

Tailcoat and tophat required for riding.
 
2012-06-14 11:57:25 AM  

HeartBurnKid: sweetmelissa31: [j.wigflip.com image 500x365]

/This is literally his horse by the way

Look at his horse. His horse is amazing.


Mitt likes horses that are the right height.
 
2012-06-14 11:57:33 AM  
So we it seems if we have a strong thriving economy, we reduce the amount of uninsured people and taking care of those that fall through the gaps will be a relatively small %. Cool.

Why don't we do that then? After all I was just told that the Private Sector was doing "fine"

/it looked good on paper.
 
2012-06-14 11:58:07 AM  

Rann Xerox: HeartBurnKid: sweetmelissa31: [j.wigflip.com image 500x365]

/This is literally his horse by the way

Look at his horse. His horse is amazing.

Mitt likes horses that are the right height.


It makes them easier to get on top of the car
 
2012-06-14 11:58:27 AM  

Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: I agree. THERE is something that needs some reform. Maybe some form of Medicare for folks between jobs?


Maybe some sort of PUBLICly available OPTION to purchase insurance from an impartial (read: not necessarily profit-driven at the expense of all else) source.

I have no idea what to call it though...
 
2012-06-14 11:59:43 AM  

Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Serious Black: Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Insurance companies like "Ants". People who continuously have some form of insurance are responsible and should be covered for all conditions.

People who don't have continuous coverage are "Grasshoppers". They don't get insurance until they are sick. Then they expect the insurance company's customers to pay for their illness even though they have not been paying into the risk pool for it (thus raising premiums for all). Is that fair?

Hence the point of the individual mandate; stop people from being grasshoppers and make them all ants.

Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few. Also, one can buy COBRA or Continuation (depending on the size of the company one is leaving) to keep their coverage continuous.

My individual insurance through my employer currently costs myself about $100 a month and my employer about $300 a month (yes, it's a very good deal). If I were to be fired and I wanted to continue my coverage through COBRA, I would have to pick up the employer's tab in addition to mine, so I would be paying about $400 a month. How the hell am I supposed to pay for all that when I just lost my primary/sole source of income?

I agree. THERE is something that needs some reform. Maybe some form of Medicare for folks between jobs?


Why sew another patch onto your jeans when they're already several sizes too small and composed of parts from seven or eight different pairs? Why not go out and buy yourself a new pair that fit properly?
 
2012-06-14 11:59:56 AM  

sweetmelissa31: HeartBurnKid: sweetmelissa31: [j.wigflip.com image 500x365]

/This is literally his horse by the way

Look at his horse. His horse is amazing.

[www.eurodressage.com image 240x305]

Tailcoat and tophat required for riding.


I thought a monocle was required, too.
 
2012-06-14 12:01:39 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Rann Xerox: HeartBurnKid: sweetmelissa31: [j.wigflip.com image 500x365]

/This is literally his horse by the way

Look at his horse. His horse is amazing.

Mitt likes horses that are the right height.

It makes them easier to get on top of the car


It's Mitt and the pygmy pony by the dental floss bush!
 
2012-06-14 12:02:25 PM  
The governor believes in an incremental, market-based solution to boosting coverage and helping states develop ways to help those with difficulty obtaining insurance or care.

Because history has showed us that this is the best way to ensure that most everyone has health insurance. In fact, 99% of Americans had health insurance until that damn Obama started meddling with things.
 
2012-06-14 12:04:19 PM  

keylock71: Yeah, they're going to replace it with Repuplicare...

Republicare can be summed up with one sentence:

"I got mine, so fark you."


fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net
 
2012-06-14 12:06:02 PM  

RedT: keylock71: Yeah, they're going to replace it with Repuplicare...

Republicare can be summed up with one sentence:

"I got mine, so fark you."

[fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net image 457x195]


If I were home I'd shoop a hand flipping the bird onto the end of that trunk
 
2012-06-14 12:06:14 PM  

Serious Black: Man, I am getting a shiat-ton of mileage out of this article lately.


Good read, man, thanks for sharing that.

Why is it that people fail to realize that in order for insurance companies to function, most clients must pay in more money than what their health care actually costs. There are ways that insurance companies reduce the costs in some ways, with bulk agreements such as "in network" physicians and providers who are promised exclusive access in their area to large numbers of patients in exchange for discounted rates, with the patient paying a penalty in the form of a higher copay or even full price for the service when he or she dares to visit another provider outside of the "network". What it boils down to, though, is that an insurance company could not survive unless most of its customers payed in more money than what their health care actually costs.

The only real reason people have insurance is to cover the cost of catastrophic illness, which is ironic since that is the best way to get dropped from an insurance plan, and become "uninsureable" for the rest of one's life. Most people who have health insurance would do better to pay for their health care out of pocket.
 
2012-06-14 12:07:51 PM  
Pre-existing conditions were covered by a pre-existing plan: charity.
 
2012-06-14 12:07:53 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: RedT: keylock71: Yeah, they're going to replace it with Repuplicare...

Republicare can be summed up with one sentence:

"I got mine, so fark you."

[fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net image 457x195]

If I were home I'd shoop a hand flipping the bird onto the end of that trunk


I agree with you here. Why is it that Republicans swear by Creationism but in reality practice Darwinism?
 
2012-06-14 12:07:58 PM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few.

Cold comfort when 62% of unemployed people take longer than 15 weeks to find another job.


exactly. Not to mention when I was laid off, of course I was offered COBRA. My insurance premium while employed was $108/month, for the "middle" tier of my companie's 3 tier plan. (low, meh, and OMG deductibles, basically), COBRA: $584/month, my ONLY option was OMG ($5000) deductible level. That's just me. Not family. One person. Aaaand of course my pay just went from reasonably decent to $1465/month unemployment.

Yeah, COBRA is awesome.
 
2012-06-14 12:08:04 PM  

qorkfiend: Ned Stark: qorkfiend: Ned Stark: Wendy's Chili: Anyone who doesn't have a problem with covering preexisting conditions, but has a problem with the mandate is either stupid or intellectually dishonest.

"I like dat horseless carriage o' yours, but I don't like that grumbly thing in the front. Whatchu call it again? The engine?"

Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done.

...there isn't, without a public option.

...And?

...and we don't have a public option.


And we do have a massive permanent corporate handout. I honestly have no idea what you are getting at. Did you mistake a discussion about policy for a list of facts?
 
2012-06-14 12:08:30 PM  

George Walker Bush: Pre-existing conditions were covered by a pre-existing plan: charity.


And Jeebus. Remember, he healed the sick.
 
2012-06-14 12:12:44 PM  

ox45tallboy: Serious Black: Man, I am getting a shiat-ton of mileage out of this article lately.

Why is it that people fail to realize that in order for insurance companies to function, most clients must pay in more money than what their health care actually costs.


Because most people don't understand how insurance works.

Most people who have health insurance would do better to pay for their health care out of pocket.

Until they get something that costs a lot of money, then they have to pay full price because they don't get the in-network price reduction. Also means they better have at minimum $100K/person ready to go at any time.
 
2012-06-14 12:14:54 PM  

Ned Stark: Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done.


I thought you were being sarcastic with "Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done."
 
2012-06-14 12:16:24 PM  

HeartBurnKid: sweetmelissa31: [j.wigflip.com image 500x365]

/This is literally his horse by the way

Look at his horse. His horse is amazing.


Give it a lick; it tastes just like raisins.
 
2012-06-14 12:18:28 PM  

George Walker Bush: Pre-existing conditions were covered by a pre-existing plan: charity.


That completely ignores the fact that millions of Americans demanded that Congress create Social Security because they were starving and broke.
 
2012-06-14 12:21:23 PM  

2 grams: What I take away from this is the problem fof calling it "insurance"

Just as I can't call up State Farm today and ask to buy flood insurance and then submit a claim for a flood that occured last week. What do you do with people who didn't buy insurance for what ever reason in the past and now want it because they've discovered they're ill? Are you going to force a private company to pay claims on that? How could that company ever stay in business?

So you force everyone to buy insurance....well, thats argueably uncostitutional.

What Romenyis trying to do is set up Goverment pools to fund these cases. It's viable. Maybe not optimal but viable.

What kills me....(some pun inteneded) I don't see an aswer other than setting up Goverment run hospitals akin to goverment schools. (Yea, you can go private if you want to pay jsut like schools) Unfortunaly I see the level of public health care falling to the same levels of public education. Yikes.

Inovation and adancement are always going to come from the privatge sector....but if you force the private sector to take on and cover things such as prexisting conditions, they can't survive.

a catch 22 it seems


Except much of the innovation is at least started through public grants. Government needs to jumpstart medical research that isn't economically viable but may yield great breakthroughs.
 
2012-06-14 12:23:39 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Books and Deities (but only the One True One, or in His Tripartite Form) of any import get capitalized, the rest get burnt.


Them're some awful fancy words there, jew-boy.

/Jeb, fetch me mah good rope.
 
2012-06-14 12:26:28 PM  

mcwehrle: exactly. Not to mention when I was laid off, of course I was offered COBRA. My insurance premium while employed was $108/month, for the "middle" tier of my companie's 3 tier plan. (low, meh, and OMG deductibles, basically), COBRA: $584/month, my ONLY option was OMG ($5000) deductible level. That's just me. Not family. One person. Aaaand of course my pay just went from reasonably decent to $1465/month unemployment.

Yeah, COBRA is awesome.


Don'cha know that you're supposed to have 6 months of salary stock piled in case you are unable to work for an extended period of time? Sheesh! No wonder you poor people are such socialists.

Lack of planning on your part, does not create an emergency on Mitten's part . . .

/Don't hock your bootstraps, you're gonna need 'em!
//Bootstrapiness!
 
2012-06-14 12:26:38 PM  

Pincy: Until they get something that costs a lot of money, then they have to pay full price because they don't get the in-network price reduction. Also means they better have at minimum $100K/person ready to go at any time.


Part of that stems from the fact that the "in-network" price reduction comes from an "exclusive" contract (read: monopoly) making sure that every one of the insured goes to a particular podiatrist in a certain area. You can always go to a different podiatrist that is closer to you, or that you have been going to all of your life before you got this particular job, but you might as well not have insurance if you don't use the "in-network" physicians.

If you take the money you and your employer are paying in, and set aside everything that isn't being used for doctor's visits, you'd be surprised how quickly enough adds up to pay for an ambulance ride or a broken leg.

The main problem is that so many people that actually have insurance are dropped from the rolls once they come down with some kind of debilitating illness, like cancer or lupus. My mom's health insurance (she's currently working as a teacher for a private corporation operating an alternative school, so no state benefits) will drop her in a hearbeat if she is diagnosed with cancer, so she carries a separate cancer policy that she pays nearly $100/month for - and here's the fun part - she doesn't have cancer. She's never smoked or worked around asbestos or done anything to put her at high risk for cancer, which is the only reason she can get the cancer policy to begin with.

So, since insurance companies like to drop people when they have catastrophic illnesses that necessitate lifetime care, why do we have health insurance?

And for crying out loud, why the fark is the dialogue "People NEED health insurance! We have to make health insurance more accessible!"

No, they farking don't. No one needs health insurance. People need health care.
 
2012-06-14 12:28:25 PM  

Job Creator: Except much of the innovation is at least started through public grants. Government needs to jumpstart medical research that isn't economically viable but may yield great breakthroughs.


Socialism!!!

/never mind the fact so many drugs are being developed in countries with single-payer health care. Viagra, anyone?
 
2012-06-14 12:29:18 PM  

Pincy: then they have to pay full price because they don't get the in-network price reduction.


One could imagine (in that kind of idle daydreaming that eventually leads you to become a bullshiat artist an economist) a place for a company that provided that half of the insurance puzzle. You pay $250 a year. You get a 'discount card'. This company lines up contracts with a network of doctors, pre-negotiates rates... that side of the business. Price negotiations that are very hard for individuals to make due to information asymmetry, immediate need, etc. But, said company wouldn't pay a penny of your actual medical bills.
 
2012-06-14 12:30:48 PM  

qorkfiend: Ned Stark: Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done.

I thought you were being sarcastic with "Yes, there is literally no way to get people insured withot massive, permanent corporate handouts. Can't be done."


OK, so were on the same page at that point. You understand I think that is a bad idea. And we agree that a public option could do the job.

But somehow "we don't have a public option right now" is an argument against the public option. That's the bit I don't grok.
 
2012-06-14 12:32:02 PM  

Lawnchair: Pincy: then they have to pay full price because they don't get the in-network price reduction.

One could imagine (in that kind of idle daydreaming that eventually leads you to become a bullshiat artist an economist) a place for a company that provided that half of the insurance puzzle. You pay $250 a year. You get a 'discount card'. This company lines up contracts with a network of doctors, pre-negotiates rates... that side of the business. Price negotiations that are very hard for individuals to make due to information asymmetry, immediate need, etc. But, said company wouldn't pay a penny of your actual medical bills.


And provides an "exclusive contract" for provision of certain medical services in a geographic location. In other words, a monopoly which eliminates patient choice in physicians and providers.
 
2012-06-14 12:33:11 PM  

RedT: mcwehrle: exactly. Not to mention when I was laid off, of course I was offered COBRA. My insurance premium while employed was $108/month, for the "middle" tier of my companie's 3 tier plan. (low, meh, and OMG deductibles, basically), COBRA: $584/month, my ONLY option was OMG ($5000) deductible level. That's just me. Not family. One person. Aaaand of course my pay just went from reasonably decent to $1465/month unemployment.

Yeah, COBRA is awesome.

Don'cha know that you're supposed to have 6 months of salary stock piled in case you are unable to work for an extended period of time? Sheesh! No wonder you poor people are such socialists.

Lack of planning on your part, does not create an emergency on Mitten's part . . .

/Don't hock your bootstraps, you're gonna need 'em!
//Bootstrapiness!


LOL. Yes, I know. I fail bootstrappy 101 miserably I had to also cash in my 401K to survive, while working my part time Wal Mart job to supplement unemployment. No insurance the entire 9 months I was unemployed. While I'm fortunate that I don't have any SERIOUS illness to deal with, I do have what is undoubtedly a preexsisting. While I can treat it OTC, I do feel much better if I can afford to see my doc and get my rx. Doc worked with me on sliding cash scale, however, pharmacies don't. And at $400/month for the one rx, it just was unpossible.

tl;dr : I was one of the lucky ones, and nothing went wrong while I had no insurance.
 
2012-06-14 12:33:35 PM  

Serious Black: George Walker Bush: Pre-existing conditions were covered by a pre-existing plan: charity.

That completely ignores the fact that millions of Americans demanded that Congress create Social Security because they were starving and broke.


That ignores the fact that the whims of large contingencies are not the responsibility of our constitutional republic.

And it did noting to alleviate their suffering and is the cause of ours.
 
2012-06-14 12:33:52 PM  

Ned Stark: OK, so were on the same page at that point. You understand I think that is a bad idea. And we agree that a public option could do the job.

But somehow "we don't have a public option right now" is an argument against the public option. That's the bit I don't grok.


H.R. 676 is languishing in la-la-land..
 
2012-06-14 12:36:13 PM  

Job Creator: Except much of the innovation is at least started through public grants. Government needs to jumpstart medical research that isn't economically viable but may yield great breakthroughs.


There isn't anything that people need that the free market won't provide for, if liberals will stand aside and let it happen. Roads, military, even the court system and government itself.
 
2012-06-14 12:37:45 PM  

mcwehrle: And at $400/month for the one rx, it just was unpossible.


Have you looked at the price of getting your drugs from other countries? We in the states get RAPED on prescription drug costs. I'm not saying you should buy from some guy in India with a .org from GoDaddy, but just take a look at what people in other countries pay for that same medication.

I don't even know what medication it is, but I'd bet you 3 to 2 it's going to be recognizably cheaper for the same medicine from the same manufacturer ANYWHERE else in the world.
 
2012-06-14 12:42:02 PM  

mcwehrle: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few.

Cold comfort when 62% of unemployed people take longer than 15 weeks to find another job.

exactly. Not to mention when I was laid off, of course I was offered COBRA. My insurance premium while employed was $108/month, for the "middle" tier of my companie's 3 tier plan. (low, meh, and OMG deductibles, basically), COBRA: $584/month, my ONLY option was OMG ($5000) deductible level. That's just me. Not family. One person. Aaaand of course my pay just went from reasonably decent to $1465/month unemployment.

Yeah, COBRA is awesome.


Heh... No shiat. When my wife lost her job, we lost our health insurance. I'm self-employed, so I was on her insurance.

Subsidized COBRA payments for us? $900 a month.

What the fark? How is that at all "helpful"?

Thankfully, we live in MA and we qualified for Commonwealth Care. It's actually the best insurance we've ever had...
 
2012-06-14 12:42:23 PM  

hillbillypharmacist: Roads,


upload.wikimedia.org

hillbillypharmacist: military


civiliancontractors.files.wordpress.com

hillbillypharmacist: even the court system


corbettlawfirm.info

hillbillypharmacist: and government itself.


Drawing a blank on this one. I'm sure it's not far away, though.
 
2012-06-14 12:44:26 PM  

sweetmelissa31: [j.wigflip.com image 500x365]

/This is literally his horse by the way


If I was that horse, I'd throw the rider off. Then I'd go find my "owners" and kick them both right in the farking face. Stuff like dressage should be classified as animal abuse, it's utterly degrading for the horse. A horse is meant to roam, to run, not prance around like a toddler in a beauty pageant. It's worse than those assholes who dress up their dogs.
 
2012-06-14 12:44:49 PM  

ox45tallboy: hillbillypharmacist: and government itself.

Drawing a blank on this one. I'm sure it's not far away, though.


There's a thread in Business about certain trade negotiations that you may find intriguing.

Link
 
2012-06-14 12:44:53 PM  

ox45tallboy: mcwehrle: And at $400/month for the one rx, it just was unpossible.

Have you looked at the price of getting your drugs from other countries? We in the states get RAPED on prescription drug costs. I'm not saying you should buy from some guy in India with a .org from GoDaddy, but just take a look at what people in other countries pay for that same medication.

I don't even know what medication it is, but I'd bet you 3 to 2 it's going to be recognizably cheaper for the same medicine from the same manufacturer ANYWHERE else in the world.


Not disagreeing with you just saying that's it ridiculous that Americans have to shop the world in order to be able to afford their medicine.
 
2012-06-14 12:46:41 PM  

George Walker Bush: Serious Black: George Walker Bush: Pre-existing conditions were covered by a pre-existing plan: charity.

That completely ignores the fact that millions of Americans demanded that Congress create Social Security because they were starving and broke.

That ignores the fact that the whims of large contingencies are not the responsibility of our constitutional republic.


Um, what? What the hell are the responsibilities of our constitutional republic if not to respond to the grievances of its citizens? And if you're trying to say Social Security is unconstitutional, it takes an incredibly tortured reading of the Taxing and Spending Clause to make it unconstitutional even by originalist standards.

And it did noting to alleviate their suffering and is the cause of ours.

Congress abolishing Social Security would recreate the very conditions that led to its introduction in the first place and would inevitably result in its recreation. And what kind of suffering is Social Security causing us anyways?
 
2012-06-14 12:50:06 PM  

qorkfiend: ox45tallboy: hillbillypharmacist: and government itself.

Drawing a blank on this one. I'm sure it's not far away, though.

There's a thread in Business about certain trade negotiations that you may find intriguing.

Link


HOA's. That's what I should have put. Many cities aren't allowing new development without a HOA in place so they won't be bothered by such things as road and streetlight maintenance or code enforcement.

But your article is interesting, I should hit the Business tab more often.
 
2012-06-14 12:50:27 PM  

Pincy: Not disagreeing with you just saying that's it ridiculous that Americans have to shop the world in order to be able to afford their medicine.


... or just get the right insurance, apparently.

I take Advair. Here are the prices I've paid with various insurance and with no insurance:

Without insurance: $250/Month

With insurance plan 1 (through wife's employer): $50/ Month

With insurance plan 2 (Commonwealth Care): $3.50/Month

I freely admit to not being well versed in how medical insurance works, but this makes no farking sense to me.
 
2012-06-14 12:52:17 PM  

mcwehrle: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Hi! I can lick my own eyebrows: Also, as for losing one's job and coverage. For Small Group Insurance, there is an allowed "Gap" between the termination of one's previous coverage and the effective date of one's new coverage without penalty. The gap is 63 days in most states, 90 in a few.

Cold comfort when 62% of unemployed people take longer than 15 weeks to find another job.

exactly. Not to mention when I was laid off, of course I was offered COBRA. My insurance premium while employed was $108/month, for the "middle" tier of my companie's 3 tier plan. (low, meh, and OMG deductibles, basically), COBRA: $584/month, my ONLY option was OMG ($5000) deductible level. That's just me. Not family. One person. Aaaand of course my pay just went from reasonably decent to $1465/month unemployment.

Yeah, COBRA is awesome.


My daughter has a pre-existing condition she's had since she was an infant, so I pretty much had to take COBRA when I was laid off last year. The cost for the two of us? $1100/month. At least I had $1600/month in unemployment to pay for it, but pesky things like the mortgage, car payment, etc weren't going to get paid on top of that. Fortunately, I was rehired before the "gift" (they gave us insurance until the end of the month in which we were laid off) ran out. If it had gone on longer, I have no idea what we would have done. I'd made too much money in the prior 12 months to qualify for the state insurance, even just for my daughter.

COBRA is indeed awesome.
 
2012-06-14 12:53:19 PM  

ox45tallboy: Drawing a blank on this one. I'm sure it's not far away, though.


Comcast Fire® offers a monthly discount if you have a smoke detector in every room and subscribe to XFINITY Triple Play.
 
2012-06-14 12:54:07 PM  

Pincy: ox45tallboy: mcwehrle: And at $400/month for the one rx, it just was unpossible.

Have you looked at the price of getting your drugs from other countries? We in the states get RAPED on prescription drug costs. I'm not saying you should buy from some guy in India with a .org from GoDaddy, but just take a look at what people in other countries pay for that same medication.

I don't even know what medication it is, but I'd bet you 3 to 2 it's going to be recognizably cheaper for the same medicine from the same manufacturer ANYWHERE else in the world.

Not disagreeing with you just saying that's it ridiculous that Americans have to shop the world in order to be able to afford their medicine.


Well, about that. Thanks to shiattons of money thrown at the Congress Critters by the drug lobbyists, it's technically illegal to re-import many of these drugs that were, in fact, produced here in the first place!
 
2012-06-14 12:57:08 PM  

ox45tallboy: Pincy: ox45tallboy: mcwehrle: And at $400/month for the one rx, it just was unpossible.

Have you looked at the price of getting your drugs from other countries? We in the states get RAPED on prescription drug costs. I'm not saying you should buy from some guy in India with a .org from GoDaddy, but just take a look at what people in other countries pay for that same medication.

I don't even know what medication it is, but I'd bet you 3 to 2 it's going to be recognizably cheaper for the same medicine from the same manufacturer ANYWHERE else in the world.

Not disagreeing with you just saying that's it ridiculous that Americans have to shop the world in order to be able to afford their medicine.

Well, about that. Thanks to shiattons of money thrown at the Congress Critters by the drug lobbyists, it's technically illegal to re-import many of these drugs that were, in fact, produced here in the first place!


See! The Free MarketTM works!
 
2012-06-14 12:58:16 PM  

ox45tallboy: Pincy: ox45tallboy: mcwehrle: And at $400/month for the one rx, it just was unpossible.

Have you looked at the price of getting your drugs from other countries? We in the states get RAPED on prescription drug costs. I'm not saying you should buy from some guy in India with a .org from GoDaddy, but just take a look at what people in other countries pay for that same medication.

I don't even know what medication it is, but I'd bet you 3 to 2 it's going to be recognizably cheaper for the same medicine from the same manufacturer ANYWHERE else in the world.

Not disagreeing with you just saying that's it ridiculous that Americans have to shop the world in order to be able to afford their medicine.

Well, about that. Thanks to shiattons of money thrown at the Congress Critters by the drug lobbyists, it's technically illegal to re-import many of these drugs that were, in fact, produced here in the first place!


And didn't they also make it so that the government can't use its leverage to negotiate lower prescription drug prices?
 
2012-06-14 01:00:52 PM  

ox45tallboy:
I don't even know what medication it is, but I'd bet you 3 to 2 it's going to be recognizably cheaper for the same medicine from the same manufacturer ANYWHERE else in the world.


I'm sure it is, it's not an unusual medication by any means. But I've always been afraid of ordering from other countries. I every so often run across a news article of some generally law abiding person (like me) on some potentially financially devastating rx (like mine would be without insurance, and the co-pay is still $45, but at least it's not $400), who orders from Canada or whatnot, customs catches it, they get fined, 30 days in jail, etc.....

is it worth it to get butt-farked like that? I'm not sure.

Because with the way my luck generally runs, that's what would happen to me.
 
2012-06-14 01:01:58 PM  
Yeah, sucks your kid died. You're too much of a grasshopper. Your kid must have been one too.

It's all right here in this children's story.

i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-14 01:08:25 PM  
You'd be mad too if someone sole your idea and slapped his name on it. Romney should sue.
 
2012-06-14 01:08:56 PM  

Pincy:
Not disagreeing with you just saying that's it ridiculous that Americans have to shop the world in order to be able to afford their medicine.


You're correct, we shouldn't have to.

Brandyelf:My daughter has a pre-existing condition she's had since she was an infant, so I pretty much had to take COBRA when I was laid off last year. The cost for the two of us? $1100/month. At least I had $1600/month in unemployment to pay for it, but pesky things like the mortgage, car payment, etc weren't going to get paid on top of that. Fortunately, I was rehired before the "gift" (they gave us insurance until the end of the month in which we were laid off) ran out. If it had gone on longer, I have no idea what we would have done. I'd made too much money in the prior 12 months to qualify for the state insurance, even just for my daughter.


yep. Same here....rent, food, electricity, car payment...those pesky things just seemed more important than COBRA. If something catastrophic would have happened, we have the hospital emergency room to fall back on. No, it's not right. But they can't refuse to treat you, and you can worry about paying for it later. Am I wrong in thinking that really sucks?????

I did try to qualify for IL state aid. Made FAR too much money in the last two quarters to even attempt it. So I wasn't poor long enough, apparently.

I don't have an answer. I just hope I don't get really really sick anytime soon. Like the next 50 years.
 
2012-06-14 01:11:50 PM  

Serious Black: Serious Black:

Um, what? What the hell are the responsibilities of our constitutional republic if not to respond to the grievances of its citizens? And if you're trying to say Social Security is unconstitutional, it takes an incredibly tortured reading of the Taxing and Spending Clause to make it unconstitutional even by originalist standards.

Congress abolishing Social Security would recreate the very conditions that led to its introduction in the first place and would inevitably result in its recreation. And what kind of suffering is Social Security causing us anyways?


Welfare is not putting every citizens' financial house in order. Ending Social Security now by giving all who paid in, the choice of receiving all existing commitments prorated or the repay of all funds withheld is the only way of instilling the work ethic needed to pull ourselves out of the far greater Depression we are currently in.
 
2012-06-14 01:11:58 PM  

mcwehrle: yep. Same here....rent, food, electricity, car payment...those pesky things just seemed more important than COBRA. If something catastrophic would have happened, we have the hospital emergency room to fall back on. No, it's not right. But they can't refuse to treat you, and you can worry about paying for it later. Am I wrong in thinking that really sucks?????


It's a myth that everyone who doesn't have insurance can just use the emergency room to get treatment. The ER is only for emergencies. If you have cancer you aren't going to get chemo or radiation treatment at the ER. So yes, they can refuse to treat you.
 
2012-06-14 01:18:06 PM  

Pincy: It's a myth that everyone who doesn't have insurance can just use the emergency room to get treatment. The ER is only for emergencies. If you have cancer you aren't going to get chemo or radiation treatment at the ER. So yes, they can refuse to treat you.


Yes, of course you're correct. I was speaking only in terms of ME, and it's not a chemo treatment I would need.

It's still farked.
 
2012-06-14 01:22:34 PM  

George Walker Bush: Serious Black: Serious Black:

Um, what? What the hell are the responsibilities of our constitutional republic if not to respond to the grievances of its citizens? And if you're trying to say Social Security is unconstitutional, it takes an incredibly tortured reading of the Taxing and Spending Clause to make it unconstitutional even by originalist standards.

Congress abolishing Social Security would recreate the very conditions that led to its introduction in the first place and would inevitably result in its recreation. And what kind of suffering is Social Security causing us anyways?

Welfare is not putting every citizens' financial house in order. Ending Social Security now by giving all who paid in, the choice of receiving all existing commitments prorated or the repay of all funds withheld is the only way of instilling the work ethic needed to pull ourselves out of the far greater Depression we are currently in.


Sure. Go ahead and run on that.
 
2012-06-14 01:24:55 PM  

George Walker Bush: Serious Black: Serious Black:

Um, what? What the hell are the responsibilities of our constitutional republic if not to respond to the grievances of its citizens? And if you're trying to say Social Security is unconstitutional, it takes an incredibly tortured reading of the Taxing and Spending Clause to make it unconstitutional even by originalist standards.

Congress abolishing Social Security would recreate the very conditions that led to its introduction in the first place and would inevitably result in its recreation. And what kind of suffering is Social Security causing us anyways?

Welfare is not putting every citizens' financial house in order. Ending Social Security now by giving all who paid in, the choice of receiving all existing commitments prorated or the repay of all funds withheld is the only way of instilling the work ethic needed to pull ourselves out of the far greater Depression we are currently in.


AH, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!1!1!1!

**gasp for air**

AH, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!1!1!1!

**collapse to floor**

/could somebody hand me an oxygen mask please?
 
2012-06-14 01:28:19 PM  
i291.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-14 01:29:15 PM  

Sock Ruh Tease: FTA: only Americans who have had constant, uninterrupted insurance coverage should be guaranteed access to a health plan, regardless of any pre-existing conditions.

To get health insurance, you need to have health insurance.

But to have health insurance, you need to have gotten health insurance...

Therefore, to have health insurance, you need health insurROMNEYBOT EXPERIENCED A CRITICAL ERROR AND NEEDS TO SHUT DOWN


He really is just the personification of a BSOD, isn't he?
 
2012-06-14 01:30:19 PM  

ox45tallboy: qorkfiend: ox45tallboy: hillbillypharmacist: and government itself.

Drawing a blank on this one. I'm sure it's not far away, though.

There's a thread in Business about certain trade negotiations that you may find intriguing.

Link

HOA's. That's what I should have put. Many cities aren't allowing new development without a HOA in place so they won't be bothered by such things as road and streetlight maintenance or code enforcement.

But your article is interesting, I should hit the Business tab more often.


That's fascinating. I wonder what sort of effect the Supreme Court ruling on the individual mandate might have on policies like this.
 
2012-06-14 01:33:12 PM  

Ned Stark: George Walker Bush: Serious Black: Serious Black:

Um, what? What the hell are the responsibilities of our constitutional republic if not to respond to the grievances of its citizens? And if you're trying to say Social Security is unconstitutional, it takes an incredibly tortured reading of the Taxing and Spending Clause to make it unconstitutional even by originalist standards.

Congress abolishing Social Security would recreate the very conditions that led to its introduction in the first place and would inevitably result in its recreation. And what kind of suffering is Social Security causing us anyways?

Welfare is not putting every citizens' financial house in order. Ending Social Security now by giving all who paid in, the choice of receiving all existing commitments prorated or the repay of all funds withheld is the only way of instilling the work ethic needed to pull ourselves out of the far greater Depression we are currently in.

Sure. Go ahead and run on that.


Truth is knowledge
 
2012-06-14 01:40:44 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: RedT: keylock71: Yeah, they're going to replace it with Repuplicare...

Republicare can be summed up with one sentence:

"I got mine, so fark you."

[fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net image 457x195]

If I were home I'd shoop a hand flipping the bird onto the end of that trunk


Nah, white Ted Nugent-looking Jesus riding the elephant while carrying a shotgun dressed in an American flag flipping the bird.
 
2012-06-14 01:45:20 PM  
Compassionate conservatism at its finest: Fark off and die, sick people. I got mine!
 
2012-06-14 01:55:26 PM  
I liked how he said "Most small businesses polled said that obamacare has made them less likely to hire people." Because a tax credit for providing health insurance for your employees is job-killing.

And then the "I want to help job creators". Loving the euphemism right there. Because if he said "I want to help the rich", he'd be seen as bad. But JOB CREATORS! Jesus farking christ, listening to him and how out of touch he is hurts my head. He really thinks that it's completely feasible for every single person to start their own business.
 
2012-06-14 02:14:50 PM  
colithian
I liked how he said "Most small businesses polled said that obamacare has made them less likely to hire people." Because a tax credit for providing health insurance for your employees is job-killing.

I don't suppose he provided a citation for this supposed poll? Also, if a poll did say that, I'd have to wonder how many of the "small businesses" who responded had a clue what they were talking about. As you said, tax credits for providing health insurance is not a job killer.

And then the "I want to help job creators". Loving the euphemism right there. Because if he said "I want to help the rich", he'd be seen as bad. But JOB CREATORS!

That's the GOP marching orders and the usual ignorant Fox News loving morons lap it up. Don't call rich people "rich people". They are JOB CREATORS.

How do people become stupid enough to believe that if you cut a "job creators" taxes, he/she will hire more people because of it? No, you idiots. The business owner will hire more people if there's enough demand for their product that they need more people. They will happily pocket the tax break.
 
2012-06-14 02:30:09 PM  
There is an obvious, presidential troll afoot.
 
2012-06-14 02:30:15 PM  
Ugh, reading that article again makes me sick. I still have to stay on my parents' plan because I have a preexisting condition, so I can't change insurance companies. How is that free market? He's pretty much telling immigrants and the poor to go fark themselves.
 
2012-06-14 02:33:00 PM  

colithian: He really thinks that it's completely feasible for every single person to start their own business.


It is if the Government's not involved.
 
2012-06-14 02:34:33 PM  

George Walker Bush: colithian: He really thinks that it's completely feasible for every single person to start their own business.

It is if the Government's not involved.


How many have you started?
 
2012-06-14 02:35:51 PM  

George Walker Bush: colithian: He really thinks that it's completely feasible for every single person to start their own business.

It is if the Government's not involved.


Possible does not always equal feasible. Not every one could start a Bain Capital to rape and pillage companies. There are only so many companies that can be pillaged that way.
 
2012-06-14 02:49:59 PM  

sdd2000: George Walker Bush: colithian: He really thinks that it's completely feasible for every single person to start their own business.

It is if the Government's not involved.

Possible does not always equal feasible. Not every one could start a Bain Capital to rape and pillage companies. There are only so many companies that can be pillaged that way.


He really thinks that he if he makes the pie bigger, the tiny crumbs most people have will increase at least somewhat, and the fact that his gigantic chunk of pie will increase exponentially is of no consequence whatsoever.
 
2012-06-14 02:56:04 PM  
President troll is a succesful troll.
 
2012-06-14 02:58:42 PM  

zarberg: George Walker Bush: colithian: He really thinks that it's completely feasible for every single person to start their own business.

It is if the Government's not involved.

How many have you started?


None, of course. That would be illegal.
 
2012-06-14 02:59:46 PM  
The sick and twisted and typically GOP thing is that his farkin wife falls into the general category of people this would effect. Of course she will never have to worry given they could just buy a hostipal for her care. Talk about the ultimate fark you I've got mine. Romneycare: don't get sick or just die quick.

Also, I just don't get the hate over an individual mandate, aren't the Rebuplicans all about personal responsibility? Wouldn't they want to stop freeloaders? Oh wait they did, once upon a time when they weren't crazy shiat heads.
 
2012-06-14 03:04:09 PM  

George Walker Bush: zarberg: George Walker Bush: colithian: He really thinks that it's completely feasible for every single person to start their own business.

It is if the Government's not involved.

How many have you started?

None, of course. That would be illegal.


Please tell me you're trolling. Or are you really that stupid?
 
2012-06-14 03:07:26 PM  

ox45tallboy: sdd2000: George Walker Bush: colithian: He really thinks that it's completely feasible for every single person to start their own business.

It is if the Government's not involved.

Possible does not always equal feasible. Not every one could start a Bain Capital to rape and pillage companies. There are only so many companies that can be pillaged that way.

He really thinks that he if he makes the pie bigger, the tiny crumbs most people have will increase at least somewhat, and the fact that his gigantic chunk of pie will increase exponentially is of no consequence whatsoever.


fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net
 
2012-06-14 03:25:47 PM  

Aar1012: Citrate1007: You don't make money by letting children live.

So Romneybot will be able to make the necessary calculations to find the true value of a human life?


bout tree fitty
 
2012-06-14 03:26:59 PM  

Dr Dreidel: He's trying to create a market for health insurance insurance: you pay a premium to a company who, in the event you lose your coverage, will buy coverage for you. The coverage they buy doesn't actually cover anything medical, but you get to say you had health insurance.


Meta-gaming or emergent behavior?
 
2012-06-14 03:52:17 PM  

Serious Black: Friedman and Hayek likely wouldn't support their policies.


i.imgur.com

If they've lost Kinky & Selma, then they can kiss the election goodbye.
 
2012-06-14 04:03:49 PM  
colithian
He's pretty much telling immigrants and the poor to go fark themselves.

Well duh. That's a core plank of the GOP platform.
 
2012-06-14 05:00:05 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Paradox absorbing crumple zones


Winner, Most Awesome Phrase of the Day for 2012-06-14.
 
2012-06-14 08:03:55 PM  
It seems what Republicans really believe is that the natural and proper penalty for an individual who completely fails at the game of capitalism for any reason should be death, and any safety net that requires others to contribute to save this poor wretch is cheating and theft from the winners.
 
2012-06-14 08:06:27 PM  

Nem Wan: It seems what Republicans really believe is that the natural and proper penalty for an individual who completely fails at the game of capitalism for any reason should be death, and any safety net that requires others to contribute to save this poor wretch is cheating and theft from the winners.


Pretty much. They are the real Darwinists.
 
2012-06-15 09:01:21 AM  

ox45tallboy: Most people who have health insurance would do better to pay for their health care out of pocket.


And if you think that you're a moron.

Ever look at your billing statement and see what a typical visit would cost you? What may be a 20-50 dollar co-pay for the insured might be $6000 for the uninsured. Need an x-ray? PFT? Blood work? You better sell your car.

Note: A lot of my family works in healthcare. My father was an executive for a healthcare company (director of the laboratory network / on the board of directors for the company, etc). I've done billing work during a few summers. The uninsured are farked, royally.

There's a common blood test that if you've ever had any blood work done you've likely had it done on you. Cost for the lab, including all overhead, testing materials, lab time, couriers, etc etc, was around $7.40ish. Depending on the insurance company, they would get paid $17 to $120 for the test. Uninsured people were charged around $270.

So frankly, the claim that you're better off paying for medical care out of pocket is just pants on the head retarded.
 
Displayed 175 of 175 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report