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.

(Talking Points Memo)   It's as if Obamacare actually protected consumers and all this brouhaha about people losing out on craptastic "insurance" policies may have just been a ruse to let insurance companies sell crap insurance again   (talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 225
    More: Asinine, obamacare, Hilton Head Island, Group Plan, health insurance exchange, insurance companies  
•       •       •

1643 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Nov 2013 at 10:03 AM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-15 09:25:00 AM
s11.postimg.org
 
2013-11-15 09:30:52 AM
Obvious tag is on vacation this week.
 
2013-11-15 10:04:11 AM
Gee, ya think?
 
2013-11-15 10:05:33 AM
There's a word for people like these. It's "grifter."
 
2013-11-15 10:06:36 AM
Ya think??!!
 
2013-11-15 10:07:47 AM
LET THEM HAVE THEIR CRAPPY INSURANCE!!!!11!!!11!!1!!!!111ONE
 
2013-11-15 10:08:22 AM
What happens to the people who purchases the awful plans if they actually get sick? Do they get bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt? Who is going to pay for their care?
 
2013-11-15 10:09:03 AM
No wai!

Obamma lied and Grandma died!
 
2013-11-15 10:10:59 AM
Government shouldn't protect people from making stupid decisions! If someone buys shiatty insurance, that's THEIR fault. Certainly not the fault of the company OFFERING shiatty "insurance" and deceiving people.

After all, people who run insurance companies are JOB CREATORS. And as we all know, Job Creators are the purest of beings, incapable of deceit.
 
2013-11-15 10:11:22 AM

ginandbacon: What happens to the people who purchases the awful plans if they actually get sick? Do they get bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt? Who is going to pay for their care?


Republican Jesus
 
2013-11-15 10:12:16 AM

ginandbacon: What happens to the people who purchases the awful plans if they actually get sick? Do they get bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt? Who is going to pay for their care?


Jesus and bootstraps
 
2013-11-15 10:12:52 AM

ginandbacon: What happens to the people who purchases the awful plans if they actually get sick? Do they get bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt? Who is going to pay for their care?


I'm sure the people who complained about this will all pitch in to pay for them. Oh.
 
2013-11-15 10:13:08 AM

bulldg4life: ginandbacon: What happens to the people who purchases the awful plans if they actually get sick? Do they get bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt? Who is going to pay for their care?

Republican Jesus


Nope:

bornagainpagan.com
 
2013-11-15 10:13:21 AM
I said this in one of the ten thousand other Obamacare threads, but people are so inured to simply accepting whatever the insurance company is offering that they're more concerned about whether the plan is "theirs" rather that whether the plan is any good.
 
2013-11-15 10:13:40 AM
Not that I'm a big fan of insurance companies or think they're above the behavior described in that article, but a whole bunch of anonymous anecdotal information isn't great journalism, TPM.
 
2013-11-15 10:14:43 AM
Every Obamacare thread is a troll thread.
Amazing.

Because people simply cannot be allowed to be protected from catastrophic health care costs.
 
2013-11-15 10:18:47 AM

Cletus C.: Not that I'm a big fan of insurance companies or think they're above the behavior described in that article, but a whole bunch of anonymous anecdotal information isn't great journalism, TPM.


Is TPM journalism now?  I mean is it Pravda no, but I still think of it as a gossip site.   One I tend to agree with mind you, but a gossip site.
 
2013-11-15 10:19:52 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: Every Obamacare thread is a troll thread.
Amazing.

Because people simply cannot be allowed to be protected from catastrophic health care costs.


If poor people aren't dying of preventable diseases, or clogging up our emergency rooms, that's socialism. And that's bad, because...socialism.

/SOCIALISM! Are you scared yet?
 
2013-11-15 10:20:21 AM
s3.amazonaws.com
 
2013-11-15 10:20:49 AM
Protip... whether it's "health insurance", trade schools, or debt-relief plans... if they're advertising during Maury, they're probably a scam.
 
2013-11-15 10:22:28 AM

Cletus C.: Not that I'm a big fan of insurance companies or think they're above the behavior described in that article, but a whole bunch of anonymous anecdotal information isn't great journalism, TPM.


But every person who complains about a cancelled policy is an objective representative of all of the problems with the ACA.
 
2013-11-15 10:22:53 AM
You mean that what we at Fark have known to be the case all along turned out to be true, and the media is just now figuring this out after having milked the latest non-scandal for all it's worth?!

NO WAI!!!
 
2013-11-15 10:26:07 AM
'Have you had cancer, heart attack, you or your husband?' And I said no. And she said, 'Good, because if you said yes, I would have had to recommend the exchanges.'"

Those sleazy bastards.

They want to have their cake and eat it too,

They want to be able to still sell their craptastic policies that aren't allowed to compete on the exchanges to people without pre-existing conditions *and* have the mandate in place.

The For Profit health care model in all it's glory, ladies and gentlemen.
 
2013-11-15 10:29:04 AM

Cletus C.: Not that I'm a big fan of insurance companies or think they're above the behavior described in that article, but a whole bunch of anonymous anecdotal information isn't great journalism, TPM.


Takehome message: It's ok when CNN, Fox and CBS do it.
 
2013-11-15 10:30:08 AM

bulldg4life: Republican Jesus


birchman: Jesus and bootstraps


Serious Black: bulldg4life: ginandbacon: What happens to the people who purchases the awful plans if they actually get sick? Do they get bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt? Who is going to pay for their care?

Republican Jesus

Nope:

[bornagainpagan.com image 450x550]


Oh my y'all are funny! Thank you all for the giggles but I still don't get the solution...

Fart_Machine: ginandbacon: What happens to the people who purchases the awful plans if they actually get sick? Do they get bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt? Who is going to pay for their care?

I'm sure the people who complained about this will all pitch in to pay for them. Oh.


So yeah. What do we do with these idiots?
 
2013-11-15 10:31:41 AM
And Obama legitimizes their bullshiat complaints by caving into to their demands.
 
2013-11-15 10:31:54 AM

Stile4aly: Cletus C.: Not that I'm a big fan of insurance companies or think they're above the behavior described in that article, but a whole bunch of anonymous anecdotal information isn't great journalism, TPM.

But every person who complains about a cancelled policy is an objective representative of all of the problems with the ACA.


Nope. But if they are on the record you have the chance to find the bullshiat behind what they say. We've seen some of that already.
 
2013-11-15 10:32:56 AM

coeyagi: Cletus C.: Not that I'm a big fan of insurance companies or think they're above the behavior described in that article, but a whole bunch of anonymous anecdotal information isn't great journalism, TPM.

Takehome message: It's ok when CNN, Fox and CBS do it.


We all have our own standards. If those are yours, fine.
 
2013-11-15 10:33:21 AM

ginandbacon: Fart_Machine: ginandbacon: What happens to the people who purchases the awful plans if they actually get sick? Do they get bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt? Who is going to pay for their care?

I'm sure the people who complained about this will all pitch in to pay for them. Oh.

So yeah. What do we do with these idiots?


I heard a crazy idea a while back; if we could make them all get useful and effective health insurance, they couldn't offload their medical bills onto the rest of us. We'd have to put some minimum standards of coverage in place, though, otherwise it wouldn't really work.
 
2013-11-15 10:34:16 AM

Cletus C.: coeyagi: Cletus C.: Not that I'm a big fan of insurance companies or think they're above the behavior described in that article, but a whole bunch of anonymous anecdotal information isn't great journalism, TPM.

Takehome message: It's ok when CNN, Fox and CBS do it.

We all have our own standards. If those are yours, fine.


I guess my standard should be "find one god damn time Cletus condemned the outragemongers for not doing their homework".  Is that what you're saying?
 
2013-11-15 10:34:19 AM

Cletus C.: coeyagi: Cletus C.: Not that I'm a big fan of insurance companies or think they're above the behavior described in that article, but a whole bunch of anonymous anecdotal information isn't great journalism, TPM.

Takehome message: It's ok when CNN, Fox and CBS do it.

We all have our own standards. If those are yours, fine.


I wasn't aware you had standards. Care to share them?
 
2013-11-15 10:35:20 AM
Like these guys and their crap insurance?
 
2013-11-15 10:35:47 AM

ginandbacon: So yeah. What do we do with these idiots?


In a nation with functional non-captured state regulatory environments, they wouldn't be allowed to call many of these plans 'health insurance' and they'd be sued to hell and back if they did (the main one named in the article is a part of the trillion-dollar Credit Suisse).

Alternatively, under the GOP plan ("sell across state lines"), if they can buy just one state legislature (Pierre, Jackson, Dover), they'd be able to sell it everywhere with no other oversight.
 
2013-11-15 10:36:08 AM

qorkfiend: ginandbacon: Fart_Machine: ginandbacon: What happens to the people who purchases the awful plans if they actually get sick? Do they get bills for hundreds of thousands of dollars and go bankrupt? Who is going to pay for their care?

I'm sure the people who complained about this will all pitch in to pay for them. Oh.

So yeah. What do we do with these idiots?

I heard a crazy idea a while back; if we could make them all get useful and effective health insurance, they couldn't offload their medical bills onto the rest of us. We'd have to put some minimum standards of coverage in place, though, otherwise it wouldn't really work.


I sort of recall hearing about that at some point. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
 
2013-11-15 10:36:53 AM
Obama. The great blame shifter. Will this work?

Answer is no. He lost his credibility. Its gone, jim.
 
2013-11-15 10:37:37 AM
I'd like to share an analogy about the ObamaCare website, using an experience with another website as a comparison.

The other website is one of the companies we (the firm I work for) orders inventory from. Their site used to be great, but as of February of this year they went over to some fancy-schmancy database solution that integrated synergy solutions blah blah blah.

There was a big fanfare about it. All customers would receive a new six-digit number for our ship-to locations, effective February 4th. All material numbers would be changed from alphanumeric ones to an eleven-digit number (all beginning with 9, then a load of zeroes and ending in a four or five digit number, leading a lot of people here to ask why they didn't just have a six-digit number for items). Items that were backordered, when they came back in stock, were sent on a first-come-first-served basis. If you had a cancellation for that item, just log into the website and take it off the backorder list. Items that were ordered were allocated in the same way: if you requested 12 of something as part of an order, and they had at least 12 in stock, you got them.

Sounded great.

The website has a total f***-up from Day One.

It doesn't allocate as promised. It hangs and kicks you out mid-order without saving your progress (the old site saved as you went along, so if you were kicked out or timed out it would have the order in a pending section). It went from being THE best site to order to the worst, by a country mile.

And it's 100% a private company. It hasn't improved in the nine months since implementation, which makes me think it's some executive manager's "baby" and they're probably still talking about "some users having occasional problems" and its "unforeseen minor hiccups". 

The government website has only enrolled 100,000 people? Luxury.
 
2013-11-15 10:37:51 AM

quatchi: 'Have you had cancer, heart attack, you or your husband?' And I said no. And she said, 'Good, because if you said yes, I would have had to recommend the exchanges.'"

Those sleazy bastards.

They want to have their cake and eat it too,

They want to be able to still sell their craptastic policies that aren't allowed to compete on the exchanges to people without pre-existing conditions *and* have the mandate in place.

The For Profit health care model in all it's glory, ladies and gentlemen.


Nationalize the bastards.
 
2013-11-15 10:38:06 AM

Lawnchair: they'd be able to sell it everywhere with no other oversight.


Yup, fraud and corruption. The best America has to offer these days. So, are we supposed to just let them die?
 
2013-11-15 10:39:41 AM

Lawnchair: Alternatively, under the GOP plan ("sell across state lines"), if they can buy just one state legislature (Pierre, Jackson, Dover), they'd be able to sell it everywhere with no other oversight.


I prefer to encapsulate all that in "the GOP plan (let insurers ignore state regulations)".
 
2013-11-15 10:39:56 AM

Stile4aly: I said this in one of the ten thousand other Obamacare threads, but people are so inured to simply accepting whatever the insurance company is offering that they're more concerned about whether the plan is "theirs" rather that whether the plan is any good.


Even Kirsten Powers, Daily Beast, said that saying 'people are too stupid to be allowed the freedom to pick the insurance they need' is a losing argument for democrats.  She also said 'notice that the talking point shifted from insuring the uninsured to saving people from crappy insurance.'  When did saving people from crappy insurance become the primary goal of obamacare?  That wasn't how it was sold.
 
2013-11-15 10:40:01 AM

ginandbacon: Cletus C.: coeyagi: Cletus C.: Not that I'm a big fan of insurance companies or think they're above the behavior described in that article, but a whole bunch of anonymous anecdotal information isn't great journalism, TPM.

Takehome message: It's ok when CNN, Fox and CBS do it.

We all have our own standards. If those are yours, fine.

I wasn't aware you had standards. Care to share them?


Depends on what kind of standards you're talking about. A few drinks can make certain of my standards malleable.

I do have standards when it comes to believing what I read on the Internet, though. I may be unique in that regard.
 
2013-11-15 10:40:36 AM

SlothB77: Like these guys and their crap insurance?


Yes.  The main piece of the puzzle is that their previous plan was not community rated.  That is, it only was offered to healthy people.   That'scrap insurance on a broader moral and economic ground, yes. And (this is somewhat more conjecture) was likely a 'rate escalator' plan, something Kaiser was known for.  That is, the rates started marching up each year.  After 5 years, Kaiser offered the people who were still healthy a cheaper plan, but the not-so-healthy kept seeing their rates go up and up.
 
2013-11-15 10:42:38 AM

SlothB77: Stile4aly: I said this in one of the ten thousand other Obamacare threads, but people are so inured to simply accepting whatever the insurance company is offering that they're more concerned about whether the plan is "theirs" rather that whether the plan is any good.

Even Kirsten Powers, Daily Beast, said that saying 'people are too stupid to be allowed the freedom to pick the insurance they need' is a losing argument for democrats.  She also said 'notice that the talking point shifted from insuring the uninsured to saving people from crappy insurance.'  When did saving people from crappy insurance become the primary goal of obamacare?  That wasn't how it was sold.


His statement wasn't about whether it was a good political message. Go ahead, try and think outside of "what does it mean politically". Go ahead. You can do it!
 
2013-11-15 10:43:20 AM

colon_pow: Obama. The great blame shifter. Will this work?

Answer is no. He lost his credibility. Its gone, jim.


Stop calling me Jim, Shirley.
 
2013-11-15 10:46:57 AM

SlothB77: When did saving people from crappy insurance become the primary goal of obamacare?  That wasn't how it was sold.


that's the window the issue is being argued in. The people who bribe the GOP know they can't win on the medicare expansion that 100s of thousands of people already signed up for or the subsidies that are going to allow poor people to afford health insurance for the first time so all the focus is on this narrow group of people who are supposedly losing their insurance and only have a more expensive option.
 
2013-11-15 10:47:17 AM
I guess I am not "typical", but I had BCBS of Alabama's best induvidual policy with a low copay which  was cancelled.  So not all policies were "crap policies" which were cancelled.  Being a single male I did not need the female health coverage mandated that it did not have.

I am a liberal, Obama voter, who supports single payer but feels Obamacare is better than what we had once the kinks get worked out.  But this "they all were/are crap policies" is not true.

Sorry if I burst anyone's bubble.
 
2013-11-15 10:47:22 AM

colon_pow: Obama. The great blame shifter. Will this work?

Answer is no. He lost his credibility. Its gone, jim.


He's a poser.  Talks a great game though.
 
2013-11-15 10:49:07 AM

quatchi: 'Have you had cancer, heart attack, you or your husband?' And I said no. And she said, 'Good, because if you said yes, I would have had to recommend the exchanges.'"

Those sleazy bastards.

They want to have their cake and eat it too,

They want to be able to still sell their craptastic policies that aren't allowed to compete on the exchanges to people without pre-existing conditions *and* have the mandate in place.

The For Profit health care model in all it's glory, ladies and gentlemen.


Niiiiiiiiice.

But, why don't they want to scam sick people, too? It's not like they're going to pay them anything, anyway.
 
2013-11-15 10:50:29 AM

heavymetal: I guess I am not "typical", but I had BCBS of Alabama's best induvidual policy with a low copay which  was cancelled.  So not all policies were "crap policies" which were cancelled.  Being a single male I did not need the female health coverage mandated that it did not have.

I am a liberal, Obama voter, who supports single payer but feels Obamacare is better than what we had once the kinks get worked out.  But this "they all were/are crap policies" is not true.

Sorry if I burst anyone's bubble.


We'll need some more details before we pass judgment; my guess is that there was a cap on expenses under your plan.
 
2013-11-15 10:51:54 AM

heavymetal: I guess I am not "typical", but I had BCBS of Alabama's best induvidual policy with a low copay which  was cancelled.  So not all policies were "crap policies" which were cancelled.  Being a single male I did not need the female health coverage mandated that it did not have.

I am a liberal, Obama voter, who supports single payer but feels Obamacare is better than what we had once the kinks get worked out.  But this "they all were/are crap policies" is not true.

Sorry if I burst anyone's bubble.


So as a woman, I shouldn't have to pay for anything relating to balls, dicks, or prostates, right?
 
Displayed 50 of 225 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report