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.

(Independent Journal Review)   Let's ask some college students and see how many of them have actually signed up for Obamacare. Bonus quote of the day: "I thought Obamacare was supposed to be, like, free"   (ijreview.com) divider line 179
    More: Obvious, obamacare, PJTV  
•       •       •

2191 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Dec 2013 at 4:44 PM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
m00
2013-12-08 02:40:33 AM  

Talondel: Why only a mandate/incentive for major medical and emergency care? Because that's the biggest area covered by health insurance that fits the economic definition of a "public good" insofar as it's non-excludable (modern society will not tolerate people dying outside a hospital simply because they cannot pay) and non-rival (the U.S. at least has the ability to provide as much major medical care as is needed). The rest of the system (preventative care, routine doctor visits, etc) aren't public goods and there's no reason to think that market forces won't work there.


Yep, this is actually pretty close to what I advocate (except I'd just go ahead and socialize it). Just have a socialized system for major medical / emergency care. Done. Leave everything else the way it is (pre-ACA).

The problem was that people were getting screwed because they got cancer, and their health insurance tried to be like "oh... well... you didn't report that you had an ingrown toenail when you were four years old. Since you failed to declare pre-existing conditions, we can drop your coverage. ha-ha!"

The strategy of insurance companies is deny coverage, litigate / delay, and hope you die before your court date. This becomes a vicious circle, because courts are supposed to be the remedy in contract law, but most contract law doesn't have you dying as an outcome of procedural delays.

So I would say the only sensible thing to do is socialize it. Or you have a fund to cover people's treatment while their cases against the insurance company are in litigation which is paid for out of punitive damages, but at that point you might as well just socialize it because to set this up you admit that insurance companies aren't the right vehicle for covering catastrophic illness.

Oh, wait. I forgot. Evil-saltine and Gyrfalcon have proof that Libertarians want to see people die, so I better change my opinion to fit their narrow-minded strawmen :D
 
2013-12-08 02:45:00 AM  

bigsteve3OOO: bizzwire: bigsteve3OOO: NO! STUPID!! young healthy people who do not need health care at all and are least able to pay are the ones funding this stupidity.  Men must fund women's health.  Young fund the elderly.  welcome to what you idiots voted for.

OK. Let's say you buy a car. Of course, you buy the mandatory Insurance, in case you cause damage to someone else or their property. You make your first payment of, say, $400. Your first day, your driving when your cell phone rings and, distracted, you plow into a parked car, causing $2,000 of damage. Which your insurance covers.

Do you really think that the insurance company used your payments to cover the claim? Do you think they paid for it with their own money? OTHER PEOPLE PAID FOR IT. This is how insurance has worked for centuries. Everybody seems to understand this except for you.

Exactly.  The government has no right to make you purchase a fiduciary instrument from a private business.  You want the government to provide health care ....FINE....why did you make them provide insurance companies a boon?  Why not pass a constitutional amendment?  Here I'll write it.  The government shall provide all citizens quality health care at no cost.

What you fools did was take choice away from people and make insurance companies rich.  Nice one Libs. Idiots.


The Individual Mandate was a Republican idea in the first place.  It was the Republican's alternative to the Clinton plan in the 90s, and was the Heritage Foundation's idea sometime in the 1980s.
 
2013-12-08 03:09:52 AM  
Another fail-ass joke article from another birdcage liner right wing blog.
It's not  information - it's Farkkk.com!
 
2013-12-08 03:11:09 AM  

m00: Gyrfalcon: The "Libertarians" would like it better if people either paid for themselves or died (preferably swiftly and silently and then buried themselves in an inconspicuous ditch)...

Is your source for this other non-Libertarians who happen to dislike Libertarians? I don't mean to pick on you, but I get annoyed when Conservatives say "Liberals would like it if X" and when Liberals say "Conservatives would like it if X" when X is some completely outrageous thing that happens to bolster the ad hominem the poster is currently making.


No no, I was referring to "Libertarians" (hence the quotation marks)--those idiots who frequent Fark and other forums and pretend they are Libertarians and Randites but really have no idea what they are talking about. Actually, my best friend is a Libertarian and he does NOT want people to die if they can't afford health care--but some fools even right here on Fark think they are "Libertarians" and seem to think that's a tenet of Libertarianism.

There are "Libertarians" and Libertarians, just like there are "Liberals" and Liberals, you know, and "Conservatives" and Conservatives. There are even "Republicans" and Republicans, although the latter are getting pretty thin on the ground.
 
2013-12-08 03:55:05 AM  

jso2897: Another fail-ass joke article from another birdcage liner right wing blog.
It's not  information - it's Farkkk.com!

 
2013-12-08 07:43:25 AM  

jjorsett: sammyk: Wouldn't the typical college student be on their parents plan until they are 26 or get their own damn job? If that's not the case because your parents are dead, strung out on meth or whatever you are probably going to get the subsidies that make it free.

Now that the website issues are getting resolved the right is getting really desperate for talking points. I don't think this is going to be the midterm election issue they were hoping for. In fact any political capitol they may have gained in the last month or 2 is going to get thrown away next month when they shut the government down again.

Please proceed teatards

Keep whistling past the graveyard. The website continues to be a mess. Just how big a one is tough to quantify because the administration can't or won't release useful data like how many people have actually managed to get insured, which requires making the first payment. The really big shoe to drop will be the cancellation of tens of millions of more policies that'll occur next year due to the delays that were put in for this year plus businesses renewing early in 2013 in order to retain their plans for one more year. You think this early round was bad PR, just wait. Then there's the adverse selection that's already occurring. The young and healthy aren't signing on, which means the premiums are going to go up. That or Obama will have to use the ACA's provisions to hand a ton of money over to the insurers to reimburse them for their losses.

But continue thinking happy thoughts, maybe you're way right and I'm way wrong, and Obamacare will be a triumph.


"The surge worked!  The surge worked!  The surge worked!"

projector.jpg
 
2013-12-08 10:05:23 AM  

m00: bizzwire: Got news for you. Hospitals already make you pay for other people's stupidity in the form of a surcharge added to your bill to pay for the uninsured. Ever been to the ER? Congratulations! You've been forced to pay for someone else. And yet, making these people pay for themselves is bad?

So taxing poor people is now a liberal plank? I guess conservatives have won.


So, being responsible for yourself and paying your fair share is now a liberal plank? I guess the conservatives have won.
 
2013-12-08 10:43:16 AM  
Compared to the price the bank owned Insurance Companies would charge if they had their way, ObamaCare is practically Free.


Trumped in one sentence.  what can i say.
 
2013-12-08 10:44:33 AM  

Mugato: sprgrss: Aren't college students by and large covered by their parents' insurance?

What he said. You're covered by your parents until age 25.



in fact, you are covered by the Republican Party until you are born.  after birth,  they don't know you any more.
 
2013-12-08 10:47:00 AM  

m00: FloydA: Because it sounds to me like you're advocating for socialism.

What's wrong with socialism?


I personally think we need more of it, but bigsteve3000 probably doesn't realize that this is what he is advocating.
 
m00
2013-12-08 10:53:58 AM  

Gyrfalcon: There are "Libertarians" and Libertarians, just like there are "Liberals" and Liberals, you know, and "Conservatives" and Conservatives. There are even "Republicans" and Republicans, although the latter are getting pretty thin on the ground.


my apologizes sir!
 
m00
2013-12-08 10:56:28 AM  

bizzwire: So, being responsible for yourself and paying your fair share is now a liberal plank? I guess the conservatives have won.


It's not about paying your fair share. It never was. Because you see, we have a mechanism for paying one's fair share -- it's called taxes. As long as we aren't taxed so that government can provide a service, we are at the mercy of corporations. The free market is wonderful for a lot of things, but protecting your life isn't one of them.
 
2013-12-08 11:15:04 AM  

m00: bizzwire: So, being responsible for yourself and paying your fair share is now a liberal plank? I guess the conservatives have won.

It's not about paying your fair share. It never was. Because you see, we have a mechanism for paying one's fair share -- it's called taxes. As long as we aren't taxed so that government can provide a service, we are at the mercy of corporations. The free market is wonderful for a lot of things, but protecting your life isn't one of them.


Okay, I'm lost here...are we in agreement, or did one of us get whooshed?
 
m00
2013-12-08 11:37:08 AM  

bizzwire: Okay, I'm lost here...are we in agreement, or did one of us get whooshed?


Not sure :D

All I was saying is that when I hear self-professed liberals defending the ACA on the grounds that basically sick people are scamming the system by going to emergency rooms for "free care," then the corporations-are-people crowd have won.

www.twinpeaksgazette.com
 
2013-12-08 11:48:39 AM  
Young people don't need health care insurance, they already have access to free clinics!
 
2013-12-08 11:52:29 AM  

m00: bizzwire: Okay, I'm lost here...are we in agreement, or did one of us get whooshed?

Not sure :D

All I was saying is that when I hear self-professed liberals defending the ACA on the grounds that basically sick people are scamming the system by going to emergency rooms for "free care," then the corporations-are-people crowd have won.


That wasn't what I said....or meant, although I can understand why you might think so. I was trying to point out the hypocrisy of the party of personal responsibility, and point out that they are getting screwed by the current system (and loving it, apparently).
 
m00
2013-12-08 11:57:43 AM  

bizzwire: That wasn't what I said....or meant, although I can understand why you might think so. I was trying to point out the hypocrisy of the party of personal responsibility, and point out that they are getting screwed by the current system (and loving it, apparently


I guess I just don't see people who get cancer as generally responsible for that. You could say they're not responsible for having health insurance but...

1) health insurance will drop you on a dime, and do everything they can to get out of coverage when you get sick
2) it's completely not affordable unless you get it through your employer
3) if your choices are eating and paying rent, or having health insurance, you're going to go with the eating and paying rent

This isn't a matter of personal responsibility in my mind.
 
2013-12-08 12:45:40 PM  

Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: bigsteve3OOO: Men must fund women's health.

And women must fund men's. That's how risk pools work.

Funny that. Of all the people complaining, it's always "I have to pay for a woman's BC!"

It's never "A woman has to pay for my prostate exams!"

Well. Its like what? One time when you are fifty then every five years? Verses every day from twelve to forty five? I get the point dont have a problem but lets be real. Its not the same.


Yay technicalities!  Never mind that BC is extremely cheap. If I remember right, my ex paid something like $15 a month.

Now change "prostate exams" to "prostate cancer."
 
2013-12-08 01:11:53 PM  

Nemo's Brother: cman: Rincewind53: Wow.  Out of all the universities in DC that they went to try this stunt, they went to Howard, the historically black college.

Gee, I wonder why?

Are you saying black people are dumb? White people can't be morons, too?

Listen, I know the point you were making. I understand it. But Jesus, dude, stop seeing boogeymen everywhere.

It's the subtle racism of Neo Liberals. They believe anyone of minority status needs to be given a helmet and knee pads.


No, just for those of you who are obviously fully retarded.  It's because we care.
 
2013-12-08 01:35:43 PM  

BMulligan: bigsteve3OOO: Its not free if you are forced by law to participate.

The law requires me to wear clothing when I leave the house. Utter tyranny. I blame 0bama.


Ummm no.  You're just conforming to societal norms instilled upon our species since that myth in the Book of Genesis.  Secular laws have adapted to such myth.
 
2013-12-08 02:20:47 PM  

grumpfuff: Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: bigsteve3OOO: Men must fund women's health.

And women must fund men's. That's how risk pools work.

Funny that. Of all the people complaining, it's always "I have to pay for a woman's BC!"

It's never "A woman has to pay for my prostate exams!"

Well. Its like what? One time when you are fifty then every five years? Verses every day from twelve to forty five? I get the point dont have a problem but lets be real. Its not the same.

Yay technicalities!  Never mind that BC is extremely cheap. If I remember right, my ex paid something like $15 a month.

Now change "prostate exams" to "prostate cancer."


Exam= finger. Cost=one rubber glove.
Now add cervical cancer.
Argument fail.
 
2013-12-08 02:28:26 PM  

Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: bigsteve3OOO: Men must fund women's health.

And women must fund men's. That's how risk pools work.

Funny that. Of all the people complaining, it's always "I have to pay for a woman's BC!"

It's never "A woman has to pay for my prostate exams!"

Well. Its like what? One time when you are fifty then every five years? Verses every day from twelve to forty five? I get the point dont have a problem but lets be real. Its not the same.

Yay technicalities!  Never mind that BC is extremely cheap. If I remember right, my ex paid something like $15 a month.

Now change "prostate exams" to "prostate cancer."

Exam= finger. Cost=one rubber glove.
Now add cervical cancer.
Argument fail.


Considering it has nothing to do with my original point, and my original point was a statement, not an argument, congrats on knocking that straw man outta the park.
 
2013-12-08 03:00:56 PM  

Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: bigsteve3OOO: Men must fund women's health.

And women must fund men's. That's how risk pools work.

Funny that. Of all the people complaining, it's always "I have to pay for a woman's BC!"

It's never "A woman has to pay for my prostate exams!"

Well. Its like what? One time when you are fifty then every five years? Verses every day from twelve to forty five? I get the point dont have a problem but lets be real. Its not the same.

Yay technicalities!  Never mind that BC is extremely cheap. If I remember right, my ex paid something like $15 a month.

Now change "prostate exams" to "prostate cancer."

Exam= finger. Cost=one rubber glove.
Now add cervical cancer.
Argument fail.


Also add in "annuals" for 50 years.
 
2013-12-08 03:03:53 PM  

grumpfuff: Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: bigsteve3OOO: Men must fund women's health.

And women must fund men's. That's how risk pools work.

Funny that. Of all the people complaining, it's always "I have to pay for a woman's BC!"

It's never "A woman has to pay for my prostate exams!"

Well. Its like what? One time when you are fifty then every five years? Verses every day from twelve to forty five? I get the point dont have a problem but lets be real. Its not the same.

Yay technicalities!  Never mind that BC is extremely cheap. If I remember right, my ex paid something like $15 a month.

Now change "prostate exams" to "prostate cancer."

Exam= finger. Cost=one rubber glove.
Now add cervical cancer.
Argument fail.

Considering it has nothing to do with my original point, and my original point was a statement, not an argument, congrats on knocking that straw man outta the park.


Seems about right. Make indefensible false equivalence then make another when called on it. Good for you! Keep farking that chicken!
 
2013-12-08 05:29:38 PM  

Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: Por que tan serioso: grumpfuff: bigsteve3OOO: Men must fund women's health.

And women must fund men's. That's how risk pools work.

Funny that. Of all the people complaining, it's always "I have to pay for a woman's BC!"

It's never "A woman has to pay for my prostate exams!"

Well. Its like what? One time when you are fifty then every five years? Verses every day from twelve to forty five? I get the point dont have a problem but lets be real. Its not the same.

Yay technicalities!  Never mind that BC is extremely cheap. If I remember right, my ex paid something like $15 a month.

Now change "prostate exams" to "prostate cancer."

Exam= finger. Cost=one rubber glove.
Now add cervical cancer.
Argument fail.

Considering it has nothing to do with my original point, and my original point was a statement, not an argument, congrats on knocking that straw man outta the park.

Seems about right. Make indefensible false equivalence then make another when called on it. Good for you! Keep farking that chicken!


And you keep on with your poutrage because you don't understand how risk pools work. Have a nice day.
 
2013-12-08 05:45:24 PM  
If your parents are rich enough that you're going to college (either covering some of your tuition, or just getting you into good enough schools) you're probably insured through them.  And many universities offer their own health care plans for those whose parents aren't.  If neither applies, there's a good chance you're poor enough for medicaid.

There are very few college students who need to purchase health insurance on the exchanges.  No shiat no one's signing up.
 
2013-12-08 06:21:34 PM  
Yeah, no. Working towards a degree does not make you any more intelligent or well-informed about current events.

People have this romanticized view of universities as a place where geniuses gather and it's almost never the case.
 
2013-12-08 06:38:44 PM  

Por que tan serioso: Exam= finger. Cost=one rubber glove.
Now add cervical cancer.
Argument fail.


Point at specific cancers all you want, but the simple fact is that female life expectancy is about 5 years longer than male life expectancy.  Men die earlier from all sorts of causes, and suffer disproportionately from many conditions such as schizophrenia.

It is hypothesized that this happens because having two X chromosomes helps to correct for any abnormalities or deficiencies in one.
 
m00
2013-12-08 11:16:42 PM  

Xcott: It is hypothesized that this happens because having two X chromosomes helps to correct for any abnormalities or deficiencies in one.


Also, grandmothers are much more important to the survival of a tribe than grandfathers.
 
Displayed 29 of 179 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report