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.

(The New York Times)   It's begun. Millions of Americans are getting insurance and there's nothing anyone can do about it   (nytimes.com) divider line 236
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

2676 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Jan 2014 at 11:19 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-01 12:49:21 PM  
SauronWasFramed:
//  my bronze policy quote:$940 a month with a $12600 deductible. No subsidy. Not affordable

I don't believe you.
ronburgandy.gif
 
2014-01-01 12:50:04 PM  

SauronWasFramed: You can't believe the numbers? You deem me a liar? Sorry, family of three: 52 male 56 and 19 females all non smokers in 39157 zip code. Go to ehealthinsurance.com and check the numbers for yourself. Look it up for yourself and see.

Bottom line: the law is so broken, it has had to have numerous extensions and exemptions. It is so broken, Mary Landrieu, the deciding democrat vote, says it needs to be amended....because her reelection hopes are pinned on you being able to keep your plan because you like it


Did you even bother to check for subsidies? cuz when I give you a $75K income (no idea how accurate that is), you get a subsidy of almost a grand, dropping your numbers down to A farkING DOLLAR after the deductible on that bronze plan, with the PLATINUM plan being $381, $2000 deductible, $20 co-pay.  Unless you're making $100,000 a year, which I doubt for some reason, you're either a liar or an idiot.  Either way I'd suggest you move, because Humana sucks ass.
 
2014-01-01 12:52:05 PM  

VTGremlin: Nope, you're correct. He's either lying or has enough health problems that it's probably just time to head out to pasture and check out the rabbits.


You've overlooked a third possibility. He may be living in a Republican led state where the State gov has been actively attempting to sabotage the ACA. If that's the case, his numbers are probably accurate.
 
2014-01-01 12:52:09 PM  

dopirt: SauronWasFramed: So we have 3 million that have signed up.

But there were 15 million that were uninsured and another 5 million that lost their policies because they didn't include free birth control (even if you are a post menopausal woman) or maternity care (for men).

In other words we are whooping it up because there are 2 million less insured.


/ if you can't afford the premiums, how will you pay the deductibles?

//  my bronze policy quote:$940 a month with a $12600 deductible. No subsidy. Not affordable


Where do you live where a Bronze plan costs $940/mo?  I though you lived in Louisiana, but I sure haven't found plans even half that expensive.


Um, the very link he put up and information he gave us gave me $694/month with a $12,000 deductible, or $898/month with a $5,000 deductible gold plan.

SauronWasFramed:

Look up Humana Local Preferred Bronze, or Gold if you want the lower deductible. Local Preferred Silver will cost $787/month, but it has $25 doctors' visits and a $9,200 deductible. Not great, but not quite as dire as what you're getting from Humana National Preferred Bronze. Did you do much shopping for this?
 
2014-01-01 12:53:10 PM  

Chameleon: Actually, he's right.  That's pretty terrible.  On the other hand, when I go to Healthcare.gov, I see that if you have an income of under $75,000 a year, you probably qualify for a subsidy which wipes out $900-$1000 a month, meaning you can that ridiculously high deductible plan for free, or get a plan with a $200 deductible for $375/month.


Man, I didn't even factor if he was eligible for a subsidy. My numbers were just what were available as flat rates.
 
2014-01-01 12:54:23 PM  

Farnn: sdd2000: The risk pool doesn't need to be the entire population, you can create risk pools of those who are actually at risk of suffering from those conditions and alter prices accordingly. Young people should have very low insurance costs because their risks are low. As a 28 year old, should my prostate cancer coverage cost be the same as my 65 year old fathers? Insurance rates should be based on the cost of treatment and the likelihood you will need treatment, not the total cost of the treatment across the entire insured population divided by the number of members. Sorry if I think young adults shouldn't be crippled by high insurance premium ...

Actually the ACA allows for age rating, but just not as much as before. The most it can be is a 3X multiple from the low cost young persons rate to old farts rate if I recall correctly.

As to the second highlighted point, you really don't understand how insurance works do you?

Yes, I believe the old multiple was 5x and now it's down to 3x which will result in up to a 66% increase in costs for young adults.  And insurance costs aren't calculated by waiting until the end of the year and then billing everyone for the total cost.  It's projected out in the future and there's a reason every insurance company has insurance because even they don't know exactly what their costs will be.


Not in Texas, the multiple was whatever I think the insurance companies wanted to make the multiple (i.e. no cap). Although this results in using your math a 66% increase for young it represents a significant decrease for those older than the "young adults". This significant decrease being removed does not match the slightly higher income one makes as one progresses through their working career.

 You have also conveniently ignored that those under 30 (if they are foolish enough) can get "catastrophic" policies.
 
2014-01-01 12:55:00 PM  

friday13: Did you even bother to check for subsidies? cuz when I give you a $75K income (no idea how accurate that is), you get a subsidy of almost a grand, dropping your numbers down to A farkING DOLLAR after the deductible on that bronze plan, with the PLATINUM plan being $381, $2000 deductible, $20 co-pay. Unless you're making $100,000 a year, which I doubt for some reason, you're either a liar or an idiot. Either way I'd suggest you move, because Humana sucks ass.


He's both a liar and an idiot.
 
2014-01-01 12:55:08 PM  
I want you all to remember that nothing you say here will mean anything. That's why I always recommend ridicule and humor over reason.
 
2014-01-01 12:58:01 PM  

Bloody William: Um, the very link he put up and information he gave us gave me $694/month with a $12,000 deductible, or $898/month with a $5,000 deductible gold plan.


Yeah, my bad, he hadn't posted that yet when I started shopping for insurance in Louisiana, and naturally I didn't check for updates upon my return.
 
2014-01-01 12:59:22 PM  

Somacandra: [i.imgur.com image 616x457]

==

My GOD.....the horror....the horror


Hopefully he can get that hand tumor looked at as well.
 
2014-01-01 01:00:03 PM  
I have to say, "... and there's nothing anyone can do about it" is spot-on.  When I talk with these people IRL they sound like they're on the brink of tears.  Because poor people. Will. Get. Health. Care.

A relative told me that I was one of the "losers" with the ACA, as I'm going to be subsidizing poor peoples' health care.  "Yeah, that's the idea, and I count it as a win."

Seeing the red states screw their own because REASONS gives me equal measures of schadenfreude and horror.
 
2014-01-01 01:00:38 PM  

Farnn: No, that's why they have insurance.  But they should have higher incomes than a 28 year old and should be able to afford higher premiums.  And what numbers am I using?  That the risk factor for prostate cancer is higher for a 65 year old than a 28 year old?  How many 28 year olds do you know with prostate cancer?


First off, you really think that old, retired people have high incomes?  What the actual fark?  You, sir, are WOEFULLY ignorant.  Not everyone is lucky enough to even retire, much less retire with a comfortable nest egg...

Second, I was referring to your premium being nearly a grand, which was admittedly true, but I doubt you actually looked at whether or not you could even GET subsidies.
 
2014-01-01 01:00:39 PM  

Bloody William: Chameleon: Actually, he's right.  That's pretty terrible.  On the other hand, when I go to Healthcare.gov, I see that if you have an income of under $75,000 a year, you probably qualify for a subsidy which wipes out $900-$1000 a month, meaning you can that ridiculously high deductible plan for free, or get a plan with a $200 deductible for $375/month.

Man, I didn't even factor if he was eligible for a subsidy. My numbers were just what were available as flat rates.


I will admit that I didn't realize that the subsidy income level was such a hard cutoff, though.  It looks like for a family of three, the maximum rate for a silver is $619 if you make under $78,000 a year, but that cap is totally gone if you make $79,000 and you get pretty screwed.  I understand that there should be a limit to the subsidies, but it seems like that should be more gently graduated.

(numbers from here)
 
2014-01-01 01:01:03 PM  

Bareefer Obonghit: I want you all to remember that nothing you say here will mean anything. That's why I always recommend ridicule and humor over reason.


Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries
 
2014-01-01 01:02:50 PM  

SauronWasFramed: Bottom line: the law is so broken, it has had to have numerous extensions and exemptions. It is so broken, Mary Landrieu, the deciding democrat vote, says it needs to be amended....because her reelection hopes are pinned on you being able to keep your plan because you like it


It's broken because it wasn't 100% perfect and has to be amended? So on that basis the Constitution was a total failure.
 
2014-01-01 01:03:08 PM  

Bloody William: dopirt: SauronWasFramed: So we have 3 million that have signed up.

But there were 15 million that were uninsured and another 5 million that lost their policies because they didn't include free birth control (even if you are a post menopausal woman) or maternity care (for men).

In other words we are whooping it up because there are 2 million less insured.


/ if you can't afford the premiums, how will you pay the deductibles?

//  my bronze policy quote:$940 a month with a $12600 deductible. No subsidy. Not affordable


Where do you live where a Bronze plan costs $940/mo?  I though you lived in Louisiana, but I sure haven't found plans even half that expensive.

Um, the very link he put up and information he gave us gave me $694/month with a $12,000 deductible, or $898/month with a $5,000 deductible gold plan.

SauronWasFramed:

Look up Humana Local Preferred Bronze, or Gold if you want the lower deductible. Local Preferred Silver will cost $787/month, but it has $25 doctors' visits and a $9,200 deductible. Not great, but not quite as dire as what you're getting from Humana National Preferred Bronze. Did you do much shopping for this?


Of course not. He hated the law before and spent all of 5 minutes logging in a checking one thing. As other posters have pointed out, if he made 75k or less (75k is pretty farking good for Mississippi), his payments would be about 1,000 dollars less per month. Just like all those other people that popped up on tv showed complaining about their prices. Once their stories were vetted it turns out they were either ignorant or lying. Some people are going to have to pay more (for real insurance), but these ridiculous claims are exactly that....ridiculous.
 
2014-01-01 01:04:37 PM  

Farnn: Young people have enough costs these days with student debt and a stagnant economy,


Remember, you CHOSE to take out loans to pay for a degree that did not improve your employment opportunities. Nut up Buttercup.
 
2014-01-01 01:06:51 PM  

Bareefer Obonghit: I want you all to remember that nothing you say here will mean anything. That's why I always recommend ridicule and humor over reason.


I started to click the "Funny" button for this, but then I pondered your point for a moment, and moved my cursor 3/4-inch and chose the "Smart" button instead.
 
2014-01-01 01:06:53 PM  
For people who like to throw around the 5 million number: you do know that is for plans canceled and not coverage lost, right?
 
2014-01-01 01:06:55 PM  
So Fartbongo's rape begins. Mr Fart please pull your big juicy hog from the torn tender anus of Muricans, we cannot handle that much meat. We need a tender slender buggerin, the GOP way. Their flaccid tiny penis slappin' our face is preferred to yer giant humper. Then shove it down our throat. But none of this is sexual or innuendo, you dirty minded perverts. We GOPers just like to use facerape metaphors that are not facerape metaphors.


teabaggingforJesus.jpg
 
2014-01-01 01:08:44 PM  

More_Like_A_Stain: Farnn: Young people have enough costs these days with student debt and a stagnant economy,

Remember, you CHOSE to take out loans to pay for a degree that did not improve your employment opportunities. Nut up Buttercup.


Yeah, that's exactly what happened to millions of students. They allllll went into vague, foofy fields because they wanted to become 17th century paleo-philosophers of southwest Europe and not because job markets change, the economy hasn't been great, the market crashed five years ago, and education prices have skyrocketed even higher than health insurance prices before the ACA.

No, it's all their fault, because the easiest answer to "why do bad things happen to good people?" is that those people must be bad in some way, and not because the world is full of unfair situations beyond anyone's control and that success almost always comes with a measure of luck as well as skill, and sometimes not even skill. No, it's the hordes of shortsighted young people getting degrees they know they can't turn into jobs. You gormless wank.
 
2014-01-01 01:11:43 PM  

Bloody William: More_Like_A_Stain: Farnn: Young people have enough costs these days with student debt and a stagnant economy,

Remember, you CHOSE to take out loans to pay for a degree that did not improve your employment opportunities. Nut up Buttercup.

Yeah, that's exactly what happened to millions of students. They allllll went into vague, foofy fields because they wanted to become 17th century paleo-philosophers of southwest Europe and not because job markets change, the economy hasn't been great, the market crashed five years ago, and education prices have skyrocketed even higher than health insurance prices before the ACA.

No, it's all their fault, because the easiest answer to "why do bad things happen to good people?" is that those people must be bad in some way, and not because the world is full of unfair situations beyond anyone's control and that success almost always comes with a measure of luck as well as skill, and sometimes not even skill. No, it's the hordes of shortsighted young people getting degrees they know they can't turn into jobs. You gormless wank.


You know if the bad luck of the economy and other bad luck continues, then those poor people might catch some other bad luck, like getting real sick or getting in an accident. I hope they actually bought health insurance rather than listen to the Koch brothers group who told them to opt out and just pay the fine.
 
2014-01-01 01:12:20 PM  
Failing the kind of existential disaster the Republicans predict (entirely possible if Obama and the Democrats are hit with a stupidity ray from outer space or there is some other rift in the space/time continuum) the ACA is on track to being the most important, beneficial, and, ultimately, popular pieces of legislation in the past 50 years. In other words, it's going to be an unprecedented political and PR disaster for the Republicans. I have to say, this seems like a situation that could have been easily avoided. At any time since the 1980′s, during their twenty years in the White House, the Republicans could have instituted something similar to the ACA, and yet they consistently chose not to. Not only that, but whenever the Democrats proposed something along these lines the Republicans fought it tooth and nail, right up to, as we've seen, shutting down the government rather than acceding to the will of the people.

I've been thinking about this and I think it reflects an essential difference in how the Democrats and the Republicans operate. Democrats offer benefits to people in hopes that they will be persuaded to vote Democratic (I suppose that might be considered bribery, although how the Democratic bribery of offering people affordable health insurance differs from the Republican bribery of offering them lower taxes escapes me). Republicans, on the other hand, offer benefits  after the factto reward loyalty. You must first prove yourself worthy, by consistently voting Republican, before they will deign to provide you with a desirable benefit. This is, for instance, the logic behind Bush's Medicare expansion. Old people have a track record of voting Republican-reward them! Conversely, failure to vote Republican means you deserve to be, in fact you  must be punished. The real reason the Republicans have opposed health care reform is because the primary beneficiaries of such reform, the poor, tend not to vote Republican. Some people will say this is the Democratic attitude towards the rich-"They don't vote Democratic! Raise their taxes!"-but I assure you, the Democrats would raise taxes on the wealthy whether or not they tended to vote Democratic. It's nothing personal. That is not the case with the Republican attitude towards the poor, which is intensely personal and indicative of  a visceral loathing for the unfortunate combined with a gleeful pleasure in increasing their suffering .

It's kind of like training your dog. Democrats tend to overindulge and over-reward their pet constituents in hopes of getting their votes. Republicans seem more interested in beating their pets sadistically when they disobey. It's the old carrot or the stick dichotomy. Personally, I'll take the carrot; you can have the stick.
 
2014-01-01 01:15:24 PM  

Bloody William: More_Like_A_Stain: Farnn: Young people have enough costs these days with student debt and a stagnant economy,

Remember, you CHOSE to take out loans to pay for a degree that did not improve your employment opportunities. Nut up Buttercup.

Yeah, that's exactly what happened to millions of students. They allllll went into vague, foofy fields because they wanted to become 17th century paleo-philosophers of southwest Europe and not because job markets change, the economy hasn't been great, the market crashed five years ago, and education prices have skyrocketed even higher than health insurance prices before the ACA.

No, it's all their fault, because the easiest answer to "why do bad things happen to good people?" is that those people must be bad in some way, and not because the world is full of unfair situations beyond anyone's control and that success almost always comes with a measure of luck as well as skill, and sometimes not even skill. No, it's the hordes of shortsighted young people getting degrees they know they can't turn into jobs. You gormless wank.


Just consider it as the flip side of the "they shouldn't have taken out mortgages that they couldn't afford" coin. Take some personal responsibility for your own choices.
 
2014-01-01 01:21:21 PM  

clambam: At any time since the 1980′s, during their twenty years in the White House, the Republicans could have instituted something similar to the ACA, and yet they consistently chose not to. Not only that, but whenever the Democrats proposed something along these lines the Republicans fought it tooth and nail, right up to, as we've seen, shutting down the government rather than acceding to the will of the people.


The invisible hand has not done it's magic in the last 30 years, but it should be allowed to continue to try.

Perhaps tax cuts will help.
 
2014-01-01 01:22:23 PM  

theknuckler_33: "Many people will get insurance cards, but will not have a clue what's covered, what's not covered and what they are supposed to pay."

For goodness sakes, it's not rocket surgery. If the bolded part is true, it is basically because those people are idiots and hasn't a damned thing to do with the ACA.


Hmpf.  I have BCBS, and the reason I haven't a clue what is actually covered is that BCBS and my doctors say stuff is covered...then I get billed for it anyway.
 
2014-01-01 01:23:04 PM  
The poor and needy getting health insurance?

Clearly an abomination against the god of the GOP -- its name is so holy, I can only use a symbol to describe it.. $.
 
2014-01-01 01:23:42 PM  

VTGremlin: Three Crooked Squirrels: SauronWasFramed:

/ if you can't afford the premiums, how will you pay the deductibles?

//  my bronze policy quote:$940 a month with a $12600 deductible. No subsidy. Not affordable

That sounds strange to me. My wife and kid were on a policy - bare bones and expensive , as she had cancer 10 years ago. Her policy, about $550 per month, was so crappy it didn't meet minimum ACA standards. So BC/BS forced her onto their shiattiest ACA compliant bronze plan. $240 a month for the two of them for better coverage than she had. Deductible lower than your quote, too. Not saying that's not the quote you got, but that seems strange.

Nope, you're correct. He's either lying or has enough health problems that it's probably just time to head out to pasture and check out the rabbits.

My bronze is $165/mo with a $5,000 deductible.


He's either full of shiat, too stupid to fill out the forms correctly, or earns mid-six figures.  In either case no sympathy about his health insurance costs.  Silver Plan limits premium at 8.05% of income regardless of subsidy level.
 
2014-01-01 01:26:15 PM  

Corvus: SauronWasFramed: So we have 3 million that have signed up.

But there were 15 million that were uninsured and another 5 million that lost their policies because they didn't include free birth control (even if you are a post menopausal woman) or maternity care (for men).

In other words we are whooping it up because there are 2 million less insured.


/ if you can't afford the premiums, how will you pay the deductibles?

//  my bronze policy quote:$940 a month with a $12600 deductible. No subsidy. Not affordable

Counting those who now get Medicare because of the ACA it is 6 MILLION!


You mean Medicaid.  Two different animals.
 
2014-01-01 01:26:21 PM  
images.sodahead.com
Steve is puzzled - "i thought it was a epic fail"
 
2014-01-01 01:29:31 PM  

strapp3r: [images.sodahead.com image 171x200]
Steve is puzzled - "i thought it was a epic fail"


Not puzzled outwitted.
FOBIO - Frequently Outwitted By Inanimate Objects
 
2014-01-01 01:29:38 PM  

Bloody William: More_Like_A_Stain: Farnn: Young people have enough costs these days with student debt and a stagnant economy,

Remember, you CHOSE to take out loans to pay for a degree that did not improve your employment opportunities. Nut up Buttercup.

Yeah, that's exactly what happened to millions of students. They allllll went into vague, foofy fields because they wanted to become 17th century paleo-philosophers of southwest Europe and not because job markets change, the economy hasn't been great, the market crashed five years ago, and education prices have skyrocketed even higher than health insurance prices before the ACA.

No, it's all their fault, because the easiest answer to "why do bad things happen to good people?" is that those people must be bad in some way, and not because the world is full of unfair situations beyond anyone's control and that success almost always comes with a measure of luck as well as skill, and sometimes not even skill. No, it's the hordes of shortsighted young people getting degrees they know they can't turn into jobs. You gormless wank.


My daughter attended St. John's College in Annapolis, MD. St. John's offers a single curriculum, the classics, starting with Ancient Greek philosophy (they actually study Ancient Greek freshman year) and working their way up to Existentialism, or something like that. In other words, the quintessential Liberal Arts degree.

She got out of school, goofed off for a few months, signed up with a temp agency and got placed at a Jewish philanthropy in Boston (she's half-Jewish and half-Armenian). That turned into a full time job and she started at $40K a year, not an engineering salary but respectable enough for a 23-year-old, even nowadays. She's moved into an apartment with some friends and is paying her own way, including her student loan bills, which are considerable.

My point here is that a "useless" degree might not be so useless after all. She learned to reason logically, to argue effectively, and to write cogently. There are places where those skills are in demand and employers are willing to pay for them. Don't be so quick to dismiss non-science degrees as useless. They are what you make of them, and, as with everything else, hard work and a little bit of luck will see you through.
 
2014-01-01 01:32:34 PM  

theknuckler_33: Suggesting that all the people who 'lost their insurance' are now uninsured is disingenuous, at best. An outright lie at worst.


Saying such is stupid at best. Retarded at worse.

Some switched. Some were dropped completely when their company left the state. It's entirely accurate to say millions lost their insurance due to the ACA requirements.

I'm not sorry that simple issues are hard for you. You have nobody to blame but yourself.
 
2014-01-01 01:33:01 PM  
Self-employed mid-thirties Floridian with pre-existing conditions here. I lost my $798/month Aetna coverage a few hours ago, and I'm now heavily burdened by my new Blue Cross insurance which is a horribly unaffordable $354/month. (That's before subsidies, BTW. I'm going to front the premiums and file for the credit in my 2014 taxes provided I qualify.)

It's a platinum plan: No deductible (vs. $1,500 with Old Plan), $2,000 out-of-pocket maximum (vs. $7,500), $10 to see my doctor (vs. $25), no charge for routine labs (vs. 100% until I reached my deductible), pharmacy copays of $0-25/month depending on the drug and where I get it from (vs. $15 or more, plus a separate $500 pharmacy deductible), and all the doctors I currently see are in-network.

Shorter: I didn't like my old plan, and now I don't have to keep it. Thanks, Obama!
 
2014-01-01 01:33:52 PM  

Elfich: Torak


I've always yearned for a movie of the Belgariad/Mallorean
 
2014-01-01 01:37:23 PM  

SauronWasFramed: But there were 15 million that were uninsured and another 5 million that lost their policies because they didn't include free birth control (even if you are a post menopausal woman) or maternity care (for men).


I think it's terrible that normal men have to exactly the same rate for insurance as a defective woman.

If women wanted to pay the same rate as normal people, they should have thought of that before they decided to be a woman.
 
2014-01-01 01:39:17 PM  

Mrbogey: Always talk about the success of a failure in the ephemeral. Never allow the facts to be introduced because nothing can be defeated if kept nebulous and theoretical.


Tell you what, for every one FACT (as in verified truth) you introduce that invalidates Obamacare as a success, I will introduce THREE insane talking points that conservative pundits or politicians reported as FACT. Shall we see who runs out first?
 
2014-01-01 01:43:27 PM  
But Richie Rich will only be able to afford a 105 ft yacht this year in stead of the 106 ft one! Socializmmmmm!!! Gaaaahh!!!
 
2014-01-01 01:45:38 PM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: SauronWasFramed: So we have 3 million that have signed up.

But there were 15 million that were uninsured and another 5 million that lost their policies because they didn't include free birth control (even if you are a post menopausal woman) or maternity care (for men).

In other words we are whooping it up because there are 2 million less insured.


/ if you can't afford the premiums, how will you pay the deductibles?

//  my bronze policy quote:$940 a month with a $12600 deductible. No subsidy. Not affordable

That sounds strange to me. My wife and kid were on a policy - bare bones and expensive , as she had cancer 10 years ago. Her policy, about $550 per month, was so crappy it didn't meet minimum ACA standards. So BC/BS forced her onto their shiattiest ACA compliant bronze plan. $240 a month for the two of them for better coverage than she had. Deductible lower than your quote, too. Not saying that's not the quote you got, but that seems strange.


No subsidy means he's making more than 400% of poverty level.
 
2014-01-01 01:50:29 PM  

meat0918: Three Crooked Squirrels: SauronWasFramed: So we have 3 million that have signed up.

But there were 15 million that were uninsured and another 5 million that lost their policies because they didn't include free birth control (even if you are a post menopausal woman) or maternity care (for men).

In other words we are whooping it up because there are 2 million less insured.


/ if you can't afford the premiums, how will you pay the deductibles?

//  my bronze policy quote:$940 a month with a $12600 deductible. No subsidy. Not affordable

That sounds strange to me. My wife and kid were on a policy - bare bones and expensive , as she had cancer 10 years ago. Her policy, about $550 per month, was so crappy it didn't meet minimum ACA standards. So BC/BS forced her onto their shiattiest ACA compliant bronze plan. $240 a month for the two of them for better coverage than she had. Deductible lower than your quote, too. Not saying that's not the quote you got, but that seems strange.

No subsidy means he's making more than 400% of poverty level.


img.fark.net

img.fark.net


I know these are not healthcare related figured, but it shows the same about of sympathy I have for him.
 
2014-01-01 02:04:12 PM  

FlashHarry: remember: to republicans, this is literally worse than hitler, stalin and al qaeda combined.


According a farker from another thread it's worse the the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.
 
2014-01-01 02:08:39 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: SauronWasFramed: they didn't include free birth control (even if you are a post menopausal woman) or maternity care (for men).

It's really unfair to force insurance companies to cover maternity care for men. Their annual costs for such coverage could end up being nearly $0, which will surely bankrupt them.


No, the problem is forcing group A to share in paying for coverage that only group B can take advantage of, something they wouldn't do voluntarily. So they have to be coerced by eliminating all the alternatives. This applies in both directions, women get birth coverage, men get boner pills for example. Likewise young people are being forced to share in the much higher costs incurred by covering the old. The central conceit of Obamacare is that it has substituted the judgement of bureaucrats and politicians for the marketplace, and the only way it can possibly make that work is by force and fiat. Unfortunately for them, as evidenced by the ad hoc and chaotic nature of the delays and changes that they're making almost on a daily basis, it doesn't work.
 
2014-01-01 02:09:03 PM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: SauronWasFramed: So we have 3 million that have signed up.

But there were 15 million that were uninsured and another 5 million that lost their policies because they didn't include free birth control (even if you are a post menopausal woman) or maternity care (for men).

In other words we are whooping it up because there are 2 million less insured.


/ if you can't afford the premiums, how will you pay the deductibles?

//  my bronze policy quote:$940 a month with a $12600 deductible. No subsidy. Not affordable

That sounds strange to me. My wife and kid were on a policy - bare bones and expensive , as she had cancer 10 years ago. Her policy, about $550 per month, was so crappy it didn't meet minimum ACA standards. So BC/BS forced her onto their shiattiest ACA compliant bronze plan. $240 a month for the two of them for better coverage than she had. Deductible lower than your quote, too. Not saying that's not the quote you got, but that seems strange.


Sometimes, people lie on the internet.

/also, those people who had their plans cancelled can now get new, better insured. They aren't uninsured forever.
 
2014-01-01 02:12:28 PM  
Welcome to the club comrades.

From Socialist Canuckistan.
 
2014-01-01 02:14:20 PM  
jjorsett:
No, the problem is forcing group A to share in paying for coverage that only group B can take advantage of, something they wouldn't do voluntarily. So they have to be coerced by eliminating all the alternatives. This applies in both directions, women get birth coverage, men get boner pills for example. Likewise young people are being forced to share in the much higher costs incurred by covering the old. The central conceit of Obamacare is that it has substituted the judgement of bureaucrats and politicians for the marketplace, and the only way it can possibly make that work is by force and fiat. Unfortunately for them, as evidenced by the ad hoc and chaotic nature of the delays and changes that they're making almost on a daily basis, it doesn't work.

You really think that the pressure of including those scenarios in this law came from bureaucrats and politicians and not 'the market' providers?

You are being silly.
 
2014-01-01 02:15:50 PM  

LoneWolf343: those people who had their plans cancelled can now get new, better insured. They aren't uninsured forever.


That's crazy. Don't you remember the old saying from Tennessee? At least it's in Texas, so they probably have in Tennessee: "Insure me once, shame on you. Insure me twice...can't get insured again."
 
2014-01-01 02:18:26 PM  

jjorsett: No, the problem is forcing group A to share in paying for coverage that only group B can take advantage of, something they wouldn't do voluntarily.


At work, I pay the same rate for insurance as old people, women of childbearing age, smokers, and people with pre-existing conditions.  People with one kid pay the same rate as people with 12 kids.

Why aren't you complaining about that?
 
2014-01-01 02:24:53 PM  
So I was able to get insurance again because of ACA, so yes, thank you President Obama for eliminating pre-existing conditions. Seriously.

But I am surprised at how many people think $250 / month plus $5000+ deductibles are reasonable.

I've never had a plan with more than a $2000 deductible. I think that with the exception of three years (across five decades) where my health expenses were $100K plus, my health expenses were more like $250 for the entire year. I would never spend more those years than $5000.

So a $5000 deductible PLUS $250 per month does seem like a huge increase to me.
 
2014-01-01 02:25:47 PM  

jjorsett: The central conceit of Obamacare is that it has substituted the judgement of bureaucrats and politicians for the marketplace, and the only way it can possibly make that work is by force and fiat. Unfortunately for them, as evidenced by the ad hoc and chaotic nature of the delays and changes that they're making almost on a daily basis, it doesn't work.


That's only because the "free market" was killing 50,000 people a year because they weren't profitable enough to cover.

They forced the government's hand because they weren't willing to fix this situation.
 
2014-01-01 02:26:39 PM  

jjorsett: as evidenced by the ad hoc and chaotic nature of the delays and changes that they're making almost on a daily basis


Couldn't those delays and changes to policy also be the result of careful consideration of various points of contention brought up by critics and concerned parties in order to make application of the law better? Nawww! What am I thinking? It's obviously evidence of total failure. Thanks Obama!
 
Displayed 50 of 236 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 »
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