Jan. 31, 2015 |
38° Light Rain Fog/Mist
See complete forecast
Copy and paste the link:
Lawrenceguy40 you are right on the money. He is following the Saul Alinsky playbook to the letter. This is how you kill a capitalist economy. I will hand it to him and his party, they have done a great job so far in killing it. November we are going to take it back. Then we will handcuff him politically. But the recovery from the damage these leftists have done will literally take years.
I love it when ignorant people try to make a caustic remark. Kosmo and Lawrence guy, you both don't know what you are talking about and OBVIOUSLY you haven't read the bill. How can getting rid of pre existing conditions be government control. Nothing will change if you currently have insurance and if you don't you will get it. How is that bad?
The GOP sure didn't do anything. The no party said no to families.
i even know some people who have no insurance and can't buy their drugs now, but will be able to when this act is finally put into place, who are opposed to this bill. Why? Do you not want medical treatment? Would you rather die? I'm just curious about why everyone having access to medical care is a bad thing? I can afford to almost be overinsured. I never miss a check up and go to the doctor when something is wrong without worrying about the cost. Twice the doctor was able to do something to keep me from being really sick and possibly dead. If I had waited like many people have to, I might have had to collect disability, which would have cost all of you a lot more money. So why are you all against people having medical care in a timely manner? Is it just because Obama supported it?
I've heard people who were pushing for more oil drilling, suddenly turn against it when Obama opened the gates. Something which irks me, even though I support most of what Obama has done thus far. So I don't follow blindly behind everything that Obama does. Why do you people suddenly change your positions on issues when Obama is in agreement with you.
Even I agreed with Bush on some things, such as immigration reform. I think if Obama came out strongly prolife, suddenly you all would become prochoice, and claim he's trying to take away your rights.
I'm getting all my ailments seen about before the death panels are put in place
You probably don't have any pre-existing conditions either? If you had medical problems, your insurance might not be cheap at all. This bill is mostly about people who have health problems who can't get insurance because it is unaffordable for them or they are blacklisted (like me) for pre-existing conditions. Requiring young people who don't buy insurance because they can't be bothered is only icing on the cake.
Requiring young people who don't buy insurance to do so ...
Probably employer supplied insurance, not the same thing
Yeah, and if you suddenly develop a condition that some BCBS bean counter decides is too expensive, they'll rescind your policy in a heartbeat. THAT'S what HCR will put an end to.
Many states require car insurance (ie liability coverage). Flood insurance is mandated in much of the country. Are those outrageous as well?
I suppose if those opposed to buying health insurance were willing to sign a waiver that is entered in a national database stating that they want to be excluded from care should they need care over and above what they can pay for at the time, then..... maybe we have a real discussion on the matter. Otherwise, I find it odd that we are so concerned about being more responsible... those who already are being responsible will continue to and those who are not, will need to. Those who are struggling financially will not be buried even further should they need care.
Some might say... well, the poor don't have to be responsible. That really goes to the heart of the matter. Health care is divided along income lines. Health care costs are out of control and it is more costly for us to not have everyone be covered so that the cost is more evenly spread.
The fact that people don't seek preventative care due to finances is very much where we are right now. You can choose not to drive a car. You can choose not to buy a home in a flood plain. Seeking medical assistance shouldn't be something we have to make a choice about.
balishag---Is this through your job? I looked for insurance for my daughter which I was going to pay for myself and found nothing even remotely like that. If it is through your job, then they are paying the rest of the premium.
Good bill. Brought fairness to health care. Brought some accountability to insurance companies, but not enough. Tea bag rhetoric is getting soggier by the minute. Democrats will add seats in the fall election because Republicans are slow on the uptake.
Let us revisit this thread after the mid-terms to see who is pumping mud.....
edjayhawk (anonymous) says…
"The way you kill a capitalist economy is for the government to give corporations huge amounts of money and not tax them fairly so the individual taxpayer makes up the difference."
And after the Democrats have taxed the bejeezus out of the corporations, who are those individuals going to work for, and how will they be able to afford buying anything from those corporations, ed?
wounded_soldier (anonymous) says…
"I love it when ignorant people try to make a caustic remark."
So do I. Got a chuckle out of yours.
BTW, you've read all 2800+ pages of the legislation, I assume?
pace (anonymous) says…
"The GOP sure didn't do anything. The no party said no to families."
While pace is apparently a proud member of the party of 'Don't Know', as evidenced by his post.
justsaying (anonymous) says…
"Many states require car insurance (ie liability coverage)."
Health insurance isn't liability insurance. Slight difference, and one might have hoped that by now most people would be less ignorant of that difference and stop beating to death that specious argument.
"I suppose if those opposed to buying health insurance were willing to sign a waiver that is entered in a national database stating that they want to be excluded from care should they need care over and above what they can pay for at the time, then..... maybe we have a real discussion on the matter."
Wow, you managed to hit BOTH of the whining liberal talking points in the same post!
They're already in such a database, for all intent and purposes - it's called 'no insurance' and it means they have to pay the bill themselves. Your contention that only those who carry insurance should get care speaks highly of your mindset.
"Otherwise, I find it odd that we are so concerned about being more responsible... those who already are being responsible will continue to and those who are not, will need to. Those who are struggling financially will not be buried even further should they need care."
So your definition of being 'responsible' is getting someone else to pay for your medical care? Great.
BTW, how are those struggling financially going to afford the $1000/month or more for insurance premiums that the government is going to force them to buy?
RiverCityConservative (anonymous) says…
"Good bill. Brought fairness to health care. Brought some accountability to insurance companies, but not enough."
Hey, I can always use a big laugh, River - care to take a whack at backing up either of those claims?
I'm treating myself for humoral imbalances. Fermented beverages play an important role.
I have health insurance through my employer and I thank God often for that. I don't need you to pay my bills.
People without insurance go to ERs and it costs the rest of us more when the bills don't get paid. Other than the financial cost, there is a human cost. There are many people that don't have the choice you apparently have. All you have to do is look at how many bankruptcies were due to medical bills to understand the link between our economic benefit as a nation when people don't walk away from their bills due to loss of their job, loss of health(care) and loss of their life savings. Insurance companies have been getting away with murder for too long. So, I agree with you; signing a waiver would take care of the matter. You wouldn't be required to carry insurance.
I am not a liberal as you so quickly try to paint me but on this issue I'd much rather be with the liberals.
justsaying (anonymous) says…
"I have health insurance through my employer and I thank God often for that. I don't need you to pay my bills."
The very fact that you "thank God often" for your insurance means you need someone to pay your bills, justsaying. Your bills are paid by your fellow employees who pay their premiums, and by the people (yes, perhaps myself) that buy your company's products, since your employer pays most of your premiums.
"People without insurance go to ERs and it costs the rest of us more when the bills don't get paid."
Based on the assumption that people without insurance don't pay their own bills. Again, this hardly speaks highly of the belief system of those who present that 'argument'. In other words, justsaying, some people are responsible enough to pay their own bills, and if you find that concept foreign and unbelievable, it doesn't say much for your own sense of personal responsibility.
But then, you think you're paying for your own medical care because you pay (your portion of) your insurance premiums.
"Insurance companies have been getting away with murder for too long."
Please, enlighten the rest of us, justsaying, since there is almost universal agreement that the biggest beneficiaries of this legislation will be those insurance companies. Go ahead and tell me how they're not going to be getting away with murder any more.
When a person that has been paying their premiums, their co-pays and their deductibles per there plan terms has their insurance company kick them off of insurance as soon as they really need it.... I'd say that is wrong. Perhaps you will still disagree.
I have paid more in insurance premiums than I have used in insurance payments since I've been with my current employer. Additionally, salaries are also adjusted downwards because of the hikes in premiums so I also pay that way as well. Then, on top of that, I pay more for care when others who cannot afford to be covered and cannot afford to pay their bills go to the hospital in critical condition. Then, there is the cost of people declaring foreclosure on neighborhoods, lowered tax base and the higher costs for all that are spread out when a person declares bankruptcy and wipes out their debt almost entirely.
The insurance companies are getting a pretty sweet deal by having more people on their private insurance plans but we will all benefit greatly by having everyone covered.
I would agree there is much to be done to improve upon what was just made law but that is typical with most laws. But, at least now, they will be monitored more, they will be held accountable more for how they allocate their funds and they will not be able to dump a person when insurance is needed.
You seem pretty aggressive on this matter. I am all for you not having to pay the fine and I'm all for you not having to buy insurance. Isn't that what you want? There are many people out there in terrible situations because of the condition of our health care system right now. I am all for this as it means someone else has access to health care. Many times (as noted with this poll), we don't know that someone needs care until it is too late.
Yes, I do thank God.... I thank him for many things and I thank him on a regular basis.
Just the opposite. The threat of effects of Obamacare has prompted me to start hoarding prescription meds and having any elective procedures and tests done NOW. My employer has historically provided exceptional health insurance coverage but I doubt that will last much longer. They immediately took a $150M charge when the bill passed.
Holy $#!T !
Yes. Now that we finally have health care reform I will be able to start getting regular treatment again. Thank you, Obama, for caring about people instead of corporations and big medicine. It's about time someone did.
I have insurance through my employer and no pre-existing conditions, thank goodness, but with the pay cuts my husband and I have had to take after his lay off in 08, we can't afford to pay copays for doctor visits - let alone afford prescription meds if we need them. We pay for our health insurance, but our budget is so tight now that we really can't afford to use it unless we are absolutely forced to. Definitely one car wreck away from financial disaster at our house...
paulette2 (anonymous) says…
"Take the example of Koch Industries."
Still plagiarizing, paulette?
Still citing a blog written by some Eastern European student journalists (direct-quoting without attribution)?
"Oh yeah. Those real honest and ethical corporations. Sign up now! Lose your job when we say so. "
And who (other than the entitled whiners of Larryville) told you someone - anyone - owed you a job, ed?
You still haven't explained how taxing those big, bad, evil corporations would be good for those individual taxpayers.
jajacut (anonymous) says…
"Yes. Now that we finally have health care reform I will be able to start getting regular treatment again. Thank you, Obama, for caring about people instead of corporations and big medicine. It's about time someone did."
Wow. You're serious, aren't you?
Ignorance is such an ugly thing, and so easily cured.
"But, at least now, they will be monitored more, they will be held accountable more for how they allocate their funds and they will not be able to dump a person when insurance is needed."
And, for the $64,000 question, want to try to answer how that will affect health care costs for ALL of us? I'll make it a simple question - will health care costs go up or down because of the loss-ratio restrictions put in place?
The piles are just piling up, I tell ya.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
Find more businesses on Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment ·