Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Isn't it weird how the republicans and insurance companies, with help from the media have turned something good into some bad?

Because on it's face, what's wrong with trying to help people get better healthcare or putting things in place so that you don't go bankrupt if you get a devastating and medically expensive disease. Or letting your kid stay on your policy until they are 26?

I really can't see what's so wrong with that.

Is it Obama's fault because he allowed the republicans to define the issue? Is it the insurance companies and the republicans fault because they're assholes? What about the media?

At the end of the day, what went wrong?

by Anonymousreply 9711/13/2013

"...and that is just inescapable."

Why can't you idiots just express your opinions? Why do you have to always conclude them with unprovable absolutes?

by Anonymousreply 211/10/2013

Obama lost control of the narrative. The ACA is important, necessary, and good. But the administration let the Republicans and the mainstream media tell the story. There should have been much more care in monitoring the rollout. Obama's people really blew it.

by Anonymousreply 311/10/2013

OP has it wrong though--the insurance companies were on board with the Affordable Care Act. Single Payer should have been the goal for Health Care Reform, not this convoluted half assed compromise with insurance companies.

by Anonymousreply 411/10/2013

Single payer was never an option. You know that. Could you elaborate R1, what was the "stank" as you put it?

by Anonymousreply 611/10/2013

Well r3 considering that the media is owned by corporations that dictate whatever policy they want by buying politicians I don't know how a sitting politician gets the media on their side if they are going against the desires of those corporations that are calling the shots.

The population still needs to get involved by harassing media outlets and politicians from local to national. The people have to make noise, even if they don't cover it a radio, television station can't ignore floods of letters, calls, emails, protests. Neither can politicians if they see/hear it will make an impression.

by Anonymousreply 711/10/2013

Democrats are notoriously bad about messaging. I think it's a problem inherent to liberals: we want to reason with people, not shout them down.

I do also think the media doesn't help at all. But the White House needs to start shouting a little louder.

by Anonymousreply 811/10/2013

Whenever a leader comes a long and changes the status quo, it upsets the established players. Obamacare is a major realignment of healthcare, which accounts for 20% of GDP, so there are a lot of established players who are, frankly, afraid that they're going to end up on the losing side. Look at it from the perspective of insurance companies: they've had free reign for years -- decades -- to charge people whatever they want, in many cases leaving people with no other choice as there are huge markets that have no competition. And along comes Obama and the Democrats, who have written into the law that for the first time, insurers no longer have a get-out-of-jail-free card when it comes to pre-existing conditions, lifetime caps, and dumping people when they get sick.

Moreover, it's just dawning on most Americans, despite the Supreme Court ruling that called Obamacare what it really is -- a tax -- that it is basically just a new tax in the form of buying health insurance. The Pubbies should be thrilled with it, because it's not the government that is actually taxing, but insurance companies that receive these funds, with 20% off the top going into their pockets. We've outsourced taxation to the private sector, but left enforcement up the the IRS; a right wing wet dream, to be honest. After all, Obamacare is the Heritage Foundation's plan from the 1990's, and it hits all the right wing hot buttons of personal responsibility and marketplace competition.

What it boils down to is the Pubbies are furious because Obama beat them at their own game. They know that we'll end up with single payer, eventually, because there will be issues that arise and situations that occur where there is no other choice but for the government to step in and run it, a la Medicare.

And now, with the problems of a dysfunctional website, the right wing sees the opening that they've been waiting for, screeching for, and lacking any other controversy, have tried to gin up (IRS-gate; Benghazi, on and on). Really, let's look at what Fox Noise has spent every minute of every day for the last week on: the fact that, of the 15% of health insurance customers who buy their coverage on the individual market, some of them are going to have to pay more. What they purposefully gloss over (and outright lie about) is that most of these people have been buying a range of product from the blissfully-unaware and woefully inadequate catastrophic care to the outright useless coverage that covers next to nothing. For example, the woman that CBS covered in Florida who screamed that her policy was doubling in cost, but when explained that her previous policy was essentially throwing money out the window, actually said Obamacare is a "blessing in disguise" -- her words.

What they don't talk about is the fact that, for the first time, we have meaningful regulation as to what constitutes insurance coverage. Obamacare set a baseline of what's covered, from preventative care to birth control. But, apparently, most people don't understand this. Media Matters looked at all of the people who Hannity had on his special Obamacare Apocalypse episode, and found that every one of them either didn't understand the changes, or we're lying about their circumstance. He was simply stoking fear.

There's been thread after thread here on DL bemoaning the fact that for some people, their insurance has been cancelled and they're going to have to pay more. And dag nabbit, as a 30-something year old dude, I don't need maternity coverage! Or a 50-something year old Frau, I don't need birth control! Well, babies don't come from the stork, and for every pregnant woman, there's a man somewhere along the line who is responsible. And just because you, personally, don't need birth control, doesn't mean that the vast majority of women, it isn't an issue.

Yes, the website roll out should have been better. But it's not the end of the world, and Obamacare will work... unless we let the teatards and Pubbies ruin it before it even gets going.

by Anonymousreply 911/10/2013

Re: original post

I agree with you, on it's face, there is nothing wrong with trying to help people get better healthcare. Frankly, I never thought I'd see it in my lifetime and I am still young lol. But, the program is flawed, that's all. It's going to cost us so much money. Money the U.S. right now just doesn't have. Okay then we say well this is something we need to have - I agree but the funding is problematic at best. I am a democrat, but I have been reading about this over and over - it's flawed. It is a GREAT IDEA. BUt I just really feel this is the wrong idea and I'm really worried the effects of President Obama's health system will have on the quality of medicine in this country.

Really wish somehow you folks would get away from this crazy Democrat/Republic bashing. If you are a Democrat, you have to bash every single word a Republican says and they are evil. If you are a Republican, you have to bash every word the Democrats say and they are evil. It's ridiculous at best. I'm so happy I have friends in the gay community that actually can see behind the Fox News talking heads simply trying to fill airtime on some random cable channel or those blowhards over at MSNBC doing the same thing and ACTUALLY take it person by person issue by issue.

Republicans didn't define this issue. The issue defined the issue!! How many speeches did we see Obama discussing this issue? He was the darling of the last Presidential race (except for about a month) and this is all we heard about for his camp and since he's been President.

The one thing I will admit: the tea party doesn't help anyone.

What went wrong? READ IT it's a FLAWED PLAN - the final version that was voted in flawed, flawed, flawed. I know 3 people this week who are on the verge of losing their healthcare who are not political but are damned sure going to be going forward now.

by Anonymousreply 1011/10/2013

r10, that's a lot of words without actually saying what the problem you see with the ACA is.

by Anonymousreply 1111/10/2013

I think you will not find many people who think the ACA is flawed. But what are we going to do about it? The Republicans sure don't seem to be proposing anything substantial.

by Anonymousreply 1211/10/2013

Ooh, I mean I think you will not find many people who think the ACA is NOT flawed.

by Anonymousreply 1311/10/2013

[quote]Obama lost control of the narrative. The ACA is important, necessary, and good. But the administration let the Republicans and the mainstream media tell the story. There should have been much more care in monitoring the rollout. Obama's people really blew it.

Actually, R3, that is twice now. First, during the 2010 midterm elections and now during the roll-out. Both times they allowed the Rethuglicans and the media to shape the narrative. It is incomprehensible to me that with this much riding on the roll-out that the Administration was not much more careful with the development of the website.

Yes, this can all be corrected, but the bad first impression will linger long after the problems are solved.

by Anonymousreply 1411/10/2013

[quote]Obamacare is a major realignment of healthcare

No, it is not. It forced a few very minor concessions from insurance companies. Which is a step forward, but it is hardly a 'major realignment'. It requires people to buy in to a market that is very broken and for the most part anti-consumer.

The real question is: Why is single payer "off the table"? This is always the first proviso of any 'serious' discussions of fixing the system and it makes no sense.

Obama was elected on a 'public option' which never came to be.

by Anonymousreply 1511/10/2013

[R11], here are some key points what I think the problems with this particular plan are. Again, I believe in healthcare just not this flawed plan:

Millions of Americans will or have seen cancellation letters from their health insurers due to Obamacare. The administration did try and put in a grandfathered in clause but individual states began adding things on those plans, rendering them void as they didn't meet items needed within Obamacare. That sucks for people losing their plans and not being able to keep the same doctor. I don't care about the soundbites on this I just care about the facts - it sucks.

Younger people, many up and coming trying to start families or careers, will have to pay more and bare the brunt of cost increases. If they decide not to get health insurance they face a fine and then have to deal with the IRS. Fun times with student loans, etc. and now this.

Isn’t this a free country? What if for some (strange) reason someone decided not to get healthcare. They get a FINE?

What about the poor people who can’t afford it , now they are going to get a fine also? I don’t see provisions set in place for that debacle.

How are we paying for all for all this? I believe in my heart it’s a human rights issue, we need healthcare, but we still do need to figure out how the heck we are going to pay for this? If you or I did this in our jobs, funded a project on credit with no long-term source of funding – we’d be fired.

insurance companies have said when a big program of this size is implemented, full testing at all angles needs to be done. They have said more testing needs to be done - some was done but not enough.

Most people’s healthcare costs WILL increase. We were warned 3-4 years back about this and adjusted accordingly.

Job Loss -we've already see this happen in the entertainment industry with daily hires being done to sneak around paying benefits. Well permament jobs will be lost under Obamacare. I've seen it first hand so many employers have or will reduce workers' hours so they no longer qualify as full-time benefits.

Look, again I think the idea of everyone having healthcare is awesome. This is just the wrong plan. In good faith I must point out It’s not all bad: the Patient’s Bill of Rights – sounds very nice: no more discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions.. No more lifetime limits on the care that you can receive. That was a huge accomplishment. But its flawed gents (and ladies), its flawed.

by Anonymousreply 1611/10/2013

Since conservatives control the media, Obama knew full well he wouldn't control the narrative. It is the customers signing up who will change the narrative. Duh.

by Anonymousreply 1711/10/2013

"The real question is: Why is single payer "off the table"?"

Asked and answered. Because there were not now and never have been enough votes for it.

by Anonymousreply 1811/10/2013

There would be riots in the streets with single payer.

by Anonymousreply 1911/10/2013

"Millions of Americans will or have seen cancellation letters from their health insurers due to Obamacare."

A lie. There have not been and will not be "millions" of cancellations due to Obamacare. The rate at which people are being cancelled has not changed significantly pre- and post-Obamacare.

"What about the poor people who can’t afford it , now they are going to get a fine also? I don’t see provisions set in place for that debacle."

The provisions are the subsidies.

"We still do need to figure out how the heck we are going to pay for this?"

We know. The CBO has vetted this. This see cost savings.

"Most people’s healthcare costs WILL increase."

Not true. There will be winners and losers, but most people will do better because the insurance companies are being reined in by law.

"I've seen it first hand so many employers have or will reduce workers' hours so they no longer qualify as full-time benefits."

Another debunked lie. There is no significant difference pre- and post-Obamacare. Fox News trots out business owners who claim to have to cut back because of Obamacare, but, whoops, they were nowhere near the threshold.

To sum up. No one is saying the ACA isn't flawed. But it's flaws are not these and not as significant as you and others want to make them.

by Anonymousreply 2011/10/2013

Of course the ACA is flawed; it was the Heritage Foundation's plan from 20 years ago... remember Hilarycare and that debacle? But we have to start somewhere. This was the only plan that could pass the Senate. Democrats generally wanted single payer or at least a public option, but Blanche Lincoln wouldn't vote for anything with a public option, and the whole thing would have collapsed. Then, Republicans demanded numerous provisions, concessions and give-aways, so Democrats compromised, and passed some real, meaningful reform (as opposed to the giant giveaway to big pharma that Medicare part D is).

The problem is that Pubbies won't work on it to make it better. No improvements can get passed because they are fixated on destroying anything Obama touches. Meanwhile, healthcare costs are rising at the slowest pace in generations. People are finally getting coverage that can't be yanked away because it will impact the insurers bottoms line, and just when consumers need it. And now that it's time to pay the insurance companies back for the compromises they made (guaranteed coverage, extended coverage for kids on their parents' plans, etc), Pubbies are screaming about the cheapskates who bought inferior policies that don't meet the standards set by the ACA and are getting cancelled.

It's not just a matter of calling each side names. One side is working to make healthcare better for all; the other side is doing everything they can to undo the President's signature achievement. One side compromised away some core ideals during the debate over Obamacare; the other side made demands, inserted perks and got concessions, and still thinks they can force the President's hand. To whit, they shut down the government in a fool's errand, harming the economy, small businesses and families in the process. For all the ballyhoo over Obama's apology over folks having to choose a new insurance policy, I've yet to hear a single Pubbie apologize for the shutdown.

I know very well that healthcare costs will continue to increase, but the difference in the short term is that vastly more people will be covered, with greater coverage. But for the first time in a generation, healthcare costs are rising more slowly than they have. The long term looks better, because that's where the ACA really kicks in and starts to make a huge difference. People will be able to see their doctor for preventative care, many for the first time in years. Studies have shown, and we all intuitively know, that preventative care is much more efficient than waiting until problems develop, much less expensive to deal with proactively, and it's better for everyone if fewer people get sick and rack up huge bills that they can't afford.

by Anonymousreply 2111/10/2013

[R20] A lie? Gee that’s interesting, I wonder what President Obama was possibly peaking of on November 7, 2013:

"Most of the folks who ... got these cancellation letters, they'll be able to get better care at the same cost or cheaper in these new marketplaces," Obama said, also noting that "we have to make sure" people do not feel as if they've been betrayed by an effort carried out with their best interests in mind.

I wonder why people would be so up in arms about cancellation letters? The volatile individual market that comprises about 5% of Americans has increased due to previous grandfathered plans no longer grandfathered with changes implemented on them by Obamacare, excuse me the ACA - I like the proper title better anyway.

“The provisions are the subsidies.”

How are we paying for those subsidies? Seriously tell me I have no clue. Sounds like another grand idea.

“Cost savings.”

It would be wonderful if you are right but that’s not what I am hearing from doctors or insurance folks.

“Insurance companies reined in by the law”

I think we both can agree there has been a need for that but we’ll have to agree to disagree that most people’s healthcare costs aren’t going to go up. I believe they will.

"I've seen it first hand so many employers have or will reduce workers' hours so they no longer qualify as full-time benefits."

I was referring to what's already happened the last several years in Los Angeles and feel the same will happen here as a result of ACA. You know, you can disagree with someone without saying something a LIE. I don’t even watch Fox News. They are a bunch of morons. I have actually talked to people about – boots on the ground. It will happen. Why in the world would a company not do this if they need, or feel they need to, save money? Of course it will happen. I don’t think its right. It should not happen - but it will.

Look, I am getting a sense of who is answering here so let’s just flip this over and pretend this was written by the Republicans. There, now would'd hate every part of it.. right you?

The flaws are significant. I STILL give them credit for trying but I am very concerned. Let’s just agree to disagree on this one, I respect your opinion and frankly --- I hope you are right. Based on the people I have spoken to – I just don’t think it is – that’s all. I appreciate the normal "discussion" however. This is what we all really should be doing more of. If you disagree with someone - you disagree. But at least "talk" without calling names. And I can fully be an Obama supporter and just covering my eyes at some of this stuff. Oye.

by Anonymousreply 2211/10/2013

r16 have you been paying attention to *who* is losing their coverage? Like that idiot woman who got national TV coverage and who thought obama 'took away her healthcare' when all they did was make it illegal to sell people 'health insurance' when all they really bought was a $50 coupon off a hospital stay?

Do you really think that kind of fraud should be legal?

Because those are the only people who are losing anything due to this law.

by Anonymousreply 2311/10/2013

r22, you arent listening to what is being said.

People were getting cancelled before. Millions MORE are not getting cancelled than were getting cancelled before. That's why it is a lie to blame the cancellations on Obamacare.

We are paying for the subsidies by reduced outlays to the insurance and pharma industries and by reducing the catastrophic health care costs through preventative care. (The fact that you admit you don't know this and have to ask proves that though you present yourself as someone knowledgeable you are really talking out of your ass.)

You are not disagreeing with me when you say more people will pay more, you are disagreeing with the CBO and the majority of economists. You get some people on your side and we can talk.

Yes, you can disagree. But when you say unfounded, unsourced, completely un-backed-up things like you have as if they were true, that is a lie. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

If the Republicans came up with this...what?? They did. It is an improvement over our previous system. It is also flawed. But...and this is the big BUT...it is not flawed in the way you claim or to the extent you imply.

by Anonymousreply 2411/10/2013

[quote]There would be riots in the streets with single payer.

What? We already have single-payer in the US, it accounts for half of every healthcare dollar spent. The rub is that it only covers the most expensive people to treat that the insurance companies can't make money off of: old people, disabled, active military, injured veterans, mentally ill, indian reservations, etc.

There should be rioting in the streets because the US taxpayer funds single-payer healthcare for the most costly patients and then we also have to get our own insurance!

The ONLY solution is to get the younger/healthier people in the same risk pool as the old/infirm. The way the rest of the civilized world does it.

by Anonymousreply 2511/10/2013

Yes of course I knew this started out as a Republican bill, one that they retracted. It was not a Republican at final inception as so many have pointed out above - Republicans have fought tooth and nail etc. etc.. Many bills grow and change organically between parties. Not the point I was making but its fine.

I'm not going to debate each and every word I've said. I just disagree. I hope I am 1000% wrong on every point and this works wonderfully for the country. I also have no problem citing meetings I've been in, publications (as unfiltered as possible) that I've read, and real people I've spoken to. I came to the conclusion, before this dumb government shut-down, before the media storm that this thing is a mess.

Bottom line: we need healthcare in this country. When the President first began about this again I remember being excited. Now - well - we'll see folks. Just don't see it the same. Have a good rest of your day.

by Anonymousreply 2611/10/2013

it doesn't matter that democrats stink at messaging and that republicans have their minions in the "librul" media to parrot their talking points of the ACA as a failure. they (the GOP) and everyone else knows this matter is SETTLED, and the ACA is the law of the land. they are still going at it for only one reason: to keep the base riled. they know if they give up now, after so much time, energy and $, the base will grow disheartened and wander away. they HAVE to keep the base angry as hornets in 2014 and 2016, or they know they are nothing but a footnote in history.

oh, they'll keep trying for years- look how they haven't really stopped trying to screw over medicare and social security, but it will be nothing but empty gestures from rancid old white men.

i mean think about it- how can it be repleaed now? are insurance companies going to just set back the clock and reinstate (the few) peopl's plans who have been cancelled? hardly. it would create even MORE chaos and get people mad at the GOP, not obama.

by Anonymousreply 2711/10/2013

What will really be interesting is how the Democratic candidates for Prez will deal with Obamacare, if public opinion doesn't change in the next couple of years.

But first, if the Democrats can't hold on to the Senate in 2014, it will throw a whole new shade on to the debate.

by Anonymousreply 2811/10/2013

oooooh, i am SO scared!! if anything the GOP will lose MORE senate and house seats next year, moron.

by Anonymousreply 2911/10/2013

oh r30....

by Anonymousreply 3111/10/2013

not that facts have ever stopped a freeper troll, but the ACA has helped cut the rate of health care costs increases in half compared to last 40 years

by Anonymousreply 3211/11/2013

There's NOTHING wrong with it, OP. Americans are just a big bunch of retarded assholes, that's all.

by Anonymousreply 3311/11/2013

The ONLY people happy with this crap are the subsidy people. Yeah you motherfuckers who are getting subsidies and freebies.

I have been telling you that our healthcare for 2 people will be $1000 a month & have been laughed at and scorned. Oh and this is the SILVER plan and we'll get to see the dr exactly THREE TIMES on it. For BOTH of us.

We are paying $399 right now and can not afford this at all. We live in the SF Bay Area, we own a house and we are eating BEANS every night as it is.

by Anonymousreply 3411/11/2013

post your plan, r34. if the benefits of your plan are comparable to the silver plan on the california covered site, maybe someone will believe you.

until you back your shit with FACTS, you are just freeping.

by Anonymousreply 3511/11/2013

I can't r35 coveredcalifornia is SHUT DOWN right now.

by Anonymousreply 3611/11/2013

Plus I have posted the plans here at least ONCE before. Not on this thread but on the other ones. Click the link - coveredcalifornia is DOWN.

by Anonymousreply 3711/11/2013

Wait, was able to get in

Use left arrow to browse to previous plans Use right arrow to browse to next plans Blue Shield Help text: When you pick a health plan, you are picking the doctors and hospitals and other health care providers that are part of that health plan. This group of doctors, hospitals and providers is called their "network" of participating providers.

Blue Shield

Blue Shield - Silver 70 ... Blue Shield - Silver 70 EPOOnce you sign up with a health plan, you then can pick from their "network" of health care providers. Going to a health care provider who is "in the network" can cost you less than going to a provider who is "outside the network."

Your monthly premium

$927

After premium assistance of $0 Press enter to add this plan to your favorites Anthem Blue Cross Help text: When you pick a health plan, you are picking the doctors and hospitals and other health care providers that are part of that health plan. This group of doctors, hospitals and providers is called their "network" of participating providers.

Anthem Blue Cross

Anthem - Silver 70 PPO, ... Anthem - Silver 70 PPO, an MSPOnce you sign up with a health plan, you then can pick from their "network" of health care providers. Going to a health care provider who is "in the network" can cost you less than going to a provider who is "outside the network."

Your monthly premium

$939

After premium assistance of $0 Press enter to add this plan to your favorites Kaiser Help text: When you pick a health plan, you are picking the doctors and hospitals and other health care providers that are part of that health plan. This group of doctors, hospitals and providers is called their "network" of participating providers.

Kaiser

Kaiser Permanente - Silv... Kaiser Permanente - Silver 70 HMOOnce you sign up with a health plan, you then can pick from their "network" of health care providers. Going to a health care provider who is "in the network" can cost you less than going to a provider who is "outside the network."

Your monthly premium

$1000

After premium assistance of $0 Press enter to add this plan to your favorites Summary Summary Benefits Column tBlue Shield - Silver 70 EPO tAnthem - Silver 70 PPO, an MSP tKaiser Permanente - Silver 70 HMO Estimated total costs premium + out-of-pocket Help text Estimates of how much you might pay in a year on each plan based on the premium and on your expected health care needs. Click the customize/change link below to personalize these values. Customize now t

$11618 per year

by Anonymousreply 3811/11/2013

it's LIVE, bitch, and as that article states, the planned shutdown will occur on the 16th.

but we don't need a link to the silver plan, we need a link to YOUR fabulous plan for which you will now pay double.

put up or shut up, freep.

by Anonymousreply 3911/11/2013

Anthem Blue Cross Help text: When you pick a health plan, you are picking the doctors and hospitals and other health care providers that are part of that health plan. This group of doctors, hospitals and providers is called their "network" of participating providers.

Anthem Blue Cross

Anthem - Silver 70 PPO, ... Anthem - Silver 70 PPO, an MSPOnce you sign up with a health plan, you then can pick from their "network" of health care providers. Going to a health care provider who is "in the network" can cost you less than going to a provider who is "outside the network."

Your monthly premium

$939

After premium assistance of $0 Press enter to add this plan to your favorites Kaiser Help text: When you pick a health plan, you are picking the doctors and hospitals and other health care providers that are part of that health plan. This group of doctors, hospitals and providers is called their "network" of participating providers.

Kaiser

Kaiser Permanente - Silv... Kaiser Permanente - Silver 70 HMOOnce you sign up with a health plan, you then can pick from their "network" of health care providers. Going to a health care provider who is "in the network" can cost you less than going to a provider who is "outside the network."

Your monthly premium

$1000

After premium assistance of $0 Press enter to add this plan to your favorites Summary Summary Benefits Column tBlue Shield - Silver 70 EPO tAnthem - Silver 70 PPO, an MSP tKaiser Permanente - Silver 70 HMO Estimated total costs premium + out-of-pocket Help text Estimates of how much you might pay in a year on each plan based on the premium and on your expected health care needs. Click the customize/change link below to personalize these values. Customize now t

$11618 per year t

$11870 per year

by Anonymousreply 4011/11/2013

Read this from the SF Chronicle. According to this story, 900,000 to 1,000,000 people in California will be liberated from their health plans. They are negotiating to extend their current health plans for 3 months.

by Anonymousreply 4111/11/2013

POST A LINK TO YOUR AMAZING $399 FOR TWO PEOPLE COVERAGE NOW.

or quit the freeping.

by Anonymousreply 4211/11/2013

because there is NO WAY you getting silver level coverage for 200 per person.

by Anonymousreply 4311/11/2013

GIVE US THE NAME OF YOUR CURRENT INSURER AND PLAN TITLE.

lying bitch.

by Anonymousreply 4411/11/2013

r43 here it is bitch

It used to be lower, we were paying $299 a month for both of us.

by Anonymousreply 4511/11/2013

Lying? LOL, you just are one fucked up yellow stream of trolldar. Read it and weep bitch. That was our health plan. Blue Shield of California 6000.

by Anonymousreply 4611/11/2013

Listen r42 r43 r44 look it up on ehealthinsurance.com for the price. That is what we paid, 2 adults $399 per month.

Anyways, just sent an email to our health insurance (and tax broker) about what to do since we now have a 3 month reprieve till March 2014 if you read the above links.

by Anonymousreply 4711/11/2013

R19, oh, MARY!

by Anonymousreply 4811/11/2013

blue sheld 70 is 258 per person.

by Anonymousreply 4911/11/2013

and your current plan has BRONZE level deductables, so why would you compare it to silver?

by Anonymousreply 5011/11/2013

oh, and your age, please. it looks as if you are comparing under 30 on your current plan and over 60 on the ACA.

so yes, you are lying, or not comparing the same things.

by Anonymousreply 5111/11/2013

Because bronze level is over $700 per month for 2 & you can go on office visits a total of 3x. We go more than that.

by Anonymousreply 5211/11/2013

no it doesn't r50 / r51

DEDUCTIBLE for SILVER

$6350.0 PER PERSON

by Anonymousreply 5311/11/2013

then you are already paying more, for less under your current plan which has a 6000 deductible. silver has a 2000 deductible. do the math.

by Anonymousreply 5411/11/2013

wrong again r51, we're not under 30 and over 60, but keep trying. You are truly obsessed.

by Anonymousreply 5511/11/2013

Well, of course it was only $399 a month for two... You get ONE doctor visit as preventative care; otherwise, until you hit $6000 in annual expenses, it doesn't pay a damn cent! Each of you! This is exactly the worthless insurance Obamacare is designed to end. What you have is called catastrophic care, and is only worth the premium if you have expenses that are relatively huge.

Here's an example: I had six doctor appointments last year, as my primary freaked out when during my physical he detected an elevated hearts rate and sent me to a cardiologist. I had several EKGs, a stress test, chest x-rays and a chest scan. My out-of-pocket for this all was less than $500. It was about $6000 worth of care when it was all said and done. Thankfully, a drug regimen is controlling it.

Upon investigation, I'm going with a silver or gold plan on coveredca in January, my monthly premiums are dropping by 50%, and my coverage is essentially unchanged, except for drug copay is now going to be $19 instead of $10. Thanks, Obamacare!

Health insurance is all based on actuarial tables and probability that you'll use it. Coincidence that my one incident cost as much as your deductible? Hardly. Just as what the insurance company charges you is based on probability, they design the plans to maximize their profits based on the probability that you'll use it and how much. It puts you in the position of ignoring a problem now because you'll pay for it, and even perversely rewards you for waiting by covering your greater future expenses. Why do you think insurance companies encourage the elderly to wait for regular check ups until they're on Medicare?

Can't you see that this is one of the driving problems that we must solve now if we're going to prevent the collapse of Medicare in the future, let alone helping people live longer lives and be happier for it?

by Anonymousreply 5611/11/2013

2k deductible with MAXIMUM out of pocket of $6350.

you current is 6k deductable and 6k max. you have to pay that $4000 difference in deductibles.

by Anonymousreply 5711/11/2013

r56 PWNED you!!! Ha ha ha ha ha.

Why are you living somewhere where you can only afford to eat beans?

Move, dumbass.

by Anonymousreply 5811/11/2013

Fox News (Fox News!!!) says if you lose your coverage, blame insurance companies, not Obamacare.

by Anonymousreply 5911/11/2013

One more thing: Obamacare caps insurance company profits.

As even the Williams piece on FOX points out, insurance company CEOs have been raking in million$ selling policies with crap coverage that they could cancel at the drop of a hat (like when you get really sick) for medium dollars. They could have let people keep that lousy coverage, but their "take" is now capped at 20% of the premiums.

So... They blame Obama for forcing them to "cancel" their existing faux plans and replace them with (more expensive) plans that actually provide broad uncancelable coverage. They're not doing it to give you decent coverage - ha - they are doing it so they can earn 20% of the higher premiums. (Which they can get away with now that everyone must have insurance.)

by Anonymousreply 6011/11/2013

r61 at least TRY to put some actual content in your troll posts.

Jesus.

by Anonymousreply 6211/11/2013

"This is exactly the worthless insurance Obamacare is designed to end. What you have is called catastrophic care, and is only worth the premium if you have expenses that are relatively huge. "

Go have a can of beans for breakfast and re-read this quote above.

It's true.

You are an idiot.

by Anonymousreply 6311/11/2013

c

by Anonymousreply 6411/11/2013

No one is getting FREE health care, bozo

by Anonymousreply 6611/11/2013

r65, It is the insurance companies that determine the rates. Not the ACA. Basically all the ACA does is set some basic rules of fairness to prevent people from financial ruin and make fraud illegal. And it requires people to get coverage (legit coverage, not fake ripoff coverage). People who can't afford it can get subsidized so they DON'T get a free ride but they get help.

Why are you not blaming Blue Cross? Obama didn't raise your rates.

by Anonymousreply 6711/11/2013

R65...Precisely the indignation I've orchestrated. Ignorant listeners take it hook, line, and sinker!

by Anonymousreply 6811/11/2013

exactly. he (or is it a she?) may not be a freeper, but the amount of ignorance about this issue is pretty much at 'freeper' levels of understanding...

(Your current plan is CRAP!!!)

by Anonymousreply 6911/11/2013

The fake outrage with erroneous info like we see from r65 is what has me convinced there are rightwing plants on sites like this trying to spread misinformation.

If only the mainstream media had the smarts of the DL.

I love the last post. 'Oh yeah? Well ... i'm ... i'm GOING TO SLEEP!" so busted.

by Anonymousreply 7011/11/2013

No I believe that r65 is paying what he/she claims to be for his/her current policy.

But the part he/she doesn't get is that current policy is INADEQUATE CRAP.

by Anonymousreply 7111/11/2013

And you indulge yourself to insulting anonymous...you're a real go getter yourself, r72!

by Anonymousreply 7311/11/2013

I work from home, online! So I get to surf the internet quite a bit.

Jealous much, r72?

by Anonymousreply 7411/11/2013

Wow r10 I have said the same thing for ages. I think I love you. A party shouldn't define how you feel about an issue...the issue should define it PERIOD.

And yes ACA is deeply flawed with some good parts in it.

by Anonymousreply 7511/11/2013

[quote]Because on it's face, what's wrong with trying to help people get better healthcare or putting things in place so that you don't go bankrupt if you get a devastating and medically expensive disease. Or letting your kid stay on your policy until they are 26?

NOTHING is wrong with this OP. And it's sickening to watch these idiots in the media, like Chuck Todd, going after President Obama and demanding apologies for a website and for wanting to HELP people have better health care when they NEVER went after George Bush or demanded that he apologize for KILLING thousands in his fake war.

by Anonymousreply 7611/11/2013

well-said, r76.

Come sit by me.

by Anonymousreply 7711/11/2013

Oh R72, what a typically-Republican criticism:

Demonize the unemployed!.

Could you be any more predictable?

by Anonymousreply 7811/11/2013

r78 Shouldn't the unemployed be demonized? I am not talking about the temporarily unemployed, but the people like my stepfather who simply refuse to go back to work and sponge off their spouse, or those that simply make up ailments (such as depression) to get disability so they don't have to work. Yeah I demonize them. It must be nice that my stepfather can has spent the last 11 years hiking and milling about while my mom works her ass off every day. He has just turned 65 so now he will collect social security. They are in the midst of divorcing he wants half....Where can I get that life. God people like that piss me off

by Anonymousreply 7911/11/2013

r79 he's not unemployed, he's a deadbeat. There's a difference.

by Anonymousreply 8011/11/2013

hmmmmm

by Anonymousreply 8211/11/2013

You do understand that insurance is a ponzi scheme, right?

by Anonymousreply 8311/11/2013

freeperella r65/r34 et al, you are either LYING or or stupid, and comparing plans that are not comparable.

and no, i'm not eligible for a subsidy so even with the ACA, my healthcare costs remain essentially unchanged for what is the equivalent of a platinum level plan so you can bite me on the "FREEBIE" healthcare, but if you are "eating BEANS every night" you are either eligible for a subsidy, or you have purchased a home you can't afford. so maybe you should look into finding a better job, or live within your means so you can afford decent health insurance.

by Anonymousreply 8411/11/2013

yes, i think most intelligent liberals understand that, r83, which is why we wanted single payer. the insurance companies are nothing but parasites, sucking off funds that could actually go towards administering care.

by Anonymousreply 8511/11/2013

i love how r86 started out as trying to be reasonable "but, but the ACA is making life hard for me and my partner!" poster and has since revealed themselves to be a typical freeper shill troll, yelling and screaming that people are getting handouts and that libruls should die in a grease fire. they ALWAYS show their true colors. they will be shouting "die of AIDS" soon. so predictable.

go back to free republic. we gays are SICK of you.

by Anonymousreply 8711/11/2013

I think you think you are talking to me, r88.

I have a great job. I live in a time zone where I am DONE working. Since you're in Cali, I guess you have another hour left?

Idiot.

by Anonymousreply 8911/11/2013

You might as well be a freeper, bean boy.

by Anonymousreply 9111/11/2013

If Obamacare's rollout difficulties are considered a "controversy" ...

... then red states turning down Medicaid expansion should be considered a scandal.

by Anonymousreply 9211/11/2013

only freepers call people "unemployed" as an insult, so keep trying, bean boy. you are being paid to be here by your fox/koch overlords and you are NOT wanted. be gone.

by Anonymousreply 9411/12/2013

[quote]Yeah, IKR, NBS News which carries water for Obama every hour of every day says that this administration KNEW that millions would lose their health plan.

totally not a freeper thing to say. you aren't even good at trolling you stupid fuck.

by Anonymousreply 9511/12/2013

Our resident bitter bay area bean-eating poster is irrationally upset at anyone he thinks is getting a subsidy.

What a nimrod.

by Anonymousreply 9611/12/2013

tell it, sister!

by Anonymousreply 9711/13/2013
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.