Jeepster80125

Can you tell me how obamacare impacted these things you are saying that we need? I would agree that obamacare does some good things like guaranteed-issue for children etc, but it completely and totally ignores the one crisis that affects nearly every American: cost.In terms of not being able to discriminate based on preexisting conditions and the car insurance analogy, I would counter with the simple fact that cars and people are different, and there's no reason that our insurance requirements for the two should be the same. You can't argue for or against discrimination based on preexisting co

I'm going to take each of your responses individually.First, regarding 'fact that insurance companies will no longer be able to drop people's insurance due to illness'. If you have insurance, your carrier CAN NOT rescind or drop coverage due to development of a health condition. NO MATTER WHAT.But, in practice, this is untrue. The reason will not be because you developed an illness. But, the insurance company will put a lot of effort into coming up with "reasons" to rescind your care. These reasons often are "an undisclosed preexisting medical condition." In other words, they'll find some slig

And that is my problem with ObamaCare. I have discussed a different way that would have been much better way earlier in this thread. Also, an MRI costs whatever an insurance company is willing to pony up. That's the problem....over-involvement by insurance companies erases any incentive doctor and patient have to figure out exactly what an MRI costs.I work on banking litigation so "I" don't add to any problem.....talk to PI lawyer about such things. "We" don't like them.I was speaking on lawyers in general and tort reform, malpractice etc. I understand you aren't personally involved, just

Cane, you realize that people who have health insurance aren't the ones filing for bankruptcy after a big claim right? We're talking about people who DON'T have insurance. Until there is some sort of system in place, don't you agree that it's pretty ****ing irresponsible to not carry health insurance, assuming it's hard to find coverage once you're sick?You can't get fire insurance on a house that's already burning, just like it's harder to find coverage if you are unhealthy. I'm not talking about why you are unhealthy be it personal responsibility or bad luck. Why should insurance carriers be

Before we start discussing this, you're coming into this as someone with pre-ex issues, I'm someone who is very, very healthy.'Distorting the market' is just as much a fault of providers like doctors and other providers of care. Do you know how much an MRI costs? How is that your insurance carriers' fault?Health insurance companies got involved when people demanded better, richer benefit plans. See HMO's and their rise and fall. When plans started offering copays for office visits, it removed some of the transparency of the costs of healthcare, but the other side of that coin is that it's easy

What about people who choose not to carry insurance? Let's assume that the cancer victim who gets treated at the ER doesn't have insurance. Why didn't they have insurance? Shouldn't they be responsible for their medical bills if they are irresponsible and don't carry coverage? There are programs in place for low income people, there are guarantee issue programs for people who have pre-ex issues, like yourself. What is the excuse for not carrying insurance? If you carry insurance and you get cancer, it pays and you aren't liable for the costs outside the deductible, coinsurance, and max out of

When the penalty for not carrying insurance is meager, like $250, there is still no incentive to purchase or carry insurance when you're healthy. Do you really think people like wang and strat are going to buy insurance just because someone says to or pay a penalty?If the penalty was something like, 5% of your income or something with teeth, then your argument has merit. Until then, an individual mandate doesn't matter if it lacks teeth, which this does.Next.

I've been on vacay and haven't seen any responses to this post, but I'm going to address it, since it appears that you continue to be ignorant on obamacare. I say that respectfully.First, regarding 'fact that insurance companies will no longer be able to drop people's insurance due to illness'. If you have insurance, your carrier CAN NOT rescind or drop coverage due to development of a health condition. NO MATTER WHAT. I have several clients with chronic, ongoing health conditions. Things that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in treatment. These clients are limited in that they can't qual

I don't know the guy. I don't know if he's wrong or not, and I'm not even sure if 'pwned' is even the right word to use there. I think I would have to actually know whether or not custom was wrong before I declare him to be 'pwned'.You probably understood this.

the sw was implied.

Ha.Like you don't 'broad brush' everyone who doesn't agree with you? Jesus fucking christ you are seriously bringing the troll lately. Smoke a cuban or something.

pwned

I think I was thinking hiring vs. investing. Or something.

Maybe you don't deal with businesses as much as I do. Our agency is one of the top 5 producers in Colorado. I'm looking over a commission sheet that reflects $455,000 written in premium for one carrier in one month, the average group is less than ten employees. I can tell you without a doubt, that the biggest reason our revenues are dropping (healthcare) is because people aren't hiring, and they're cutting costs. Not only are most of my clients not hiring or growing, they are cutting benefits because things are so bad. Unfortunately for me, one of the first things small employers do is cut ben

You're a smart guy. But please stop saying that obamacare helps the 'less fortunate'. Respectfully, you're either naive or willfully ignorant, BG-style, if you think obamacare helps the poor or was designed to do as such. I'd be eager to take this to the healthcare thread, but you don't seem very interested in that thread.While I would agree that entitlement programs help the less fortunate, obamacare is not that. That's my point.Carry on.

In your opinion, did cash4clunkers have the same effect as the stimulus? Obamacare?

I asked you about some old radio equipment in a new property. Update: No equipment, just random old stuff, wiring through the house, generators out back, and a couple of antenna on the roof. No trips to antiques roadshow for me I guess.

Let's talk healthcare then. I just don't think you've thought about this. The time and effort required instituting something like this could be better spent in a million other areas. Cost of end-of-life care, tort reform, access, anything but this. I'll agree that this might make society healthier in general. However, since there isn't a clear line, there shouldn't be any line/restriction, because we shouldn't have to pay for our society's poor health.For example, our state's high risk pool for uninsured people is funded by premiums paid for by people who have insurance. Kind of like unemploym

Just....no.It's not the ****ing doctors making decisions cane. It's bureaucrats and politicians. 'Getting Healthier' is a talking point. Adding a sin tax doesn't solve our healthcare problems. It only creates a small revenue stream.

This is the problem. If someone wants to believe a ****ing porn star, not get their kid vaccines, and the kid gets sick, that's on them, not me. Where do you draw the line with 'few areas'? How about all of the people taking advantage of welfare and unemployment? Why not start there? I agree with your sin tax, but this whole liberal notion of you making my decisions is just so baffling to me. Would you want BG making your life decisions?

But that's no fun. I'm such an action junkie that I'll get scratch tickets to play in between hands. There's a game called crossword that you can actually spend ten minutes on. Really make that $3 worth it.

http://www.flatheadbeacon.com/articles/art...stos_aid/19253/in part:Then she asked Baucus if the extended Medicare coverage could be repealed when a new presidential administration takes over, since she feared her grandchildren could suffer from asbestos sickness, making them the fourth generation in her family stricken with contamination.A staff member for Baucus told her the health care law has the power of statute, and would need to be repealed for the coverage to go away.Judy Matott asked Baucus if he would work to improve Libby’s image, and then asked him and Sebelius, “if either of you r

I agree, and those tax revenues should stay in state as well. I play the lottery/stupid tax in my state, because half of the proceeds go to our state's parks and wildlife.

If my choices were situations like controlling the amount of salt in restaurant food and disallowing toys in kids meals versus paying a tax like smokes or booze, I'll take the tax.Assuming those are our two choices. I'd also be a fan of leaving me the fuck alone to enjoy whatever habits I want.

I don't really have a problem paying some sort of fee (tax?) for the right to eat whatever-the-fuck-I-want. I don't advocate calorie limits based on heavier weight or required exercise, so I don't want granola's pushing their bean curds on me either.