every company has a model in place in order to make a profit. If you increase the cost of doing business you have to cut costs. It's really not difficult
...
So, there you have it... you have answered your own question. It is the company that decides how it faces increases in operating expenses... it pulls anchor and sails off to China.
Exactly, making obscene profits in the healthcare industry, off of people's vulnerabilities and illnesses.
How ironic is it that obama promotes an increase of domestic jobs and production...and his policies are not only contradictory, but paradoxical to his desired outcome?
Name one piece of Obama's policy that "proves" this point. One.
* bonus point for doing so without quoting Fox News.
When attempting intelligent conversations with liberals why is it always the same shit?
1 - Fox news (which no one against obamacare mentioned here)
2 - Constant deflecting of blame for obama's lack of effectiveness during his first term. 'He was left with such a disaster'. Fucking cry me a river. He must be the best god damned president we have ever had because things never seem to be his fault
Both are old and tired. Try something else.
To answer your question....read the OP. Obamacare has led to job cuts and shipment of domestic labor overseas, both of which are a paradox of what he is promoting during his campaign.
I wish that just once liberals would own their party's shortcomings without pointing the finger or bringing up certain media outlets. Instead all I seem to hear and see is how entitled they are to govt assistance, help from the 'rich', and excuses.
Ah, the old "oh you liberals are all the same" copout. It must be nice to be able to fall back on name calling as your primary means of flexing internet muscles.
Catch phrases, and not understanding the core of the issue(s) is not a real way to have a debate. Obamacare has not lead to any job cuts. When Romney enacted his strikingly similar plan in MA in 2006, it had almost no effect on jobs whatsoever. This is Romney's rally cry, because he is no longer pandering to a blue state. Universal health care, a REPUBLICAN cause for many years, is up and running just fine in MA (where I live, and work in the healthcare industry). Romney is now saying what he thinks he needs to say to gain the independent vote, but unfortunately for his base and for the people who don't do their due diligence: it's a lie. The ACA (not identical to Romneycare but close enough) is not a job killer. No matter how you stretch it and try to contort the facts, it's simply not true.
Have fun trying to continually pigeonhole everyone who debates with you as a "liberal". It's played out at this point. Find a new shtick.
You can't label me a liberal or a Democrat; I am neither. I am a left leaning independent with common sense and I'm guessing a lot more knowledge about the ACA and the healthcare industry than you. You're firing out empty rhetoric, catch phrases, and played out gimmicks. Try actually going out there and learning something for a change. You are just wrong here and out of your league.
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
Funny cause I see it both ways not one way.
And we can have it both ways but not for long.
This the point, why I bitch...
you have no solutions and your reality will be the fall of this country.
I also find it less than funny your attacks on my character...
but I grow accustomed remember your moral compass is no better than
mine or others. :fp:
And I find it very much less than funny that now candidates can not even address
our immigration troubles for fear of losing votes.
Something should have been done a decade ago because now we see the results
of millions of extra people on our drained social services,
our hospitals, our fire and police, our education, our aid.
We are going bankrupt to boot!
What will it be like for our children? How high will the deficit climb?
How low will the quality of life go? When will the fall come?
Perhaps in your time Cosmo.
Please put your money where your mouth is and give that
little extra you and others have to give. Did I miss you addressing this solution?
the capable supplementing, providing sponsorship for those
who come here illegally.
You can help pay for those from your pocket
because many people can not afford this,
they are hurting providing for their own families.
This can offset those who can not, like the American Dad
working two jobs though getting pushed into poverty
while paying for others debt and being penalized with extra taxes
for not being able to afford our President's insurance plan.
..
Again... NOTHING to do with your posting of an anecdotal example other than baiting to get me into a circular debate with no foundation in fact nor reasoning.
Sorry, but, I'm going to take a pass on that one and let you believe anything you want about me.
You have no idea what I believe about you ...
your bias keeps you from knowing. Unfortunately it's obvious how you feel
about me.
I will say the American Dad working two jobs, struggling, doesn't feel anecdotal,
he feels oh so real.
Really now you want to let corporations/ business off the hook for benefits?
Why?
So the big business makes even more money while the little people are taxed more.
And business is taxed because they take the penalty instead of providing
the insurance.
So just a whole lot more tax and we know what government does with that ...
it spends more foolishly not wisely or frugally.
...
Bait.
Smells like shit. I ain't takin' it.
Bait is now asking someone to explain a statement, backing up one's opinion,
requesting more info?
Is debate only one sided, people of the same opinion ranting and ragging?
If someone with a different opinion arrives to challenge,
are they then baiting? The different opinion belongs to a troll?
I thought debate was sharing opposing views...
making a statement of opinion and explaining why, either with facts, experience,
or even just feelings... key words here sharing views.
Silly me why didn't someone tell me much earlier
If you would rather not engage then do not quote me.
I will respect your wishes if you do not want to engage.
But please don't underhandedly post words talking about me
with others, as has happened in the past.
This is the most baiting behavior as one must defend themselves.
I will state my opinion and those who read it may agree, may not, may enjoy
may not but you know that is what all of us are doing.
Really now you want to let corporations/ business off the hook for benefits?
Why?
So the big business makes even more money while the little people are taxed more.
And business is taxed because they take the penalty instead of providing
the insurance.
So just a whole lot more tax and we know what government does with that ...
it spends more foolishly not wisely or frugally.
...
Bait.
Smells like shit. I ain't takin' it.
Bait is now asking someone to explain a statement, backing up one's opinion,
requesting more info?
Is debate only one sided, people of the same opinion ranting and ragging?
If someone with a different opinion arrives to challenge,
are they then baiting? The different opinion belongs to a troll?
I thought debate was sharing opposing views...
making a statement of opinion and explaining why, either with facts, experience,
or even just feelings... key words here sharing views.
Silly me why didn't someone tell me much earlier
If you would rather not engage then do not quote me.
I will respect your wishes if you do not want to engage.
But please don't underhandedly post words talking about me
with others, as has happened in the past.
This is the most baiting behavior as one must defend themselves.
I will state my opinion and those who read it may agree, may not, may enjoy
may not but you know that is what all of us are doing.
What you have said in your last passage is true; however, I think if one wants to be appreciated and respected in a debate or discussion, they must be careful how they deliver their perspective. Otherwise the point gets lost in the delivery.
32 million Americans are currently without health insurance. Thanks to this Act, a larger portion of the general population will now have access to the coverage they need.
Patients with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied coverage by insurance companies, and companies can no longer drop someone once they get sick.
College students can stay on their parents’ plans until the age of 26.
The federal government will pay the states to allow low-income individuals to enroll in Medicaid
The Medicaid “doughnut hole” gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
Each year, $125 million will go towards funding school-based health centers and programs to reduce teen pregnancy.
States are required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to find the best deals on private health insurance.
If an insurance company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
The number of bankruptcies caused by health-related issues will be severely reduced.
CONS
The intrusion of the federal government into the practice of medicine.
18 million of the uninsured will be forced to go under Medicaid, while the rest will have to accept another government program. Even so, millions will remain uninsured.
By 2019, an estimated 4.8 million seniors will be forced out of Medicare Advantage.
Medicare will be cut by $528 billion dollars.
Taxes will be increased (especially on high-income individuals).
By forcing States to accept federally-mandated health insurance, the Act violates States’ rights.
Some speculate that you can be thrown in jail for failure to pay your health insurance taxes.
Bait is now asking someone to explain a statement, backing up one's opinion,
requesting more info?
Is debate only one sided, people of the same opinion ranting and ragging?
If someone with a different opinion arrives to challenge,
are they then baiting? The different opinion belongs to a troll?
I thought debate was sharing opposing views...
making a statement of opinion and explaining why, either with facts, experience,
or even just feelings... key words here sharing views.
Silly me why didn't someone tell me much earlier
If you would rather not engage then do not quote me.
I will respect your wishes if you do not want to engage.
But please don't underhandedly post words talking about me
with others, as has happened in the past.
This is the most baiting behavior as one must defend themselves.
I will state my opinion and those who read it may agree, may not, may enjoy
may not but you know that is what all of us are doing.
What you have said in your last passage is true; however, I think if one wants to be appreciated and respected in a debate or discussion, they must be careful how they deliver their perspective. Otherwise the point gets lost in the delivery.
You mean like how you've treated me in the past?
Presuming, assuming, insulting and arrogantly ?
Go back and read your last passage (I think it was your last?) to me where you called me smug and arrogant. Then you suggested a few other things about me, while, in the same breath, chastised me for make assumptions about you. I got over it. In fact, it didn't really bother me that much- I can see where one might get that opinion of me.
Getting more to the point from what I meant: when you continually wink at someone, roll their eyes at someone, and slap your head at someone when you mock their post... it doesn't make for good conversation. It makes for irritation. With that said, I have noticed you have toned it back quite a bit with regards to these traits- and it is appreciated. You are much more credible when one isn't annoyed with some of those features found on the right side of the reply page.
I'll admit, you've gotten to me more than once, but at no time have I thought you were an evil person.
Go back and read your last passage (I think it was your last?) to me where you called me smug and arrogant. Then you suggested a few other things about me, while, in the same breath, chastised me for make assumptions about you. I got over it. In fact, it didn't really bother me that much- I can see where one might get that opinion of me.
Getting more to the point from what I meant: when you continually wink at someone, roll their eyes at someone, and slap your head at someone when you mock their post... it doesn't make for good conversation. It makes for irritation. With that said, I have noticed you have toned it back quite a bit with regards to these traits- and it is appreciated. You are much more credible when one isn't annoyed with some of those features found on the right side of the reply page.
I'll admit, you've gotten to me more than once, but at no time have I thought you were an evil person.
I have never rolled my eyes not once not ever, it is too insulting.
You see you know nothing about me :? But boy do I get ole rolly when someone disagrees ....
head slap....
My motive is not to be credible, I'd rather be understood and felt.
Why else use smilies? And I wink in real life too which often brings a smile my way.
As far as irritating...
I'll just say way to much negativity, hate, division, animosity, jealousy are spinning motives. That is irritating to me.
And irritating to the mods who forever have to break things up.
Again ignore feature can relieve irritation but often curiosity kills that cat.
32 million Americans are currently without health insurance. Thanks to this Act, a larger portion of the general population will now have access to the coverage they need.
Patients with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied coverage by insurance companies, and companies can no longer drop someone once they get sick.
College students can stay on their parents’ plans until the age of 26.
The federal government will pay the states to allow low-income individuals to enroll in Medicaid
The Medicaid “doughnut hole” gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
Each year, $125 million will go towards funding school-based health centers and programs to reduce teen pregnancy.
States are required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to find the best deals on private health insurance.
If an insurance company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
The number of bankruptcies caused by health-related issues will be severely reduced.
CONS
The intrusion of the federal government into the practice of medicine.
18 million of the uninsured will be forced to go under Medicaid, while the rest will have to accept another government program. Even so, millions will remain uninsured.
By 2019, an estimated 4.8 million seniors will be forced out of Medicare Advantage.
Medicare will be cut by $528 billion dollars.
Taxes will be increased (especially on high-income individuals).
By forcing States to accept federally-mandated health insurance, the Act violates States’ rights.
Some speculate that you can be thrown in jail for failure to pay your health insurance taxes.
32 million Americans are currently without health insurance. Thanks to this Act, a larger portion of the general population will now have access to the coverage they need.
Patients with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied coverage by insurance companies, and companies can no longer drop someone once they get sick.
College students can stay on their parents’ plans until the age of 26.
The federal government will pay the states to allow low-income individuals to enroll in Medicaid
The Medicaid “doughnut hole” gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
Each year, $125 million will go towards funding school-based health centers and programs to reduce teen pregnancy.
States are required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to find the best deals on private health insurance.
If an insurance company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
The number of bankruptcies caused by health-related issues will be severely reduced.
CONS
The intrusion of the federal government into the practice of medicine.
18 million of the uninsured will be forced to go under Medicaid, while the rest will have to accept another government program. Even so, millions will remain uninsured.
By 2019, an estimated 4.8 million seniors will be forced out of Medicare Advantage.
Medicare will be cut by $528 billion dollars.
Taxes will be increased (especially on high-income individuals).
By forcing States to accept federally-mandated health insurance, the Act violates States’ rights.
Some speculate that you can be thrown in jail for failure to pay your health insurance taxes.
is this biased?
Cite the source, please, and then I'll do some research.
32 million Americans are currently without health insurance. Thanks to this Act, a larger portion of the general population will now have access to the coverage they need.
Patients with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied coverage by insurance companies, and companies can no longer drop someone once they get sick.
College students can stay on their parents’ plans until the age of 26.
The federal government will pay the states to allow low-income individuals to enroll in Medicaid
The Medicaid “doughnut hole” gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
Each year, $125 million will go towards funding school-based health centers and programs to reduce teen pregnancy.
States are required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to find the best deals on private health insurance.
If an insurance company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
The number of bankruptcies caused by health-related issues will be severely reduced.
CONS
The intrusion of the federal government into the practice of medicine.
18 million of the uninsured will be forced to go under Medicaid, while the rest will have to accept another government program. Even so, millions will remain uninsured.
By 2019, an estimated 4.8 million seniors will be forced out of Medicare Advantage.
Medicare will be cut by $528 billion dollars.
Taxes will be increased (especially on high-income individuals).
By forcing States to accept federally-mandated health insurance, the Act violates States’ rights.
Some speculate that you can be thrown in jail for failure to pay your health insurance taxes.
is this biased?
Cite the source, please, and then I'll do some research.
sorry I forgot to post it ... twice no least :oops:
32 million Americans are currently without health insurance. Thanks to this Act, a larger portion of the general population will now have access to the coverage they need.
Patients with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied coverage by insurance companies, and companies can no longer drop someone once they get sick.
College students can stay on their parents’ plans until the age of 26.
The federal government will pay the states to allow low-income individuals to enroll in Medicaid
The Medicaid “doughnut hole” gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
Each year, $125 million will go towards funding school-based health centers and programs to reduce teen pregnancy.
States are required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to find the best deals on private health insurance.
If an insurance company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
The number of bankruptcies caused by health-related issues will be severely reduced.
CONS
The intrusion of the federal government into the practice of medicine.
18 million of the uninsured will be forced to go under Medicaid, while the rest will have to accept another government program. Even so, millions will remain uninsured.
By 2019, an estimated 4.8 million seniors will be forced out of Medicare Advantage.
Medicare will be cut by $528 billion dollars.
Taxes will be increased (especially on high-income individuals).
By forcing States to accept federally-mandated health insurance, the Act violates States’ rights.
Some speculate that you can be thrown in jail for failure to pay your health insurance taxes.
is this biased?
I think the biggest con of the whole thing is that we're being forced to rely more heavily on insurance to pay for our health care....which will only drive up medical costs artificially even more than it has over the last 30-40 years that it's been in control of our health care.
People would not accept this payment model for ANY OTHER ASPECT of their lives, but it's the so-called solution when it comes to the most important aspect....their health.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
32 million Americans are currently without health insurance. Thanks to this Act, a larger portion of the general population will now have access to the coverage they need.
Patients with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied coverage by insurance companies, and companies can no longer drop someone once they get sick.
College students can stay on their parents’ plans until the age of 26.
The federal government will pay the states to allow low-income individuals to enroll in Medicaid
The Medicaid “doughnut hole” gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
Each year, $125 million will go towards funding school-based health centers and programs to reduce teen pregnancy.
States are required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to find the best deals on private health insurance.
If an insurance company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
The number of bankruptcies caused by health-related issues will be severely reduced.
CONS
The intrusion of the federal government into the practice of medicine.
18 million of the uninsured will be forced to go under Medicaid, while the rest will have to accept another government program. Even so, millions will remain uninsured.
By 2019, an estimated 4.8 million seniors will be forced out of Medicare Advantage.
Medicare will be cut by $528 billion dollars.
Taxes will be increased (especially on high-income individuals).
By forcing States to accept federally-mandated health insurance, the Act violates States’ rights.
Some speculate that you can be thrown in jail for failure to pay your health insurance taxes.
is this biased?
I think the biggest con of the whole thing is that we're being forced to rely more heavily on insurance to pay for our health care....which will only drive up medical costs artificially even more than it has over the last 30-40 years that it's been in control of our health care.
People would not accept this payment model for ANY OTHER ASPECT of their lives, but it's the so-called solution when it comes to the most important aspect....their health.
That is an important CON, and that was not on the list either,
thank you
I remember 30-40-50 years ago, we had no insurance, no credit cards
and paid for our doctor visits hospital care from our savings.
Savings a word not heard much.
What happened to the health savings accounts
that were starting for the young people? My benefits person for IL
was pushing strong for those about a decade ago.
I think that disappeared.
Can you imagine that if instead of welfare programs, the government decided it the way it would help people put food on the table would be to force all of them to buy grocery insurance or get it through their employers?
Imagine the employer taking out your grocery insurance premium before you received your net pay and then having some third party pay for your groceries at prices they set?
Is there a soul alive that believes grocery costs would go down?????
So why don't people see that health insurance is the problem???
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
for the first time in my life i have a primary health insurance and i even have a secondary insurance as well. all of this happened under obama. i am enjoying having my monthly and even weekly visits to the many doctors, clinics and multiple hospitals i see finally paid for.
Can you imagine that if instead of welfare programs, the government decided it the way it would help people put food on the table would be to force all of them to buy grocery insurance or get it through their employers?
Imagine the employer taking out your grocery insurance premium before you received your net pay and then having some third party pay for your groceries at prices they set?
Is there a soul alive that believes grocery costs would go down?????
So why don't people see that health insurance is the problem???
Except Medicare Fee for Service administered by the government costs more than Medicare Advantage administered through health plans.
Analogies don't work. Food does not = health care. Interestingly, Americans have no problem finding plenty of calories regardless of socioeconomic status. But, many have issues trying to get them to see their doctors in a timely manner even when implored to do so.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Except Medicare Fee for Service administered by the government costs more than Medicare Advantage administered through health plans.
Analogies don't work. Food does not = health care. Interestingly, Americans have no problem finding plenty of calories regardless of socioeconomic status. But, many have issues trying to get them to see their doctors in a timely manner even when implored to do so.
I think analogies do work and I'm not equating food = health care. What I'm saying is that NOBODY would accept the health care payment model (i.e. health insurance often through employer deductions pre-net pay) for any other aspect of their lives because it's painfully obvious that it would drive up the cost of whatever they were controlling.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Does anyone know WHY employers provide Health Care Insurance?
...
It is because it is one of many benefits companies use to obtain and retain employees. Prior to the 1930s... companies didn't have to provide shit to it workers other than a wage. Through collective bargaining agreements, workers got benefits, such as sick days, vacation days, paid holidays, medical insurance, etc... along with their wages.
It has evolved into something that people expect to get automatically.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
Obamacare... and Romneycare is not that different. I'm not thrilled with Obamacare it's not exaxtly what I hoped for. I wanted a complete universial health care system in America. I think it addresses SOME of the issues but still leaves people open to employer's dropping their healthcare option leaving them high and dry. Why is health care dependent on your employer? That system has got to go.
I'm just flying around the other side of the world to say I love you
Sha la la la i'm in love with a jersey girl
I love you forever and forever
Adel 03 Melb 1 03 LA 2 06 Santa Barbara 06 Gorge 1 06 Gorge 2 06 Adel 1 06 Adel 2 06 Camden 1 08 Camden 2 08 Washington DC 08 Hartford 08
We know how you feel- you've made that very evident with your long stream of juvenile posts.
Instead of just listening to your Dad and his dinner table talk and then repeating it on this forum... why don't you spend a few moments, research the two candidates, and then formulate (create) your own opinion.
After doing this, you might still feel the same way, but here's the second thing: then borrow a thesaurus from your school before writing your next post. Look up a comparable word to 'sucks' and use it instead. That way you don't make every Romney supporter look like a (insert word here).
Not only would you come across as more credible (believable)... you'd be helping your cause so much more.
Not sure if it's due to Obamacare or not, but my company just moved to a Health Savings Account plan. I would say my premiums are about the same, however half of what I pay now goes into a savings account. I also have a 6k deductible for sick visits now, (used to be $20 copay) and no coverage for things that were covered before.
Needless to say, unless I have a broadsword protruding from my gut, I'm not going to see a Dr.
Not sure if it's due to Obamacare or not, but my company just moved to a Health Savings Account plan. I would say my premiums are about the same, however half of what I pay now goes into a savings account. I also have a 6k deductible for sick visits now, (used to be $20 copay) and no coverage for things that were covered before.
Needless to say, unless I have a broadsword protruding from my gut, I'm not going to see a Dr.
...
I hear what you're saying, but, the thing about insurance... in my opinion... it's for the big things.
Car Insurance for example... If I get in a minor fender bender, I'm not going to go to my insurance company to fix it. If I get in a major accident where my car is totalled and I'm laid up in a hospital bed for a week... i'll gladly pay the deductibles because having to pay for the whole thing will mean a big hit on my finances.
Same thing with Health Insurance. I'll gladly pay for the check-ups and trips to the doctor's office for a sprained ankle. I want them there in case the big things hit... cancer, heart disease, perforated intestine, broadsword plunged into my gut... things that are going to bankrupt me and leave in financial ruin.
That's why I have insurance... for the big things that might happen to me.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Ok. I won't ask you to answer my entire post. But, can you tell me about how it will "bend the cost curve?"
How about the above question?
Third time's the charm? It's been a week since I posted the cost question and nary an attempt to answer it. How did this pile of legislation "bend the cost curve" (it's original stated intent)?
Everyone focuses on pre-ex, etc. Nobody's against pre-ex coverage. We're all just wondering how we will pay for it. Giving out money is easy.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Ok. I won't ask you to answer my entire post. But, can you tell me about how it will "bend the cost curve?"
How about the above question?
Third time's the charm? It's been a week since I posted the cost question and nary an attempt to answer it. How did this pile of legislation "bend the cost curve" (it's original stated intent)?
Everyone focuses on pre-ex, etc. Nobody's against pre-ex coverage. We're all just wondering how we will pay for it. Giving out money is easy.
I will research 'bending the cost curve' and have an answer for you! To be honest, I haven't heard much about it.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
We know how you feel- you've made that very evident with your long stream of juvenile posts.
Instead of just listening to your Dad and his dinner table talk and then repeating it on this forum... why don't you spend a few moments, research the two candidates, and then formulate (create) your own opinion.
After doing this, you might still feel the same way, but here's the second thing: then borrow a thesaurus from your school before writing your next post. Look up a comparable word to 'sucks' and use it instead. That way you don't make every Romney supporter look like a (insert word here).
Not only would you come across as more credible (believable)... you'd be helping your cause so much more.
i agree with you bigtime, mr. thirty bills unpaid. sometimes you and i agree others times we may not. but i will tell ya you are always intelligent... at least from what i have read of yours. nice job and great advice to a dude whom seems to get a kick out of getting under the skins of others who may not support a crooked ass multimillionaire who changes his mind as often as the wind shifts directions
Comments
Exactly, making obscene profits in the healthcare industry, off of people's vulnerabilities and illnesses.
Oh no, a 2.3% tax.........
Ah, the old "oh you liberals are all the same" copout. It must be nice to be able to fall back on name calling as your primary means of flexing internet muscles.
Catch phrases, and not understanding the core of the issue(s) is not a real way to have a debate. Obamacare has not lead to any job cuts. When Romney enacted his strikingly similar plan in MA in 2006, it had almost no effect on jobs whatsoever. This is Romney's rally cry, because he is no longer pandering to a blue state. Universal health care, a REPUBLICAN cause for many years, is up and running just fine in MA (where I live, and work in the healthcare industry). Romney is now saying what he thinks he needs to say to gain the independent vote, but unfortunately for his base and for the people who don't do their due diligence: it's a lie. The ACA (not identical to Romneycare but close enough) is not a job killer. No matter how you stretch it and try to contort the facts, it's simply not true.
Have fun trying to continually pigeonhole everyone who debates with you as a "liberal". It's played out at this point. Find a new shtick.
You can't label me a liberal or a Democrat; I am neither. I am a left leaning independent with common sense and I'm guessing a lot more knowledge about the ACA and the healthcare industry than you. You're firing out empty rhetoric, catch phrases, and played out gimmicks. Try actually going out there and learning something for a change. You are just wrong here and out of your league.
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
your bias keeps you from knowing. Unfortunately it's obvious how you feel
about me.
I will say the American Dad working two jobs, struggling, doesn't feel anecdotal,
he feels oh so real.
requesting more info?
Is debate only one sided, people of the same opinion ranting and ragging?
If someone with a different opinion arrives to challenge,
are they then baiting? The different opinion belongs to a troll?
I thought debate was sharing opposing views...
making a statement of opinion and explaining why, either with facts, experience,
or even just feelings... key words here sharing views.
Silly me why didn't someone tell me much earlier
If you would rather not engage then do not quote me.
I will respect your wishes if you do not want to engage.
But please don't underhandedly post words talking about me
with others, as has happened in the past.
This is the most baiting behavior as one must defend themselves.
I will state my opinion and those who read it may agree, may not, may enjoy
may not but you know that is what all of us are doing.
What you have said in your last passage is true; however, I think if one wants to be appreciated and respected in a debate or discussion, they must be careful how they deliver their perspective. Otherwise the point gets lost in the delivery.
I found this in my journey
PROS:
32 million Americans are currently without health insurance. Thanks to this Act, a larger portion of the general population will now have access to the coverage they need.
Patients with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied coverage by insurance companies, and companies can no longer drop someone once they get sick.
College students can stay on their parents’ plans until the age of 26.
The federal government will pay the states to allow low-income individuals to enroll in Medicaid
The Medicaid “doughnut hole” gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
Each year, $125 million will go towards funding school-based health centers and programs to reduce teen pregnancy.
States are required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to find the best deals on private health insurance.
If an insurance company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
The number of bankruptcies caused by health-related issues will be severely reduced.
CONS
The intrusion of the federal government into the practice of medicine.
18 million of the uninsured will be forced to go under Medicaid, while the rest will have to accept another government program. Even so, millions will remain uninsured.
By 2019, an estimated 4.8 million seniors will be forced out of Medicare Advantage.
Medicare will be cut by $528 billion dollars.
Taxes will be increased (especially on high-income individuals).
By forcing States to accept federally-mandated health insurance, the Act violates States’ rights.
Some speculate that you can be thrown in jail for failure to pay your health insurance taxes.
is this biased?
Presuming, assuming, insulting and arrogantly ?
Go back and read your last passage (I think it was your last?) to me where you called me smug and arrogant. Then you suggested a few other things about me, while, in the same breath, chastised me for make assumptions about you. I got over it. In fact, it didn't really bother me that much- I can see where one might get that opinion of me.
Getting more to the point from what I meant: when you continually wink at someone, roll their eyes at someone, and slap your head at someone when you mock their post... it doesn't make for good conversation. It makes for irritation. With that said, I have noticed you have toned it back quite a bit with regards to these traits- and it is appreciated. You are much more credible when one isn't annoyed with some of those features found on the right side of the reply page.
I'll admit, you've gotten to me more than once, but at no time have I thought you were an evil person.
You see you know nothing about me :? But boy do I get ole rolly when someone disagrees ....
head slap....
My motive is not to be credible, I'd rather be understood and felt.
Why else use smilies? And I wink in real life too which often brings a smile my way.
As far as irritating...
I'll just say way to much negativity, hate, division, animosity, jealousy are spinning motives.
That is irritating to me.
And irritating to the mods who forever have to break things up.
Again ignore feature can relieve irritation but often curiosity kills that cat.
I found this in my journey
PROS:
32 million Americans are currently without health insurance. Thanks to this Act, a larger portion of the general population will now have access to the coverage they need.
Patients with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied coverage by insurance companies, and companies can no longer drop someone once they get sick.
College students can stay on their parents’ plans until the age of 26.
The federal government will pay the states to allow low-income individuals to enroll in Medicaid
The Medicaid “doughnut hole” gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
Each year, $125 million will go towards funding school-based health centers and programs to reduce teen pregnancy.
States are required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to find the best deals on private health insurance.
If an insurance company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
The number of bankruptcies caused by health-related issues will be severely reduced.
CONS
The intrusion of the federal government into the practice of medicine.
18 million of the uninsured will be forced to go under Medicaid, while the rest will have to accept another government program. Even so, millions will remain uninsured.
By 2019, an estimated 4.8 million seniors will be forced out of Medicare Advantage.
Medicare will be cut by $528 billion dollars.
Taxes will be increased (especially on high-income individuals).
By forcing States to accept federally-mandated health insurance, the Act violates States’ rights.
Some speculate that you can be thrown in jail for failure to pay your health insurance taxes.
is this biased?
Cite the source, please, and then I'll do some research.
http://blog.debate.org/2012/06/29/the-p ... ple-guide/
I googled pros and con and was wondering if others felt this was unbiased.
I think the biggest con of the whole thing is that we're being forced to rely more heavily on insurance to pay for our health care....which will only drive up medical costs artificially even more than it has over the last 30-40 years that it's been in control of our health care.
People would not accept this payment model for ANY OTHER ASPECT of their lives, but it's the so-called solution when it comes to the most important aspect....their health.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
thank you
I remember 30-40-50 years ago, we had no insurance, no credit cards
and paid for our doctor visits hospital care from our savings.
Savings a word not heard much.
What happened to the health savings accounts
that were starting for the young people? My benefits person for IL
was pushing strong for those about a decade ago.
I think that disappeared.
Imagine the employer taking out your grocery insurance premium before you received your net pay and then having some third party pay for your groceries at prices they set?
Is there a soul alive that believes grocery costs would go down?????
So why don't people see that health insurance is the problem???
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
fuck yes, obama!
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Except Medicare Fee for Service administered by the government costs more than Medicare Advantage administered through health plans.
Analogies don't work. Food does not = health care. Interestingly, Americans have no problem finding plenty of calories regardless of socioeconomic status. But, many have issues trying to get them to see their doctors in a timely manner even when implored to do so.
I think analogies do work and I'm not equating food = health care. What I'm saying is that NOBODY would accept the health care payment model (i.e. health insurance often through employer deductions pre-net pay) for any other aspect of their lives because it's painfully obvious that it would drive up the cost of whatever they were controlling.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
...
It is because it is one of many benefits companies use to obtain and retain employees. Prior to the 1930s... companies didn't have to provide shit to it workers other than a wage. Through collective bargaining agreements, workers got benefits, such as sick days, vacation days, paid holidays, medical insurance, etc... along with their wages.
It has evolved into something that people expect to get automatically.
Hail, Hail!!!
And Obamacare
Emoticon
many probably won't like nor trust the source but I found it a good read
Sha la la la i'm in love with a jersey girl
I love you forever and forever
Adel 03 Melb 1 03 LA 2 06 Santa Barbara 06 Gorge 1 06 Gorge 2 06 Adel 1 06 Adel 2 06 Camden 1 08 Camden 2 08 Washington DC 08 Hartford 08
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Felt compelled to reply to this.
We know how you feel- you've made that very evident with your long stream of juvenile posts.
Instead of just listening to your Dad and his dinner table talk and then repeating it on this forum... why don't you spend a few moments, research the two candidates, and then formulate (create) your own opinion.
After doing this, you might still feel the same way, but here's the second thing: then borrow a thesaurus from your school before writing your next post. Look up a comparable word to 'sucks' and use it instead. That way you don't make every Romney supporter look like a (insert word here).
Not only would you come across as more credible (believable)... you'd be helping your cause so much more.
Needless to say, unless I have a broadsword protruding from my gut, I'm not going to see a Dr.
I hear what you're saying, but, the thing about insurance... in my opinion... it's for the big things.
Car Insurance for example... If I get in a minor fender bender, I'm not going to go to my insurance company to fix it. If I get in a major accident where my car is totalled and I'm laid up in a hospital bed for a week... i'll gladly pay the deductibles because having to pay for the whole thing will mean a big hit on my finances.
Same thing with Health Insurance. I'll gladly pay for the check-ups and trips to the doctor's office for a sprained ankle. I want them there in case the big things hit... cancer, heart disease, perforated intestine, broadsword plunged into my gut... things that are going to bankrupt me and leave in financial ruin.
That's why I have insurance... for the big things that might happen to me.
Hail, Hail!!!
Third time's the charm? It's been a week since I posted the cost question and nary an attempt to answer it. How did this pile of legislation "bend the cost curve" (it's original stated intent)?
Everyone focuses on pre-ex, etc. Nobody's against pre-ex coverage. We're all just wondering how we will pay for it. Giving out money is easy.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce