Trump on Obamacare

[Dukes]

This pretty much sums it up.

<a href="http://s25.photobucket.com/albums/c80/nvrsumr/?action=view&amp;current=wpid-facebook_-119862145.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c80/nvrsumr/wpid-facebook_-119862145.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

[barryr]

Yep, pretty good summation. But the blind believe it will work and do so smoothly as well. But it is the others that don't agree that are stupid.

[orinjkrush]

pretty funny. thanks.

don't know which is worse having 2 million disease vectors running around untreated or

having 2 million more people on the public dole. yikes.

[Spider]

How did that birther thing work out for trump ? And no new doctors ? What they closed up medical school ?

[houghtam]

This pretty much sums it up.

<a href="http://s25.photobucket.com/albums/c80/nvrsumr/?action=view&amp;current=wpid-facebook_-119862145.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c80/nvrsumr/wpid-facebook_-119862145.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

Let me get this straight. We're taking advice from a guy who has declared bankruptcy three times, been divorced twice, spends 15 weeks having people kiss his ass before firing all but one of them, and who still believes our rightfully elected president isn't American.

Think about it...

[tnedator]

pretty funny. thanks.

don't know which is worse having 2 million disease vectors running around untreated or

having 2 million more people on the public dole. yikes.

A lot of the people I know that "can't afford" health insurance, still won't qualify for the expanded medicaid and won't qualify for any or only partially vouchered health care on the public exchanges. Meaning, it will be cheaper for them to pay the Obamacare Tax and remain uninsured, rather than pay the $2,000-5,000 a year to pay their portion of the subsidized public exchange insurance (and that assumes that the premiums COME DOWN as a result of Obamacare, which the the bill assumes. The bill, and CBO calculations, assume that Obamacare will create an immediate reduction in premiums of about 25%.

They will continue doing what they do now, which is go to the emergency room when a kid has a cold, or a parent has a kidney stone, and then setting up a 20 year payment plan with the hospital to pay it off.

Oh, by the way, they will keep their two new cars, Xbox360, DirecTV and Cable internet, not to mention their Iphones for everyone in the family.

This will give insurance to "some" people that can't afford it, most specifically those that fall under the expanded medicaid guidelines, which will be 133% of the federal poverty level. So, that means an individual making about $15.5k and family of four making $32,000 will now qualify for Medicaid and have their insurance paid for by tax payers.

However, once you cross over that threshold, and say have a person making $24,000, he will have to pay something like $2,000 after taxes (I'm pretty sure it won't be tax deductible) for a high deductible health insurance plan. The annual deductible will be something like $2,000.

So, that single person making 24k a year will have the choice of paying about $2k for a high deductible insurance plan from a public exchange (assuming premiums miraculously decrease, or the government comes up with money for bigger subsidies than expected) or paying a $600 tax (individual mandate).

So, when making the decision between internet, Xbox, Cell phone, etc., do you think that single person will choose to pay that $50 a month Obamacare Tax to NOT have insurance, or the $150+ a month for health care?

Easy, they will pay the tax and remain uninsured and spend that extra $100 a month on something else. All along, knowing that if they get cancer, break their back or have some other catastrophic injury/illness, then they can simply purchase insurance at that time knowing that the insurance company will have to take them on and have to cover their now pre-existing illness.

[W*GS]

Let me get this straight. We're taking advice from a guy who has declared bankruptcy three times, been divorced twice, spends 15 weeks having people kiss his ass before firing all but one of them, and who still believes our rightfully elected president isn't American.

Think about it...

Who gives a **** what Trump thinks?

Oh yeah - wingnuts.

[ghwk]

Let me get this straight. We're taking advice from a guy who has declared bankruptcy three times, been divorced twice, spends 15 weeks having people kiss his ass before firing all but one of them, and who still believes our rightfully elected president isn't American.

Think about it...

Plus the combover, don't forget the combover. Hilarious!

[Fedaykin]

A lot of the people I know that "can't afford" health insurance, still won't qualify for the expanded medicaid and won't qualify for any or only partially vouchered health care on the public exchanges. Meaning, it will be cheaper for them to pay the Obamacare Tax and remain uninsured, rather than pay the $2,000-5,000 a year to pay their portion of the subsidized public exchange insurance (and that assumes that the premiums COME DOWN as a result of Obamacare, which the the bill assumes. The bill, and CBO calculations, assume that Obamacare will create an immediate reduction in premiums of about 25%.

They will continue doing what they do now, which is go to the emergency room when a kid has a cold, or a parent has a kidney stone, and then setting up a 20 year payment plan with the hospital to pay it off.

Oh, by the way, they will keep their two new cars, Xbox360, DirecTV and Cable internet, not to mention their Iphones for everyone in the family.

This will give insurance to "some" people that can't afford it, most specifically those that fall under the expanded medicaid guidelines, which will be 133% of the federal poverty level. So, that means an individual making about $15.5k and family of four making $32,000 will now qualify for Medicaid and have their insurance paid for by tax payers.

However, once you cross over that threshold, and say have a person making $24,000, he will have to pay something like $2,000 after taxes (I'm pretty sure it won't be tax deductible) for a high deductible health insurance plan. The annual deductible will be something like $2,000.

So, that single person making 24k a year will have the choice of paying about $2k for a high deductible insurance plan from a public exchange (assuming premiums miraculously decrease, or the government comes up with money for bigger subsidies than expected) or paying a $600 tax (individual mandate).

So, when making the decision between internet, Xbox, Cell phone, etc., do you think that single person will choose to pay that $50 a month Obamacare Tax to NOT have insurance, or the $150+ a month for health care?

Easy, they will pay the tax and remain uninsured and spend that extra $100 a month on something else. All along, knowing that if they get cancer, break their back or have some other catastrophic injury/illness, then they can simply purchase insurance at that time knowing that the insurance company will have to take them on and have to cover their now pre-existing illness.

A very excellent argument for what I say all the time: treating health care as an "insurable" service is insane.

Insurance is for things that are statistically only likely to happen to a very small minority, or at least at a very low overall frequency. Health cannot be "insured" -- everyone gets sick and hurt -- everyone needs medical care.

This is why civilized countries don't **** around with "insurance" idiocy like we do.

[BroncoBeavis]

A lot of the people I know that "can't afford" health insurance, still won't qualify for the expanded medicaid and won't qualify for any or only partially vouchered health care on the public exchanges. Meaning, it will be cheaper for them to pay the Obamacare Tax and remain uninsured, rather than pay the $2,000-5,000 a year to pay their portion of the subsidized public exchange insurance (and that assumes that the premiums COME DOWN as a result of Obamacare, which the the bill assumes. The bill, and CBO calculations, assume that Obamacare will create an immediate reduction in premiums of about 25%.

They will continue doing what they do now, which is go to the emergency room when a kid has a cold, or a parent has a kidney stone, and then setting up a 20 year payment plan with the hospital to pay it off.

Oh, by the way, they will keep their two new cars, Xbox360, DirecTV and Cable internet, not to mention their Iphones for everyone in the family.

This will give insurance to "some" people that can't afford it, most specifically those that fall under the expanded medicaid guidelines, which will be 133% of the federal poverty level. So, that means an individual making about $15.5k and family of four making $32,000 will now qualify for Medicaid and have their insurance paid for by tax payers.

However, once you cross over that threshold, and say have a person making $24,000, he will have to pay something like $2,000 after taxes (I'm pretty sure it won't be tax deductible) for a high deductible health insurance plan. The annual deductible will be something like $2,000.

So, that single person making 24k a year will have the choice of paying about $2k for a high deductible insurance plan from a public exchange (assuming premiums miraculously decrease, or the government comes up with money for bigger subsidies than expected) or paying a $600 tax (individual mandate).

So, when making the decision between internet, Xbox, Cell phone, etc., do you think that single person will choose to pay that $50 a month Obamacare Tax to NOT have insurance, or the $150+ a month for health care?

Easy, they will pay the tax and remain uninsured and spend that extra $100 a month on something else. All along, knowing that if they get cancer, break their back or have some other catastrophic injury/illness, then they can simply purchase insurance at that time knowing that the insurance company will have to take them on and have to cover their now pre-existing illness.

Yeah the preexisting condition stuff is going to drive a death spiral. The only way around that is if the tax is worse than buying the insurance (won't happen because it's ugly politics)

"Insurance" that allows you to insure something that already happened isn't really insurance. It's financing.

But lucky us, at the end of the day when many of the insurance exchanges start to fail, we'll have a certain group of politicos saying "See we gave Private Insurance a chance and it didn't work!"

Oh, and the Trump thing has the look of one of those things that gets busted on Snopes. Maybe he said it, but I'm skeptical.

[houghtam]

Yeah the preexisting condition stuff is going to drive a death spiral. The only way around that is if the tax is worse than buying the insurance (won't happen because it's ugly politics)

"Insurance" that allows you to insure something that already happened isn't really insurance. It's financing.

But lucky us, at the end of the day when many of the insurance exchanges start to fail, we'll have a certain group of politicos saying "See we gave Private Insurance a chance and it didn't work!"

Oh, and the Trump thing has the look of one of those things that gets busted on Snopes. Maybe he said it, but I'm skeptical.

News flash for you. We're already past that point. We already gave private insurance a chance and it didn't work. Now we're on the slow road to cleaning up their mess.

[BroncoBeavis]

A very excellent argument for what I say all the time: treating health care as an "insurable" service is insane.

Insurance is for things that are statistically only likely to happen to a very small minority, or at least at a very low overall frequency. Health cannot be "insured" -- everyone gets sick and hurt -- everyone needs medical care.

This is why civilized countries don't **** around with "insurance" idiocy like we do.

Many younger people might average seeing a doctor once a decade or so. They should be able to buy insurance that recognizes this reality.

In reality health care insurance should be structured just like life insurance... if you buy in early, you're guaranteed lower rates for the rest of your life, so long as you pay the bills.

Then your insurance company is stuck with you and can't terminate your coverage, so they have no incentive to try to get rid of you or your claims. Unfortunately our employer-based insurance strategy made more rational insurance models like this impossible.

Also, many of the "advanced" countries you keep talking about still use an insurance model, there's just usually a public floor underneath somewhere.

[Rohirrim]

Why does Trump use the word "we." None of it applies to him. I'm sure he has a personal doctor on his staff and a medical account that makes him interest as long as he stays healthy - tax deductible, no doubt.

[ghwk]

Many younger people might average seeing a doctor once a decade or so. They should be able to buy insurance that recognizes this reality.

In reality health care insurance should be structured just like life insurance... if you buy in early, you're guaranteed lower rates for the rest of your life, so long as you pay the bills.

Then your insurance company is stuck with you and can't terminate your coverage, so they have no incentive to try to get rid of you or your claims. Unfortunately our employer-based insurance strategy made more rational insurance models like this impossible.

Also, many of the "advanced" countries you keep talking about still use an insurance model, there's just usually a public floor underneath somewhere.

Where did you get that "fact"?

[Paladin]

Frankly, I think of the "mandate" as a "Free Rider" Rider. (Mittens invented that term.) Less than one % of Americans will be charged the penalty, but no one, absolutely NO ONE will pay the charge. Why, you ask? Because the law contains 2 provisions that prohibit collection of any such penalty. Further, there is a subsidy available for people who meet certain means tests standards. The Insurance Exchanges will be the place to get those quotes from PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANIES. Also, the Exchanges will be availble to small businesses to get insurance for their employees as well as tax credits for doing so.

Butif you had no insurance, what if the Hospital says you have to pay all prospective reasonable and foreseeable costs for services before you get services? Even in the ER? You can argue that the Hospital may get local property tax, but the Hospital would get no federal funds. Further, Free Riders would pay the FULL costs. And they may not get the same level of services. (Remember a few years ago when LA, California. hopsitals would shuttle pregnant undocumented latinas all around town?) Imagine yourself after Lorena Bobbit snipped you and you had no insurance. What's it gonna be? Pay or play?

Trump is laughable becasue he a clown in a bad haircut. Many conservatives are against the AHCA because it has Obama's name on it. All the money in the world can be spent on this election, but it will never change three things: Obama has been a very successful president, the AHCA will not be changed, and Mittens is still the GOP candidate. Hilarious!



(This message was typed without the aid of Mrs. TOG's nipples.)

[Paladin]

Many younger people might average seeing a doctor once a decade or so. They should be able to buy insurance that recognizes this reality.

In reality health care insurance should be structured just like life insurance... if you buy in early, you're guaranteed lower rates for the rest of your life, so long as you pay the bills.

Then your insurance company is stuck with you and can't terminate your coverage, so they have no incentive to try to get rid of you or your claims. Unfortunately our employer-based insurance strategy made more rational insurance models like this impossible.

Also, many of the "advanced" countries you keep talking about still use an insurance model, there's just usually a public floor underneath somewhere.

Seems to me that more younger people get hurt in auto accidents and by drug use. And the numbers, IIRC, are increasing.

Your "argument" is not based on fact.


(This message was typed without the aid of Mrs. TOG's nipples.)

[orinjkrush]

A lot of the people I know that "can't afford" health insurance, still won't qualify for the expanded medicaid and won't qualify for any or only partially vouchered health care on the public exchanges. Meaning, it will be cheaper for them to pay the Obamacare Tax and remain uninsured, rather than pay the $2,000-5,000 a year to pay their portion of the subsidized public exchange insurance (and that assumes that the premiums COME DOWN as a result of Obamacare, which the the bill assumes. The bill, and CBO calculations, assume that Obamacare will create an immediate reduction in premiums of about 25%.

They will continue doing what they do now, which is go to the emergency room when a kid has a cold, or a parent has a kidney stone, and then setting up a 20 year payment plan with the hospital to pay it off.

Oh, by the way, they will keep their two new cars, Xbox360, DirecTV and Cable internet, not to mention their Iphones for everyone in the family.

This will give insurance to "some" people that can't afford it, most specifically those that fall under the expanded medicaid guidelines, which will be 133% of the federal poverty level. So, that means an individual making about $15.5k and family of four making $32,000 will now qualify for Medicaid and have their insurance paid for by tax payers.

However, once you cross over that threshold, and say have a person making $24,000, he will have to pay something like $2,000 after taxes (I'm pretty sure it won't be tax deductible) for a high deductible health insurance plan. The annual deductible will be something like $2,000.

So, that single person making 24k a year will have the choice of paying about $2k for a high deductible insurance plan from a public exchange (assuming premiums miraculously decrease, or the government comes up with money for bigger subsidies than expected) or paying a $600 tax (individual mandate).

So, when making the decision between internet, Xbox, Cell phone, etc., do you think that single person will choose to pay that $50 a month Obamacare Tax to NOT have insurance, or the $150+ a month for health care?

Easy, they will pay the tax and remain uninsured and spend that extra $100 a month on something else. All along, knowing that if they get cancer, break their back or have some other catastrophic injury/illness, then they can simply purchase insurance at that time knowing that the insurance company will have to take them on and have to cover their now pre-existing illness.

interesting points. i don't personally know too many people who don't have or can't buy health insurance. except what i read on the internets.

[houghtam]

Seems to me that more younger people get hurt in auto accidents and by drug use. And the numbers, IIRC, are increasing.

Your "argument" is not based on fact.


(This message was typed without the aid of Mrs. TOG's nipples.)

It's based on anecdote, which according to Beavis is strictly verboten, at least if you're talking about whether oil spills actually do damage. By the way, Beavis, I still can't canoe or fish te Kalamazoo River, and that's two years later.

http://m.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/03/fallout-kalamazoo-tar-sands-spill-keystone

[Spider]

Between beavis and tned ..got enough bullshiat to fertilize 400 acres .....fire up the pto spreader I doubt these 2 are done ....

[Spider]

It's based on anecdote, which according to Beavis is strictly verboten, at least if you're talking about whether oil spills actually do damage. By the way, Beavis, I still can't canoe or fish te Kalamazoo River, and that's two years later.

http://m.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/03/fallout-kalamazoo-tar-sands-spill-keystone

I tried to several people about tar sands ....the stuff is nasty ...the pipe line is a bad idea ...Oil spills are bad enough , but that stuff is several times worse

[mhgaffney]

Me has it right. Who gives a **** what Mr Trump thinks?

[BroncoBeavis]

Where did you get that "fact"?

Virtually every guy I know under 50. I think 2003, maybe 2004 was the last time I saw a doctor. And I'm nowhere near alone.

[ghwk]

Virtually every guy I know under 50. I think 2003, maybe 2004 was the last time I saw a doctor. And I'm nowhere near alone.

Ok so the quote was just speculation and anecdotal. Cool I've got it now.

[BroncoBeavis]

Between beavis and tned ..got enough bullshiat to fertilize 400 acres .....fire up the pto spreader I doubt these 2 are done ....

Spidey's still upset he can't tell the difference between a coal plant and an oil refinery. Bear that in mind next time he pontificates on energy policy. LOL

[BroncoBeavis]

Seems to me that more younger people get hurt in auto accidents and by drug use. And the numbers, IIRC, are increasing.

Your "argument" is not based on fact.


(This message was typed without the aid of Mrs. TOG's nipples.)

You traded an anecdote for a stereotype generalization. Not much improvement. We can look at stats if you want.

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1114.pdf

Looks like 18-44 year-olds were 4 times more likely than 65-74 year-olds to not see a health care provider in a year. 50% more likely than 45-64 year olds.

Then men in general are half as likely as women to see a doctor any given year.

It's irrational to set up a market where the young pay anywhere near what older people should pay for coverage. Especially considering our youngest adult generation is generally the poorest.

When you take an honest look at it, this kind of subsidization is one of the most regressive tax schemes you could ever imagine.

[peacepipe]

Spidey's still upset he can't tell the difference between a coal plant and an oil refinery. Bear that in mind next time he pontificates on energy policy. LOLif I remember correctly spider owned you on that issue.

[BroncoBeavis]

if I remember correctly spider owned you on that issue.

Yes, when he insisted there was an oil refinery in a city that the EPA apparently doesn't know about, then described exactly the location of a coal-fired power plant, I was totally pwned.

[solydmusyl]

Unlike you yahoos.........
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.

However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people, and the businesses they own.

The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with! I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access, by the appointees of the Obama administration, of all of your personal healthcare direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide…

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance, or if you have private insurance that is not deemed acceptable to the Health Choices Administrator appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a tax instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much, out the original ten in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law It doesn’t stop there though.

The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights.

Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution.” If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it, without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat, I suggest they consult the source, the US Constitution, and Bill of Rights. There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.- Mike Connelly

[W*GS]

Me has it right. Who gives a **** what Mr Trump thinks?

Hey gaffe - what's Venus?

When was America *really* America?

Man up, ya chicken****.

[Arkie]

And no new doctors ? What they closed up medical school ?

There will always be new doctors, but are the enrollments at medical school increasing to match the tens of millions newly insured? Instead there will be a massive drain on the best foreign doctors that moved here to practice medicine. Medical schools will continue to enroll new students, but less qualified students will become doctors especially if doctors' pay decreases. Conclusion: a thinly spread less qualified healthcare system that takes care of more people.

[The Lone Bolt]

@solydmusyl: does your name refer to the contents of your head? Your post reads like laughable right-wing propaganda.

How about citing the exact pages in the law where you discovered all of these terrible things and let us be the judge of what the law really says?

[W*GS]

Unlike you yahoos.........

Wow. First post out of the gate, and full of horse****.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/health-care-overhaul-constitutional

Old road apples, too, ta boot.

[houghtam]

Wow. First post out of the gate, and full of horse****.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/health-care-overhaul-constitutional

Old road apples, too, ta boot.

Seriously who makes a dummy account for this purpose?

[Paladin]

Yeah, I think I read that in the John Birch Societry Newsletter. Or was it the Faux News Newsletter? Murdoch's Newsletter? Not sure. When we went camping, I used them in the outhouse. They are poor "tissue" paper.





(This message was typed without the aid of Mrs. TOG's nipples.)

[W*GS]

Seriously who makes a dummy account for this purpose?

barryr, lonestar, any one of the resident dullard wingnuts...

[pricejj]

The extra $2068 per year that I'm going to have to fork over per year to subsidize another middle-class American is going to prevent me from going to from buying a house and saving for retirement.

At least you will get to keep your Escalade...

What incentive is there to get a good job?

I am subsidizing your rent, your healthcare, your food, your electricity bill, your phone bill, your education, your unemployment, and your retirement.

...at least let me take a ride in the Escalade...geesh...

[barryr]

The extra $2068 per year that I'm going to have to fork over per year to subsidize another middle-class American is going to prevent me from going to from buying a house and saving for retirement.

At least you will get to keep your Escalade...

What incentive is there to get a good job?

I am subsidizing your rent, your healthcare, your food, your electricity bill, your phone bill, your education, your unemployment, and your retirement.

...at least let me take a ride in the Escalade...geesh...

But, but, it's the rich who are going to fund all of this, not middle America. You didn't hear that recycled theme?

[tnedator]

interesting points. i don't personally know too many people who don't have or can't buy health insurance. except what i read on the internets.

I know quite a few. Personally, I would do everything in my power not to go without insurance coverage, especially since my wife is a cancer survivor, therefore she has a big pre-existing condition hanging over her head.

Fortunately, like in most other states, we do have the safety net of the Arkansas high risk group, which provides insurance for people like my wife who become excluded from group plans because of having a pre-existing condition and failing to maintain insurance. Last time I checked into it as a backup, it was somewhere around $450 a month. Expensive for single person coverage, but not astronomical if you need it.

A very excellent argument for what I say all the time: treating health care as an "insurable" service is insane.

Insurance is for things that are statistically only likely to happen to a very small minority, or at least at a very low overall frequency. Health cannot be "insured" -- everyone gets sick and hurt -- everyone needs medical care.

This is why civilized countries don't **** around with "insurance" idiocy like we do.

Unfortunately, somewhere along the line we have forgotten what "insurance" is and how it is supposed to work. The analog to what Obamcare does would be:

Being allowed to pay a $50 a year fine/tax, which then enabled you to AFTER you get into a car wreck, which is your fault, to go to State Farm or whoever and say, "hey, I've been in a wreck. It's my fault. I want to buy insurance now, which the law says you have to sell me, so that you can replace my car, and pay the medical bills of the kid I just paralyzed."

Or

Paying a $200 a year fine, and then having your spouse, a few days after you die, call up AIG and purchase a life insurance on your corpse, stating, "the law says that you have to allow me to buy a $2 million policy on my husband that died last week. How soon before I can collect the money? By the way, I will be naming my self as the beneficiary..."

Don't get me wrong, I have also become used to the routine care that we used to pay for out of our pocket that is now considered "insurance." Speaking of routine care, how about another Obamacare analog:

The analog for the modern version of health insurance is buying car insurance and expecting it to cover the cost of your oil changes and tire replacements. Not too many people would think of that as "insurance" and in exactly the same way, our current form of "health insurance" is no longer "insurance."


Anyway, I've had a couple bloody marys and half a bottle of Malbec, so I'm rambling, but the point is that many people don't know what the **** the word "insurance" means.

[pricejj]

But, but, it's the rich who are going to fund all of this, not middle America. You didn't hear that recycled theme?

1. Government employees pay next to nothing for health insurance...shifting their costs onto the middle class.

2. Medicare/Medicaid have ultra-low reimbursement rates...shifting costs onto the middle class.

3. Now, Obamacare forces a family of three making more than $57,000 annually to subsidize everyone in a lower income bracket.

4. And Obamacare forces individuals making more than $33,000 per year to subsidize everyone in a lower income bracket.

[tnedator]

1. Government employees pay next to nothing for health insurance...shifting their costs onto the middle class.

2. Medicare/Medicaid have ultra-low reimbursement rates...shifting costs onto the middle class.

3. Now, Obamacare forces a family of three making more than $57,000 annually to subsidize everyone in a lower income bracket.

4. And Obamacare forces individuals making more than $33,000 per year to subsidize everyone in a lower income bracket.

Welcome to the new, "patriotic" America...

[pricejj]

Not only am I being forced to purchase a $6000 per year insurance plan (on services that I would never use)...but I am also being forced to subsidize someone elses over-priced insurance plan with my taxes...


Which one of you Democrat Socialists are going to explain to my son why I can't afford to travel 1,000 miles to see him anymore?

[houghtam]

Unfortunately, somewhere along the line we have forgotten what "insurance" is and how it is supposed to work. The analog to what Obamcare does would be:

Being allowed to pay a $50 a year fine/tax, which then enabled you to AFTER you get into a car wreck, which is your fault, to go to State Farm or whoever and say, "hey, I've been in a wreck. It's my fault. I want to buy insurance now, which the law says you have to sell me, so that you can replace my car, and pay the medical bills of the kid I just paralyzed."

Sure. Please, let's please use this analogy.

We also have speed limits, red lights, stop signs and crosswalks which tell you how to drive, keep others safe, and ultimately keep you safe as well. These things all keep costs down and save lives. So would mandating what you can and can't eat.

[BroncoBeavis]

Sure. Please, let's please use this analogy.

We also have speed limits, red lights, stop signs and crosswalks which tell you how to drive, keep others safe, and ultimately keep you safe as well. These things all keep costs down and save lives. So would mandating what you can and can't eat.

Broccoli mandate. Hold the dressing!

[lonestar]

This pretty much sums it up.

<a href="http://s25.photobucket.com/albums/c80/nvrsumr/?action=view&amp;current=wpid-facebook_-119862145.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c80/nvrsumr/wpid-facebook_-119862145.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

:thumbsup:

bears repeating..

[ghwk]

:thumbsup:

bears repeating..

If you are an idiot, yes.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Not only am I being forced to purchase a $6000 per year insurance plan (on services that I would never use)...but I am also being forced to subsidize someone elses over-priced insurance plan with my taxes...


Which one of you Democrat Socialists are going to explain to my son why I can't afford to travel 1,000 miles to see him anymore?

Damn!

You're so far gone on the Fox Kool-Aid you're beyond hope.

None of the above is even remotely true.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Urban Institute: Individual Mandate Would Not Affect 94 Percent Of Americans. A March 2012 report by the nonpartisan Urban Institute found that 94 percent of Americans "would not face a requirement to newly purchase insurance or pay a fine." From Urban Institute's report:
The "individual mandate" -- the requirement that individuals either have health insurance coverage or pay a fine -- is both the best known and the least popular component of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). That people know about the mandate -- and may even worry about it -- is not surprising, given both the heated political controversy and the constitutional challenge surrounding this provision of the law. What may be surprising, however, is that if the ACA were in effect today, 94 percent of the total population (93 percent of the nonelderly population) or 250.3 million people out of 268.8 million nonelderly people -- would not face a requirement to newly purchase insurance or pay a fine. [Urban Institute, March 2012 (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fbig.assets.huffingtonpost.com%2 FIndividualMandate.pdf)]

[chadta]

Sure. Please, let's please use this analogy.

We also have speed limits, red lights, stop signs and crosswalks which tell you how to drive, keep others safe, and ultimately keep you safe as well. These things all keep costs down and save lives. So would mandating what you can and can't eat.

Did you just really suggest that the government should control what we can and cant eat or drink or smoke ?

[tnedator]

Sure. Please, let's please use this analogy.

We also have speed limits, red lights, stop signs and crosswalks which tell you how to drive, keep others safe, and ultimately keep you safe as well. These things all keep costs down and save lives. So would mandating what you can and can't eat.

Some of those, which keep you safe vs. keeping others safe, have been highly contentious (seat belt laws, for instance). Regardless, what do those laws have to do with my analog -- being allowed to buy car insurance AFTER you are in a car wreck?

[BroncoBeavis]

Some of those, which keep you safe vs. keeping others safe, have been highly contentious (seat belt laws, for instance). Regardless, what do those laws have to do with my analog -- being allowed to buy car insurance AFTER you are in a car wreck?

Nothing really. What he meant to say was life is dangerous, therefore Americans need a caring government willing to hold their hand and guide them across the street.

Then refuse to let go and slap them every time they want to do something fun and/or stupid like eat a cheeseburger or ride an atv.

[BroncoBeavis]

Urban Institute: Individual Mandate Would Not Affect 94 Percent Of Americans. A March 2012 report by the nonpartisan Urban Institute found that 94 percent of Americans "would not face a requirement to newly purchase insurance or pay a fine." From Urban Institute's report:
The "individual mandate" -- the requirement that individuals either have health insurance coverage or pay a fine -- is both the best known and the least popular component of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). That people know about the mandate -- and may even worry about it -- is not surprising, given both the heated political controversy and the constitutional challenge surrounding this provision of the law. What may be surprising, however, is that if the ACA were in effect today, 94 percent of the total population (93 percent of the nonelderly population) or 250.3 million people out of 268.8 million nonelderly people -- would not face a requirement to newly purchase insurance or pay a fine. [Urban Institute, March 2012 (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fbig.assets.huffingtonpost.com%2 FIndividualMandate.pdf)]



Urban Institute?

Why not just quote Axelfraud and cut out the middleman? LOL

[Requiem]

Trump is old.

[tnedator]

Nothing really. What he meant to say was life is dangerous, therefore Americans need a caring government willing to hold their hand and guide them across the street.

Then refuse to let go and slap them every time they want to do something fun and/or stupid like eat a cheeseburger or ride an atv.

Hey, I had $20,000 worth of surgery after eating a cheesburger and then wrecking on a four-wheeler. lol Good thing I had insurance and only had to pay a few thousand out of pocket. Not sure how I survived that without Obamacare.

[tnedator]

Trump is old.

Yea, but he has good hair for a man his age.

[Requiem]

It looks like a ginger crapped on his skull. Gross.

[BroncoBeavis]

Hey, I had $20,000 worth of surgery after eating a cheesburger and then wrecking on a four-wheeler.

See, now imagine if Joe Biden was making your decisions for you. Don't you see how much better your life would be? LOL

That's why it hit so close to home when these guys watched John Edwards fall from grace. He had the whole thing figured out.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/john-edwards-vows-to-end-all-bad-things-by-2011,2235/

[tnedator]

See, now imagine if Joe Biden was making your decisions for you. Don't you see how much better your life would be? LOL

Well, in hindsight, he probably would have nanny-stated my ATV into being illegal, and as a result I wouldn't have tried to hydroplane over the flooding logging road at 40MPH and wouldn't have shattered my wrist.

Maybe this nanny state thing has some merit after all.

[BroncoBeavis]

Well, in hindsight, he probably would have nanny-stated my ATV into being illegal, and as a result I wouldn't have tried to hydroplane over the flooding logging road at 40MPH and wouldn't have shattered my wrist.

Maybe this nanny state thing has some merit after all.

And on a logging road no less. In Democratopia, there is no such thing. Gaia struck you with her carbonkarma wand, my friend. There's no two ways about it. :)

[tnedator]

And on a logging road no less. In Democratopia, there is no such thing. Gaia struck you with her carbonkarma wand, my friend. There's no two ways about it. :)

True. There were no speed signs. No stop lights. No controls at all. That road should have been barred from use by us little children of the nanny state.

[Requiem]

America can't afford to waste any more money on the deep South than it already does.

[houghtam]

LOL at the Republican pity party circle jerk going on in here. Nanny state this, can't pay my child support that. Here's a suggestion...one given all the time by your type during the Bush administration:

If you don't like America, get the **** out.

Have a nice day. :)

[tnedator]

America can't afford to waste any more money on the deep South than it already does.

Good thing I'm in the mid-south, I want me some guderment hand outs...

[barryr]

Economist Stephen Moore says nearly 75% of costs of Obamacare will fall on families making less than 120,000 a year. And premiums will go up despite Obamacare supposedly not lowering costs as claimed or, more accurately, lied. Of course, as with typical liberal fashion, they'll say "he's not a real economist." But the Obama backers are now finally calling people who sit on the government dole as "free loaders" but then want to keep making even more social programs. Liberals and hypocrisy are synonymous in all subjects.

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/30/wsj-chief-economist-75-of-obamacare-costs-will-fall-on-backs-of-those-making-less-than-120k-a-year/

[W*GS]

barryr is a being good little minion and repeating the right-wing talking-point-o-the-day.

So when does the memo go out to you guys? 8am local time?

[Pony Boy]

How did that birther thing work out for trump ? And no new doctors ? What they closed up medical school ?

Shootfire, they are probably fixin to open up a mess of them gal-darn new medical schools right near them goshdang trucking driving schools.........Git-R-Done Obama. :~ohyah!:

[barryr]

barryr is a being good little minion and repeating the right-wing talking-point-o-the-day.

So when does the memo go out to you guys? 8am local time?

Cue the self-proclaimed global warming expert and economist who decides who are experts on such issues. Didn't take you long.

[barryr]

Shootfire, they are probably fixin to open up a mess of them gal-darn new medical schools right near them goshdang trucking driving schools.........Git-R-Done Obama. :~ohyah!:

Or make it easier to become a doctor and less schooling to save time, so you'll have less qualified doctors out there. But more people will be able to afford seeing them, so it's wonderful.

[DenverBrit]

Economist Stephen Moore says nearly 75% of costs of Obamacare will fall on families making less than 120,000 a year. And premiums will go up despite Obamacare supposedly not lowering costs as claimed or, more accurately, lied. Of course, as with typical liberal fashion, they'll say "he's not a real economist." But the Obama backers are now finally calling people who sit on the government dole as "free loaders" but then want to keep making even more social programs. Liberals and hypocrisy are synonymous in all subjects.

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/30/wsj-chief-economist-75-of-obamacare-costs-will-fall-on-backs-of-those-making-less-than-120k-a-year/

He's an economist......a Reagan and Bush economist, a money man for the far right along with Laffer.

And to say the majority will bear 75% of the cost of healthcare didn't need an economist.

However, his comments aren't really about that. He, and the right, are more concerned about the 25% that will fall on the wealthy and mega rich.

Try and keep up.

[BroncoBeavis]

A question has come up and I think it might cause some sort of living breathing constitutional crisis. But once the triple bacon cheeseburger ban is in place, what happens if someone eats it in a bedroom?

Does that invalidate the Freedom of the Bedroom Commandment? Or does freedom in the bedroom fall short of absolute and only protect non-nutritional penetration? :)

[houghtam]

A question has come up and I think it might cause some sort of living breathing constitutional crisis. But once the triple bacon cheeseburger ban is in place, what happens if someone eats it in a bedroom?

Does that invalidate the Freedom of the Bedroom Commandment? Or does freedom in the bedroom fall short of absolute and only protect non-nutritional penetration? :)

The Freedom of the Bedroom Amendment (not Commandment...we don't allow religion in government here) does not cover acts that purposely negatively affect public health.

[BroncoBeavis]

The Freedom of the Bedroom Amendment (not Commandment...we don't allow religion in government here) does not cover acts that purposely negatively affect public health.

Schweet. Double-bag-it mandate... no question.

And some styles have more health risks than others. We'll get this thing narrowed down to Missionary before long in the name of public safety. Be just like the old days. In Gaia We Trust. LOL

[houghtam]

Schweet. Double-bag-it mandate... no question.

And some styles have more health risks than others. We'll get this thing narrowed down to Missionary before long in the name of public safety. Be just like the old days. In Gaia We Trust. LOL

Yeah, some professions cause greater health risks than others, too. Like religious leaders.

[Requiem]

Wait, they are banning triple cheeseburgers?

[houghtam]

Wait, they are banning triple cheeseburgers?

Not until 2016.

Well, 2017...we won't get sworn in til January. :)

[Requiem]

I read that Bloomberg wants to ban large sized sugar drinks in NYC. Maybe that was what Beavis was referring to.

[BroncoBeavis]

Yeah, some professions cause greater health risks than others, too. Like religious leaders.

The safest work is in the subsidized green energy field. You don't even have to produce anything that anyone wants... other than a check to the DNC, that is. But who gets hurt writing a kickback check or two?

[houghtam]

The safest work is in the subsidized green energy field. You don't even have to produce anything that anyone wants... other than a check to the DNC, that is. But who gets hurt writing a kickback check or two?

Right but with all the religious leaders out of the way, there won't be anyone to argue with...oh what's that stuff called...oh yeah, science. That way green energy and all other sorts communist tree hugger policies will get implemented.

[BroncoBeavis]

Wait, they are banning triple cheeseburgers?

I said Triple BACON Cheeseburgers, btw. The Beef people tithed adequately to the party, so they're off the hook until the pork products get stacked on.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/554225_434706993216546_614721880_n.jpg

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/534687_494752170542336_1206795189_n.jpg