Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 6 of 19 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 273
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    West Covina CA
    Posts
    18,546
    This article made me feel a lot better about the ACHA and the speculative/misleading figures about how many people will lose insurance.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot.../#2893cdf45951

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    18,057
    Quote Originally Posted by Cracka2HI! View Post
    This article made me feel a lot better about the ACHA and the speculative/misleading figures about how many people will lose insurance.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot.../#2893cdf45951
    Even with this more favorable view, it is going to insure 5 million less Americans. We are going in the opposite direction, we should be looking to cover as many people as possible, not reducing the number covered.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,589
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Where are you getting those numbers?

    https://www.google.com/amp/dailysign...y-in-2016/amp/

    Everywhere I've gone shows only 6.5 million who paid the tax instead of getting insurance in 2016. And that was a 20% reduction from the previous year, so less people were actually paying the penalty and more being enrolled, not the other way around...
    I did a quick search and the article on the top said 33 million without insurance. The article is based on 2014. It includes non-citizens, who can have legal status, but because they aren't citizens do not qualify for medicare, young people who don't buy it and people in states that haven't accepted the medicare expansion, and a big bucket of others. The reality is that more people would be insured, if the government and states expand medicare to cover them. If not, they aren't buying the insurance.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...lth-insurance/

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    18,057
    Quote Originally Posted by johnnyi View Post
    I did a quick search and the article on the top said 33 million without insurance. The article is based on 2014. It includes non-citizens, who can have legal status, but because they aren't citizens do not qualify for medicare, young people who don't buy it and people in states that haven't accepted the medicare expansion, and a big bucket of others. The reality is that more people would be insured, if the government and states expand medicare to cover them. If not, they aren't buying the insurance.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...lth-insurance/
    But that number is far different than "people who would rather pay the fine than get Obamacare", the majority of those people that don't have Obamacare Has nothing to do with them deciding they'd rather pay the tax.

    It's also an odd complaint against the ACA that it doesn't insure enough people when the counter proposal insures less.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    72,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Cracka2HI! View Post
    This article made me feel a lot better about the ACHA and the speculative/misleading figures about how many people will lose insurance.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot.../#2893cdf45951
    Ugh I hate Forbes. Not because of their content/bias/etc., just because they refuse to operate properly without me disabling my ad blocker. I hate websites that bombard me with ads and ad blocker makes them tolerable, but some like them drastically lock down what you can view with one on.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    West Covina CA
    Posts
    18,546
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Ugh I hate Forbes. Not because of their content/bias/etc., just because they refuse to operate properly without me disabling my ad blocker. I hate websites that bombard me with ads and ad blocker makes them tolerable, but some like them drastically lock down what you can view with one on.
    LOL! The worst.

    It's not like the article makes the AHCA out to be great or anything. It does make me hopeful some of the worst things I've heard about it are overblown. The main thing I took from it is that there could actually be a somewhat smooth transition if the mandate is extended out to 2020. Of course Republicans will want to reject that. I'm hoping the reality sets in for them that that isn't a horrible compromise and the alternative could be many many times worse. I know, probably wishful thinking.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,589
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Even with this more favorable view, it is going to insure 5 million less Americans. We are going in the opposite direction, we should be looking to cover as many people as possible, not reducing the number covered.
    However, we aren't taking into account that there might be new reasons for some to spend money on insurance if there are health savings accounts, which pay for the first dollars of the deductibles instead of waiting until the deductibles are exhausted before paying out a cent. We also aren't taking into account that companies might be more willing to hire more people with less insurance mandates and less expensive policies and either insure those people directly or the people would have more money (since they have a job or a better paying job) to buy insurance on their own.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pittsbruh
    Posts
    67,834
    I think it says a lot about a leader if their stance on something is "whatever, let's just not do anything and step back and let it crash and burn. Then blame it on the other party and let that prove that we should do whatever it is we want". That might be where we are at this point. Trump's alluded to it. Jeffrey Lord said it point blank today.

    I've, for what I feel are common sensical reasons, never felt that Trump actually cares about the well-being of people, let alone the poor and sick. It seems more likely that he/they just want to look good, be proven "right", blame someone else and to get their agenda through no matter how it gets done or how much anything suffers.

    They might not have a choice though. I don't see how they come up with anything that satisfies everyone, because what many of them want is so unsatisfying.
    this my sig

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    72,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Cracka2HI! View Post
    LOL! The worst.

    It's not like the article makes the AHCA out to be great or anything. It does make me hopeful some of the worst things I've heard about it are overblown. The main thing I took from it is that there could actually be a somewhat smooth transition if the mandate is extended out to 2020. Of course Republicans will want to reject that. I'm hoping the reality sets in for them that that isn't a horrible compromise and the alternative could be many many times worse. I know, probably wishful thinking.
    Forbes is actually pretty level headed, so I enjoy reading them, I just hate that they out-and-out restrict access. Most sites will say "hey we see you've got a pop up blocker" and ask you to turn it off on their site. And usually those sites are not obnoxious with their ads.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Allentown
    Posts
    33,992
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    I can't understand where people are getting these ****ty health insurance plans. My deductible is $250 and it covers almost everything like preventive things 100%.
    I think you are just super lucky.

    I've been working in medical billing for nearly 10 years and the companies I've worked for have never had a deductible/oop under $1000. I even worked for a hospital. The premiums were less, free at one point, but never that low.

    Working in billing I obviously see our patients' deductibles/OOP and I can tell you, at least for my current company, have never seen an amount under $500. We service medicaid patients but obviously those are $0. Your commercial plans are always $1000+. Hell, Medicare has a deductible of $183 this year, only 70 less than you. You're just lucky.

    EDIT: This is basically insurances from states all along the east coast and as far west, along the line, as MN down to AL. Not blanketing the entirety of states but still a good majority of states to get a good feel of types of OOPs.
    Last edited by koldjerky; 03-15-2017 at 05:13 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack of Blades View Post
    I don't consider Brand New indie. I consider them ****ing awesome and don't belong to a genre.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    257
    Based on the legislation as it stands, here’s generally how you could be affected:

    If you're among the 50 percent of Americans who get health insurance from their employers, the House bill would remove the penalty imposed by the ACA on companies with 50 or more employees if they did not offer insurance to their workers. In an effort to save money, some companies with 50 to 200 employees might stop offering health insurance. If you work at a company in that size range, you could find yourself having to decide whether to buy insurance on your own or go without. Though the GOP plan does away with almost all the taxes that fund the ACA, it does keep one: the so-called Cadillac tax on employers that offer generous healthcare coverage. Although that tax wouldn't kick in till 2025, it could prompt your employer to offer less comprehensive coverage or plans where you shoulder more of the cost.

    If you buy your own insurance, the House plan does away with the penalty currently imposed for those who don’t want to buy any. However, if too many young, healthy people opt out of insurance, it will drive up rates for everyone else. So the House plan tries to encourage people to stay insured by allowing insurance companies to charge 30 percent higher premiums for one year if you let your policy lapse. If you buy your own insurance, the GOP plan also changes how you will get help paying for your premiums. The GOP formula is based mainly on age, though in contradictory ways. On the one hand, it gives larger credits ($4,000) to people 60 and older, and smaller ones ($2,000) to those 30 and younger. But it also allows insurers to charge older people up to five times more than younger ones (vs. just three times more under the ACA).

    If you're on Medicaid, under the GOP proposal, Medicaid plans would not have to meet the current requirement that must cover 10 "essential" health services, including maternity coverage, prescription drugs, and mental healthcare. If you’re getting health insurance through the Medicaid expansion program now, you’ll be grandfathered in and still receive it. But starting in 2020, if you have a break in coverage for more than one month you won’t be able to re-enroll. Currently, the federal government guarantees matching a percentage of a state's Medicaid spending, regardless of the cost. The GOP bill caps the amount of federal funding that states can receive per Medicaid enrollee. A cap would mean that when program costs go up, as they inevitably will, states would either have to reduce coverage or come up with funds to offset the extra expense.

    If You're on Medicare, the GOP proposal still has some implications for you, or at least those who hope to be in the future. That’s because the House bill eliminates virtually all taxes used to fund the ACA starting in 2018, including a 0.9 percent payroll tax on higher-income workers that funnels money into Medicare. Without those funds, Medicare could be insolvent in 2024 and have to start reducing the amount of benefits it pays out—four years sooner than previously predicted.
    Last edited by Crovash; 03-15-2017 at 05:49 PM.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    West Covina CA
    Posts
    18,546
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Forbes is actually pretty level headed, so I enjoy reading them, I just hate that they out-and-out restrict access. Most sites will say "hey we see you've got a pop up blocker" and ask you to turn it off on their site. And usually those sites are not obnoxious with their ads.
    Yeah, I hear ya. That **** is annoying af. I can't stand pretty much anything that delays me from getting to where I clicked immediately. I had turn off sigs here cause of that.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    72,620
    Imma let conservatives keep bashing Obamacare and salivating over Trumpcare, but first imma let Jan Brewer savage Trumpcare.


  14. #89
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    25,461
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Imma let conservatives keep bashing Obamacare and salivating over Trumpcare, but first imma let Jan Brewer savage Trumpcare.


    Would you respect this women's opinion if she wasn't an "R" happened to say something you agree with this time?

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    18,150
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    Would you respect this women's opinion if she wasn't an "R" happened to say something you agree with this time?
    It's a good post, I think both sides see trump care as a pretty bad cluster **** at this point. I said it jokingly before, but I think the reality is settling in that this guy just doesn't know what the **** he's doing. He's probably gonna set up a nice little market crash for himself to cash out on, so his trickle down is on point, but outside of that he looks pretty lost

    If he starts ****in with China, as he keeps proclaiming he will, I don't see how it could end well

    I find trump to be both vey inspiring and very scary at the same time. The same two qualities I hope to build up within myself

Page 6 of 19 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •