# another health insurance rant



## Goags (May 28, 2004)

The numbers speak for themselves...I'm 62, in reasonable good health, only take 1 rx med, etc. Not gonna bend over and take this one...got til the 15th to shop around.


----------



## poco jim (Jun 28, 2010)

Goags said:


> The numbers speak for themselves...I'm 62, in reasonable good health, only take 1 rx med, etc. Not gonna bend over and take this one...got til the 15th to shop around.


They got me too, goags! A little over $100 a month, it's just going to get worse, buddy.


----------



## Mako232 (Sep 16, 2005)

Be careful who you vote for.


----------



## cva34 (Dec 22, 2008)

Just remember The same got that pushed through..Said there was no inflation to speak of so SS was only going to get 1.5% increase..You can tell he don't buy groceries! ..Or have to pay for insurance!


----------



## fultonswimmer (Jul 3, 2008)

Funny....my premium for my Medicare supplement plans will decrease by half(that is right....50%) when my new policy kicks in on January 1, 2014. Should I be thanking Palin, Cruz or ???? for this and what about my retirement funds which are up considerably during the last few years. Should I send this bonus to George W?
Give me a fricking break!!!


----------



## Blk Jck 224 (Oct 16, 2009)

It gets worse daily...Pay more & get less.


----------



## sureshot840 (Mar 3, 2009)

Private insurance companies do not want to insure people who need to use it. They only want to insure young healthy people. 

Eventually they raise the rates so you can not afford it, in the attempt to remove people from the "group policy" who are using the insurance. 

Similar to buying a 1 million dollar term life insurance policy for a 70 yr old person for 30 years. 

Remember insurance is defined as "transfer of risk" & the higher the risk (statistically) the more it will cost. 

They don't care if you are healthy either. I told them I was a good driver when I was under 25, didn't matter - still paid a ridiculous car insurance rate.


----------



## bobbyoshay (Nov 29, 2008)

Post it up fulton....the majority have their rates going up even with an increase of deductibles.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

fultonswimmer said:


> Funny....my premium for my Medicare supplement plans will decrease by half(that is right....50%) when my new policy kicks in on January 1, 2014. Should I be thanking Palin, Cruz or ???? for this and what about my retirement funds which are up considerably during the last few years. Should I send this bonus to George W?
> Give me a fricking break!!!


What an idiot...


----------



## Ted Gentry (Jun 8, 2004)

bobbyoshay said:


> Post it up fulton....the majority have their rates going up even with an increase of deductibles.


Good thing he's a swimmer Bobby, He's in the deep end and totally unaware of it. You can't fix stupid.:headknock


----------



## yellowmouth2 (Aug 16, 2005)

fultonswimmer said:


> Funny....my premium for my Medicare supplement plans will decrease by half(that is right....50%) when my new policy kicks in on January 1, 2014. Should I be thanking Palin, Cruz or ???? for this and what about my retirement funds which are up considerably during the last few years. Should I send this bonus to George W?
> Give me a fricking break!!!


So your retirement fund is up considerably? You think your boy Obama had anything to do with that? Give me a break!!


----------



## MikeS2942 (Mar 5, 2010)

So you have a 26% increase to help pay for free health care for those who expect it to be given to them. On behalf of those who demand free support for healthcare, housing, and food, they thank you for your gracious support.


----------



## Goags (May 28, 2004)

Heck, I just might quit work and suckle on the guv'ment teat awhile. Truth be known, I wanna throwup.


----------



## Court (Jul 16, 2011)

Just got my renewal today-Going up from $1700 to $1999 starting 2/1/14-By the way my family & I are in good health-This is for myself,wife & daughter in college-Ridiculous


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

My company pays all of my insurance. I do not know what they pay. I do know our deductable went from 2000 to 4000. It only covers 60% after that. I did look at the new government website and it looks like I could get the same deductable with better coverage after the deductable for around 500. Also my wife who has MS and rhuematoid arthritis could not get coverage for any amount through a private insurer because of pre existing conditions will now be able to get coverage. It is not bad for everybody.


----------



## Bull Fish (Nov 15, 2006)

fultonswimmer said:


> Funny....my premium for my Medicare supplement plans will decrease by half(that is right....50%) when my new policy kicks in on January 1, 2014. Should I be thanking Palin, Cruz or ???? for this and what about my retirement funds which are up considerably during the last few years. Should I send this bonus to George W?
> Give me a fricking break!!!


As Ricky Bobby would say "With all due respect" I'm glad that my already strapped budget and increase of 57% can offset the cost of others. While my retirement plan is in the tank, and the current business that I'm in is falling on a daily basis due to more and more emissions requirements.

I'm not into conspiracies but at the rate of inflation that I have seen throughout my few years in the working world along with taxes and MOOCHES on society all will fall apart before I ever think of retirement. So please enjoy the fruits of everyone else's labors since the political party in which you so dearly display your love for spent your SS $ on something else long ago. So let's go rob peter some more and Paul can continue to love life.

Enjoy my friend.... Enjoy!


----------



## Ted Gentry (Jun 8, 2004)

shaggydog said:


> My company pays all of my insurance. I do not know what they pay. I do know our deductable went from 2000 to 4000. It only covers 60% after that. I did look at the new government website and it looks like I could get the same deductable with better coverage after the deductable for around 500. Also my wife who has MS and rhuematoid arthritis could not get coverage for any amount through a private insurer because of pre existing conditions will now be able to get coverage. It is not bad for everybody.


I'd love to see the print out on that quote, I call bs, but i could be wrong.


----------



## poco jim (Jun 28, 2010)

Bull Fish said:


> As Ricky Bobby would say "With all due respect" I'm glad that my already strapped budget and increase of 57% can offset the cost of others. While my retirement plan is in the tank, and the current business that I'm in is falling on a daily basis due to more and more emissions requirements.
> 
> I'm not into conspiracies but at the rate of inflation that I have seen throughout my few years in the working world along with taxes and MOOCHES on society all will fall apart before I ever think of retirement. So please enjoy the fruits of everyone else's labors since the political party in which you so dearly display your love for spent your SS $ on something else long ago. So let's go rob peter some more and Paul can continue to love life.
> 
> Enjoy my friend.... Enjoy!


You nailed it, green to ya


----------



## waterwolf (Mar 6, 2005)

My BIL said he has the new OBC and it's cheaper ? He can't produce facts about the rates either. I guess he is one of the 14.000 Texans that have signed up so far? Still waiting.


----------



## Reel Time (Oct 6, 2009)

I will lose my health insurance on December 31 because of Obamacare. I just signed up for new insurance (not through the government website). I'm 58 and will have to pay $758/month. Last year a person my age would pay $415.
My math says that's an 83% increase. To be fair, I chose a $1500 lower deductible plan so I expected a slightly higher premium, but not this much.


----------



## madbayrunner (Oct 25, 2013)

fultonswimmer said:


> Funny....my premium for my Medicare supplement plans will decrease by half(that is right....50%) when my new policy kicks in on January 1, 2014. Should I be thanking Palin, Cruz or ???? for this and what about my retirement funds which are up considerably during the last few years. Should I send this bonus to George W?
> Give me a fricking break!!!


 read the fine print genius, many of your meds will be dropped and your plan will be tightened. they are planning on you dying or voting for liberals again to get your freebies on my back. the reason your retirement funds are up is due to monopoly money being printed. but you obviously don't care cause your are getting your, regardless of the next three generations that will have income taxes of 50-60% to pay for your geraiatric goodies. this is the same mind set that elected Heir Obama. you are selfish and short sighted. give me a freakin break!! my Blue Cross notice came today and went up 27% with a huge deductible on a major medical policy. I;m 54 and have no health concerns, in addition I will have to pay the Obamacare penalty(new tax) for 2014. most of this **** has not even kicked in yet. wait 'til you need a bypass or valve job and Obamas death panel decide you are too old for the price of the limited number of procedures rationed out for the year. why don't you move to Canada and live to enjoy rationed medicine and die waiting for your gov't procedure that will never come,
get your facts straight and give all of all a freakin break!


----------



## madbayrunner (Oct 25, 2013)

Goags said:


> The numbers speak for themselves...I'm 62, in reasonable good health, only take 1 rx med, etc. Not gonna bend over and take this one...got til the 15th to shop around.


 got my notice today, increase 26%, major medical with high deductibles.
plus will pay the Heir Obama tax penalty in 2014

that's what happens when a rookie wins a beauty contest. at what point do we accept the gov't taking all of our money and then giving us an allowance back to live on, with gov't rationed services


----------



## Rotate (Mar 7, 2011)

For those of you buying your own insurance, has anyone figured out a way to "circumvent" the increased premiums, deductibles etc....?

My family plan is through my employer and while my premium is increasing the coverage is staying pretty close to the same (for the time being). I am sure this will continue to change for the worse.

Can you still purchase a "catastrophic" high deductible, low premium plan? My wife and I both used this type of plan before we had our children. We paid cash (at a deep discount) when we needed routine medical care and normally came out way ahead.

Any other ideas?


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

This country is doomed. My heart aches to think of the future my kids & grand kids will face...


----------



## madbayrunner (Oct 25, 2013)

Rotate said:


> For those of you buying your own insurance, has anyone figured out a way to "circumvent" the increased premiums, deductibles etc....?
> 
> My family plan is through my employer and while my premium is increasing the coverage is staying pretty close to the same (for the time being). I am sure this will continue to change for the worse.
> 
> ...


 the Obama method does away with major medical catastophoc 
plans, that's the whole point. Obamacare wants you to pay for your fair share for stuff you will never get or use; birth control, pap smear, etc, its for the greater good. you will pay!


----------



## Zeitgeist (Nov 10, 2011)

Yep, I am self employed and have been for 13 years. I am with Blue Cross Blue Shield. I don't have to change my plan but my rates are going up 19% in January. I called them to discuss and they said it is to stay compliant with the Affordable Healthcare Act.


----------



## RLwhaler (Sep 10, 2005)

Bocephus said:


> This country is doomed. My heart aches to think of the future my kids & grand kids will face...


Right here^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


----------



## waterwolf (Mar 6, 2005)

*?...?.......*



fultonswimmer said:


> Funny....my premium for my Medicare supplement plans will decrease by half(that is right....50%) when my new policy kicks in on January 1, 2014. Should I be thanking Palin, Cruz or ???? for this and what about my retirement funds which are up considerably during the last few years. Should I send this bonus to George W?
> Give me a fricking break!!!


FUNNY.....You and my brother-n-law must be the only ones that had their health care go down.??? FUNNY..


----------



## reelbusy (Feb 7, 2008)

Bocephus said:


> This country is doomed. My heart aches to think of the future my kids & grand kids will face...


You hit the nail on the head! Correcto!


----------



## MarkU (Jun 3, 2013)

I own a small business and pay for 1/2 of my employees health care. We renewed Nov 1st. Our insurance jumped from $427 per employee, to $588 per month. Not to mention we went from a 2k yearly out of pocket to 4k now. We have BCBS, great insurance, no complaints on our coverage. But RX, Dr. visits all went up.
My agent, who I've had for years. Basically told me, we won't be able to afford next years increase. Not sure what I'm going to do then. Just have to see how this BS plays out.


----------



## waterwolf (Mar 6, 2005)

MarkU said:


> I own a small business and pay for 1/2 of my employees health care. We renewed Nov 1st. Our insurance jumped from $427 per employee, to $588 per month. Not to mention we went from a 2k yearly out of pocket to 4k now. We have BCBS, great insurance, no complaints on our coverage. But RX, Dr. visits all went up.
> My agent, who I've had for years. Basically told me, we won't be able to afford next years increase. Not sure what I'm going to do then. Just have to see how this BS plays out.


Guess we can go visit the Medicine Man or the Voodoo Doctor next year.. Keep your health in check because you will go broke trying to fix yourself later down the road.


----------



## 2slick (Dec 5, 2008)

Sad thing......they're gonna pump enough money (more) into this thing to make it work. Obumer is gonna look good to the multitudes, and guess how they're gonna vote in the next election......you guessed it.....Hillary.


----------



## chumy (Jul 13, 2012)

fultonswimmer said:


> Funny....my premium for my Medicare supplement plans will decrease by half(that is right....50%) when my new policy kicks in on January 1, 2014. Should I be thanking Palin, Cruz or ???? for this and what about my retirement funds which are up considerably during the last few years. Should I send this bonus to George W?
> Give me a fricking break!!!


At the ripe young age of 69 you still don't get it. Good luck my friend!!


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

Rotate said:


> For those of you buying your own insurance, has anyone figured out a way to "circumvent" the increased premiums, deductibles etc....?
> 
> My family plan is through my employer and while my premium is increasing the coverage is staying pretty close to the same (for the time being). I am sure this will continue to change for the worse.
> 
> ...


No. You may be able to find this, but you'll have to pay a penalty to the gov't as well since these types of plans don't conform to Obamacare. :headknock

If you have an individual plan, the only way to keep your premium down is with the 12 month loop hole (if your insurer allows it).

But all you're doing is delaying the pain a year.


----------



## gunsmoke11 (Apr 30, 2012)

fultonswimmer said:


> Funny....my premium for my Medicare supplement plans will decrease by half(that is right....50%) when my new policy kicks in on January 1, 2014. Should I be thanking Palin, Cruz or ???? for this and what about my retirement funds which are up considerably during the last few years. Should I send this bonus to George W?
> Give me a fricking break!!!


Thank god your 69 your old *** won't be on the gov nipple for ever.


----------



## bluefin (Aug 16, 2005)

For those that can - start a HSA (health savings account). The deductibles under the new gov. plans are horrendous. 

A HSA is something you can contribute to that's pre-taxed money. Many large company plans offer this (not with their money though) or you can do it independently. I've been putting $$ in for years but one major hospital visit will put a big dent in to what's there. 

MarkU - best you can do is let your emp.'s know what's going on and keep them informed. It's common knowledge now that everyone is taking a hit. Still amazes me when I talk to one and they act like I somehow created this mess. 

For those that don't understand pre-taxed:
You make $30k per year. You pay 20% taxes. You owe Uncle Sam $6k.
You make $30k per year. You put $2k in a pre-taxed HSA (or any qualifying plan). You subtract $2k from $30k. You're taxed on $28 or $5,600.
For some people this will actually drop them in tax brackets saving them even more money.


----------



## Tortuga (May 21, 2004)

Small businesses that pay all or part of your premium will be dumping all of their employees onto the State 'Exchanges' next year..and it will be 'every man for himself'

I think the whopping premium raises on current polices are just the insurance companys taking advantage of the situation and blaming O-Care for their increase. All this means is the Ins Cos are making more profit...


----------



## JDS (Jul 14, 2004)

My family insurance was going to go up $1400/month.
Switched to BS/BC and changed our anniversary date. It's still higher though.


----------



## TheSamarai (Jan 20, 2005)

Unfortunately most premiums were gonna increase anyway. I really do think the insurance companies are using this obama excuse to jack it up even more.


----------



## Centex fisher (Apr 25, 2006)

Yep, can't stand to think what my kids and grandkids will be dealing with. It hurts my heart too. 
The once great America we knew is disappearing fast.


----------



## Jamaica Cove (Apr 2, 2008)

I need to start an Insurance Company. I can charge high premiums with huge deductibles and likely get Gummint support increasing my profits. that or start another A.C.O.R.N. and get millions to give pennies to the gimmedats.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

Tortuga said:


> Small businesses that pay all or part of your premium will be dumping all of their employees onto the State 'Exchanges' next year..and it will be 'every man for himself'
> 
> I think the whopping premium raises on current polices are just the insurance companys taking advantage of the situation and blaming O-Care for their increase. All this means is the Ins Cos are making more profit...


This is why you heard a lot of Dr.'s and Hospital's bemoaning ACA but hardly a peep from big Ins. Co.'s. All by design...


----------



## bluefin (Aug 16, 2005)

Those Ins. Co.'s spent years and years in college to get where they are now.
In fact I know several insurance agents that spent 8 years in college.


----------



## smak90 (Sep 4, 2011)

Rotate said:


> For those of you buying your own insurance, has anyone figured out a way to "circumvent" the increased premiums, deductibles etc....?
> 
> My family plan is through my employer and while my premium is increasing the coverage is staying pretty close to the same (for the time being). I am sure this will continue to change for the worse.
> 
> ...


My BIL is self-employed and has signed up his family with this outfit. The rates are incredibly reasonable. 
http://mychristiancare.org/medi-share/

It's not exactly insurance so you have to read and analyse to make you're own decisions. I'm neither recommending or slamming, I'm just mentioning an alternative. According to my BIL it qualifies as insurance under ObamaCare.


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

Haute Pursuit said:


> This is why you heard a lot of Dr.'s and Hospital's bemoaning ACA but hardly a peep from big Ins. Co.'s. All by design...


American Nursing Association is pro ACA.

"The American Nurses Association (ANA) voiced its strong support for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and its disappointment with efforts by the 112nd Congress to repeal the law."

http://www.nursingworld.org/Homepag...2011-NI/ANA-Support-Affordable-Care-Act-.html


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

spuds said:


> American Nursing Association is pro ACA.
> 
> "The American Nurses Association (ANA) voiced its strong support for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and its disappointment with efforts by the 112nd Congress to repeal the law."
> 
> http://www.nursingworld.org/Homepag...2011-NI/ANA-Support-Affordable-Care-Act-.html


Is that like the American Medical Association (AMA) support for Obamacare?

In 2011, 70% of Drs disagreed with the AMA's stance on Obamacare. Only 13% agreed with it.

The AMA now represents a measly 1/4 of doctors in the US, loosing quite a number of members specifically _because _they supported the ACA.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*So. Yall loooooooove insurance companies do you?*

I am about the same age as OP. I used a "private insurance exchange" set up by the professional organization for my profession. This is what everyone in Texas would be doing if Gov. Goodhair and Sen. Ricky Ricardo had set up a state insurance exchange for Texas instead of opting out and fear-mongering the national site and all its bugs and problems.

I got on the private insurance exchange website, selected an ACA compliant "Bronze" plan comparable to my prior plan effective 1/1/14. Three questions. My age, my zipcode and my tobacco use. That's it. I enrolled, got set up for payment and click done. My un-subsidized premium is half what it was under my prior Aetna group plan. That's thousands of dollars per year savings in my case.

The new insurance company has diligently emailed me, robo-called me and mailed my my new insurance card. I am pleased.

To the OP, I would get on the national web site and shop a plan there effective 1/1/14. I think your present insurance company is raising your rate one last time before 1/1/14 and it has nothing to do with the new ACA plans. If you Google Texas health insurance exchanges there is a lot of stuff to research. Here is one thing I found but not sure about it. Fortunately for me my profession created its own exchange. http://www.healthinsurance.org/texas-state-health-insurance-exchange/


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

goatchze said:


> Is that like the American Medical Association (AMA) support for Obamacare?
> 
> In 2011, 70% of Drs disagreed with the AMA's stance on Obamacare. Only 13% agreed with it.
> 
> The AMA now represents a measly 1/4 of doctors in the US, loosing quite a number of members specifically _because _they supported the ACA.


Coming from Missouri, you'll have to 'show me' where those figures came from.......

How would anyone know accurately how many Dr's dropped out of the AMA?


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

spuds said:


> American Nursing Association is pro ACA.
> 
> "The American Nurses Association (ANA) voiced its strong support for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and its disappointment with efforts by the 112nd Congress to repeal the law."
> 
> http://www.nursingworld.org/Homepag...2011-NI/ANA-Support-Affordable-Care-Act-.html


Where exactly did I mention the ANA? Apples and oranges...


----------



## RLwhaler (Sep 10, 2005)

goatchze said:


> Is that like the American Medical Association (AMA) support for Obamacare?
> 
> In 2011, 70% of Drs disagreed with the AMA's stance on Obamacare. Only 13% agreed with it.
> 
> The AMA now represents a measly 1/4 of doctors in the US, loosing quite a number of members specifically _because _they supported the ACA.


X2. You know that was a dog and pony show obummer pulled that day.It's more like 82% disagree 8% agree,and the rest is on the fence.


----------



## Ted Gentry (Jun 8, 2004)

Got my BCBSTX renewal today, thanks for the 25% increase you stinking democrats.


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

Haute Pursuit said:


> Where exactly did I mention the ANA? Apples and oranges...


You didn't. You generalized that "a lot" of doctors spoke against it. I asked my GP specifically, and she said she is overall in favor of ACA.

Don't you think ANA has at least as much vested in the healthcare debate, as doctors and hospitals?


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

fultonswimmer said:


> Funny....my premium for my Medicare supplement plans will decrease by half(that is right....50%) when my new policy kicks in on January 1, 2014. Should I be thanking Palin, Cruz or ???? for this and what about my retirement funds which are up considerably during the last few years. Should I send this bonus to George W?
> Give me a fricking break!!!


I must ask fultonswimmer, do you live in a van down by the river?

I think I will just stop now so I do not end up in the banned camp..


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

spuds said:


> You didn't. You generalized that "a lot" of doctors spoke against it. I asked my GP specifically, and she said she is overall in favor of ACA.
> 
> Don't you think ANA has at least as much vested in the healthcare debate, as doctors and hospitals?


As much as donuts have vested in cops... lol

Doctor's who have their own practice are whom I was referring to. Not even close to a nurse who works for a doctor. Try again dummocrat.t


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

Haute Pursuit said:


> As much as donuts have vested in cops... lol
> 
> Doctor's who have their own practice are whom I was referring to. Not even close to a nurse who works for a doctor. Try again dummocrat.t


DUMMOCRAT? Really? That's very adult of you!!! hwell:

Many nurses work on hospital staffs, just like many doctors. One of my best friend's wife is a nurse practicioner. She is partner in a Urgent Care clinic. No hysterics from them over ACA. They expect an increase in business.

Still no poof of the mass exidus of doctors from the AMA. Maybe it's true, I don't know.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

spuds said:


> DUMMOCRAT? Really? That's very adult of you!!! hwell:
> 
> Many nurses work on hospital staffs, just like many doctors. One of my best friend's wife is a nurse practicioner. She is partner in a Urgent Care clinic. No hysterics from them over ACA. They expect an increase in business.
> 
> Still no poof of the mass exidus of doctors from the AMA. Maybe it's true, I don't know.


So who pays nurses? Who has more of a vested interest? There have been many articles on Doctors who say they will not be able to operate under the ACA, which is exactly what it was drafted for. Centralized hospital's and medicine... All under Govt. control. Say goodbye to choice.


----------



## Newbomb Turk (Sep 16, 2005)

^^^ This ^^^
They sign the back of the check not the front...


----------



## 98aggie77566 (Jul 7, 2009)

The simple fact of the matter is:
- if it benefits your business or personal situation you are going to be for it. Whether you are in the healthcare business and have some angle, or maybe a patient with a pre existing condition....it maybe a regular on the govt teat.
- if it doesn't benefit you personally, you are more than likely against it

The other fact is...at somepoint this ship is gonna spring enough holes that the govt can't pump in enough $$.

At that point, healthcare will end up like the old days...doctors carrying a satchel and paid in cash...or do not pass go/collect $200 on your way to the undertaker.

Ain't nothing for free folks.

The market was balanced....with the new law, if you are saving....someone else is paying.


----------



## Ted Gentry (Jun 8, 2004)

spuds said:


> DUMMOCRAT? Really? That's very adult of you!!! hwell:
> 
> Many nurses work on hospital staffs, just like many doctors. One of my best friend's wife is a nurse practicioner. She is partner in a Urgent Care clinic. No hysterics from them over ACA. They expect an increase in business.
> 
> Still no poof of the mass exidus of doctors from the AMA. Maybe it's true, I don't know.


She's probably more astute at nursing than business, good for her patients and bad for her bank account. She'll be singing the blues before long, we're already seeing the cuts coming in 2014.:headknock


----------



## Ted Gentry (Jun 8, 2004)

Originally Posted by *spuds*  
_DUMMOCRAT? Really? That's very adult of you!!! hwell:

Many nurses work on hospital staffs, just like many doctors. One of my best friend's wife is a nurse practicioner. She is partner in a Urgent Care clinic. No hysterics from them over ACA. They expect an increase in business.

Still no poof of the mass exidus of doctors from the AMA. Maybe it's true, I don't know._



Ted Gentry said:


> She's probably more astute at nursing than business, good for her patients and bad for her bank account. She'll be singing the blues before long, we're already seeing the cuts coming in 2014.:headknock


Spuds, after rereading your post, I can understand why she is happy for the ACA, her clinic should make a butt load of money from the individuals that can't afford obuma care. Unfortunately, the medical profession as a whole will suffer from the ACA (obumycare) as much as we will.


----------



## RLwhaler (Sep 10, 2005)

spuds said:


> DUMMOCRAT? Really? That's very adult of you!!! hwell:
> 
> Many nurses work on hospital staffs, just like many doctors. One of my best friend's wife is a nurse practicioner. She is partner in a Urgent Care clinic. No hysterics from them over ACA. They expect an increase in business.
> 
> Still no poof of the mass exidus of doctors from the AMA. Maybe it's true, I don't know.


Spud, U/C was "gravy" to capture the lower hanging fruits 5-6 years ago.
Free standing E/R is choking the life out of them.

There's a BIG difference between nursing staff and MD. staff!


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

You guys seem convinced ACA is gonna be a bad thing. My insurance next year is going up by $10. 

Wish I could debate all your misguided assumptions and claims about the merits of ACA, but I'm on a 2000 mile trip to close a deal that will bring several hundred thousand dollars to our local Houston economy.
Sincerely 
A Hummer driving, power boat loving, oil producing, weapons stashing, CHL card carrying, job creating, proud ACA supporter.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk


----------



## Billygoat (Feb 1, 2013)

My insurance is going down next year for the same coverage.... I think its like looking at restaurant or apartment reviews, most people only take the time to speak out about them if they are having problems.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

spuds said:


> Coming from Missouri, you'll have to 'show me' where those figures came from.......
> 
> How would anyone know accurately how many Dr's dropped out of the AMA?


http://www.jacksoncoker.com/Promos/internal/Surveys/AMA/images/JC-AMA-SurveyFullPresentation.pdf

Whether the ACA is "good" or "bad" depends on your situation, but unless you get a subsidy, the majority of Americans will see a cost increase. This is _especially _true for anyone who currently has an Individual Plan.

For me, the ACA is going to double my costs. This is 100%, irrefutable fact.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Cherry picking is history under ACA*



goatchze said:


> http://www.jacksoncoker.com/Promos/internal/Surveys/AMA/images/JC-AMA-SurveyFullPresentation.pdf
> 
> Whether the ACA is "good" or "bad" depends on your situation, but unless you get a subsidy, the majority of Americans will see a cost increase. This is _especially _true for anyone who currently has an Individual Plan.
> 
> For me, the ACA is going to double my costs. This is 100%, irrefutable fact.


Good point. But throughout this process I have heard of dome paying rates that seemed really cheap. So if some companies cherry picked only the young and proven healthy and under the new system a higher premium is allocated to them I think that is reasonable.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Cherry picking is history under ACA*



goatchze said:


> http://www.jacksoncoker.com/Promos/internal/Surveys/AMA/images/JC-AMA-SurveyFullPresentation.pdf
> 
> Whether the ACA is "good" or "bad" depends on your situation, but unless you get a subsidy, the majority of Americans will see a cost increase. This is _especially _true for anyone who currently has an Individual Plan.
> 
> For me, the ACA is going to double my costs. This is 100%, irrefutable fact.


Good point. But throughout this process I have heard of some paying rates that seemed really cheap. So if some companies cherry picked only the young and proven healthy and under the new system a higher premium is allocated to them I think that is reasonable.


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

Hey spuds, have you used your golden plan yet? Let's have a (sensible) ( meaningful) discussion after you use your golden plan for a couple of years.. I call bs.. But I'll give you the benefit of a doubt.. At your gain and my children's loss.. Enjoy your gold plan and all your material goods you so generously posted about.. Must be nice to live in such a lavish lifestyle.. How wonderful.. Enjoy the good times while you still can.. Now, back to work I go so I can pay the tax so you can live such a lifestyle.. Thank me later..


----------



## K Man (Jun 21, 2012)

All these issues are just the tip of an iceberg. I'm in the health insurance business and I could write pages of how messed up this ACA law is. Health insurance will will be forever changed for everyone. Be careful in purchasing plans online or from people you don't know. We have seen many cases of fraud in the last few weeks, and this will only get worse.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

Johnboat said:


> Good point. But throughout this process I have heard of some paying rates that seemed really cheap. So if some companies cherry picked only the young and proven healthy and under the new system a higher premium is allocated to them I think that is reasonable.


For fear of sending this thread to the Jungle, I'll simply say that _I do not agree_ it is reasonable that my family now has an extra _$5,000 per year_ taken from it.


----------



## RRbohemian (Dec 20, 2009)

I have one question for those who support obamacare--for the few that benefit from it was it worth the nearly billion dollars spent on the website and the billions it will cost for years to come?


----------



## K Man (Jun 21, 2012)

The ACA was never meant to work. It was tax designed for the responsible insured individuals and businesses to help the government expand the already broken and fraudulent Medicaid program. If your current insurance plan has decreased and you have the same policy, count your blessings. Your insurance company will likely not be in business for long.


----------



## bluefin (Aug 16, 2005)

RRbohemian said:


> I have one question for those who support obamacare--for the few that benefit from it was it worth the nearly billion dollars spent on the website and the billions it will cost for years to come?


I'll have you know those Canadians worked hard on that!!
From my Canadian contact - You have no idea how hard it is to contact your boss while he's on the fairway or being chewed out during a funeral doing selfies. They tried to get him to come up there and meet with them over some of the issues but the wife would have no part of it. Said it was too cold. Would rather visit old friends. So they went to Africa.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

RRbohemian said:


> I have one question for those who support obamacare--for the few that benefit from it was it worth the nearly billion dollars spent on the website and the billions it will cost for years to come?


You might want to double check your figures on how much the website cost. You are way off.


----------



## bobbyoshay (Nov 29, 2008)

Game-Over said:


> You might want to double check your figures on how much the website cost. You are way off.


http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obamacare-cost-hearing-website/2013/10/24/id/532856

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/11/18/feds-gave-4b-to-states-to-start-obamacare-sites/

http://www.atr.org/obama-administration-spent-point-billion-state-a7994


----------



## MikeV (Jun 5, 2006)

bluefin said:


> For those that can - start a HSA (health savings account). The deductibles under the new gov. plans are horrendous.
> 
> A HSA is something you can contribute to that's pre-taxed money. Many large company plans offer this (not with their money though) or you can do it independently. I've been putting $$ in for years but one major hospital visit will put a big dent in to what's there.
> 
> ...


Show us the math on this since you understand pre-taxed and all.


----------



## MikeV (Jun 5, 2006)

spuds said:


> You guys seem convinced ACA is gonna be a bad thing. My insurance next year is going up by $10.
> 
> Wish I could debate all your misguided assumptions and claims about the merits of ACA, but I'm on a 2000 mile trip to close a deal that will bring several hundred thousand dollars to our local Houston economy.
> Sincerely
> ...


Yep, your are a dyed in the wool two time obama voter for sure. So, hey, post up your two policies, showing the coverages, and showing the premiums for both years.


----------



## RRbohemian (Dec 20, 2009)

Game-Over said:


> You might want to double check your figures on how much the website cost. You are way off.


Way off like under?


----------



## troutomatic1488 (Jun 18, 2006)

All insurance companies are great while you are making payments to them what separates them is when you make a claim.


----------



## DannyMac (May 22, 2004)

Simple solution, adopt the "Gandhi principal" Passive resistance, "I refuse to buy it, I refuse to pay it"!! There is no penalty for not paying the fine, and there are not enough jails to hold all the Americans who would take this stand!! NOBAMA and his cronies wouldn't know what to do!


----------



## Capt. Blood (Apr 1, 2010)

*blame game*



TROUTOMATIC said:


> All insurance companies are great while you are making payments to them what separates them is when you make a claim.


yeah, y'all keep blaming insurance companiesâ€¦.thats the same thing the ares holes in the gubberment are doing and want people to believeâ€¦that will fit their agenda, which is targeting the end of private insurance in this country.THATS WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT!!!! this thing is so screwed up and is gonna get worse by the day until the point comes that insurance companies quitâ€¦.That right - they will say, "gezz, we are in bus to make money just like ever other business in our society. If we can't make a decent return on our money we can sell something else." And they will! (remember all you gimmecrats..we are supposed to be a capitalist society) When they begin to fail,... guess what??? the current incarnation of power will say SINGLE PAYOR SYSTEM IS THE WAY TO GOâ€¦..thats where this is all headed. It always has been the plan!

:hairout:


----------



## Tortuga (May 21, 2004)

Capt. Blood said:


> yeah, y'all keep blaming insurance companiesâ€¦.thats the same thing the ares holes in the gubberment are doing and want people to believeâ€¦that will fit their agenda, which is targeting the end of private insurance in this country.THATS WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT!!!! this thing is so screwed up and is gonna get worse by the day until the point comes that insurance companies quitâ€¦.That right - they will say, "gezz, we are in bus to make money just like ever other business in our society. If we can't make a decent return on our money we can sell something else." And they will! (remember all you gimmecrats..we are supposed to be a capitalist society) When they begin to fail,... guess what??? the current incarnation of power will say SINGLE PAYOR SYSTEM IS THE WAY TO GOâ€¦..thats where this is all headed. It always has been the plan!
> 
> :hairout:


Too true, Capt B.... Amazing thing to me is that more people haven't figured that out yet...


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Ted Gentry said:


> I'd love to see the print out on that quote, I call bs, but i could be wrong.


You can call bs on anything you want to. I have no reason to lie and would not lie to begin with. Some people post and do not know what they are talking about.


----------



## Ted Gentry (Jun 8, 2004)

shaggydog said:


> You can call bs on anything you want to. I have no reason to lie and would not lie to begin with. Some people post and do not know what they are talking about.


Show us the numbers.


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

75979


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

smak90 said:


> My BIL is self-employed and has signed up his family with this outfit. The rates are incredibly reasonable.
> http://mychristiancare.org/medi-share/
> 
> It's not exactly insurance so you have to read and analyse to make you're own decisions. I'm neither recommending or slamming, I'm just mentioning an alternative. According to my BIL it qualifies as insurance under ObamaCare.


I would stay away from these plans. You may find yourself with huge out of pocket expenses since no hospital will contract with them. The reason they don't contract with them is when these plans pay (if they do), they decide what they will pay and the patient is responsible for the difference unlike a contracted plan.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*deja vu all over again*

If you Google the topic you will see what the opponents of Social Security and Medicare said at the time about those now popular (well at least now accepted) programs.

This "insert whatever in blank" is socialism mantra is not new.

Here is one slide show of opponents from the past. http://billmoyers.com/content/deja-...tirades-against-social-security-and-medicare/


----------



## troutomatic1488 (Jun 18, 2006)

Capt. Blood said:


> yeah, y'all keep blaming insurance companiesâ€¦.thats the same thing the ares holes in the gubberment are doing and want people to believeâ€¦that will fit their agenda, which is targeting the end of private insurance in this country.THATS WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT!!!! this thing is so screwed up and is gonna get worse by the day until the point comes that insurance companies quitâ€¦.That right - they will say, "gezz, we are in bus to make money just like ever other business in our society. If we can't make a decent return on our money we can sell something else." And they will! (remember all you gimmecrats..we are supposed to be a capitalist society) When they begin to fail,... guess what??? the current incarnation of power will say SINGLE PAYOR SYSTEM IS THE WAY TO GOâ€¦..thats where this is all headed. It always has been the plan!
> 
> :hairout:


So you don't think the insurance industry is exploiting this to increase profits?


----------



## Tortuga (May 21, 2004)

TROUTOMATIC said:


> So you don't think the insurance industry is exploiting this to increase profits?


I'm sure that is EXACTLY what the insurance companies are doing now.. Making hay while the sun shines... Be dumb if they didn't take advantage when a gift is placed at their door...

Problem is they are shooting themselves in the foot with all the increases in premiums and deductibles and playing right into the hands of the Feds who want nothing less than a single payer system..which will essentially close the door on the private insurance industry....

Canada..move over....here we come...


----------



## fmlyfisher (Apr 29, 2013)

Johnboat said:


> If you Google the topic you will see what the opponents of Social Security and Medicare said at the time about those now popular (well at least now accepted) programs.
> 
> This "insert whatever in blank" is socialism mantra is not new.
> 
> Here is one slide show of opponents from the past. http://billmoyers.com/content/deja-...tirades-against-social-security-and-medicare/


I couldn't agree more!!! I sincerely wish at least one of these programs had not come to fruition. SS makes Madoff's Ponzi scheme look like chicken scratch!!!! As for Medicare I don't have as much issue with, as it seems right to take care of older folks who have worked their whole lives. Even ancient societies cared and respected their elderly. But.......... Medicaid is **** and it aggravates me every paycheck to know I'm having to pay for some crackheads healthcare. I don't want to hear about all the poor folks who won't make it if they don't have government health care. Look around nature, anything that can't provide for itself or contribute to the herd just don't make it!! Time to let herd thin itself


----------



## Poolman (Jul 1, 2012)

with those kind of increases you could say you still don't have insurance


----------



## TheSamarai (Jan 20, 2005)

u are forgetting that people who cant afford insurance already have medicaid. That hasnt changed. Its insurance one group always has to bear more of the burden to insure the collective whole. Its what our society is. Try going to alot of the third world countries. There is no such thing as insurance, u only get seen when u show the green.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

fmlyfisher said:


> I couldn't agree more!!! I sincerely wish at least one of these programs had not come to fruition. SS makes Madoff's Ponzi scheme look like chicken scratch!!!! As for Medicare I don't have as much issue with, as it seems right to take care of older folks who have worked their whole lives. Even ancient societies cared and respected their elderly. But.......... Medicaid is **** and it aggravates me every paycheck to know I'm having to pay for some crackheads healthcare. I don't want to hear about all the poor folks who won't make it if they don't have government health care. Look around nature, anything that can't provide for itself or contribute to the herd just don't make it!! Time to let herd thin itself


My MIL worked many, many years, and in the end was living off what little SS she received, around 750/mo. That was her total income, except for the help we were providing. She qualified for medicaid. So you think that is a bad thing, just let the old ones die. Very nice, you will be there some day.

The fix to the problem is not do away with these things, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, but to patrol them better. Get rid of the fraud and a lot of things would become much easier to bear. This includes private medical insurance.


----------



## Tortuga (May 21, 2004)

Good reply, Shaggy... SS was doing just fine until Congress got their grubby hands on the trust fund and squandered it on any pet projects they could think up instead of what OUR money was intended for in the first place. We are all living longer and I have read that an adjustment of two years in the time of when SS is available spread over the next ten years will make the SS system healthy and functional for at least the next 70 years...

Medicare is also a surprisingly smooth operation..less the fraud you mention. Operating expenses for MC are a much smaller percentage of the whole picture than private health insurance companies require.. No stockholders to satisfy, interest to pay, dividends expected..etc...

I look on basic Medicaid as a social responsibility.. We cannot just toss old, destitute, ill people out into the gutter to die.. I agree that the system has been terribly abused...but that is mainly due to politicians that WE elected using it as bait to corral votes....

Simple hard-nosed administration of all three is all that is needed.. Cut out the waste, fraud and abuse and all three systems will function as they were intended to do...

.02


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

TROUTOMATIC said:


> So you don't think the insurance industry is exploiting this to increase profits?


No, I think they're covering their hind quarters. No one knows what the new costs are going to be accepting every single person that applies for insurance, and under the ACA, their hands are tied when adjusting rates year-to-year. This uncertainty is an underwriter's nightmare. If you're going to roll the dice, you better err on the side of too large an increase and remain solvent rather than too little increase and go belly up.

If it was all about insurers "exploiting this to increase profits", you'd see a bigger disparity between the for-profit and not-for-profit groups. BCBS and Scott and White, both not-for-profits, have premium increases the same scale as others.


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> My MIL worked many, many years, and in the end was living off what little SS she received, around 750/mo. That was her total income, except for the help we were providing. She qualified for medicaid. So you think that is a bad thing, just let the old ones die. Very nice, you will be there some day.
> 
> The fix to the problem is not do away with these things, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, but to patrol them better. Get rid of the fraud and a lot of things would become much easier to bear. This includes private medical insurance.





Tortuga said:


> Good reply, Shaggy... SS was doing just fine until Congress got their grubby hands on the trust fund and squandered it on any pet projects they could think up instead of what OUR money was intended for in the first place. We are all living longer and I have read that an adjustment of two years in the time of when SS is available spread over the next ten years will make the SS system healthy and functional for at least the next 70 years...
> 
> Medicare is also a surprisingly smooth operation..less the fraud you mention. Operating expenses for MC are a much smaller percentage of the whole picture than private health insurance companies require.. No stockholders to satisfy, interest to pay, dividends expected..etc...
> 
> ...


I disagree, phase them all out. Generationally of course.

I'd opt out of SS right now and lose what I've paid in if I had that option.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

txjustin said:


> I disagree, phase them all out. Generationally of course.
> 
> I'd opt out of SS right now and lose what I've paid in if I had that option.


That means millions and millions would be out of a lot of money, money they paid in and would never get back. Also many are not disciplined enough to put money back for old age. Social security is a wonderful program. It was designed to help people when they could no longer work. If the government had not siphoned off a ton of social security money for other projects, as Tortuga pointed out, there would be no funding issues. It is not the peoples fault that the program has been abused.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

SS is going bankrupt because of fundamental actuarial issue, not because of the use of the funds in the interim. We pay out some portion of the people far far more than they contributed in taxes, even with an investment return on the "contributions." Further, we have under priced the "disability" benefit portion of the program. 

The whole idea that SS was fine until the politicians got their hands on the trust fund is Al Gore propaganda. That's because the program suffers from a basic, fundamental actuarial problem. The current premiums/taxes simply don't support the benefits promised.


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> That means millions and millions would be out of a lot of money, money they paid in and would never get back. Also many are not disciplined enough to put money back for old age. Social security is a wonderful program. It was designed to help people when they could no longer work. If the government had not siphoned off a ton of social security money for other projects, as Tortuga pointed out, there would be no funding issues. It is not the peoples fault that the program has been abused.


Did you miss the part where I said generationally? As in, if you've contributed, you get your money back. Start today with 16 years olds and make it so they don't contribute.

Further, who cares if people aren't responsible enough to save for retirement? The .gov isn't anyone's mother or father. You sound very much like a big .gov kinda person.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*FIFY*



txjustin said:


> Further, who cares if people aren't responsible enough to save for retirement? The .gov isn't anyone's mother or father. You sound very much like a CHRISTIAN person.


Fixed it for ya.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Ernest said:


> SS is going bankrupt because of fundamental actuarial issue, not because of the use of the funds in the interim. We pay out some portion of the people far far more than they contributed in taxes, even with an investment return on the "contributions." Further, we have under priced the "disability" benefit portion of the program.
> 
> The whole idea that SS was fine until the politicians got their hands on the trust fund is Al Gore propaganda. That's because the program suffers from a basic, fundamental actuarial problem. The current premiums/taxes simply don't support the benefits promised.


The government HAS siphoned off SS funds on more than one occasion.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

txjustin said:


> Did you miss the part where I said generationally? As in, if you've contributed, you get your money back. Start today with 16 years olds and make it so they don't contribute.
> 
> Further, who cares if people aren't responsible enough to save for retirement? The .gov isn't anyone's mother or father. You sound very much like a big .gov kinda person.


I do not get involved in political affairs, but it is easy to see, in some instances where the problem lies. There is only one permanent solution and it does not involve any human.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

The fact that the government has used some SS funds in the interim has NOTHING to do with the problems facing the project. The program is not currently bankrupt due to a cash flow issue. Its bankrupt because the premiums don't support the promised benefits.

Here is a quick C-n-P:

T_here has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government. The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

Most likely this question comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no effect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself._


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

txjustin said:


> Further, who cares if people aren't responsible enough to save for retirement? The .gov isn't anyone's mother or father. You sound very much like a big .gov kinda person.


Yeah screw the old people. If they cant handle being homeless and hungry, they deserve to die. Do you really want to live in a society that gives a **** about worthless old people?


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

poppadawg said:


> Yeah screw the old people. If they cant handle being homeless and hungry, they deserve to die. Do you really want to live in a society that gives a **** about worthless old people?


Key word you missed from another post of mine...GENERATIONAL. All entitlements and safety nets need to be disbanded or reworked and it is going to take generations to fix them.

Further, you are free to give people your money, I'd like to keep mine. Now, I do believe in extreme safety nets, just nothing like they are now.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

txjustin said:


> Key word you missed from another post of mine...GENERATIONAL. All entitlements and safety nets need to be disbanded or reworked and it is going to take generations to fix them.
> 
> Further, you are free to give people your money, I'd like to keep mine. Now, I do believe in extreme safety nets, just nothing like they are now.


Here's the problem. People absolutely sux at thinking past tomorrow. Some of these folks are degenerates and worthles parasites of society. Some are your neighbors, relatives, and friends. These people would be dirt poor and living in abject poverty if SS didnt exist. Most Americans would rather pay the SS tax then see old people hungry, homeless, and begging in the streets. Some things are just worth paying for.


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

poppadawg said:


> Here's the problem. People absolutely sux at thinking past tomorrow. Some of these folks are degenerates and worthles parasites of society. Some are your neighbors, relatives, and friends. These people would be dirt poor and living in abject poverty if SS didnt exist. Most Americans would rather pay the SS tax then see old people hungry, homeless, and begging in the streets. Some things are just worth paying for.


Why can't SS be privatized? .Gov has no reason to be in it. 
What you say is a slippery slope. Kind of like spoons make people fat, guns pull the trigger themselves to kill people, etc.

Again, this is all a generational issue, as in it's gonna take generations to fix.


----------



## TheSamarai (Jan 20, 2005)

U want to privatize a system that at its core is not a profit maker. Get real what business is gonna pick that up. Without govt intervention, programs like medicare and SS can say bye bye. the real problem is that people are just living longer and the elder account for the majority of the country's healthcare dollars.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

txjustin said:


> Why can't SS be privatized? .Gov has no reason to be in it.
> What you say is a slippery slope. Kind of like spoons make people fat, guns pull the trigger themselves to kill people, etc.
> 
> Again, this is all a generational issue, as in it's gonna take generations to fix.


You just don't get it. It is not that I disagree with you, you are just not reading what some of us are saying. Some people will not take care of their needs for the future. They will not plan ahead and save for old age. That is what SS is for. Some could do it, but some will not. Think of it as a forced savings account.


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

To each their own. I happen to not be a big .gov statist. 

Now, lets rant some more about our health insurance and how everyone has a God given right to free healthcare.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*TxJustin, individual responsibility is a myth.*

Yes younger Americans like TxJustin feel they are 100% in control of life's events and that they can take care of them and theirs without any programs at all. But let their older parents need care, or a sister or brother need disability, or a child get diabetes, and they change their tune and fast and find out what program is available so that they don't have to use their money to help the relative.

I don't trust individual Americans to provide for all their health and retirement needs on their own without any government involvement. And I don't want to pay for the train wreck that would happen if we all believed they would buy privatized medicare and social security.

Do you trust individual Americans to drive safely on their own without any enforcement? Help no you don't. Do you trust individual Americans to not trespass on your property out of their own sense of whats right? Help no you don't. Do you trust individual Americans to only take a reasonable amount of fish and game during the proper time of year without supervision and enforcement so that there is some left for you and your kids to take? Help no you don't.

I am reminded of a parody a while back with actors as Obama and Romney. It was funny because it was true and lambasted both candidates. But one line in particular sticks in my mind. The O character said to the R character: "Hey moneybags, its a country not a company!"

And TxJustin, I would be careful about making statements about whether or not there is or should be a "God given right" to healthcare without first checking with the Bible. Just sayin'. http://www.openbible.info/topics/helping_those_in_need


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

It doesn't say anywhere in the bible to funnel your money through the government to help others.. You missed it totally.. None of these scriptures say anything about paying money to corrupt governments to help others.. Not even comparable.. Out of the kindness of my heart I will help missions and other groups to do his! It's not the governments job!


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

This is the churches job.. The body of Christ.. Not Barrie's ..


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

Johnboat said:


> Yes younger Americans like TxJustin feel they are 100% in control of life's events and that they can take care of them and theirs without any programs at all. But let their older parents need care, or a sister or brother need disability, or a child get diabetes, and they change their tune and fast and find out what program is available so that they don't have to use their money to help the relative.
> 
> I don't trust individual Americans to provide for all their health and retirement needs on their own without any government involvement. And I don't want to pay for the train wreck that would happen if we all believed they would buy privatized medicare and social security.
> 
> ...


So you support government control of retirement and the health industry, correct? All this based on your religion...or shall I say your interpretation of it? Do you also support theft? When my money is forcefully taken and redistributed that equals theft as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

Seeker said:


> It doesn't say anywhere in the bible to funnel your money through the government to help others.. You missed it totally.. None of these scriptures say anything about paying money to corrupt governments to help others.. Not even comparable.. Out of the kindness of my heart I will help missions and other groups to do his! It's not the governments job!





Seeker said:


> This is the churches job.. The body of Christ.. Not Barrie's ..


Absolutely agree with you. Also, this is how the sick, indigent, and destitute used to be taken care of.


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

What in the name makes you people think what's mine is yours for the free taking? You have lost your minds. You thinking your entitled to anything of mine is crazy.. I will choose who I help.. Without the gun pointed to my head thank you very much..


----------



## Bull Fish (Nov 15, 2006)

Johnboat said:


> Yes younger Americans like TxJustin feel they are 100% in control of life's events and that they can take care of them and theirs without any programs at all. But let their older parents need care, or a sister or brother need disability, or a child get diabetes, and they change their tune and fast and find out what program is available so that they don't have to use their money to help the relative.
> 
> I don't trust individual Americans to provide for all their health and retirement needs on their own without any government involvement. And I don't want to pay for the train wreck that would happen if we all believed they would buy privatized medicare and social security.
> 
> ...


I'm a young 32 years old. I became a father of a child at the young age of 19. He was not supposed to live to finish his first day. He is now 13. The insurance and money that I busted my tale for paid his medical bills for the first 6 months of his life in tx children's plus the numerous months and countless surgeries that followed. Never was I offered nor did I look for a hand out to pay for this or him. To say that there is no way that one can do it with a strong back and a mind to do so is ignorant! If one feels compelled to look for someone or something outside of their family church or community to pay for things needed while they are down and out you loose respect from me if you have an able body. I have made a career out of a trade worked my way from the bottom to the top without a hand from anyone. If you truly think that I should have to support someone who had the same opportunity of a high school education as my self but chose not to or a life of crime or they are/ were too dad gum lazy to get it.... YOU ARE WRONG!


----------



## MikeV (Jun 5, 2006)

Johnboat said:


> Yes younger Americans like TxJustin feel they are 100% in control of life's events and that they can take care of them and theirs without any programs at all. But let their older parents need care, or a sister or brother need disability, or a child get diabetes, and they change their tune and fast and find out what program is available so that they don't have to use their money to help the relative.
> 
> I don't trust individual Americans to provide for all their health and retirement needs on their own without any government involvement. And I don't want to pay for the train wreck that would happen if we all believed they would buy privatized medicare and social security.
> 
> ...


Do you trust Americans to wipe their own rear, or should the government provide rear wipers for those who won't do it themselves?


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

Bull Fish, you have my full respect. Job we'll done sir! You will be truly blessed..


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

Bull Fish said:


> I'm a young 32 years old. I became a father of a child at the young age of 19. He was not supposed to live to finish his first day. He is now 13. The insurance and money that I busted my tale for paid his medical bills for the first 6 months of his life in tx children's plus the numerous months and countless surgeries that followed. Never was I offered nor did I look for a hand out to pay for this or him. To say that there is no way that one can do it with a strong back and a mind to do so is ignorant! If one feels compelled to look for someone or something outside of their family church or community to pay for things needed while they are down and out you loose respect from me if you have an able body. I have made a career out of a trade worked my way from the bottom to the top without a hand from anyone. If you truly think that I should have to support someone who had the same opportunity of a high school education as my self but chose not to or a life of crime or they are/ were too dad gum lazy to get it.... YOU ARE WRONG!


I commend you as well for what you have done but what would you have done if you weren't able to work and lost your insurance for some unplanned for reason. What would you have done? I see it every day and can promise you that Medicaid has been a life saver for countless children. It also helps keep the hospitals going to be able to help those that need the help.


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

Leo, the system was fine the way it was. It was not perfect.. This whole mentality of entitlement has got to stop. We did not have it when I was a kid and we all survived.. If you had money and got sick.. you got treated.. if you were broke and could not afford it.. you still got it at the counties expense.. now, with all of the bureaucracy, bloated waste and flat out government thieves.. it's time for change. If you think the kids had it bad before.. Good gosh you wait to see what they are fixing to get.. this mentality of entitlements has got to stop..


----------



## Ted Gentry (Jun 8, 2004)

Bull Fish said:


> I'm a young 32 years old. I became a father of a child at the young age of 19. He was not supposed to live to finish his first day. He is now 13. The insurance and money that I busted my tale for paid his medical bills for the first 6 months of his life in tx children's plus the numerous months and countless surgeries that followed. Never was I offered nor did I look for a hand out to pay for this or him. To say that there is no way that one can do it with a strong back and a mind to do so is ignorant! If one feels compelled to look for someone or something outside of their family church or community to pay for things needed while they are down and out you loose respect from me if you have an able body. I have made a career out of a trade worked my way from the bottom to the top without a hand from anyone. If you truly think that I should have to support someone who had the same opportunity of a high school education as my self but chose not to or a life of crime or they are/ were too dad gum lazy to get it.... YOU ARE WRONG!





Seeker said:


> Leo, the system was fine the way it was. It was not perfect.. This whole mentality of entitlement has got to stop. We did not have it when I was a kid and we all survived.. If you had money and got sick.. you got treated.. if you were broke and could not afford it.. you still got it at the counties expense.. now, with all of the bureaucracy, bloated waste and flat out government thieves.. it's time for change. If you think the kids had it bad before.. Good gosh you wait to see what they are fixing to get.. this mentality of entitlements has got to stop..


 Bull Fish and Seeker, congratulations on two excellent post.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Ignorance of "the way it was"*



Seeker said:


> Leo, the system was fine the way it was. It was not perfect.. This whole mentality of entitlement has got to stop. We did not have it when I was a kid and we all survived.. If you had money and got sick.. you got treated.. if you were broke and could not afford it.. you still got it at the counties expense.. now, with all of the bureaucracy, bloated waste and flat out government thieves.. it's time for change. If you think the kids had it bad before.. Good gosh you wait to see what they are fixing to get.. this mentality of entitlements has got to stop..


Total BS above. Here is are a couple of pictures of "the way it was" back in the good old days before government got involved (i.e. before American voters said "enough is enough" and demanded that the legislators THEY elected pass reform laws) The old days were really the hardest of times, especially on children and working people:


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

No Johnboat, you show pictures of child labor law issues.. That's not what this thread is about.. Apples and oranges. When kids of this day were too sick for treatment they died or survived. That's not the way it's been for quiet some time. I agree. Child labor laws were needed.. And rightfully so..


----------



## Tortuga (May 21, 2004)

Well..let's pose a little problem here.. We (some of you) have finally done away with Medicaid and Medicare altogether... Suppose your favorite Grandmother is diagnosed with a particularly bad form of cancer.. Treatment can easily cost a half a million bucks or more.. She is obviously too old to have any health insurance, even if we haven't already done away with that as well.. What do we do with Granny ???... Just wait for the inevitable..hoping the pain isn't too severe on her and doesn't last more than a few months...or years...and wait for her demise ??.. Then mebbe wrap her in a big black baggie and set her on the curb for Saturday pickup ????

It sounds like Bull Fish and Seeker and Ted can just write a check to cover it..but not too many other folks can scratch up a half million on short notice..

A little humanity wouldn't hurt along the way.... even if it costs a few bucks...:headknock


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Its all about money. 

If Granny is 92, and the projected treatment costs are $500k, should we take money from group A and give it to Granny for treatment? For what estimated additional life span? What if it buys her only a year? How about 3? Does that even matter? Is there any risk/reward analysis to be applied whatsoever? 

And remember, there is no end in sight of the Grannys. There are millions upon millions of them, and the number will grow significantly over the near term as the Baby Boomers age. 

If Granny is 92 and no insurance company will touch her, does it make sense to have the US taxpayer act as the insurer? That's what this is all about: social insurance for risks no private insurer will touch at a premium Granny (and/or her family) can afford. Is that a proper role for the US taxpayer: insurer of last resort? 

Or, should Granny (or her family) be responsible for procuring adequate insurance or assets to fund her projected medical costs? 

As a society, we need to come up with some sort of answers to these questions.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Did someone say death squads?


----------



## fmlyfisher (Apr 29, 2013)

Tortuga said:


> Well..let's pose a little problem here.. We (some of you) have finally done away with Medicaid and Medicare altogether... Suppose your favorite Grandmother is diagnosed with a particularly bad form of cancer.. Treatment can easily cost a half a million bucks or more.. She is obviously too old to have any health insurance, even if we haven't already done away with that as well.. What do we do with Granny ???... Just wait for the inevitable..hoping the pain isn't too severe on her and doesn't last more than a few months...or years...and wait for her demise ??.. Then mebbe wrap her in a big black baggie and set her on the curb for Saturday pickup ????
> 
> It sounds like Bull Fish and Seeker and Ted can just write a check to cover it..but not too many other folks can scratch up a half million on short notice..
> 
> A little humanity wouldn't hurt along the way.... even if it costs a few bucks...:headknock


Head knock all you want, but just from personal experience I can tell ya that when catastrophic situations arise like the one you mentioned families that are worth a **** come together and provide. The ones that don't, look to everyone else to do it for them. Like I said before the entities that refuse to provide for themselves ( and this includes families not just individuals) get thinned out.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

So what is the value of a life? And does that value decrease as we age? Just because we are old, does that mean that we should just face the fact and accept death? We are all going to die, as long as this system goes on, but man, by nature wants to live, it does not matter, in most instances, what his age is, he does not want to die. It is amazing that some of you can be so insensitive......well maybe not. Just a word, you too will be in the same situation as us that are getting older. I know you can't look ahead, but believe me, when you get there you will not want to die.


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> So what is the value of a life? And does that value decrease as we age? Just because we are old, does that mean that we should just face the fact and accept death? We are all going to die, as long as this system goes on, but man, by nature wants to live, it does not matter, in most instances, what his age is, he does not want to die. It is amazing that some of you can be so insensitive......well maybe not. Just a word, you too will be in the same situation as us that are getting older. I know you can't look ahead, but believe me, when you get there you will not want to die.


So then you condone theft?


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

I'm tryin.. I'm trying real hard.. 

What makes one think he / she is owed anything in life? 

Anyone?


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

shaggydog said:


> So what is the value of a life? And does that value decrease as we age? Just because we are old, does that mean that we should just face the fact and accept death? We are all going to die, as long as this system goes on, but man, by nature wants to live, it does not matter, in most instances, what his age is, he does not want to die. It is amazing that some of you can be so insensitive......well maybe not. Just a word, you too will be in the same situation as us that are getting older. I know you can't look ahead, but believe me, when you get there you will not want to die.


All of you are overlooking one other option. For those that don't have insurance or are near end of life, we can send them to a really cool place where joint and muscle pain will be minimized and the excitement will take their mind off any health issue. Space. Send them up in a rocket ship to outer space with some food and water. Out of sight out of mind.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Ernest said:


> Its all about money.
> 
> If Granny is 92, and the projected treatment costs are $500k, should we take money from group A and give it to Granny for treatment? For what estimated additional life span? What if it buys her only a year? How about 3? Does that even matter? Is there any risk/reward analysis to be applied whatsoever?
> 
> ...


This pretty much sums it up IMHO. If insurance could be purchased, what do you suppose the premium would be on a 92 y/o woman in bad health would be? I dont care how big and wonderful your family is, unless you are mega wealthy it would not be affordable. So it comes back to medicare. How much should be allocated to save Granny? At what point do you cut Granny off? Beats hell outta me.


----------



## fmlyfisher (Apr 29, 2013)

Don't have to be mega wealthy just willing to find a way to make it work. And caring for the elderly is probably not going to ruffle any feathers honestly, but having to care for people who are unwilling to TRY to care for themselves(Medicaid not Medicare) most definitely does. I just can't understand how people feel like it is governments job to plan for your retirement. If a person doesn't have the foresight to realize at some point they are going to grow old and doesn't plan accordingly, well..... Walmart's always hiring greeters!!!

Shaking my 31 yr old and already planning head


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

Not sure how we got on the _medicare _tangent, but increased premiums that people are seeing due to the ACA has little to do with it. About as much as 100 y/o pictures of child laborers has to do with the health care situation of today.

Medicare is a tax on the young distinct from the _new _tax that is Obamacare.


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

You beat me to it but you are 100% nicer about it than me. Granny has children. They better be excellent planners because if your not.. It all ends the same.. Either way..


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Some real Christian attitudes on here by some that claim to be true Christian. Get old, go away, nobody cares about you now.


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

Right shaggy.. I know this was meant for me.. My faith has no place in this debate. Don't even go there even though you want to soo bad. Stick to the topic. God will sort the rest of it out on his time.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Planning is good my 31 year old grasshopper*



fmlyfisher;6999306 I just can't understand how people feel like it is governments job to plan for your retirement. If a person doesn't have the foresight to realize at some point they are going to grow old and doesn't plan accordingly said:


> I know you have just become aware of all this in this current anti-government anti-entitlement "conservative" era, but Social Security has been "government's job" more than twice as long as you have been on this planet and Medicare is way older than you are too.
> 
> Planning is good. We all try our best to foresee and plan, but as you plan and prepare, always remember this famous quote about life:
> 
> ...


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Being a Christian is not a part time responsibility, it is full time. You do not get to pick and choose.

(Mark 12:31) The second is this, â€˜You must love your neighbor as yourself.â€™ There is no other commandment greater than these.â€

Remember, these are Jesus words. So you think throwing old people that cannot care for themselves out in the cold is the thing to do?

There are more important things than money. Compassion is one of them.


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

I owe no one anything but love itself. Book of Romans! Now are you going to twist it like you always do?


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Seeker said:


> I owe no one anything but love itself. Book of Romans! Now are you going to twist it like you always do?


It looks like you are doing the twisting. I am just showing the second greatest commandment. The first is to love your God with your whole heart, soul and mind. Loving your fellow man also means showing compassion for him. Again, money is not everything, there are many more things more valuable than money. Yet that seems to be the only issue when it comes to Medicade and Medicare. Those programs have been around for a long time and have helped many people. You are not the only one that has paid toward them, I have also.


----------



## TheSamarai (Jan 20, 2005)

*elderly*

medicare, medicaid, private insurance, they are all intertwined into each other to think that one operates exclusive of the other is foolish. Medicare would not be solvent if it wasnt heavily subsidized y the healthy. i would bet that if insurance did not have to cover the elderly ( lets say 50 cause this is usually when your body starts to break down) your rates would be a lot cheaper.


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)




----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

shaggydog said:


> Being a Christian is not a part time responsibility, it is full time. You do not get to pick and choose.
> 
> (Mark 12:31) The second is this, â€˜You must love your neighbor as yourself.â€™ There is no other commandment greater than these.â€
> 
> ...


You're mixing two different worlds.

This is Christian charity:

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=9363238

I doubt that demanding the government _take _money from _some _to help _others _- _by threat of force_ - is what Jesus had in mind.

Let the digression continue.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

TheSamarai said:


> medicare, medicaid, private insurance, they are all intertwined into each other to think that one operates exclusive of the other is foolish. Medicare would not be solvent if it wasnt heavily subsidized y the healthy. i would bet that if insurance did not have to cover the elderly ( lets say 50 cause this is usually when your body starts to break down) your rates would be a lot cheaper.


No doubt you are correct. SS would not be solvent if it were not for those coming into the workforce. That is the way those programs were designed. If it weren't for fraud and abuse they would all function properly. Get that fixed and the system will be fixed.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

shaggydog said:


> No doubt you are correct. *SS would not be solvent if it were not for those coming into the workforce.* That is the way those programs were designed. If it weren't for fraud and abuse they would all function properly. Get that fixed and the system will be fixed.


You mean like a ponzi scheme?


----------



## fmlyfisher (Apr 29, 2013)

Johnboat said:


> I know you have just become aware of all this in this current anti-government anti-entitlement "conservative" era, but Social Security has been "government's job" more than twice as long as you have been on this planet and Medicare is way older than you are too.
> 
> Planning is good. We all try our best to foresee and plan, but as you plan and prepare, always remember this famous quote about life:
> 
> ...


Yes sir, I understand these BS programs have become so entrenched in our lives the majority just take them as par for the course. This is also why younger people of a similar line of thinking to mine are so opposed to ACA. This program will become "normal" before long as well and then we'll never be out from under it. I for one enjoy having a few dollars out of the paycheck I EARN to be able to do things for and with my friends and family. I have said this a thousand times anyone that would like to benefit from these programs has to pay for them, I just wish there was an opt out for those of us that don't want or need them!


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

fmlyfisher said:


> Head knock all you want, but just from personal experience I can tell ya that when catastrophic situations arise like the one you mentioned families that are worth a **** come together and provide. The ones that don't, look to everyone else to do it for them. Like I said before the entities that refuse to provide for themselves ( and this includes families not just individuals) get thinned out.


In the 25yrs I have worked for a major Med Center hospital dealing with this exact situation, I can tell you that the only families that have come together to help pay for the huge hospital bills have been international patients. The Americans, all races and financial ability included, jump at any kind of financial assistance they can get. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but people don't want to give up what they have, especially to a hospital.


----------



## fmlyfisher (Apr 29, 2013)

Leo said:


> In the 25yrs I have worked for a major Med Center hospital dealing with this exact situation, I can tell you that the only families that have come together to help pay for the huge hospital bills have been international patients. The Americans, all races and financial ability included, jump at any kind of financial assistance they can get. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but people don't want to give up what they have, especially to a hospital.


Because........... Drum roll please....... They haven't had to in several generations!!! And I totally agree with you Americans have stopped trying to care for themselves and their families because they expect someone else to do it for them! Hence the reason a lot refer to government programs as entitlements. I really don't have a viable answer because the reforms I'd like to see would come with a full on hot war between the minority that would rather provide for themselves and the majority who really want someone else to work and provide for them.


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

fmlyfisher said:


> Because........... Drum roll please....... They haven't had to in several generations!!! And I totally agree with you Americans have stopped trying to care for themselves and their families because they expect someone else to do it for them! Hence the reason a lot refer to government programs as entitlements. I really don't have a viable answer because the reforms I'd like to see would come with a full on hot war between the minority that would rather provide for themselves and the majority who really want someone else to work and provide for them.


Bingo. Unless they have the realization that they are the only one's responsible, nothing will ever change.


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

Oh they know it.. They just don't want to do it.. That's where my beef lies. But you nailed it.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

fmlyfisher said:


> Because........... Drum roll please....... They haven't had to in several generations!!! And I totally agree with you Americans have stopped trying to care for themselves and their families because they expect someone else to do it for them! Hence the reason a lot refer to government programs as entitlements. I really don't have a viable answer because the reforms I'd like to see would come with a full on hot war between the minority that would rather provide for themselves and the majority who really want someone else to work and provide for them.


Please. Your moms dying and you don't have enough money to treat her without seeking assistance from the Gov't. You are going to let her die rather than get assistance?


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

poppadawg said:


> Please. Your moms dying and you don't have enough money to treat her without seeking assistance from the Gov't. You are going to let her die rather than get assistance?


All these young guys are bullet proof and have tons of money set aside to take care of their aging parents. Unfortunately some don't realize the facts of life and have not lived it. There are times people need help, I am not talking about freeloading, I have never done that and never will, but I am not rich and live day to day. My dad was a disabled vet. He had a stroke and spent the last 6 years of his life in a nursing home, and yes he did get assistance. We could not have made ends meet without it. We moved my mom in with us to help out. So you think we are freeloaders because we received assistance. Really.


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

Been supporting my mom since I was 14.. And put myself through college.. Without help.. Have my own garden.. I have two foreign adopted children that I am raising. One is in Africa the other is in Central America. I also support a major mission group over in the Philippines who takes care of several hundred parent less children. Plus I pay heavy taxes for all you who rely on the government.. What else do you want from me Shaggydog? I give until it hurts just as I am supposed to do. Judge me buddy.. And I'm still standing by Gods "Grace".. "Not by works"! Carry on..


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Seeker said:


> Been supporting my mom since I was 14.. And put myself through college.. Without help.. Have my own garden.. I have two foreign adopted children that I am raising. One is in Africa the other is in Central America. I also support a major mission group over in the Philippines who takes care of several hundred parent less children. Plus I pay heavy taxes for all you who rely on the government.. What else do you want from me Shaggydog? I give until it hurts just as I am supposed to do. Judge me buddy.. And I'm still standing by Gods "Grace".. "Not by works"! Carry on..


"Faith without works is dead." Not judging, just disagreeing, as usual.


----------



## Tortuga (May 21, 2004)

Seeker said:


> I'm tryin.. I'm trying real hard..
> 
> What makes one think he / she is owed anything in life?
> 
> Anyone?


I seem to remember some raggedy old piece of parchment that said something like...

"with certain inalienable rights... life, liberty, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS."

That will suffice for me....:biggrin:


----------



## Seeker (Jul 6, 2009)

I was taught to respect elders.. I'll be nice and big grin with you.. I'm sure you've earned it.. Bigger grin..


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

It seems many of those who are complaining about ACA don't realize the extent that they are paying for those with no insurance already. This is a complex issue, but certainly goes deeper than simply some folks receiving an initial increase in their premiums.

I spent the last weekend with my sister-in-law who is a billing manager for a major hospital in the midwest. She is 110% in favor of ACA with the hopes that her hospital can just survive, till ACA comes into affect. 

She says that there are tens of millions of dollars each year that their hospital has to write off because people are uninsured or under-insured.

She calls those folks freeloaders. We need to put an end to freeloaders and that's one thing that ACA accomplishes. 

Freeloaders, like many on here, are adamant that they don't need insurance or they carry minimum insurance. That's fine, till they have a major catastrophy. 

Most of those cheap insurance plans don't pay for wellness visits. Instead of catching serious problems early on when they could be treated, these folks typically wait until the problem becomes serious and requires hospitalization. Then they quickly exceed the maximum on their policy or they can't come up with the high deductable, few in-hospital treatments are covered. Guess who pays the rest?

S-I-L says she hears many of the same complaints that we have seen on here about higher premiums. She says first of all, premiums have been spiraling out of control every year anyway, so any increase should be weighed against the average yearly increase. 

Also you cannot simply complain about an increase in premiums, without looking at ALL the details of both coverage plans. She has shown many families how much more coverage they will be getting for their family; if they take advantage of wellness visits, lower co-pays on office visits, lower co-pays on prescriptions, free innoculations, just to name a few. Or how much more would be covered in the event of a hospitalization. 

Besides the freeloaders running up our medical costs there are also those that the insurance companies have been taking advantage of for years. Now millions of AMERICANS can get coverage that the insurance companies wouldn't insure previously, because of a pre-exisiting condition. 

These folks have no choice but are a major drag on the healthcare system. Once again, who do you think ends up paying for their costs?

One other thing, the idea behind ACA is to shop around, an idea promoted by the Republicans BTW. The insurance companies have to compete for your business. It's up to us to be proactive and choose our coverage wisely.


----------



## fmlyfisher (Apr 29, 2013)

poppadawg said:


> Please. Your moms dying and you don't have enough money to treat her without seeking assistance from the Gov't. You are going to let her die rather than get assistance?


Been there,
Helped my mom through 9 yrs of cancer from the time I was 9 until she passed 1 month after I graduated high school. No government assistance at any time. My dad worked away from home 11 months out of the year because it kept the bills paid and the care going. After she passed I worked with him through summers after college and helped pay down the 1/2 mil or so in medical bills still owed. So tell me again how when times get tough everyone will turn to their government teat begging for help. Like I said before it can be done you just have to willing to work... Kinda sounds like life to me


----------



## Tortuga (May 21, 2004)

*"She says that there are tens of millions of dollars each year that their hospital has to write off because people are uninsured or under-insured."*

Consider the possibility that maybe the hospitals are over-billing for their services as well. Wife's new hip...Hospital bill = $200K plus... Medicare sent them 1700..supplement another 500.. All is well...

My ESI spinal injections.. 30 minute out-patient treatment...

First hospital..$10,000.00...MC settled with them for $900

Second Hospital.. $6000.00.. MC settled with them for $900 also

Doctor's bills were inflated and reduced at about the same rate..

Seems like a possibility that mebbe the hospitals are over-charging 'slightly' and can take the unpaid balance on the whopping bills as an operational expense or charge off...therefore reducing their income taxes...

Just a wild hair of speculation.....:biggrin:


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Or, Medicare is systematically underpaying the doctors/hospitals. Thus, folks not on Medicare or some other gov. program pay more. A lot more. As in, cost shifting. 

Many major hospitals are not-for profit. Memorial Herman, for example. Thus, bad debt write off's don't really help. For profit organization can use bad debt write offs, but there are very few successful business models that intentionally create bad debt write offs. Sure, there are some, but they are few and far between.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

fmlyfisher said:


> Been there,
> Helped my mom through 9 yrs of cancer from the time I was 9 until she passed 1 month after I graduated high school. No government assistance at any time. My dad worked away from home 11 months out of the year because it kept the bills paid and the care going. After she passed I worked with him through summers after college and helped pay down the 1/2 mil or so in medical bills still owed. So tell me again how when times get tough everyone will turn to their government teat begging for help. Like I said before it can be done you just have to willing to work... Kinda sounds like life to me


9 years of cancer and it only cost 500k? Was this a hospital in Mexico? If it was somebody I loved I would send them to MD Anderson. The finest cancer center in the world, right here in our fine city. 500k would get you through the first set of Xrays.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Ernest said:


> Or, Medicare is systematically underpaying the doctors/hospitals. Thus, folks not on Medicare or some other gov. program pay more. A lot more. As in, cost shifting.
> 
> Many major hospitals are not-for profit. Memorial Herman, for example. Thus, bad debt write off's don't really help. For profit organization can use bad debt write offs, but there are very few successful business models that intentionally create bad debt write offs. Sure, there are some, but they are few and far between.


And if you are going to right off bad debt, why not charge 50 bucks for an aspirin? The insurance company calls BS, but poor Bubba gets stuck with it cause nobody thinks he is going to pay anyway. The higher Bubbas bill is, the higher the write off and the less revenue the hospital has to pay tax on. 
ACA sounds like a nightmare. But, the whole thing has been whacked for a long time before that. They took something completed messed up and made it worse. God Bless Corporate America and good bennefits.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

I'll let the accountants explain it to you guys, but you don't get to inflate your bills to $1,000,000.00, settle for $100, and get a $999,900.00 tax write off as bad debt or an expense. Not giving tax advice, but bad debts are deductible only to the extent you previously took the full amount of the bill to income. Thus, its a wash. 

You declare the $1,000,000 as income and then take $999,900 as bad debt expense. So, you still only pay taxes on the $100 you collected. Same as if you simply claimed the $100 as income, with no bad debt write off. 

If the rules were otherwise, everyone would grossly over charge, settle for less, and pay no income taxes. 

And, of course, many of these hospitals are not for profit.


----------



## Tortuga (May 21, 2004)

Ernest said:


> Or, Medicare is systematically underpaying the doctors/hospitals. Thus, folks not on Medicare or some other gov. program pay more. A lot more. As in, cost shifting.
> 
> Many major hospitals are not-for profit. Memorial Herman, for example. Thus, bad debt write off's don't really help. For profit organization can use bad debt write offs, but there are very few successful business models that intentionally create bad debt write offs. Sure, there are some, but they are few and far between.


No ******* contest, Counselor...but a quick google of MH's balance sheet shows a first quarter 'Net Profit' of $35 MILLION...and last years total Net Profit for the whole year of a little north of $190 MILLION...

'Non-Profit' ???????......:spineyes:


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Ernest said:


> I'll let the accountants explain it to you guys, but you don't get to inflate your bills to $1,000,000.00, settle for $100, and get a $999,900.00 tax write off as bad debt or an expense. Not giving tax advice, but bad debts are deductible only to the extent you previously took the full amount of the bill to income. Thus, its a wash.
> 
> You declare the $1,000,000 as income and then take $999,900 as bad debt expense. So, you still only pay taxes on the $100 you collected. Same as if you simply claimed the $100 as income, with no bad debt write off.
> 
> ...


Dang it. I thought I had them figured out. I see your point. Makes sense. Thanks


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Hospital CEO salary and advertising budget*

Profit or non-profit makes no difference. I would like to know the salary of the Memorial Hermann CEO and what their annual advertising budget is.

I know in my small city the two systems spend tons on advertising because they are constantly on TV, radio, billboards. And I have been told from knowledgeable sources that their CEO (they are not medical doctors but professional manager) salaries are in the national champ football coach range.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

spuds said:


> It seems many of those who are complaining about ACA don't realize the extent that they are paying for those with no insurance already. This is a complex issue, but certainly goes deeper than simply some folks receiving an initial increase in their premiums....
> 
> ...
> 
> ...




So Spuds, if we're already paying for the free loaders, and now the free loaders are going to magically disappear...why are my costs going up? Have you really thought out those arguments you are making?

I assume when you say "freeloaders on here", you're talking about those of us who are young and despise the ACA. If so, let me clue you in on something, because you seem to have some fundamental misunderstandings.

*I am not a freeloader.*

My insurance was affordable. It is not a "fake" or "phony" insurance plan as some would have you believe, just because it was already affordable or because the rates will go up under ACA. Look up Scott and White's My Plan 80 if you don't believe me. That is my current plan.

It covered the health consumption items I might expect as a 30 something, both in terms of routine health care and unknown emergencies. It would be a "silver" plan under the ACA if it included a _few_ things I did not want, such as maternity coverage, substance abuse, etc. When the 12 month loop hole runs out for me and I lose this plan, I'll be none the better for it. But it will cost me twice as much.

As with most things, premiums do rise year to year. I have been with the same insurer for 8 years now, and every year, the costs do go up.

*They have never doubled in a year.*

In fact, they've barely doubled over 8 years, and the increase in the last several has been due to the ACA as well.

You have always been able to "shop around". That's exactly how I ended up with the insurer I have, and something that I did every few years (just like home owners insurance). The biggest falsehood being peddled around is that somehow the ACA "created a market out of thin air that didn't exist before" The market was already there. End of story. I've been involved with it since 2005, so trust me on that.

Look, you can try to pick this thing up from the clean end, but _it will never make sense to someone like me who is having more and more burden placed on them while getting absolutely nothing in return_.

It will make perfect sense to someone who is receiving the benefits that others are paying for through taxes, such as those who will receive subsidies to offset the increased costs (that would be 75% of Americans). It may make sense to those who don't see a significant increase in their costs because the is increase passed on to a class of others (such as those who are 10 years out from Medicare).

But most people my age are too ignorant or oblivious to realize how much this law is ripping them a new one. Just look at how many voted for Obama. I'm actually happy to see a few of your "freeloaders" on here who do realize they're getting hosed.

On a different note, Tortuga, your ellipses omit the most important parts of that phrase. * "that among these are"*. We are all endowed with more rights than simply those listed, and an important one is property.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

The Memorial Hermann Healthcare System is a not for profit organization. Fact. You can suggest otherwise, but you would be wrong. And, its not some sort of secret or anything. 

Maybe you should ask Mr. Levy or Mr. Cohen. I'm sure they can explain it to you. While you have their ear, ask about the increasing competitive grocery market, and how the costs of their delivery service - standing alone - compare to the fees charged for that service. I'm confident the conversation will be a real eye opener for you on multiple issues.


----------



## fmlyfisher (Apr 29, 2013)

poppadawg said:


> 9 years of cancer and it only cost 500k? Was this a hospital in Mexico? If it was somebody I loved I would send them to MD Anderson. The finest cancer center in the world, right here in our fine city. 500k would get you through the first set of Xrays.


After 9 years of continuously paying for care and with the health insurance my dad PAID for there was around 500k left dumbass. And I know exactly where MD Anderson is I drive a woman who was too sick to drive herself from the time the state would give me DL at 14 on. See when you actually pay for your own **** you don't get a statement at the end telling you how much Uncle Sam paid you get a bill every time there is procedure or visit which you are then expected to pay. It's a tough concept to grasp I understand


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Your deductable was 500k? That is tough to grasp. And the discussion was what would you do if you didnt have insurance or the cash for treating a loved one, would you ask the govt for assitance? Remember?


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*No thanks to that plan (or, its wealth insurance, not health insurance)*



fmlyfisher said:


> After 9 years of continuously paying for care and with the health insurance my dad PAID for there was around 500k left dumbass. And I know exactly where MD Anderson is I drive a woman who was too sick to drive herself from the time the state would give me DL at 14 on. See when you actually pay for your own **** you don't get a statement at the end telling you how much Uncle Sam paid you get a bill every time there is procedure or visit which you are then expected to pay. It's a tough concept to grasp I understand


Uh. whatever insurance plan or individual planning y'all were on, count me out.

Everybody will get some level of care in this country whether rich or poor. Poor. No problem. Rich. No problem. The question for the moderately affluent working middle class is: How can I prevent bankruptcy or total loss of accumulated savings and wealth due to an illness?

And if her situation was due to reaching a maximum lifetime amount under an insurance policy that is not allowed under ACA. In that sense everyone is getting more for their premium dollar under ACA compliant policies.


----------



## HarryK (Jun 5, 2008)

Tortuga said:


> No ******* contest, Counselor...but a quick google of MH's balance sheet shows a first quarter 'Net Profit' of $35 MILLION...and last years total Net Profit for the whole year of a little north of $190 MILLION...
> 
> 'Non-Profit' ???????......:spineyes:


Try looking up Tx Childrens Hosp, too...see how much they have in reserves, genius. It's called research, grants, donations etc, but some manage it better than others...back at ya with the :spineyes:


----------



## fmlyfisher (Apr 29, 2013)

poppadawg said:


> Your deductable was 500k? That is tough to grasp. And the discussion was what would you do if you didnt have insurance or the cash for treating a loved one, would you ask the govt for assitance? Remember?


My discussion was if you didn't have a government crutch to lean on you would have find a way to work it out or the herd gets thinned either way works for me as long as I don't end up paying for someone I could care less about. And as far as the dollar amount I stated being part of a deductible, with an 80/20 insurance plan that 20% adds up to a lot with 9 yrs of cancer treatment.

The only reason I divulge personal information like this was to point out that people who are willing to take care of their own, do. I'm sick of being asked to provide for everyone else in the country!

Obviously you guys years of experience will outweigh any argument I could make to you, so I'll agree that we disagree and go back to tryin to figure out who my longhorns are gonna have for a coach next year. I appreciate the debate fellas


----------



## alien750 (May 21, 2010)

Wow, I cant believe I just read all that and this has gotten way off topic. 

My biggest issue with Obamacare is that everyone is being "FORCED" to purchase healthcare. No you don't have to buy it but then you get penalized (therefore being forced). I don't think the government has any place telling me what I should be spending my money on. I have insurance and never use it, but that is MY CHOICE. There are some that can better manage THEIR own money and would rather save it, since they are rather healthy and take care of themselves, than spend it on the high cost of healthcare. This is America, Home of the Free (well used to be). We are slowly loosing our freedom right before our very eyes to the government. Just take the light bulb for example, The one that we have used since Thomas Edison invented it. The government has put a ban on them. Why? Because they think it is "better for us". What happen to the free market and the consumer the free will to choose what they like and think is better? 

I can go on and on, but ill just stop there.
Merry CHRISTmas to all, and yes I cling to God and my guns.


----------



## TheSamarai (Jan 20, 2005)

The fact is before obamacare everyone was entitled to healthcare but not everyone had to pay for it. Have u ever seen anyone turned away from the ER? Somebody had to pay for that.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

The fact is the health care/insurance industry has been broken for many years. What is the solution, I don't really know, but i do know that something needs to be done. I do not care who is in office, but at least someone is trying to do something about it. The entire industry needs to be fixed.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Then how do you feel about Texas forcing auto liability insurance on drivers?*



alien750 said:


> My biggest issue with Obamacare is that everyone is being "FORCED" to purchase healthcare. No you don't have to buy it but then you get penalized (therefore being forced). I don't think the government has any place telling me what I should be spending my money on. I have insurance and never use it, but that is MY CHOICE. I can go on and on, but ill just stop there.


Isn't mandatory automobile liability insurance a similar idea? Isn't it a recognition that lots of people with no money in their pocket would drive uninsured and the rest of us would have to pick up their tab by paying higher premiums? And remember...the auto insurance isn't being forced on us by the feds, but by good ole red state Texas laws.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Johnboat said:


> Isn't mandatory automobile liability insurance a similar idea? Isn't it a recognition that lots of people would drive uninsured and the rest of us would have to pick up their tab by paying higher premiums? And the auto insurance isn't being forced on us by the feds, but by good ole red state Texas laws.


Great analogy, and the way it should be.


----------



## Ted Gentry (Jun 8, 2004)

Johnboat said:


> Isn't mandatory automobile liability insurance a similar idea? Isn't it a recognition that lots of people would drive uninsured and the rest of us would have to pick up their tab by paying higher premiums? And the auto insurance isn't being forced on us by the feds, but by good ole red state Texas laws.


Nobody is forcing you to buy that car.


----------



## alien750 (May 21, 2010)

Johnboat said:


> Isn't mandatory automobile liability insurance a similar idea? Isn't it a recognition that lots of people with no money in their pocket would drive uninsured and the rest of us would have to pick up their tab by paying higher premiums? And remember...the auto insurance isn't being forced on us by the feds, but by good ole red state Texas laws.


Not the same, Automobile Insurance comes with purchasing a car. That's a CHOICE you get to make. If you don't want to pay for insurance then don't buy the car. You know what else you HAVE to buy when you get a car? GAS! Don't want to pay the high price of gas, you guessed it, don't buy the car.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Ted Gentry said:


> Nobody is forcing you to buy that car.


So you think it be best for someone to forgo buying a car, so they can set around all day, with no opportunity to get a job. So who is going to support them? In this day and time a car is almost a necessity to make a living. Could it be done, possibly, but the car is a means to an end.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Good point. Drivers are also "forced" to pay for highways*



alien750 said:


> Not the same, Automobile Insurance comes with purchasing a car. That's a CHOICE you get to make. If you don't want to pay for insurance then don't buy the car. You know what else you HAVE to buy when you get a car? GAS! Don't want to pay the high price of gas, you guessed it, don't buy the car.


Gas price includes about 38 cents a gallon for taxes. So drivers are forced to pay for highways right at the pump.

You guys arguing that driving a car is an optional activity are really showing your weakness in that argument. Getting medical care is optional too. I suppose you could just stay home and die if you wanted to. Seriously?


----------



## Ted Gentry (Jun 8, 2004)

shaggydog said:


> So you think it be best for someone to forgo buying a car, so they can set around all day, with no opportunity to get a job. So who is going to support them? In this day and time a car is almost a necessity to make a living. Could it be done, possibly, but the car is a means to an end.


Shaggy, you ever hear about a little thing called mass transit, you know, buses and trains?:headknock


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Ted Gentry said:


> Shaggy, you ever hear about a little thing called mass transit, you know, buses and trains?:headknock


There are MANY places that do not offer mass transit. Keep beating your head against that wall. Maybe it will beat some sense into it.


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

Ted Gentry said:


> Shaggy, you ever hear about a little thing called mass transit, you know, buses and trains?:headknock


This is getting hard to keep up with. I need to write down all these birth rights...


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

Johnboat said:


> Gas price includes about 38 cents a gallon for taxes. So drivers are forced to pay for highways right at the pump.
> 
> You guys arguing that driving a car is an optional activity are really showing your weakness in that argument. Getting medical care is optional too. I suppose you could just stay home and die if you wanted to. Seriously?


No, it is absolutely, 100% not a weak argument. Scalia's broccoli argument implicitly shows how silly the "you have to have it anyways" stance can be.

You are required to buy auto insurance _if you choose_ to operate a vehicle on Texas motorways.

You are required to buy health insurance _if you are alive_.

One can choose to live life without a car. Half of New Yorkers do so. Whether _you think_ it's pragmatic that you can make such a choice in this state is irrelevant. You can move. You can carpool. You can live within walking distance of work like one of my coworkers. You can choose not to drive but be driven, like my grandmother has done. You still have a choice, and _it is 100% fact that if you do not operate a car, you do not have to buy auto insurance._ (This all goes without saying that if you are blind, quadriplegic, in a nursing home etc. you're obviously not required to buy auto insurance)

Every single person living is, well alive, and choosing not to be isn't a valid choice, as even you have pointed out.

Those are fundamentally different things. End of story.

But that the Mandate requires you to buy insurance is only a fraction of what is wrong with this law, and you guys still seem to not get that point.

*MANY YOUNG PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE ACA HAVE INSURANCE ALREADY.* You seem to think that if you're young and complaining then you must simply not have health insurance at all, that you're a moocher rolling the dice with other people's money, or that you're some irresponsible kid too ignorant to understand the risks in life. This is not the case!

The mandate is more than "you must buy health insurance". The mandate is "you must buy this health insurance that costs twice what you pay now, even though you will see no added benefit".

It's the lie that "if you like your plan, you can keep it*"


----------



## K Man (Jun 21, 2012)

Well put Goatcheze! Remember the ACA is a tax, either way you look at it! You pay if you have, so that the have nots don't have too.


----------



## waterwolf (Mar 6, 2005)

Got with my BIL and sister and they signed up and it cost 475.00 a month with a 3,000.00 deductible....they are the only people I can find that ACA has reduced their medical cost.? He grew up in Washington, D.C. and voted for Obama...my poor sister.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

goatchze said:


> No, it is absolutely, 100% not a weak argument. Scalia's broccoli argument implicitly shows how silly the "you have to have it anyways" stance can be.
> 
> You are required to buy auto insurance _if you choose_ to operate a vehicle on Texas motorways.
> 
> ...


They have a great mass transit system in New York, where you can get by without a vehicle. There is no mass transit in Waxahachie Texas. You mass transit analogy only applies in very few areas.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Hate "nanny government?*

Speaking of freedoms and choices, here is one to consider. You can move to a place where there is zero government meddling with freedom and worrying about the welfare of its citizens. A place where you eat what you kill and if you are smart, tough and aggressive enough, you can succeed and if not, if you are weaker or ill you will fail. One such place is called Somalia.


----------



## 47741 (Jan 5, 2010)

Best idea ever-

IF YOU LIKE your plan, you keep it. If you don't like it, go to the free market and find another one. IF YOU want to subsidize someone else's premium directly, please include an extra $xxx/month to your payment.

See the 2nd option doesn't sound so good and nobody does it on their own free will. How come when the same exact thing is mandated, people are supportive of the idea? The world would be different if people would actually put serious money to a cause they believe in....Instead, all you "ACA is great type" are the problem. You don't/didn't and won't complain a bit when someone else is forced to pay more for your beloved cause.

*How about this for size- * Everyone is required to own 3 guns- A handgun, rifle and shotgun. If you like your guns, you can keep them (as long as the handgun is a 5-shot revolver .38+P, the rifle is a .270 win mag with 4x36 scope and the shotty is a 10ga double barrel breach loader.) If you can't afford it, we'll make it accessible for you at a reduced cost. If you currently have 3 guns but they don't meet the specs, your guns will be destroyed and you'll have to buy replacement ones on our gov't provided market place. Now, the market place will have different amounts of subsidy depending on your income. Some will pay 3 dollars, some will pay 5000 dollars, but you'll get the same 3 guns. Some, who have guns that meet the needs, but the wrong brands, will be forced to pay a "cadillac gun tax" each month, and your social security rates will go up.

Now everyone will have 3 guns. Can't get ammo though...maybe we'll subsidize your purchase there too, income depending of course.

Sounds like a shibby deal.....why is it better for the medical field to do the exact same thing?


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

ITS A CRIMINAL ACT OF THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE HEALTHCARE ON ITS CITIZENS. THERE IS NO TWO WAYS AROUND THIS. IF YOU ARE A CONSTITUTIONALIST, AND BELIEVE IN WHAT OUR FOREFATHERS HAVE LAID OUT FOR US, YOU WILL REALIZE THIS IS NOT GOOD. ITS A SLIPPERY SLOPE, YOU LET THE GOVERNMENT MAKE YOU DO THIS ONE THING AND IT JUST HELPS THEM GAIN EXPERIENCE IN DOING THE NEXT FORCED AGENDA. NOT EVERYBODY CONFORMS TO THE STANDARD AMERICAN DIET OF FAST FOOD, CANNED FOOD, FROZEN FOOD, MASSIVE SUGAR COSUMPTION, LAZINESS. THEY PICKED A REAL NICE TOPIC TO BEND YOU OVER ON, HEALTH, BECAUSE IT HITS HOME. BUT GUESS WHAT, USE YOUR BRAIN AND UNDERSTAND THEY ARE TRYING TO PREY ON WEAK MINDS. YES, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS WHO WILL NOW GET COVERAGE, BUT IT SHOULDN'T COME AT THE EXPENSE OF YOUR NEIGHBOR. THATS A PROBLEM THAT SHOULD BE ERRADICATED BY A DIFFERENT METHOD. WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE ON FOODSTAMP, GOV ASSISTANCE, UNEMPLOYEMENT, THEN EVER BEFORE AND OBVIOUSLY THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO PRAISE THE SYSTEM. 
You can penalize me for me refusing to participate in the health insurance racket, I don't care. I haven't needed insurance because if I have to go the doctor (once in 15 years) I will just pay cash. You can look at it like this : 15 years, 180 months of coverage I've saved, at $200/month that's $36,000 I've kept in my pocket for the ONE $500 visit where I had to get 5 staples in my head, and was way OVERCHARGED for a 20 minute visit. You are crazy in the head if you think I'm going to pay hundreds of dollars a month for insurance, then when I need care i'm going to be forced to have roughly a $5,000 deductible. Chances are I won't ever have a visit over $5,000, so I will just be paying cash like I have in the past. So tell me why I want to just pee away hundreds of dollars a month.


----------



## fmlyfisher (Apr 29, 2013)

Johnboat said:


> Speaking of freedoms and choices, here is one to consider. You can move to a place where there is zero government meddling with freedom and worrying about the welfare of its citizens. A place where you eat what you kill and if you are smart, tough and aggressive enough, you can succeed and if not, if you are weaker or ill you will fail. One such place is called Somalia.


I would argue that one of the reasons countries like the one you mentioned are such disasters is the somebody feed me mentality of the masses. They are always looking or the next leader to take care of them so the only real survival of the fittest is between the few ambitious enough to try to take control. Actually sounds familiar huh?


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

YakSerious said:


> ITS A CRIMINAL ACT OF THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE HEALTHCARE ON ITS CITIZENS. THERE IS NO TWO WAYS AROUND THIS. IF YOU ARE A CONSTITUTIONALIST, AND BELIEVE IN WHAT OUR FOREFATHERS HAVE LAID OUT FOR US, YOU WILL REALIZE THIS IS NOT GOOD. ITS A SLIPPERY SLOPE, YOU LET THE GOVERNMENT MAKE YOU DO THIS ONE THING AND IT JUST HELPS THEM GAIN EXPERIENCE IN DOING THE NEXT FORCED AGENDA. NOT EVERYBODY CONFORMS TO THE STANDARD AMERICAN DIET OF FAST FOOD, CANNED FOOD, FROZEN FOOD, MASSIVE SUGAR COSUMPTION, LAZINESS. THEY PICKED A REAL NICE TOPIC TO BEND YOU OVER ON, HEALTH, BECAUSE IT HITS HOME. BUT GUESS WHAT, USE YOUR BRAIN AND UNDERSTAND THEY ARE TRYING TO PREY ON WEAK MINDS. YES, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS WHO WILL NOW GET COVERAGE, BUT IT SHOULDN'T COME AT THE EXPENSE OF YOUR NEIGHBOR. THATS A PROBLEM THAT SHOULD BE ERRADICATED BY A DIFFERENT METHOD. WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE ON FOODSTAMP, GOV ASSISTANCE, UNEMPLOYEMENT, THEN EVER BEFORE AND OBVIOUSLY THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO PRAISE THE SYSTEM.
> You can penalize me for me refusing to participate in the health insurance racket, I don't care. I haven't needed insurance because if I have to go the doctor (once in 15 years) I will just pay cash. You can look at it like this : 15 years, 180 months of coverage I've saved, at $200/month that's $36,000 I've kept in my pocket for the ONE $500 visit where I had to get 5 staples in my head, and was way OVERCHARGED for a 20 minute visit. You are crazy in the head if you think I'm going to pay hundreds of dollars a month for insurance, then when I need care i'm going to be forced to have roughly a $5,000 deductible. Chances are I won't ever have a visit over $5,000, so I will just be paying cash like I have in the past. So tell me why I want to just pee away hundreds of dollars a month.


I hope you never have a serious disease or injury. If you were to have a stroke, contract cancer, have a heart attack, or have a serious car wreck, you may be looking at hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of care or treatment. Maybe you can pay out that kind of money if you do not have insurance, I know I could not afford it.

So when you are unable to pay, guess who does, we all do. You, sir, are the problem. You probably do not carry car insurance also.


----------



## Pasadena1944 (Mar 20, 2010)

shaggydog said:


> I hope you never have a serious disease or injury. If you were to have a stroke, contract cancer, have a heart attack, or have a serious car wreck, you may be looking at hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of care or treatment. Maybe you can pay out that kind of money if you do not have insurance, I know I could not afford it.
> 
> *So when you are unable to pay, guess who does, we all do.* You, sir, are the problem. You probably do not carry car insurance also.


and do you really believe that your $600.00 a month you pay to your insurance company is going to cover "hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of care or treatment" on it's own with out thousands of others paying to help you? If you do you're dumber than a box of rocks!!!!!


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

Shaggy lil Dog...So because I am healthy, have zero need to pay into a system of sick people who are on numerous medications I'M PART OF THE PROBLEM. NO SIR, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM, YOU AND YOUR MENTALITY. And assumptions, you know what they do. I have car insurance because I drive a car. I don't have health insurance because I take care of myself physically and mentally. 
Yes I understand where you are going with this, the "what if" scenario's. But brotha, I'll take my chances on NOT GETTING A DISEASE BY TAKING CARE OF MYSELF, AND I HOPE I DON'T GET INTO A SERIOUS CAR WRECK BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE WHO DRIVE AREN'T DROOLING IN WHEELCHAIRS. You are living a life of fear and "what if's". A majority of the population hasn't been in a life altering car wreck, and a majority of the population isn't diseased. So why am I going to live in fear that it will happen to me ? You are just a scared old man with a weak mentality whose life IS based off assumptions and not off real factual numbers. If 60% of the people who drove cars were in life altering car crashes, and 60% of the people were disease ridden, I could see that buying health insurance would probably be a smart move. But, I have no family to worry about, I am a single male, am healthy.....If you free your mind and body, you will also free your money


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

YakSerious said:


> I haven't needed insurance because if I have to go the doctor (once in 15 years) I will just pay cash. You can look at it like this : 15 years, 180 months of coverage I've saved, at $200/month that's $36,000 I've kept in my pocket for the ONE $500 visit where I had to get 5 staples in my head, and was way OVERCHARGED for a 20 minute visit. You are crazy in the head if you think I'm going to pay hundreds of dollars a month for insurance, then when I need care i'm going to be forced to have roughly a $5,000 deductible. Chances are I won't ever have a visit over $5,000, so I will just be paying cash like I have in the past. So tell me why I want to just pee away hundreds of dollars a month.


So what happens if you get into a car wreck and rack up a million dollar hospital bill? You gonna reach into those deep pockets and pay that off or are you gonna lay that expense out for the rest of us to cover?

Love how a 33 year old thinks that since he has been to the doctor once in 15 years, that the next 33 are going to be the same! You might want to take a look at the statistics as far as how age affects your health.


----------



## TheSamarai (Jan 20, 2005)

yak serious. u are 33, u will look at healthcare differently when u are 60. I guarantee u u wont be able to pay cash for your services. Unlike some countries, no one is denied healthcare in our great United States. When that happens then yes you cant make people pay for insurance.


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

"What if" , gotta love it..do you know the chances of me getting in a car wreck where my medical bills are +$1 million dollars. Most people will live their whole life and never get in a wreck of that magnitude, or even close :rotfl:


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

So you are gambling with our money that you will never have a catastrophic injury/illness?

Wish all bets were like this one. You get to avoid paying for insurance and in the off chance that you do actually need healthcare that you can't pay for out of pocket the taxpayers make up the difference. Sounds like a win/win for you.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Game-Over said:


> So you are gambling with our money that you will never have a catastrophic injury/illness?
> 
> Wish all bets were like this one. You get to avoid paying for insurance and in the off chance that you do actually need healthcare that you can't pay for out of pocket the taxpayers make up the difference. Sounds like a win/win for you.


Thats how the illegals do it. No pay, then show up at the emergency room. Do you speak spanish yakserious?


----------



## K Man (Jun 21, 2012)

YakSerious said:


> Shaggy lil Dog...So because I am healthy, have zero need to pay into a system of sick people who are on numerous medications I'M PART OF THE PROBLEM. NO SIR, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM, YOU AND YOUR MENTALITY. And assumptions, you know what they do. I have car insurance because I drive a car. I don't have health insurance because I take care of myself physically and mentally.
> Yes I understand where you are going with this, the "what if" scenario's. But brotha, I'll take my chances on NOT GETTING A DISEASE BY TAKING CARE OF MYSELF, AND I HOPE I DON'T GET INTO A SERIOUS CAR WRECK BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE WHO DRIVE AREN'T DROOLING IN WHEELCHAIRS. You are living a life of fear and "what if's". A majority of the population hasn't been in a life altering car wreck, and a majority of the population isn't diseased. So why am I going to live in fear that it will happen to me ? You are just a scared old man with a weak mentality whose life IS based off assumptions and not off real factual numbers. If 60% of the people who drove cars were in life altering car crashes, and 60% of the people were disease ridden, I could see that buying health insurance would probably be a smart move. But, I have no family to worry about, I am a single male, am healthy.....If you free your mind and body, you will also free your money


You ever heard of pneumonia? Our office writes health insurance daily and we see some of the most unbelievable cases happen to young healthy males and females all the time. Here is one for you, " You're doing your daily jog, trip over an expansion joint on the side walk, you hit your head on the concrete and get knocked out. You wake up in the ER room with nurses and a doctor, telling you you will be alright but they are going to keep you overnight for observation. You get out the next day, get your hospital bill in the mail a week later. Ambulance ride: 8k,(ground ride), total hospital bill, 6k. These are no insurance cash cost. To insure you, 2k per year. Do an HSA and you can put money away tax free but you are covered mainly for catastrophic coverage.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Pasadena1944 said:


> and do you really believe that your $600.00 a month you pay to your insurance company is going to cover "hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of care or treatment" on it's own with out thousands of others paying to help you? If you do you're dumber than a box of rocks!!!!!


It happens every day. That is why everybody should have insurance. If you just check around I am sure you probably know someone that it has done just that for. Cancer, heart transplants, many diseases cost hundreds thousands of dollars for care. It may cost out of pocket a few thousand but not nearly what all of the costs are. I have seen it and do know for a fact.


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

I have nothing to do with your money or the system you buy into. You can make up endless scenario's , but they are all just that, made up


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

YakSerious said:


> Shaggy lil Dog...So because I am healthy, have zero need to pay into a system of sick people who are on numerous medications I'M PART OF THE PROBLEM. NO SIR, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM, YOU AND YOUR MENTALITY. And assumptions, you know what they do. I have car insurance because I drive a car. I don't have health insurance because I take care of myself physically and mentally.
> Yes I understand where you are going with this, the "what if" scenario's. But brotha, I'll take my chances on NOT GETTING A DISEASE BY TAKING CARE OF MYSELF, AND I HOPE I DON'T GET INTO A SERIOUS CAR WRECK BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE WHO DRIVE AREN'T DROOLING IN WHEELCHAIRS. You are living a life of fear and "what if's". A majority of the population hasn't been in a life altering car wreck, and a majority of the population isn't diseased. So why am I going to live in fear that it will happen to me ? You are just a scared old man with a weak mentality whose life IS based off assumptions and not off real factual numbers. If 60% of the people who drove cars were in life altering car crashes, and 60% of the people were disease ridden, I could see that buying health insurance would probably be a smart move. But, I have no family to worry about, I am a single male, am healthy.....If you free your mind and body, you will also free your money


MOOOOOOOOOORON. It is your mentality, what mentality you have that contributes to the problem. What if you are in an accident and disabled for life, and yes it happens. Who is going to pay for your care? I never said 60% have had a life altering accident, you are just throwing out numbers with nothing to base them on. Accidents do happen. Guess who picks up the tab when those people do not have insurance. Young and DUMB!


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

poppadawg, I'm Caucasian, I have a job, pay taxes, am here legally because I was born here, and you are probably living off my SS money I've been pumping in....it is my RIGHT to do as I please. So as far as I'm concerned you don't believe in Freedom. You are all mostly socialists, so I can now see where Obama got all of his votes. I am a constitutionalist, I believe in Freedom, If you need healthcare pay for it because for some reason or another I don't.


----------



## ChuChu (Jan 23, 2010)

I'm just thankful I have the same insurance I had last year, and it went up only $4.60 a month. No ACA for me, and I AM thankful.


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

This really grinds my gears. For the whole insurance thing to work you need people who don't use the system to pay for people who need the system. Then if you don't pay for the system, the people who USE it say "hey you could maybe get really hurt and its going to cost a lot, then you will possibly default on payment and that's why i'm paying such a high premium" But whats really happening is the people who are USING the system because they have poor health and need it, are the ones who are jacking up the premiums because their care far exceeds the amount of money THEY put in. But now THEY are the ones who get mad when you don't get a policy and pay for THEM because of a made up scenario where you default on your payments and it results in their premiums being jacked up. When in reality, the people who are using the system are the ones who make their own premiums go up. 
The industry NEEDS people like me in it to pay for people like you. I don't need to pay for you, so I don't. Worry about yourself, and pay your own way. 

I'm not going to go join a gang for protection, I can fight myself, even if the fight is harder. An insurance company only makes money on those who don't need it. Crazy huh..


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

YakSerious said:


> I have nothing to do with your money or the system you buy into. You can make up endless scenario's , but they are all just that, made up





YakSerious said:


> This really grinds my gears. For the whole insurance thing to work you need people who don't use the system to pay for people who need the system. Then if you don't pay for the system, the people who USE it say "hey you could maybe get really hurt and its going to cost a lot, then you will possibly default on payment and that's why i'm paying such a high premium" But whats really happening is the people who are USING the system because they have poor health and need it, are the ones who are jacking up the premiums because their care far exceeds the amount of money THEY put in. But now THEY are the ones who get mad when you don't get a policy and pay for THEM because of a made up scenario where you default on your payments and it results in their premiums being jacked up. When in reality, the people who are using the system are the ones who make their own premiums go up.
> The industry NEEDS people like me in it to pay for people like you. I don't need to pay for you, so I don't. Worry about yourself, and pay your own way.
> 
> I'm not going to go join a gang for protection, I can fight myself, even if the fight is harder. An insurance company only makes money on those who don't need it. Crazy huh..


Who do you think pays for someones healthcare if they can't afford the out of pocket expenses and don't have insurance? By not spreading the risk through an insurance policy you are placing the burden of payment squarely on the shoulders of the taxpayer should you require healthcare that you cannot pay out of pocket.


----------



## SaltyCowboy (Feb 25, 2012)

50 million americans are on Food Stamps.

49 percent of Americans are on some type of Gubberment Assistance that they think is free money and i guess it is free for the freeloaders that take it and have come to think it's their god given right. 

But wait it's not Gubberment assistance, it's the Working People, the Business People, the people that actually pay the tax money.

Gimeecrats and politicians give me a break already, stop stealing from the people that are the backbone of this country, the load is getting heavy, the tax payers are getting fed up.


----------



## boom! (Jul 10, 2004)

Game-Over said:


> Who do you think pays for someones healthcare if they can't afford the out of pocket expenses and don't have insurance? By not spreading the risk through an insurance policy you are placing the burden of payment squarely on the shoulders of the taxpayer should you require healthcare that you cannot pay out of pocket.


Yeah, it's all set up to protect the taxpayers.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

YakSerious said:


> poppadawg, I'm Caucasian, I have a job, pay taxes, am here legally because I was born here, and you are probably living off my SS money I've been pumping in....it is my RIGHT to do as I please. So as far as I'm concerned you don't believe in Freedom. You are all mostly socialists, so I can now see where Obama got all of his votes. I am a constitutionalist, I believe in Freedom, If you need healthcare pay for it because for some reason or another I don't.


 Not hardly Jr. I have and will continue to pay way more than I will ever get out of it. They suck it out of me all year then hit me again April 1. You are whats wrong with the system. There 10's of thousands of people just like you in emergency rooms everyday that were never going to get sick or hurt. Creating a huge strain on the health care system that people such as myself pay for through healthcare insurance and out of pocket expense. You think its free? And you have the balls to call the people that expect a person to pay their own way a socialist? Really? Do you know what that term means? I think the only thing you truely covet about freedom is the free part


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

See guys, if I were raised in the old days like ya'll........ in a different time, when health insurance was reasonable, and the economy was booming, and there was free-love to be had disease free, bay systems pristine and untouched with limits of 25-27 inch trout uncommon on a day of catching 250 fish, the world to be discovered and gas was barely the price of a stick of chewing gum. I'd have lived the good life, with the opportunity to buy land at a fraction of the cost of what it is today. Living in a prosperous time where topics such as "keeping out the illegals", and "government mandated healthcare" where not even to be thought of. As you set up for your retirement you watched a change in government, your health, the people around you. You started noticing that many people are now taking advantage of the system, prices of everything start going up, you even notice the government throwing hard earned taxpayer money away at frivolous affairs. YOU now see your savings account being worth a fraction of what it should have been after taxes have been raised and health cost gone up. But at this point you are already older, stable from decades of savings, you need the healthcare in your age so you justify the cost. But as everything has gone to heck around you, you were the one living and let this happen. Times were so good that you were oblivious to what you were letting happen in your country. You really grew old with the times, so comfortable in fact that you have lost control of your country. You are now bickering with a 33 year old who is still green to the world about how he won't pay into an eff'ed up system. You fail to realize that maybe he has learned from your mistakes. Maybe if the system is jacked up, and he doesn't want to feed the beast that has been let out of control, maybe he has learned from his elders mistakes. Maybe, that "kid" still has the mindset that is needed to get this country from bleeding itself dry. Maybe if everybody could think like that "kid" we wouldn't be where we are now. Maybe that "kid" isn't going to jump in a poo-nado just because everyone else is basking in the sheet-storm


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

poppadawg said:


> Not hardly Jr. I have and will continue to pay way more than I will ever get out of it. They suck it out of me all year then hit me again April 1. You are whats wrong with the system. There 10's of thousands of people just like you in emergency rooms everyday that were never going to get sick or hurt. Creating a huge strain on the health care system that people such as myself pay for through healthcare insurance and out of pocket expense. You think its free? And you have the balls to call the people that expect a person to pay their own way a socialist? Really? Do you know what that term means? I think the only thing you truely covet about freedom is the free part


Pappadog, just remember, you can't fix stupid. Yak has the same problem as a lot of youngsters. A sense of entitlement. We have supported the system for all of our lives and yet we are the freeloaders. When I turn 65 I will get something back that I have put in for years, will I get it all back, I doubt it. People like Yak think that nothing could ever happen to them, I don't need it, never will need it. bla, bla bla, bla, bla. All they have to do is go to a hospital and look in the rooms and they will be surprised at how many young people there are there.

A good friend of our son, at the ripe old age of 42 had a stroke and will never work again. My wife is a tech in the IC ward at one of the smaller branches of Methodist Hospital in Dallas. She tells me all to often of the young people that are in intensive care and may or may not get out, and if they do, they may never work again. Guess who will be picking up the tab for some of those young people? Yet it can never happen, right? Some people just don't get it. Hopefully they will never have to face a situation like that, but to say it would never happen is idiotic.

It is really funny how stupid my step sons thought their mother and I were when they were younger. As they began to approach 40, they decided that we were much smarter than they originally thought. It is amazing what experience can do.

Bottom line is someone is going to pay for it. Yak, if you really wanted not to be a part of the problem, either get a job that supplies you insurance, or pay for it yourself. The way things stand now, is you expect for us to do so if something bad happens to you.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

Yak, I'm going to side with the ACA supporters on this one. While I think it is your right to be irresponsible, I think you're a moran to not at least carry catastrophic coverage. Forget the taxpayer, forget the other people whose insurance premiums may or may not be higher because of you...think of the risk, as small as you might perceive, that you're putting your family under.

While I have a note now on my new house, my previous one was completely paid off. Guess what? I still carried fire insurance on it. Chances that my house would burn down? Pretty slim. Was I _required _to have this policy anymore? No. But the premiums I paid to push that catastrophic risk onto the insurer were worth it.

Likewise, I own some acreage and purchased liability insurance for it. Chances that some idiot wanders onto my property, hurts themselves, then sues me? Slim to none. Was I _required _to buy it? No. But again, insuring against that catastrophe is more than worth the premium.

I also have a term life policy. Chances that I die in my 30s? Statistically small, but the risk of my family being burdened financially due to losing my wages was enough to make me pay the premium to the insurer.

The cars? They're paid off, so we're not required to carry comp/coll. If we wreck one of them, we can take care of a replacement ourselves. Would it suck? Sure, but we decided to carry liability only with the cars. Why? Because that is actually a risk we can take on.

What your argument should really be is that, being young and healthy, I don't need all the terms required under the ACA for my plan. I should be able to not only choose whether to have insurance, but I should be able to choose what level of insurance is right for me, just like I due for my maximum liability coverage (liability on acreage and autos) or the insured amount against loss (home owners policy and term life).

That's not how the ACA works. It's a one size fits all plan that the law foists upon you. There is no longer an option for "catastrophic only" coverage, or a variety of other options. It is "you must be insurance that we think is right for you".


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*The middle class: employees vs the self-employed*

Part of the trouble having a reasonable conversation is that a lot of middle class folks with jobs have a different "nanny". Their fortune 500 company handles all the details and pays for most of their family's health insurance bill. They have no clue what the premiums are. All they notice is their deductible and co pay. Everything is great IF they don't lose that job! Now some are getting a reality check.  And some companies are rethinking the whole thing (with or without the ACA being a factor) so their employees are not getting the same low deductible or copay as before.

As a self employed "professional" for the last 30 plus years I have always had to jack with this health insurance issue on my own. Every month I personally pay my actual monthly premium. My self-employed wife does the same. Welcome to our world. hwell:


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

YakSerious said:


> See guys, if I were raised in the old days like ya'll........ in a different time, when health insurance was reasonable, and the economy was booming, and there was free-love to be had disease free, bay systems pristine and untouched with limits of 25-27 inch trout uncommon on a day of catching 250 fish, the world to be discovered and gas was barely the price of a stick of chewing gum. I'd have lived the good life, with the opportunity to buy land at a fraction of the cost of what it is today. Living in a prosperous time where topics such as "keeping out the illegals", and "government mandated healthcare" where not even to be thought of. As you set up for your retirement you watched a change in government, your health, the people around you. You started noticing that many people are now taking advantage of the system, prices of everything start going up, you even notice the government throwing hard earned taxpayer money away at frivolous affairs. YOU now see your savings account being worth a fraction of what it should have been after taxes have been raised and health cost gone up. But at this point you are already older, stable from decades of savings, you need the healthcare in your age so you justify the cost. But as everything has gone to heck around you, you were the one living and let this happen. Times were so good that you were oblivious to what you were letting happen in your country. You really grew old with the times, so comfortable in fact that you have lost control of your country. You are now bickering with a 33 year old who is still green to the world about how he won't pay into an eff'ed up system. You fail to realize that maybe he has learned from your mistakes. Maybe if the system is jacked up, and he doesn't want to feed the beast that has been let out of control, maybe he has learned from his elders mistakes. Maybe, that "kid" still has the mindset that is needed to get this country from bleeding itself dry. Maybe if everybody could think like that "kid" we wouldn't be where we are now. Maybe that "kid" isn't going to jump in a poo-nado just because everyone else is basking in the sheet-storm


You really are clueless. This is the greatest country that ever existed. Yes I pay a buttload in taxes but I live like a friggin king and am **** thankfull I live where I do. Think for a sec. If nobody paid healthcare insurance what kind of HC system do you suppose we would have? Think Mexico. Less than Mexico. Who do you think trains the best mexican doctors? Do you think anyonme but the wealthiest actually gets heathcare? The problem is you enjoy all the fruits, but fail to recognize your responsibilty to make sure you are not a leech on society. You are not the answer, you are the problem.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

Johnboat said:


> Part of the trouble having a reasonable conversation is that a lot of middle class folks with jobs have a different "nanny". Their fortune 500 company handles all the details and pays for most of their family's health insurance bill. They have no clue what the premiums are. All they notice is their deductible and co pay. Now some are getting a reality check. And some companies are rethinking the whole thing (with or without the ACA being a factor) so their employees are not getting the same low deductible or copay as before.
> 
> As a self employed "professional" for the last 30 plus years I have always had to jack with this health insurance issue on my own. Every month I personally pay my actual monthly premium. My self-employed wife does the same. Welcome to our world


And all that the ACA is doing is replacing one nanny with another. The whole premise of forcing you onto healthcare.gov was to ensure you got your subsidy so as not to notice the dramatic rate increase and the fore, once again, have no clue what the true cost is.

Don't know if I'm the one you're welcoming to your world, but I've been doing the same since 2005. It's this reason that I think the ACA is so jacked up; I'm seeing it's real affect on my family right now.

The reality check is being forced to have a nanny at all (and pay for her to boot!)


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Here's where Republicans are wrong and now paying the political price*

Republicans (well at least today's most conservative, tea party, CNBC, Fox types Larry Kudlow, Meechelle Cabruso Carrera and other dummy Republicans anyway) have been asleep at the wheel when they have been in power. Their desperate mantra that government should stay the heck out of the way and the free market will take care of everything has failed in several areas, especially the following:

1. Healthcare policy.
2. Education policy.
3. Environmental policy.
4. Energy policy.

So the shirt hits the fan and Democrats step into the vacuum. And maybe Democrats who are more liberal than needed.

What we need are moderates. We need reasonable men and women who listen more than they blab. THAT is what is hard to find in government today.

My fantasy: I will wake up and Jon Huntsman, Jr. (R) is the President and Paul Sadler (D) is the freshman Senator from Texas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Huntsman,_Jr.


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

goatcheese, obviously i'm not the "moran" here  My argument is not what you want my argument, or think my argument should be. Everybody is praising insurance, and in general insurance is a good idea, but in reality its the actual insurance companies that are making the healthcare premiums go up. There is no competitive market that exists in the healthcare world. You pay health insurance with a lot of other people, the bill is super high, the insurance companies pay the high bill because they are charging so much, and there is never any market correction that takes place. It shields competition in the healthcare industry. - and I simply don't want to be forced into this system that I disagree with. 

And poppadawg, i'm enjoying none of your fruits buddy, none of em


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

shaggydog said:


> I hope you never have a serious disease or injury. If you were to have a stroke, contract cancer, have a heart attack, or have a serious car wreck, *you may be looking at hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of care or treatment.* Maybe you can pay out that kind of money if you do not have insurance, I know I could not afford it.
> 
> So when you are unable to pay, guess who does, we all do. You, sir, are the problem. You probably do not carry car insurance also.


I'll pay them $50 a month till I get it paid off.....


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

Yak, "moran" is an intentional joke, though I do appreciate that you're watching over my spelling for me. It comes from this guy who I don't believe used it intentionally.










:wink:

And JB, while I know you just love gov't, the free market is doing a pretty bang up job when it comes to energy.


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

thought it was to "soften the blow" ....lol goatcheese , say what you mean the first time


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*FIFY*



goatchze said:


> And JB, while I know you just love gov't, the free market UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA is doing a pretty bang up job when it comes to energy.


You make my point sort of. Romney and the Republicans harped and harped on leasing Federal lands. All the while, under that evil O, the biggest finds in energy were being drilled and produced in shale formations.

That commie Boone Pickens wants some Government policy and incentives in favor of infrastructure, electric generation, vehicles etc using natural gas.

Current popular conservative thinking is that Government should not be picking winners and losers. Just let the market decide. That is BS in energy policy. We need to elect the smartest people who can pick the real winners based not on lobbyists but on common sense, forward thinking and the best interests of the country. We need to de-incentive burning food (corn) for fuel and give incentives to burn abundant, domestic nat gas. And for God's sake, lets not waste this American shale oil and nat gas advantage by letting the free market export our domestically produced oil and gas overseas.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

Johnboat said:


> You make my point sort of. Romney and the Republicans harped and harped on leasing Federal lands. All the while, under that evil O, the biggest finds in energy were being drilled and produced in shale formations.
> 
> That commie Boone Pickens wants some Government policy and incentives in favor of infrastructure, electric generation, vehicles etc using natural gas.
> 
> Current popular conservative thinking is that Government should not be picking winners and losers. Just let the market decide. That is BS in energy policy. We need to elect the smartest people who can pick the real winners based not on lobbyists but on common sense, forward thinking and the best interests of the country. We need to de-incentive burning food (corn) for fuel and give incentives to burn abundant, domestic nat gas. And for god sake, lets not waste this American nat gas advantage by letting the free market ship it overseas.


That's a load of drivel, but a different discussion than this thread.

But here, I fixed it back.



goatchze said:


> And JB, while I know you just love gov't, the free market IN SPITE OF PRESIDENT OBAMA is doing a pretty bang up job when it comes to energy.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

YakSerious said:


> And poppadawg, i'm enjoying none of your fruits buddy, none of em


 Well then son you should put forth a little more effort, cuz even a loser can live like a king in this fine country. Maybe if you were a little more responsible you could get you some of it. I can tell ya one thing for sure, it taste glorious.


----------



## SaltyCowboy (Feb 25, 2012)

Good or bad depending on how you look at it,

Todays medical system is a racket sustained by the fear of death.


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

poppadawg, I said I am reaping no benefit from anything you have done in the healthcare market (your pay-in). That's what I meant by "your fruits".:walkingsm If you want the government meddling in everything you do by all means bend over. Just remember that our government does not have the Midas touch that you seem to visualize. hwell:


----------



## Gator gar (Sep 21, 2007)

SaltyCowboy said:


> Good or bad depending on how you look at it,
> 
> Todays medical system is a racket sustained by the fear of death.


Yep and I am 48 years old and have lived a great life. If I die tomorrow, I didn't leave anything I wanted to do, undone. I ain't wanting to die, so after the first, I'm taking a proactive approach and I'm gonna start juicing. Stay healthy my friends.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

YakSerious said:


> poppadawg, I said I am reaping no benefit from anything you have done in the healthcare market (your pay-in). That's what I meant by "your fruits".:walkingsm If you want the government meddling in everything you do by all means bend over. Just remember that our government does not have the Midas touch that you seem to visualize. hwell:


.

Govt doesnt have anything to do with it. You are a grown *** man. You need to take responsibility for yourself. Catastrophic insurance is cheap. Dont be a worthless dedbeat. If you mangled tomorrow, who pays? Your mommy? You going to force that on your loved ones? Grow up and take care of business


----------



## H2 (Jan 11, 2005)

RLwhaler said:


> Spud, U/C was "gravy" to capture the lower hanging fruits 5-6 years ago.
> Free standing E/R is choking the life out of them.
> 
> There's a BIG difference between nursing staff and MD. staff!


This is true.

I was at the ZT Wealth gala last Saturday and the speakers (Dr.'s and investment bankers) did not have any thing to share except the downside to the ACA. One of ZT's holdings is Altus which owns and operates a variety of healthcare facilities including freestanding E/R's , most that I spoke with did not see any upside for their operations with the exception of their hospice developments.LOL


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

YakSerious said:


> ITS A CRIMINAL ACT OF THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE HEALTHCARE ON ITS CITIZENS. THERE IS NO TWO WAYS AROUND THIS. IF YOU ARE A CONSTITUTIONALIST, AND BELIEVE IN WHAT OUR FOREFATHERS HAVE LAID OUT FOR US, YOU WILL REALIZE THIS IS NOT GOOD. ITS A SLIPPERY SLOPE, YOU LET THE GOVERNMENT MAKE YOU DO THIS ONE THING AND IT JUST HELPS THEM GAIN EXPERIENCE IN DOING THE NEXT FORCED AGENDA. NOT EVERYBODY CONFORMS TO THE STANDARD AMERICAN DIET OF FAST FOOD, CANNED FOOD, FROZEN FOOD, MASSIVE SUGAR COSUMPTION, LAZINESS. THEY PICKED A REAL NICE TOPIC TO BEND YOU OVER ON, HEALTH, BECAUSE IT HITS HOME. BUT GUESS WHAT, USE YOUR BRAIN AND UNDERSTAND THEY ARE TRYING TO PREY ON WEAK MINDS. YES, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS WHO WILL NOW GET COVERAGE, BUT IT SHOULDN'T COME AT THE EXPENSE OF YOUR NEIGHBOR. THATS A PROBLEM THAT SHOULD BE ERRADICATED BY A DIFFERENT METHOD. WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE ON FOODSTAMP, GOV ASSISTANCE, UNEMPLOYEMENT, THEN EVER BEFORE AND OBVIOUSLY THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO PRAISE THE SYSTEM.
> You can penalize me for me refusing to participate in the health insurance racket, I don't care. I haven't needed insurance because if I have to go the doctor (once in 15 years) I will just pay cash. You can look at it like this : 15 years, 180 months of coverage I've saved, at $200/month that's $36,000 I've kept in my pocket for the ONE $500 visit where I had to get 5 staples in my head, and was way OVERCHARGED for a 20 minute visit. You are crazy in the head if you think I'm going to pay hundreds of dollars a month for insurance, then when I need care i'm going to be forced to have roughly a $5,000 deductible. Chances are I won't ever have a visit over $5,000, so I will just be paying cash like I have in the past. So tell me why I want to just pee away hundreds of dollars a month.


I don't know what to say..So what happens when you need 500 stitches in your hard head. Who's going to pay for that along with the MRI, CT, possible rehab, or any other choice of conditions an insured person wouldn't have to stress over?


----------



## YakSerious (Jun 21, 2013)

How did people ever survive before insurance ?


----------



## fishingcacher (Mar 29, 2008)

YakSerious said:


> How did people ever survive before insurance ?


They paid their doctor with eggs and vegetables.


----------



## 47741 (Jan 5, 2010)

To all you 'must have insurance' goons-

You do realise that a catastrophic policy is not the ACA. You do realize that most people never need "full health insurance" as in the ACA. Maybe some end of life care, etc. You can survive and make more money by not paying monthly premiums for MOST families.

I am not sure if you can get a catastrophic any more thanks to ACA.

And AGAIN- IF YOU WANT EVERYONE TO HAVE INSURANCE, YOU PONY UP THE BILL. 

We've survived for millennia without health insurance. Why the crisis now? Use some critical thinking skills.

Never once have you walked into an ER and not been served. I've walked in without insurance and paid cash for services rendered. I've gone to doctors PRN and paid cash for services rendered. Yes, services were 4x the cost of copay, but I chose what I needed, I chose who I saw, I did pay 400/month for nonsense coverage that allows for $25 dollar doctor visits and $5 dollar prescriptions.


----------



## T_rout (Jul 25, 2013)

A majority of you are commenting about catastrophic events and accidents that may require 100s of thousands of dollars. We do not need to pay $300-$700 a month for total coverage. It should be your choice to have only major medical coverage if you are worried about accidents and other major medical expenses. You get in a car crash you should be smart enough to have a decent car insurance policy that will help. Healthy young people do not need premium coverage, but somebody has to pay for all the losers who don't pay for anything in life because they don't feel the need to be a productive citizen. If this insurance **** is such a good deal for us then why are the people who implemented it not accountable to help pay for it?!?


----------



## RLwhaler (Sep 10, 2005)

H2 said:


> This is true.
> 
> I was at the ZT Wealth gala last Saturday and the speakers (Dr.'s and investment bankers) did not have any thing to share except the downside to the ACA. One of ZT's holdings is Altus which owns and operates a variety of healthcare facilities including freestanding E/R's , most that I spoke with did not see any upside for their operations with the exception of their hospice developments.LOL


LOL! Yes Sir...VERY familiar with Altus group.Free standing ER WILL come to an end..In fact,some have already seen a great deal on slow/low reimbursment rate.My cousin owns three! Stupid girl! We called that the "fad phase",..As you know,fad will fade out.Utilizing the 30 miles law billing under a Hospital provider numbers is just too much gamble.Insurance comp. are aware of this.there's an old boy(physician) out in the Spring/Woodlands area that in court as we speak in the tone of 28 Mill.with Aetna.:headknock


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

SaltyTX said:


> To all you 'must have insurance' goons-
> 
> You do realise that a catastrophic policy is not the ACA. You do realize that most people never need "full health insurance" as in the ACA. Maybe some end of life care, etc. You can survive and make more money by not paying monthly premiums for MOST families.
> 
> ...


When you need it you need it. Just because you haven't needed something catastrophic yet does not mean you never will. Accidents happen, we never know when or where. Without insurance who pays?


----------



## TheSamarai (Jan 20, 2005)

its ironic, we buy insurance to cover everything in our lives; ie car, boat, house, life, yet we we start talking about something that really matters, like health, then the opinion changes. Just like every other forms of insurance, a certain subgroup always ends up sudsidizing another group. Thats the way insurance works.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*The "train wreck" analogy*

If there is a Republican who hasn't been televised saying "Obamacare is a train wreck" I don't know who that could be.

But, I actually like that analogy. We have had a couple of real train wrecks in the news this year, sadly. But what happens after a train wreck? Do you tear out the rails, demolish the stations, junk the locomotives and rail cars? Heck no. YOU FIX THE PROBLEMS AND QUICKLY RE-ESTABLISH RAIL SERVICE. So if Obamacare is a "train wreck" the first few months in, FIX IT.

Furthering the analogy, lets look at the prior insurance company run system: That was like a total slow meltdown happening to the entire rail system. A long term situation where all the rails were loose and rusty,locomotives needing repair, rail tariffs were getting so high that only the rich and subsidized could afford to use the system. European countries with super fast efficient rail systems laughed at us. People whose companies gave them free rail service as an employee benefit never realized the true cost. Democrats called for reform and Republicans said "leave it to the RR companies and free market will sort it out".

Its only an analogy, not a perfect fit to the facts. But if Republicans want to keep using it, it works for me.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

shaggydog said:


> When you need it you need it. Just because you haven't needed something catastrophic yet does not mean you never will. Accidents happen, we never know when or where. Without insurance who pays?


That's correct shaggy. But going back to Salty, Trout, and my earlier point:

_You can no longer purchase "catastrophic" coverage. _ The ACA dictates to you what insurance is best for you, whether you're 27 and healthy or a 58 year old smoker with diabetes. It requires that you purchase coverage that does not make sense to you as an individual.

Again, it's simply that the ACA requires that you buy insurance. That's argument/problem 1. Problem 2 is that it says exactly what insurance you must buy.

If the ACA simply said you needed coverage for the events you guys keep throwing out there as "examples", it would be a completely different discussion.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Lots of plans to choose from*



goatchze said:


> The ACA dictates to you what insurance is best for you. Again, it's simply that the ACA requires that you buy insurance. That's argument/problem 1. Problem 2 is that it says exactly what insurance you must buy.


Hey goatchze, I have actually had to buy in the new system effective 1/1/14. Already done. I went through a private insurance exchange set up by my profession. ACA is not a one size fits all set up. There are (I think this is right) 3 bronze, 3 silver, 3 gold and 3 platinum ACA compliant policies. The lowest has the highest deductible and co pay and you have to have approved plan doctors. The highest is pretty darn Cadillac. Its your choice (and way more easy to understand and compare choices than I remember having before under pre ACA insurance).


----------



## MikeV (Jun 5, 2006)

TheSamarai said:


> its ironic, we buy insurance to cover everything in our lives; ie car, boat, house, life, yet we we start talking about something that really matters, like health, then the opinion changes. Just like every other forms of insurance, a certain subgroup always ends up sudsidizing another group. Thats the way insurance works.


For those who do not buy life insurance, or boat insurance, how do the rest of us subsidize their not purchasing? If people were FORCED to buy them, and some people given credits or subsidies due to their level of income, then you would be correct in comparing them to health insurance. As it is in the real world though, not so much.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

Johnboat said:


> Hey goatchze, I have actually had to buy in the new system effective 1/1/14. Already done. I went through a private insurance exchange set up by my profession. ACA is not a one size fits all set up. There are (I think this is right) 3 bronze, 3 silver, 3 gold and 3 platinum ACA compliant policies. The lowest has the highest deductible and co pay and you have to have approved plan doctors. The highest is pretty darn Cadillac. Its your choice (and way more easy to understand and compare choices than I remember having before under pre ACA insurance).


JB, I've looked into it as well and have even <gasp> logged into the website. I'm using the 12 month loop hole until next December when I'll have the "marketplace" foisted on me with a vengeance, and my costs will double.

If I hand you three apples, one red, one green, and one yellow, and tell you to choose from these...

..you're still choosing an apple.

What the ACA offers you is a lot of "choices" of the same thing. There is absolutely no doubt that the ACA has limited your choices. It was designed to do this very thing.

And yes, the ACA is a once size fits all system when it comes to the "Essential Benefits". Should a person who is male and single really care, for example, whether he had maternity coverage? Would a female in her late 20s really care whether an annual colonoscopy required coinsurance or was covered 100%?


----------



## boom! (Jul 10, 2004)

I find it laughable that the savior to the health industry is a government that can't build a working website for a billion dollars. This is the best we've got?


----------



## TheSamarai (Jan 20, 2005)

if our policy is such that you wont get treatment if u dont have insurance or the money to pay for medical services, then yes I agree u cant be forced to buy insurance, but clearly that is not our policy. we need to either change the policy of no money, no treatment or we collectively have to have everyone pay into the pool.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*I am a lot older than you and my prior choices were nil*



goatchze said:


> JB, I've looked into it as well and have even <gasp> logged into the website. I'm using the 12 month loop hole until next December when I'll have the "marketplace" foisted on me with a vengeance, and my costs will double.
> 
> If I hand you three apples, one red, one green, and one yellow, and tell you to choose from these...
> 
> ...


This is where there is a real difference and this difference probably would have caught you later in life too. I was locked into an expensive professional group plan that had to take me. I have a blood test number that my physician is OK with, but that precluded me finding cheaper insurance before, even with a letter from him. I have always had a high deductible. I have never had any sort of major illness or claim. I am not overweight, no tobacco use, and very active, even moderately athletic. So, yes to me I was like a kid at a candy store with the new choices, the no preexisting condition, the no lifetime cap. Yes I do in fact pay a price that is way higher than you will due to our age difference because age is still a factor in setting the premium. I hope yours doesn't double for the compliant coverage. Maybe you will find out that its not that drastic. Maybe your prior plan was not as good as you think. Anyway, good luck.:brew2:


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

JB, if I switched to an ACA approved plan right now, comparable to what I currently have, my costs would double. I don't really expect that to change next year. For a while you could do a quick comparison on eHealthInsurance.com. Perhaps you still can now that Obama has changed the law a time or two.

I've already mentioned in this thread the current policy my family has. It has no lifetime max, is guaranteed renewable, and newborns are automatically accepted. It was just right for me and my family. It was what we needed and as good as we think it is (I looked at this issue thoroughly). We've had _and used_ this plan for a couple of years now.

It costs $330/mo.

The image you see below is for an ACA "approved" equivalent. It came from eHealthInsurance.com, but when I got on HealthCare.gov, the plan prices were the same, down to the penny, if you did not receive a subsidy. So if you wan to see what's out there, go to eHealth, not the government site.

The ACA equivalent costs twice as much with a higher deductible.

As far as age, it is still a factor, but not as big as it once was (due to the ACA). This is also a reason why costs are increasing for younger people and perhaps not so much for those in the older brackets. When I first signed up for Scott and White in 2005, my premium for this plan (with a much, much lower deductible at the time, and only for me) was $75. For my same policy, a 60 y/o was paying $600+ back then. Now, the spread can only be 3:1, which means that the younger person will be essentially over paying for the risk the insurer is assuming for that individual.

As for preexisting conditions, this was a major concern that the law tried to address. I'm sure that it plays a significant role in the cost increase we're seeing. My current insurance does still require medical underwriting, so the cost of including those with pre-existing conditions is excluded.


----------



## goatchze (Aug 1, 2006)

I couldn't find our $5000 deductible offered on the eHealth website, but here's the one for a $1,500 deductible. As you can imagine, tripling the deductible significantly reduces the premium.

Even this plan is cheaper than the ACA plan.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Understood*

Goatchze:

I agree with your last posts. Apparently the government is making younger pay more than before and older less than before. Before I was paying Aetna $1,330.00 per month just for me with a $2,500 deductible, not even including my wife who has her own plan. Now I am half that and yes, much younger wife  is paying more (but not double).

In my eyes, your prior $330 per month for an entire family was unsustainable old system or new. Using a car insurance analogy, maybe young people were paying a rate like a car owner who never takes the car out of the garage and the older people were paying a rate like a driver who puts 60K miles every year. So, lots of young people said Hey I never drive so I won't buy insurance at all. Now they have to buy insurance. Maybe fair, maybe not. But when it comes to things like taxes, insurance, etc. there no such thing as fair. (check out the threads going on now and many before now about homeowners insurance and real estate tax appraisals)

Anyway, good luck to you and your family. Bottom line lets all stay healthy in 2014.


----------



## Tortuga (May 21, 2004)

I kinda long for the 'good old days'...

Kid gets sick..take him to Doc..Doc gives prescription...Reach in wallet...Give Doc $10.. take script to drug store..get meds..give druggist $5.. give meds to kid...kid gets well..

Momma comes up prego.. Go to OB/Gyn Doc...give him $300...good for nine monthly visits to Doc and hospital bills for birth...kid squirts out..momma 'recovers' in nice hospital room for a week...haul them both home...happy and healthy...

Kid breaks bone, etc...same routine..all is well...

Cash on the barrel head...

What am I missing here.???....LOL


----------



## RLwhaler (Sep 10, 2005)

boom! said:


> I find it laughable that the savior to the health industry is a government that can't build a working website for a billion dollars. This is the best we've got?


BOOM!! x2.

Here's an article that one of our managing partners wrote:

http://www.humanevents.com/2009/02/17/stimulating-nationalized-healthcare/#.Uq9MnP2t2Yg.facebook


----------



## 47741 (Jan 5, 2010)

Tortuga said:


> I kinda long for the 'good old days'...
> 
> Kid gets sick..take him to Doc..Doc gives prescription...Reach in wallet...Give Doc $10.. take script to drug store..get meds..give druggist $5.. give meds to kid...kid gets well..
> 
> ...


You are missing NOTHING. Except, how dare we ask people to pay for their own care. [sarcasm] I mean a $25 dollar co-pay for all services is legit! [/sarcasm]

You're right on. too bad more can't see it.


----------



## 47741 (Jan 5, 2010)

shaggydog said:


> When you need it you need it. Just because you haven't needed something catastrophic yet does not mean you never will. Accidents happen, we never know when or where. Without insurance who pays?


This where you are so wrong!

Who pays? The one who was in the accident (or a responsible party involved.) Period. End of story. Sell your possessions, mortgage your house, get a 2nd or even third job. It is possible, it is proper. It is _my choice_ to self insure or not self insure. It isn't up to YOU or the GOV'T to decide for me.

Somewhere along in society, we've made it 'okay' for someone to NOT to have to suffer. Poop happens and sometimes it hurts and is difficult. Some plan better and therefore come out better in the end. Some don't plan and strife forever. That's life.

This "everyone wins" mentality is the death of us. ACA is more of that and more "you're too inept" to handle yourself cradle to grave from the gov't.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

:fish:


SaltyTX said:


> This where you are so wrong!
> 
> Who pays? The one who was in the accident (or a responsible party involved.) Period. End of story. Sell your possessions, mortgage your house, get a 2nd or even third job. It is possible, it is proper. It is _my choice_ to self insure or not self insure. It isn't up to YOU or the GOV'T to decide for me.
> 
> ...


Those days like Tortuga's are long gone. Our health care is socialist by the very fact we wont let people just die cuz they dont have the money in their pocket. I hate leeches too. No ifea what the answer is, not a clue.


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

I'm missing something. Are you saying people should be left to die if they can't pay for healthcare?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

No. Thats the problem tho. If it was pay or die I dont think we would be having this problem. So whats the answer? How do you get jerkwads to pay their way? Without govt mandated bs? I have no earthly idea, and have no confidence in anybody elses


----------



## boom! (Jul 10, 2004)

Tortuga said:


> I kinda long for the 'good old days'...
> 
> Kid gets sick..take him to Doc..Doc gives prescription...Reach in wallet...Give Doc $10.. take script to drug store..get meds..give druggist $5.. give meds to kid...kid gets well..
> 
> ...


Ah, you're talking about _before_ there was health insurance......


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

poppadawg said:


> No. Thats the problem tho. If it was pay or die I dont think we would be having this problem. So whats the answer? How do you get jerkwads to pay their way? Without govt mandated bs? I have no earthly idea, and have no confidence in anybody elses


There is no answer I see other than more people having decent paying jobs so they can afford to buy insurance but I don't see that happening any time soon. Employers are doing their best do to more with less, as they should be but the bottom line is there is a population that is left out. Of course their are lots of people that will always want to take advantage of the system but we need to find a way to help those that aren't.


----------



## Goags (May 28, 2004)

boom! said:


> Ah, you're talking about _before_ there was health insurance......


And BEFORE there was out of control medical costs/malpractice insurance, etc...kid gets sick...take him to the doc...doc orders every test available...waits 3 days for results, and then writes a rx...reach in pocket to pay...have heart attack when see the bill. :wink:


----------



## T_rout (Jul 25, 2013)

boom! said:


> I find it laughable that the savior to the health industry is a government that can't build a working website for a billion dollars. This is the best we've got?


Look at the postal service!! They control the mail and how much it costs to send mail. Yet they went under and are still skating on thin ice!! Social security is another one! Anything run by our government is due to fail!! They are absolute idiots!!


----------



## terryguidry (Jun 6, 2011)

*17.25*

every 17.25 minutes there is a flight leaving this country, don't like it here, good luck at your next home.

oh, by the way, if you get on the net to whine and complain at your next stop you may get the ****e beat out of you by the gistopo.

love it or leave it beaches.


----------



## Goags (May 28, 2004)

terryguidry said:


> every 17.25 minutes there is a flight leaving this country, don't like it here, good luck at your next home.
> 
> oh, by the way, if you get on the net to whine and complain at your next stop you may get the ****e beat out of you by the gistopo.
> 
> love it or leave it beaches.


No where does it say I have to love this or leave it...I can always hope for change


----------



## 47741 (Jan 5, 2010)

Leo said:


> I'm missing something. Are you saying people should be left to die if they can't pay for healthcare?


Are you suggesting that people do die now, because of lack of emergency care?
Are you suggesting that the ACA prevents this problem? 
Are you suggesting that the ACA prevents this more than before?
Are you suggesting that the ACA WON'T let people die via rationed care?

Are you suggesting that everyone, regardless of abilities should have access to every option, at any cost, at any time in their life, if they can't afford it on their own?

Like it or not, ACA, or any other legislation cannot make everyone equal. That's just the facts, it may not jive with some pie-in-the-sky thoughts, but it is true. People may be CREATED equal, but some are worse off than others. If you personally, want to change that. Find, I applaud you- go donate your fruits to others. Don't force me to do so.

Here's a scenario for you: (well, 2). Curious about your responses.

One: A homeless person, on the streets for 30 years, addicted to alcohol and meth and has no ability to improve his situation. We find out he has lung cancer (for argument, let's say he went to the ER because he was hit by a car accidentally.) Do you want to spend 1 million to fix the cancer? If so, who pays, and why?

Two: Family of 4, 36k/year. Healthy, parents mid 30s, kids 8 and 10. Previous insurance, 460/month. Basic plan, includes doc visits, reasonable, but somewhat painful (say 10k/year) out of pocket max deductible. Everything is swell. now ACA- costs go up to 1500/mo and out of pocket is down to 8k/year. What do you tell them? Why is this better?

Last reminder- Nobody makes it out alive. Some go sooner than others, sad as it is. Money and socialism can't fix it.


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

I think your last sentence says it all for a lot of people . So who is supposed to pay for it in either of your scenarios? I never said anything about ACA, All I'm saying is there has to be a better way for those that are in need.


----------



## boom! (Jul 10, 2004)

Goags said:


> And BEFORE there was out of control medical costs/malpractice insurance, etc...kid gets sick...take him to the doc...doc orders every test available...waits 3 days for results, and then writes a rx...reach in pocket to pay...have heart attack when see the bill. :wink:


Yeah, exactly. When insurance companies got involved in the business it went to hail.


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

Actually what happened is the medical community came up with all of the tests and procedures that really help people but are so expensive, no one can afford them so now every wants them. We should ban new technology


----------



## Fishtexx (Jun 29, 2004)

Lawyer's and lawsuits didn't help either. Too many looking to get paid.


----------



## Goags (May 28, 2004)

Leo said:


> Actually what happened is the medical community came up with all of the tests and procedures that really help people but are so expensive, no one can afford them so now every wants them. We should ban new technology


NOT exactly, Leo. There IS some cover-my-*** tests done everyday! Not blaming the docs.


----------



## 47741 (Jan 5, 2010)

Leo said:


> Actually what happened is the medical community came up with all of the tests and procedures that really help people but are so expensive, no one can afford them so now every wants them. We should ban new technology


Everyone wants a Mercedes too, but can't afford it...


----------



## boom! (Jul 10, 2004)

Fishtexx said:


> Lawyer's and lawsuits didn't help either. Some idiot gets a million $$ for spilling hot coffee on her lap at a drive thru...too many people looking to get paid.


Yes sir, and another case of medical malpractice insurance companies settling out of court on every frivolous law suit brought to court.


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

SaltyTX said:


> Everyone wants a Mercedes too, but can't afford it...


Can't afford to live? You really feel that way?


----------



## 47741 (Jan 5, 2010)

Leo said:


> Can't afford to live? You really feel that way?


Stay on topic. Answer all my questions posed to you already, especially the 2 scenarios. Maybe you don't like the answers you have.


----------



## boom! (Jul 10, 2004)

Leo said:


> Can't afford to live?


Can't afford to live forever?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Whats the viable answer?


----------



## jesco (Jun 23, 2013)

AS an immigrant lucky enough to now be a proud American citizen, I wish to offer my .02(USD) for anyone who cares. Many people in my family back in Canada are eyeing developments in America regarding health care very closely. As proud as they are of their health care system, several of them have visited the U.S. for "elective" surgery that they would have waited for for YEARS (literally) back in Canada. The thought of America sliding eventually into a single payer system leaves them with no or few options for so called elective medical procedures. Beware gov't meddling in the private sector.


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

That is the topic. Healthcare is expensive, no question. My point is that unfortunately no one can afford to pay for anything other than routine care, and that's a stretch. Let's say your kid or grand kid was diagnosed with a very serious illness and couldn't afford insurance (cancer)?. What would you do if you couldn't afford to pay it for them?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

How come they cant afford insurance? What do u mean no one? Can they not afford or do they chose not to pay?


----------



## 47741 (Jan 5, 2010)

Leo said:


> That is the topic. Healthcare is expensive, no question. My point is that unfortunately no one can afford to pay for anything other than routine care, and that's a stretch. Let's say your kid or grand kid was diagnosed with a very serious illness and couldn't afford insurance (cancer)?. What would you do if you couldn't afford to pay it for them?


If you're not prepared to answer the scenarios, then how can you have a serious discussion about healthcare? You can't. You can't ignore the big stuff and make up fluff about people not surviving without going to the doctor.

People all over the world live without health care outside of emergency services (often limited and sometimes that of a witch doctor.) What makes us special? It plays right into the scenarios....

Man up, discuss the realities of the nonsense that is the ACA (and all of its variants)


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

SaltyTX said:


> Are you suggesting that people do die now, because of lack of emergency care? No but who pays for it?
> Are you suggesting that the ACA prevents this problem? Not at all
> Are you suggesting that the ACA prevents this more than before? No because the people the not going to buy into it
> Are you suggesting that the ACA WON'T let people die via rationed care? If they don't get coverage and choose not to get treatment for free by walking into an ER of course ACA can't help them
> ...


Hopefully I've answered some of your questions, but I doubt it.


----------



## RLwhaler (Sep 10, 2005)

jesco said:


> AS an immigrant lucky enough to now be a proud American citizen, I wish to offer my .02(USD) for anyone who cares. Many people in my family back in Canada are eyeing developments in America regarding health care very closely. As proud as they are of their health care system, several of them have visited the U.S. for "elective" surgery that they would have waited for for YEARS (literally) back in Canada. The thought of America sliding eventually into a single payer system leaves them with no or few options for so called elective medical procedures. Beware gov't meddling in the private sector.


RIGHT HERE^^^^^^^^^ WE are the VERY first facility to opened up in Montreal....Loving it!


----------



## K Man (Jun 21, 2012)

Health insurance is has not been affordable to most families bottom line. The ACA and it's crazy mandates has come with alarming increases. In 2001 when I first started selling insurance, a male 35 years of age with a wife and 2 children could purchase a decent plan with a $500 deductible for about $500 per month. The new ACA metallic plans that are being offered, this same silver plan ($2500 deductible) would run this family around $1000 in most areas in Texas. We have not even seen the worst part of this government fiasco.


----------

