View Full Version : Was nice while it lasted, maybe.....
gimmethesimplelife
11-10-14, 2:03pm
It looks like ObamaCare is going back to the Supreme Court and who knows how that is going to go.....I don't trust the Supreme Court personally to not overturn it and I wonder how the millions of people who have been able to get coverage with pre-existing conditions are going to take this. I would not be surprised to see people taking it to the streets as they figure out that human life is not worth health care in America, and I also think if ObamaCare is overturned, it is going to be harder to immigrate out of America legally as there will be more competition from other fed up people wanting out of America. I hope the Supreme Court has some common sense and does not overturn this law - it has it's flaws, I'm not going to deny that - but to yank away health care from people with pre-existing conditions at the snap of a finger - why would anyone have any loyalty towards or want to live in such a country?
In my perfect world, the law would stand but perhaps with some alterations.....This is what I dearly hope will happen. And I will also admit the law could use some fine tuning, yes indeed. Rob
You understand that the ACA is a *huge* piece of legislation, and will likely be challenged for this/the/the-other-thing for decades.
The Supreme Court isn't ruling on the whole enchilada, they won't "overturn" it. They may require some tweaks of the ACA if they discern that specific challenged bits are unconstitutional.
gimmethesimplelife
11-10-14, 2:30pm
You understand that the ACA is a *huge* piece of legislation, and will likely be challenged for this/the/the-other-thing for decades.
The Supreme Court isn't ruling on the whole enchilada, they won't "overturn" it. They may require some tweaks of the ACA if they discern that specific challenged bits are unconstitutional.it is a huge piece of legislation, I'll agree with you on that. I also think that maybe on this one I need to do more research - what is going around my neighborhood is that we are at risk of living in constant and continual fear 24/7 of getting sick and having our lives ruined by America. (debt forever for issues that would not cause this in any other developed country). It is true on this one I don't know all the details and I'm going to do more research before I continue to post on this one. Rob
As I understand it, if the Supreme Court takes up the case it will be limited to whether or not subsidies should be paid out to folks subscribed under the federal exchange. It really should be a no-brainer since the legislation clearly states that subsidies would only apply to people subscribed under state exchanges, however, the Supreme Court has already set precedent by allowing the individual mandate to be re-classified as a tax rather than a penalty, so, who knows...
Perhaps this wouldn't even be an issue if anyone had read it before they signed it.
iris lilies
11-10-14, 3:39pm
moderated by a moderator . :)
gimmethesimplelife
11-10-14, 3:59pm
Rob, you are not at risk here, do you understand that? Isn't that what's it's all about, Rob getting his? So relax.
The issue is people who are receiving ACA subsidies in states like mine that didn't expand Medicaid.IL, if I didn't know your posts over the years I have to admit I'd be offended by your post here. Please let me clarify - this is not all about Rob getting his and it never was. There are many more Robs out there than just myself (though I've been told before that when they made me they broke the mold, lol) - what I mean is that I am not the only person out there in an economic situation similar to my own. I worry about these people, too, especially since people on such an economic level make up the bulk of my social interactions these days.
What I am respectfully saying here is please understand it never was, isn't, and hopefully never will be all about Rob. Rob
Teacher Terry
11-10-14, 5:48pm
If people lose their subsidies they won't be able to afford the insurance. I hope this does not happen.
iris lilies
11-10-14, 6:20pm
If people lose their subsidies they won't be able to afford the insurance. I hope this does not happen.
It's true that many people think that they can't afford insurance, and that's certainly true for some of them. And then, for others, they would need to cut back on automobiles, cell phones, vacations, food buys, alcohol, etc in order to have money to pay insurance premiums. And in the case of my friends with their $350,000+ paid-for house in Mexico, they'd need to cut back on houses. Only those friends are not now buying ACA insurance because they think they cannot afford it and they want Medicaid, dammit! they do not plan to pay any penalty. But back to the topic--
Who knows, maybe good old high deductible insurance will become available again in the 34 states that didn't expand Medicare. If the mandate for employer and individual ACA compliant insurance is struck down, that will leave a market need for affordable insurance represented by high deductible plans, and insurance companies may offer them.
iris lilies
11-10-14, 6:22pm
IL, if I didn't know your posts over the years I have to admit I'd be offended by your post here. Please let me clarify - this is not all about Rob getting his and it never was. There are many more Robs out there than just myself (though I've been told before that when they made me they broke the mold, lol) - what I mean is that I am not the only person out there in an economic situation similar to my own. I worry about these people, too, especially since people on such an economic level make up the bulk of my social interactions these days.
What I am respectfully saying here is please understand it never was, isn't, and hopefully never will be all about Rob. Rob
ok, then, Rob and the people at his economic level, in the state of Arizona, are not affected. None of you need to worry.
ApatheticNoMore
11-10-14, 6:25pm
Lots of people can't afford the insurance now. You can't have insurance with several thousand dollar deductibles (many plans on the ACA are like that) given many people's income in this country. It's often not much better than no insurance if you can barely afford the premiums and certainly could never afford to use the insurance for anything serious.
It's true that many people think that they can't afford insurance, and that's certainly true for some of them. And then, for others, they would need to cut back on automobiles, cell phones, vacations, food buys, alcohol, etc in order to have money to pay insurance premiums.
on the other hand there's probably more evidence of the alcohol improving one's health (a single glass a day for one's heart :~) ) than there is of the U.S. medical industrial complex improving it.
"... on the other hand there's probably more evidence of the alcohol improving one's health (a single glass a day for one's heart :~) ) than there is of the U.S. medical industrial complex improving it."
Lol.
Someone said something that's been rattling around in my brain. "People can certainly more afford to go $6K into debt than several hundred thousand." Ok. So ... how about making medical deductible loans instead, loans that are guaranteed and perhaps subsidized or at least kept at reasonable rates, with gentle payment terms, like student loans. At least as an interim measure, it would ensure that people who aren't able to come up with $6K in magical savings don't wind up dead or bankrupt. It would give people incentive to take care of their health and avoid having that kind of debt, but not so much "incentive" they lived in terror of getting sick.
ETA: I don't love it and I would prefer a different model entirely, it's such a ridiculous disgrace we can't do better than some third world countries, but it seems like this gives everyone a little something.
awakenedsoul
11-10-14, 8:03pm
I receive subsidies through Covered California. If I get a show, my income will go up, and I'll pay three times what I pay now. (which is $120.00 a month.) That would be great, and easy for me to pay on a union salary. I am a person who could afford to buy health insurance without the subsidies. My house is paid off, and I am car free. That's made things much easier, financially. There was a time that I couldn't, but I was teaching ballet and yoga. My income was low, and I was driving all over creation teaching classes. Property taxes, home repairs, and car maintenance were a strain. Back then I purchased a catastrophic insurance policy, and that was enough. I would get that again if they offered it.
I finally got my bill from the hospital after my bicycle accident. It was for just over $1,000. I thought it would be much higher. I was in the ER for a few hours. I "refused treatment". I had my deductible set aside in savings. I think because I am technically unemployed, (living off savings, not retirement income,) I was billed far less than I expected.
iris lilies
11-10-14, 8:55pm
...
Perhaps this wouldn't even be an issue if anyone had read it before they signed it.
That's nice of you to pretend that the drafters of the bill just goofed up. They made an innocent mistake! or that's what they would like us all to believe.
I read Jonathan Gruber's words about the stupidity of the American public and his deliberate attempt to hide information as he wrote the bill. The lying liars who lie knew what they were doing, I am now convinced.
That's nice of you to pretend that the drafters of the bill just goofed up. They made an innocent mistake! or that's what they would like us all to believe.
I read Jonathan Gruber's words about the stupidity of the American public and his deliberate attempt to hide information as he wrote the bill. The lying liars who lie knew what they were doing, I am now convinced.
That's the kinder, gentler me showing through. In reality, it's very well known that the idea was to pressure the states to fall into line and the legislation was worded in ways to pressure them to do so. When it didn't work the only fall-back was to misrepresent their intentions and violate a very clearly documented portion of the law in order to pacify a specific demographic.
In my opinion, the Supremes have no choice but to invalidate the subsidies, otherwise the force/authority of law means nothing. Of course, pure democracy is nothing more than mob rule and a lot of our citizens could care less about the superiority of a republican form of government, which should ensure that laws mean what they say and say what they mean.
iris lilies
11-10-14, 9:34pm
That's the kinder, gentler me showing through. In reality, it's very well known that the idea was to pressure the states to fall into line and the legislation was worded in ways to pressure them to do so. When it didn't work the only fall-back was to misrepresent their intentions and violate a very clearly documented portion of the law in order to pacify a specific demographic.
In my opinion, the Supremes have no choice but to invalidate the subsidies, otherwise the force/authority of law means nothing. Of course, pure democracy is nothing more than mob rule and a lot of our citizens could care less about the superiority of a republican form of government, which should ensure that laws mean what they say and say what they mean.
Yep, it's hard to see how Justice Roberts could torque this one.
Rob, you are not at risk here, do you understand that? Isn't that what's it's all about, Rob getting his? So relax.
The issue is people who are receiving ACA subsidies in states like mine that didn't expand Medicaid.
Hmmm.....funny how some people can be rude/insulting and not have their posts removed.
iris lilies
11-11-14, 10:48am
Hmmm.....funny how some people can be rude/insulting and not have their posts removed.
Ok, you are right. I'll self moderate my previous post and remove it. This was not my finest hour. :)
I also think if ObamaCare is overturned, it is going to be harder to immigrate out of America legally as there will be more competition from other fed up people wanting out of America.
You may want to get started on your process now. Or maybe you have already done so? If so, where are you heading?
gimmethesimplelife
11-11-14, 12:56pm
It's true that many people think that they can't afford insurance, and that's certainly true for some of them. And then, for others, they would need to cut back on automobiles, cell phones, vacations, food buys, alcohol, etc in order to have money to pay insurance premiums. And in the case of my friends with their $350,000+ paid-for house in Mexico, they'd need to cut back on houses. Only those friends are not now buying ACA insurance because they think they cannot afford it and they want Medicaid, dammit! they do not plan to pay any penalty. But back to the topic--
Who knows, maybe good old high deductible insurance will become available again in the 34 states that didn't expand Medicare. If the mandate for employer and individual ACA compliant insurance is struck down, that will leave a market need for affordable insurance represented by high deductible plans, and insurance companies may offer them.That's all well and fine IL if insurance companies once again offer high deductible plans as the plans in ObamaCare have quite high thresholds before the insurance kicks in - but there is one large glaring problem with your idea here. What if pre-existing condition clauses once again were allowed? That would mean that horrible 24/7/365 fear of getting sick and fear of America due to insane mountains of debt that you would not face in any other developed country, if you couldn't get coverage due to a pre-existing condition and if you couldn't make a run for the border or fly off to much more sanely priced healthcare elsewhere. I'm all for high deductible plans PROVIDED that applicants are not victimized by a pre-existing conditions clause, and I don't trust corporate America not to get that clause back in high deductible policies.
As far as health care goes, I lack trust period though I will admit that that ACA has been good to yours truly. Nevertheless, I still go down to Mexico for a physical every year and will be going to Mexicali soon to have my ear wax removed - I see it as insurance to keep my health care contacts across the border current and up to date. To some on this board this may seem radical and they might not get it, to me it is common sense every day survival brought on by learned distrust of American health care and how it works.
Let's just hope that pre-existing condition clauses don't return - under that scenario, I do agree with you about high deductible insurance policies. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
11-11-14, 1:05pm
You may want to get started on your process now. Or maybe you have already done so? If so, where are you heading?I'm thinking Uruguay as my top choice, but I'm also considering Chile and to a lesser degree Ecuador. All have affordable healthcare and the first two the UN says are about equal to the US in corruption - meaning the stereotype of Latin American corruption doesn't apply to the first two. I could go on and on about Chile and Uruguay but I'll spare everyone that and just leave it at having answered your question. Rob
Rob - I like your synopsis of those 3 countries as related to corruption and healthcare. My son spent several months in Costa Rica and neighboring countries a few years ago. He often talks of going south again for awhile ...
gimmethesimplelife
11-11-14, 7:14pm
I just left yahoo.com news where there is a piece about ObamaCare unravelling and the gist of it seems to be that the ACA is in danger of falling apart. If anyone is interested, please to go yahoo.com news where the full story can be read. I feel so much strongly about this but yet on the other hand I also feel something in me dying. I can't read the future and I don't know what the future holds for the ACA but I really don't like myself that I allowed myself to hope human life could be worth health care in the United States. As I said in another thread, I should have known better and I'm holding myself to blame for having hope. At least I was able to get my gallbladder out and was able to find out why I was so tired all the time - thyroid issues - so it hasn't been a complete wash for me.
And I know this is a broken record but I'm close to Mexico so I have that option where many other people don't and for that I am EXCEEDINGLY lucky. But I can't help wondering how horrible this is for all the Robs out there - meaning people in my circumstances - who allowed themselves to believe and hope.
I also don't understand how expanded Medicaid could stand if the ACA does unravel or collapse or whatever verb you want to use. So it is my issue too - and even if expanded Medicaid were to stand if the ACA falls, that doesn't mean I don't feel for those above the income guidelines who can't get into expanded Medicaid or if they live in a state that did not expand - and then they can't access the exchanges as the exchanges may no longer exist.
I agree it remains to be seen what happens here but I'm not feeling any faith that basic human rights and human dignity will reign supreme here. I'm really losing faith big time.....amazing how in a period of less than one week the two things that I felt so good about and held such hope for the future for are threatened. Health care access and also same sex marriage - how either of these will play out is anyone's guess. I'm just not feeling good about the outcomes on either but I do believe health care is more threatened than same sex marriage.
i'm basically back to just going through the motions in life other than the fact that I'm seeing someone - which is nice and keeps me going. But other than that, just going through the motions. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
11-11-14, 7:17pm
Rob - I like your synopsis of those 3 countries as related to corruption and healthcare. My son spent several months in Costa Rica and neighboring countries a few years ago. He often talks of going south again for awhile ...My personal belief is that the future is going to be in countries other than Western Europe or Canada or the US or New Zealand or Australia.....going south takes some adjustment for people used to the Western/Developed way of doing things IMHO but the payoff is in some areas life is much saner - such as in work ethic not as intense, family meaning more, and health care being more sanely priced and more accessible. I think your son is smart to see the positives somewhere like Costa Rica, I really do. Certainly there are some downsides, nothing is ever perfect, but the tradeoffs seem worth it to me.
Thanks for your post, Tammy. Rob
Rob, what keeps you here (in the U.S.)?
gimmethesimplelife
11-11-14, 11:56pm
Rob, what keeps you here (in the U.S.)?Fair question, Reyes. One thing is that I need to have more money saved away in the credit union to make myself a more attractive candidate for immigration as I am far from the only American out there reaching these kinds of conclusions - something you are NOT going to hear much about on the media I'm afraid. To do so at this late date in my life - I'll be 48 on Saturday - I'm probably best off being self employed, and at the moment I am taking web design and development classes. I may never even use them to be honest, who knows, but I am learning more about computers and in a jam, I can be creative as hell. I'm hoping to take my moxie and turn it into some kind of online business that would make me a more attractive candidate for immigration as other countries can now be choosier than before. I also want to make sure my Mother is doing OK in her old age as she has sacrificed a great deal for me and I don't want her treated as many elderly in America are treated - that just doesn't work for me. No can do.
So there are a few reasons I am still here. Rob
History shows us the natural lifespan of empires. The west will eventually dim ... Hopefully as England has done as opposed to how Rome went down. I hope to live out my years in the USA. Emigration is hard. But I understand why it happens.
Whew! And here I was concerned that some of you might not be able to celebrate millions of your fellow Americans losing* their insurance due to some moral dilemma. Thank goodness morals are not really required in this! Celebrate away!
Now, finally basic health care can be what it should have been all along. A privilege, for those who can afford it. I mean, poor people don't get sick, do they? They eat a lot of rice and beans...grub around in the dirt. They must be as healthy as horses, and we don't offer subsidies for horse insurance. It is the same thing, isn't it?
(Oh, and by the way, don't look to us for help in being able to afford it cause we're not all about that living wage BS either)
As that great Ayn Rand follower and republican, Jesus said, "Screw the doomed. Suffer the little children, if they can't afford health insurance. Now bring me my guns so i can chase all these poor people of my lawn."
*See, now we can see what ACTUALLY losing your health care looks like, instead of just that phony republican whine 'I looost my health insurance" when in fact it was only that their policy had CHANGED. (not exactly the same thing is it, but it played well. I believe we were treated to a few performances of that...still playing, I believe)
iris lilies
11-12-14, 9:47pm
Whew! And here I was concerned that some of you might not be able to celebrate millions of your fellow Americans losing* their insurance due to some moral dilemma. Thank goodness morals are not really required in this! Celebrate away!
Now, finally basic health care can be what it should have been all along. A privilege, for those who can afford it. I mean, poor people don't get sick, do they? They eat a lot of rice and beans...grub around in the dirt. They must be as healthy as horses, and we don't offer subsidies for horse insurance. It is the same thing, isn't it?
(Oh, and by the way, don't look to us for help in being able to afford it cause we're not all about that living wage BS either)
As that great Ayn Rand follower and republican, Jesus said, "Screw the doomed. Suffer the little children, if they can't afford health insurance. Now bring me my guns so i can chase all these poor people of my lawn."
*See, now we can see what ACTUALLY losing your health care looks like, instead of just that phony republican whine 'I looost my health insurance" when in fact it was only that their policy had CHANGED. (not exactly the same thing is it, but it played well. I believe we were treated to a few performances of that...still playing, I believe)
peggy, it's not over until it's over.
If the ACA is such a great boon for this nation, and the Supreme Court overturns the section about subsidies in states without their own exchanges and other aspects of the bill fall because of that--you can blame your buddies for drafting poor legislation. And understand that that has been a major point of criticism against this ACA bill--it's just bad* legislation.
If the Democrats are so damned smart to know what's best for us, too bad they couldn't legislate it.
And if the Republicans overturn the entire thing via enough votes in the new Congress then they will be the Enemy of the State according to you and everyone will see how wholly bad they are, and they will be voted out at the next election.
Me, I can hardly wait for Hilary Clinton to enter the White House to be pitted against the Republican Congress in the ACA debates. We all remember how that last health initiative that Hilary championed when down. That pretty much killed her political career, for a while anyway.
*it is bloated, complex, it serves special interests to the Dems and PResident Obama, it's full of holes in logic and in thoroughness and it places undue burden on the states. Just to name a few problems.
gimmethesimplelife
11-12-14, 9:53pm
peggy, it's not over until it's over.
If the ACA is such a great boon for this nation, and the Supreme Court overturns the section about subsidies in states without their own exchanges and other aspects of the bill fall because of that--you can blame your buddies for drafting poor legislation. And understand that that has been a major point of criticism against this ACA bill--it's just bad* legislation.
If the Democrats are so damned smart to know what's best for us, too bad they couldn't legislate it.
And if the Republicans overturn the entire thing via enough votes in the new Congress then they will be the Enemy of the State according to you and everyone will see how wholly bad they are, and they will be voted out at the next election.
Me, I can hardly wait for Hilary Clinton to enter the White House to be pitted against the Republican Congress in the ACA debates. We all remember how that last health initiative that Hilary championed when down. That pretty much killed her political career, for a while anyway.
*it is bloated, complex, it serves special interests to the Dems and PResident Obama, it's full of holes in logic and in thoroughness and it places undue burden on the states. Just to name a few problems.IL, just curious, do you really think Hillary is going to win in 2016? I like her (probably no surprise to you) and I'd love to see her win but I don't think her path to winning the Presidency is going to be very smooth. Many people dislike her and she can be polarizing. Even myself that likes her can see that. Just curious why you think she might win? Rob
iris lilies
11-12-14, 10:04pm
IL, just curious, do you really think Hillary is going to win in 2016? I like her (probably no surprise to you) and I'd love to see her win but I don't think her path to winning the Presidency is going to be very smooth. Many people dislike her and she can be polarizing. Even myself that likes her can see that. Just curious why you think she might win? Rob
I'll bet money that Hil will win. She's a strong character and she's got magic Bill campagining for her, he is beloved. In her favor I say with sincerity, Hil is no idiot and she's a tough person and a tough campaigner. That's why she's taking her own sweet time to see if there is a groundswell of support for her because she knows how rigorous is the campaigning. I think she's not going to venture out until she is quite certain that she will win the Democratic nominee position.
The American public who don't like her will hold their nose and vote the Ticket, as always. It's the ticket that counts.
I'll bet money that Hil will win.Hell I'm not even sure she'll get the nomination. Most young Progressives (the current party base) are American Idol type voters, quick to get behind the the newest, ideologically sexy newcomer. That's how she lost it last time and I'd bet she'll lose it again to an Elizabeth Warren type, nothing sells better than class warfare.
iris lilies
11-12-14, 10:52pm
Hell I'm not even sure she'll get the nomination. Most young Progressives (the current party base) are American Idol type voters, quick to get behind the the newest, ideologically sexy newcomer. That's how she lost it last time and I'd bet she'll lose it again to an Elizabeth Warren type, nothing sells better than class warfare.
My gut instincts about politics are always wrong, so you are likely right. :)
As that great Ayn Rand follower and republican, Jesus said, "Screw the doomed. Suffer the little children, if they can't afford health insurance. Now bring me my guns so i can chase all these poor people off my lawn."
Ok that was a little over the top but damn, you made me laugh.
peggy, it's not over until it's over.
If the ACA is such a great boon for this nation, and the Supreme Court overturns the section about subsidies in states without their own exchanges and other aspects of the bill fall because of that--you can blame your buddies for drafting poor legislation. And understand that that has been a major point of criticism against this ACA bill--it's just bad* legislation.
If the Democrats are so damned smart to know what's best for us, too bad they couldn't legislate it.
And if the Republicans overturn the entire thing via enough votes in the new Congress then they will be the Enemy of the State according to you and everyone will see how wholly bad they are, and they will be voted out at the next election.
Me, I can hardly wait for Hilary Clinton to enter the White House to be pitted against the Republican Congress in the ACA debates. We all remember how that last health initiative that Hilary championed when down. That pretty much killed her political career, for a while anyway.
*it is bloated, complex, it serves special interests to the Dems and PResident Obama, it's full of holes in logic and in thoroughness and it places undue burden on the states. Just to name a few problems.
It is good legislation, and it HAS helped millions of Americans. It has saved tax payers by getting uninsured folks out of the emergency room (which we the people paid for) and on to insurance. Even with the subsidies, we the tax payers have saved. It has created thousands of jobs. And health care, which ALWAYS goes up in cost, has gone up at a much SLOWER rate since the start of Obamacare. And for those who have a bit of a problem with this concept, let's say bananas traditionally go up 10 cents each and every year, but because of the slow-it-down program, they go up only 5 cents, that is a good thing. It has been that way with health care costs. And anyone who tries to imply that your cost wouldn't go up under the old way is lying to you and playing you for a fool.
No, sadly, the mistake democrats made in crafting this legislation was to labor under the assumption that even republicans actually cared about their constituents, and would want to do the best for them. Their mistake was to believe the BS conservatives spout about caring for 'the people' and looking out for the little guy. Instead, like a bunch of petulant 5 year olds, (including our state legislature, IL) they refused to set up state exchanges, or expand Medicaid, although it was paid for. It was purely for spite. Meanwhile, our taxes are sent out to support other states medicaid/exchanges.
Now how does this help us? How does this help the people of our state? And if this is overturned, and millions of people in these 30 some odd states are suddenly ripped off health care, what do you think is going to happen? Taking away these subsidies will cause the whole thing to implode, because this stabs the heart of the act. And that's what republicans want. They want health care to be a privilege, cause in republican world it's every man for himself. If you can't afford it, you don't need it.
Frankly I'd like Elizabeth Warren to run. I like her and her ideas, but I think she is too soft. I think she would buy into the false notion that republicans really want to govern for the good of all, just like Obama. Hillary has walked in those woods for a long time now and can recognize poisonous snakes when she sees them.
It is good legislation, and it HAS helped millions of Americans. It has saved tax payers by getting uninsured folks out of the emergency room (which we the people paid for) and on to insurance. Even with the subsidies, we the tax payers have saved. It has created thousands of jobs. And health care, which ALWAYS goes up in cost, has gone up at a much SLOWER rate since the start of Obamacare. And for those who have a bit of a problem with this concept, let's say bananas traditionally go up 10 cents each and every year, but because of the slow-it-down program, they go up only 5 cents, that is a good thing. It has been that way with health care costs. And anyone who tries to imply that your cost wouldn't go up under the old way is lying to you and playing you for a fool.
No, sadly, the mistake democrats made in crafting this legislation was to labor under the assumption that even republicans actually cared about their constituents, and would want to do the best for them. Their mistake was to believe the BS conservatives spout about caring for 'the people' and looking out for the little guy. Instead, like a bunch of petulant 5 year olds, (including our state legislature, IL) they refused to set up state exchanges, or expand Medicaid, although it was paid for. It was purely for spite. Meanwhile, our taxes are sent out to support other states medicaid/exchanges.
Now how does this help us? How does this help the people of our state? And if this is overturned, and millions of people in these 30 some odd states are suddenly ripped off health care, what do you think is going to happen? Taking away these subsidies will cause the whole thing to implode, because this stabs the heart of the act. And that's what republicans want. They want health care to be a privilege, cause in republican world it's every man for himself. If you can't afford it, you don't need it.
Frankly I'd like Elizabeth Warren to run. I like her and her ideas, but I think she is too soft. I think she would buy into the false notion that republicans really want to govern for the good of all, just like Obama. Hillary has walked in those woods for a long time now and can recognize poisonous snakes when she sees them.
Damned Republicans! If they removed the yoke of government from our necks we'd probably just sit in the field and die, those evil bastards.
Teacher Terry
11-13-14, 8:09pm
IL, you are right that some people can afford insurance but choose to waste their $ on other things. But many, many people would have to choose between insurance, food, meds or housing. I have spent my entire life either working as a social worker or helping people with disabilities return to work & I can say that my experience has been that most people are not in their present situations through any fault of their own. Yes some are but most are not. For some reason there is such a skewed perception of people that require some form of assistance. I have seen people do all the right things ( work, save $ etc) and then lose it all to illness/accident/disability, etc. Working in these fields has always made me grateful that none of these things have happened to me. It has also really given me a compassion/empathy for circumstance people find themselves in often through no fault of their own.
iris lilies
11-13-14, 9:23pm
IL, you are right that some people can afford insurance but choose to waste their $ on other things. But many, many people would have to choose between insurance, food, meds or housing. I have spent my entire life either working as a social worker or helping people with disabilities return to work & I can say that my experience has been that most people are not in their present situations through any fault of their own. Yes some are but most are not. For some reason there is such a skewed perception of people that require some form of assistance. I have seen people do all the right things ( work, save $ etc) and then lose it all to illness/accident/disability, etc. Working in these fields has always made me grateful that none of these things have happened to me. It has also really given me a compassion/empathy for circumstance people find themselves in often through no fault of their own.
The ACA says that each person should pay 8% of their income toward health insurance.
Do you think that standard is fair? What do you think of those who do not buy ACA insruance even though they are mandated to have insurance? And for my example, let's assume that they don't fall within Medicaid definitions. I know several people who choose not to obey the law in my area and qualifying for Medicaid has nothing to do with it.
gimmethesimplelife
11-13-14, 9:54pm
It is good legislation, and it HAS helped millions of Americans. It has saved tax payers by getting uninsured folks out of the emergency room (which we the people paid for) and on to insurance. Even with the subsidies, we the tax payers have saved. It has created thousands of jobs. And health care, which ALWAYS goes up in cost, has gone up at a much SLOWER rate since the start of Obamacare. And for those who have a bit of a problem with this concept, let's say bananas traditionally go up 10 cents each and every year, but because of the slow-it-down program, they go up only 5 cents, that is a good thing. It has been that way with health care costs. And anyone who tries to imply that your cost wouldn't go up under the old way is lying to you and playing you for a fool.
No, sadly, the mistake democrats made in crafting this legislation was to labor under the assumption that even republicans actually cared about their constituents, and would want to do the best for them. Their mistake was to believe the BS conservatives spout about caring for 'the people' and looking out for the little guy. Instead, like a bunch of petulant 5 year olds, (including our state legislature, IL) they refused to set up state exchanges, or expand Medicaid, although it was paid for. It was purely for spite. Meanwhile, our taxes are sent out to support other states medicaid/exchanges.
Now how does this help us? How does this help the people of our state? And if this is overturned, and millions of people in these 30 some odd states are suddenly ripped off health care, what do you think is going to happen? Taking away these subsidies will cause the whole thing to implode, because this stabs the heart of the act. And that's what republicans want. They want health care to be a privilege, cause in republican world it's every man for himself. If you can't afford it, you don't need it.
Frankly I'd like Elizabeth Warren to run. I like her and her ideas, but I think she is too soft. I think she would buy into the false notion that republicans really want to govern for the good of all, just like Obama. Hillary has walked in those woods for a long time now and can recognize poisonous snakes when she sees them.Health care as a privilege again? I don't know that I have the emotional strength to deal with that with so little in return for putting up with the 24/7/365 nightmare of that. I guess what I'm saying is those are immigrate out to wherever you can words. I know you don't like it when I post such Peggy, and I don't mean to offend, (honestly I don't) but.....I don't know any other way to process the nightmare of health care being a privilege and not a right again. I can't come up with a better solution than voting with my feet, sorry.
That said, none of us can read the future and many did not think the Supreme Court would let ObamaCare stand so who knows? One positive thing is if ObamaCare unravels, I believe those who have their health care yanked from them by a court decision by people who safely have benefits when they themselves have little to lose - they will hit the streets. I really can see that happening - in large numbers - and I think it's long overdue in many ways. I have the feeling such a scenario could be a repeat of Ferguson - in the sense of police overreach. It remains to be seen of course. But I don't believe everyone who loses their health care would just sit by and accept it. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
11-13-14, 9:56pm
IL, you are right that some people can afford insurance but choose to waste their $ on other things. But many, many people would have to choose between insurance, food, meds or housing. I have spent my entire life either working as a social worker or helping people with disabilities return to work & I can say that my experience has been that most people are not in their present situations through any fault of their own. Yes some are but most are not. For some reason there is such a skewed perception of people that require some form of assistance. I have seen people do all the right things ( work, save $ etc) and then lose it all to illness/accident/disability, etc. Working in these fields has always made me grateful that none of these things have happened to me. It has also really given me a compassion/empathy for circumstance people find themselves in often through no fault of their own.+ 1000 Rob
PS This is the America I know that you speak of.
iris lily
11-13-14, 10:02pm
Health care as a privilege again? I don't know that I have the emotional strength to deal with that with so little in return for putting up with the 24/7/365 nightmare of that. I guess what I'm saying is those are immigrate out to wherever you can words. I know you don't like it when I post such Peggy, and I don't mean to offend, (honestly I don't) but.....I don't know any other way to process the nightmare of health care being a privilege and not a right again. I can't come up with a better solution than voting with my feet, sorry.
That said, none of us can read the future and many did not think the Supreme Court would let ObamaCare stand so who knows? One positive thing is if ObamaCare unravels, I believe those who have their health care yanked from them by a court decision by people who safely have benefits when they themselves have little to lose - they will hit the streets. I really can see that happening - in large numbers - and I think it's long overdue in many ways. I have the feeling such a scenario could be a repeat of Ferguson - in the sense of police overreach. It remains to be seen of course. But I don't believe everyone who loses their health care would just sit by and accept it. Rob
Let's see, you will be looting and burning? or what, exactly?
If you wish to legally and peacefully protest, be my guest.
gimmethesimplelife
11-13-14, 10:05pm
Let's see, you will be looting and burning? or what, exactly?
If you wish to legally and peacefully protest, be my guest.No. Just to make it clear I won't be looting and burning. Please don't attach that image to me. Nor would I condone such. I personally would join peaceful protests but if they turned violent - which I am very much against - I would quietly slip away and get out of the situation. And I wouldn't be thrilled with protestors that instigate the police - and yes, I realize that some do. That is not what my definition of protesting is about.
Color me legal and peaceful. Rob
Damned Republicans! If they removed the yoke of government from our necks we'd probably just sit in the field and die, those evil bastards.
Ah the 'yolk of oppression' I know all those 'free' Americans want the 'choice' of food/rent and health care. how happy they will be to be able to die like true Americans...but out in the field, behind something preferably, where we don't have to actually watch.:(
You know Alan, it's replies like this from you and others that prove you really don't get it. You just don't. And it's sad really. Either you completely lack empathy, or you are totally ignorant to the realities of 'out here' in the real world.
You really believe that everyone has a choice in whether they have health care or not. You actually believe they are better off without basic health care.
You really are a good republican conservative.
You really believe that everyone has a choice in whether they have health care or not. You actually believe they are better off without basic health care.
No, but I do believe there's two sides to every coin toss. No government or private entity can provide for one person without taking it from someone else and many people have a problem with all powerful entities such as governments applying the necessary force to accomplish that end. It's not a lack of empathy for individuals as much as a low tolerance for overwhelming force.
You really are a good republican conservative.
Thank you!
Teacher Terry
11-14-14, 12:47pm
IL, yes I think it is fair that people pay 8% of their income for health insurance unless they qualify for Medicaid. For those that defy the law when they can afford to buy insurance I think the fines should be bigger. They will turn up in our emergency rooms costing this country a fortune. I pay 16% of my income for our insurance. Also some of the deductibles on the plans are too high. This country needs a single payer system which would eliminate all of this nonsense.
gimmethesimplelife
11-14-14, 1:01pm
Ah the 'yolk of oppression' I know all those 'free' Americans want the 'choice' of food/rent and health care. how happy they will be to be able to die like true Americans...but out in the field, behind something preferably, where we don't have to actually watch.:(
You know Alan, it's replies like this from you and others that prove you really don't get it. You just don't. And it's sad really. Either you completely lack empathy, or you are totally ignorant to the realities of 'out here' in the real world.
You really believe that everyone has a choice in whether they have health care or not. You actually believe they are better off without basic health care.
You really are a good republican conservative.Peggy, I could not agree with you more. You hit the nail right on the head here as far as I am concerned. It's funny, just under three miles north from me is the most expensive office rent corner in metro Phoenix - for those familiar with Phoenix, I'm talking of the Camelback Esplanade. Every now and then I go up there to do secret shops at The Cheesecake Factory and I will eavesdrop on conversations there and at the Macy's next door and sometimes I really do feel like I am in a different country and I am amazed I didn't have to show a passport to enter this one I am temporarily in. Many of the people three miles north of me just don't get it. I used to want to be one of these people - seriously - this was the reason I went to college. That didn't work out as planned and I find myself grateful I'm not living that life. Too many hours, too much debt, too much stress, and very funky priorities and what I consider no real sense of proportion. I'm sure there are exceptions to this but I sure do run across this when I am in that other country.
I fit in much better with people who are struggling and who are direct and real as a result of it. Where I live people get what you have posted here and I most certainly do also. Thanks for summing this up better than I could. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
11-14-14, 1:03pm
IL, yes I think it is fair that people pay 8% of their income for health insurance unless they qualify for Medicaid. For those that defy the law when they can afford to buy insurance I think the fines should be bigger. They will turn up in our emergency rooms costing this country a fortune. I pay 16% of my income for our insurance. Also some of the deductibles on the plans are too high. This country needs a single payer system which would eliminate all of this nonsense.+ 1000 Rob
gimmethesimplelife
11-14-14, 1:06pm
No, but I do believe there's two sides to every coin toss. No government or private entity can provide for one person without taking it from someone else and many people have a problem with all powerful entities such as governments applying the necessary force to accomplish that end. It's not a lack of empathy for individuals as much as a low tolerance for overwhelming force.
Thank you!Alan, please correct me if I am wrong, I thought you were a Liberterian? If you are, do you side with Republicans because they are closer to the Liberterian way of thinking than Democrats are? Rob
gimmethesimplelife
11-14-14, 1:21pm
No, but I do believe there's two sides to every coin toss. No government or private entity can provide for one person without taking it from someone else and many people have a problem with all powerful entities such as governments applying the necessary force to accomplish that end. It's not a lack of empathy for individuals as much as a low tolerance for overwhelming force.
Thank you!OK. Surprise! I'm not totally against what you have said here. I have seen government incompetence in my lifetime - remember my terror this past April after my first hospitalization of three nights? During this time I received a letter from DES in Arizona telling me that my application for Medicaid had been denied - then I called Arizona Medicaid and they told me no worries, I'm covered, as did the insurance company itself. Left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing.....and I do see problems with ObamaCare and the rollout was every embarrassing period. So I can see (kind of) where you are coming from.
That having been said, if you do believe people should have basic health care, and under current economic conditions there is no way they can afford it, if the government doesn't provide it, which entity should? How should it be delivered to the millions who can't afford it and the millions who have been tossed out of the middle class due to this brutally turbo charged capitalism we are now left dealing with? If not the government providing health care, who then? Who provides health care to someone who has been victimized by their hours getting cut and they find themselves unable to get another job, either FT or PT and the bills keep stacking up through no fault of their own? Do you not understand this scenario is playing out over and over and over again all across the USA? So who provides health care if not the government? Rob
Alan, please correct me if I am wrong, I thought you were a Liberterian? If you are, do you side with Republicans because they are closer to the Liberterian way of thinking than Democrats are? RobSometimes, when people ask you to check a box, you need more than one. I think of myself as a libertarian leaning conservative who is better served by the Republican party. I'm also always amused when people use any of those terms as slurs as if their target should slink back into whatever corner their betters reserve for them. I think it really pisses some folks off if you take it as a compliment.
I really don't mean to make republicans heads explode, but there are good reports out about Obamacare.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2014/10/31/key-study-on-obamacare-2015-premium-rates-is-out-and-you-wont-believe-whats-going-to-happen/
It works. Just as we said it would. People like it, and it works. People are insured, premiums are either coming down, staying the same or going up much slower than they would otherwise. More companies are joining the exchange which helps everyone cause of, you know, competition and free market. And the US taxpayers are saving a bundle moving folks out of the emergency room and into health care where they belong.
Apparently all those happy insured didn't get the memo that they are really being oppressed and trampled upon by the government. ;)
I think republicans in congress are trembling in their boots at the prospect of SCOTUS gutting it. It's one thing to pander and give lip service to your ill informed base and it's another to deal with the backlash of actually doing what you have used to whip up frenzy.
I realize all this good news makes some very unhappy, and i hope they step forward and say that, for the record.
gimmethesimplelife
11-24-14, 12:26pm
I really don't mean to make republicans heads explode, but there are good reports out about Obamacare.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2014/10/31/key-study-on-obamacare-2015-premium-rates-is-out-and-you-wont-believe-whats-going-to-happen/
It works. Just as we said it would. People like it, and it works. People are insured, premiums are either coming down, staying the same or going up much slower than they would otherwise. More companies are joining the exchange which helps everyone cause of, you know, competition and free market. And the US taxpayers are saving a bundle moving folks out of the emergency room and into health care where they belong.
Apparently all those happy insured didn't get the memo that they are really being oppressed and trampled upon by the government. ;)
I think republicans in congress are trembling in their boots at the prospect of SCOTUS gutting it. It's one thing to pander and give lip service to your ill informed base and it's another to deal with the backlash of actually doing what you have used to whip up frenzy.
I realize all this good news makes some very unhappy, and i hope they step forward and say that, for the record.This may surprise some here but my overall take on ObamaCare to date is that I agree with something Iris Lilies posted some time ago - there are winners and losers under ObamaCare. Due to my income level, I happen to be one of the winners - this year I have spent sixteen days total in the hospital, had numerous tests done and surgery done and have not received a bill for a dime. Great. This does not mean that I don't understand that people up higher on the income scale than yours truly but certainly not rich have sometimes fared not so well under ObamaCare with some facing much higher premiums and much higher deductibles. In my neighborhood you will find many ObamaCare winners but as I said, I can see where others have not fared so well under this plan.
I will go even further and side with Bae on one thing - I remember his displeasure some time ago as he was told he could keep his plan and it turned out he couldn't keep it. I believe the new plan was more comprehensive (?) - it's been awhile since this exchange - but nonetheless - Obama had a Bush moment (remember this read my lips, no new taxes) - but with Obama it was if you like your plan you can keep it. It didn't work out that way for everyone and I can understand the displeasure with this by those who didn't win under ObamaCare. Rob
iris lilies
11-24-14, 12:42pm
...
I will go even further and side with Bae on one thing - I remember his displeasure some time ago as he was told he could keep his plan and it turned out he couldn't keep it. I believe the new plan was more comprehensive (?) -.... Rob
Yes! Yes it is more comprehensive because we all learned that President Obama knows better than we do about what we need. He will have free health exam once a year because you know he can't afford to pay an office visit fee. Only Alan can afford that.
gimmethesimplelife
11-24-14, 12:58pm
Yes! Yes it is more comprehensive because we all learned that President Obama knows better than we do about what we need. He will have free health exam once a year because you know he can't afford to pay an office visit fee. Only Alan can afford that.IL, the flip of this coin, though? In countries that have universal health care that I so approve of, coverage is much more comprehensive than the plan Bae once had. I don't seem to hear much complaints from citizens in countries with universal health care in regards to the depth and coverage of their care, other than waiting periods for care in some countries. THAT BEING SAID HOWEVER, DRUM ROLL HERE PLEASE.....We here in the United States are also guilty of excessive waiting periods - LOOK AT THE VA SCANDAL - capitalized as the scandal started (of all the places in the US it could have started lol) in Phoenix. Point being, I'm no longer buying the claim that waiting periods for health care in the US are automatically shorter than elsewhere - this one permanently and no longer passes the reality test for me. Rob
We got a lovely cancellation notice, again. Dear Wife has spent two days with the web site, and on the phone, trying to make sure we are re-enrolled for Thanksgiving. Web site has been up/down, or losing data, since the notices came out.
Yay!
This new improved "free" comprehensive insurance is so nice! I wish they'd get Alan to pay a bit more for the infrastructure though, I don't see how an overworked, busy, lower-income wage-earner would have time to struggle with the nonsense to wade through the process. And my state allegedly has one of the smoother-running systems.
It was so horrible before when I just wrote a check, got to see the doctor I wanted without fuss, and received exactly the insurance I wanted. And could get a sufficient supply of medications without being required to go to the pharmacy every few weeks to beg for another small refill.
Glorious!
Gee bae, if I remember correctly, you didn't buy through the ACA website last time. Your wife got confused and was scammed by your insurance company into believing that if you didn't renew with them, right then, the insurance police, or someone, would break down your door and arrest you. All before the ACA website was even up and running, months before the actual deadline. Plus your regular doctor, apparently, decided not to accept this insurance (which I assume he accepted before) for who knows what reason. I certainly hope you didn't reward this same insurance company with MORE of your business. Or maybe instead of making your wife do this again, you ask for help from the many sources that are willing to help guide you/her through this.
You're right, sometimes it can be frustrating for young, overworked, busy low income folks to shuffle from one doctor to the next trying to find someone who will see their kid for a lower cost or maybe take very small payments for their service....or, no wait, to get health care coverage for their family... gee, it's almost as time consuming and difficult as doing the research for/shopping for a car..
My first advise would be to CALL YOUR DOCTOR of choice and see which insurance he takes. Then go to the ACA website and see what plans that/those insurance carriers have. Then, maybe call that insurance company and talk to someone who can walk you/your wife through it. And then you can just write the check and go to your doctor, of choice.
It's not that difficult. It's the SAME insurance companies as before. It's the SAME doctors as before. If your wait time to see the doctor is long, IT'S NOT THE INSURANCE COMPANIES OR THE GOVERNMENT causing it. It's your doctor!
The more people like this and the better it works, the more laughable some claims of 'difficulties' become. It reminds me of one of those late night commercials where the poor woman simply can not slice a tomato, no matter HOW hard she tries!
I'm not saying there haven't been difficulties, but millions have already signed up and are enjoying the benefits. And they aren't IT wizards who invented the internet.>8)
Wrong, Peggy. Do carry on...
iris lilies
11-26-14, 12:19pm
IL, the flip of this coin, though? In countries that have universal health care that I so approve of, coverage is much more comprehensive than the plan Bae once had. I don't seem to hear much complaints from citizens in countries with universal health care in regards to the depth and coverage of their care, other than waiting periods for care in some countries. THAT BEING SAID HOWEVER, DRUM ROLL HERE PLEASE.....We here in the United States are also guilty of excessive waiting periods - LOOK AT THE VA SCANDAL - capitalized as the scandal started (of all the places in the US it could have started lol) in Phoenix. Point being, I'm no longer buying the claim that waiting periods for health care in the US are automatically shorter than elsewhere - this one permanently and no longer passes the reality test for me. Rob
I can't see how your example of poor health care, the V.A. health care system, supports your larger drumbeat argument toward more gubmnt health care. Dude, spectacularly bad example.
gimmethesimplelife
11-26-14, 10:11pm
I can't see how your example of poor health care, the V.A. health care system, supports your larger drumbeat argument toward more gubmnt health care. Dude, spectacularly bad example.My point was that just because health care is delivered in the United States, that does not automatically mean every last time there will not be an excessive wait for health care services. But I do see your point too, beyond mine - VA care is government health care, something akin to universal health care in countries where health care is covered by the government. This can cause excessive waits - I agree with you on this much. See, we once again agree on something.....Rob
Teacher Terry
11-27-14, 4:14pm
My DIL is from Poland & gets most of her healthcare when she visits home. She is very happy with the cost, care & quickness of service.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.