MANDATORY health insurance, part 2 - Page 32 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-28-2010, 09:47 AM   #621
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 01:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
I saw a bit of Michael Moore on Larry King last night. He had a contest on his web site to find out the penalty for insurance companies for denying coverage to someone with a preexisting condition. He says that it's hidden in the bill, that it's only $100.00 a day. So they could essentially just pay that and it would cost them less than just stringing someone along who has any life threatening illness or disease. Um, that doesn't sound good enough at all to me.
But someone with a preexisting condition can live for years.

A family member of mine was denied depression meds because it was a preexisting condition, so it can definately add up.

It's not only the life threatening conditions that insurance companies deny. So if you average it across the board I'm sure it's a pretty stiff penalty.
__________________

BVS is offline  
Old 04-28-2010, 09:51 AM   #622
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 02:07 PM
I understand all that, but in order to account for life threatening conditions they should have made the penalty higher. Athletes get fined much higher than that for meaningless issues compared to anyone's life or health. I'd like to know what the rationale was for that. I just can't see insurance companies worrying about that kind of money.
__________________

MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 05-24-2010, 09:12 PM   #623
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 12:07 PM
Quote:
Support for repeal of the new national health care plan has jumped to its highest level ever. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 63% of U.S. voters now favor repeal of the plan foisted on the country by deceit and bribery passed by congressional Democrats and signed into law by President Obama in March.

Prior to today, weekly polling had shown support for repeal ranging from 54% to 58%.

Currently, just 32% oppose repeal.

The new findings include 46% who Strongly Favor repeal of the health care bill and 25% who Strongly Oppose it.
Always like to start the week with good news.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 05-24-2010, 11:06 PM   #624
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 01:07 PM
Oh, landline surveys

Rasmussen do you even have a clue how obsolete you are?
BVS is offline  
Old 05-25-2010, 12:18 AM   #625
Paper Gods
Forum Administrator
 
KhanadaRhodes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a vampire in the limousine
Posts: 60,684
Local Time: 01:07 PM
Quote:
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 63% of old people bored enough to take a stupid telephone survey now favor repeal of the plan passed by congressional Democrats and signed into law by President Obama in March.
fixed.
__________________
KhanadaRhodes is offline  
Old 05-25-2010, 11:58 AM   #626
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 10:07 AM
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 8% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Eighty-four percent (84%) Strongly Disapprove.
deep is offline  
Old 05-25-2010, 12:20 PM   #627
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BonosSaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 02:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
I understand all that, but in order to account for life threatening conditions they should have made the penalty higher. Athletes get fined much higher than that for meaningless issues compared to anyone's life or health. I'd like to know what the rationale was for that. I just can't see insurance companies worrying about that kind of money.


I agree this is troubling. It gives the insurance companies an option to pick and choose based on whom to cover and whom to deny. They'll pick up the pre-existing that will run them less than $36,500 a year and deny the condition that is either a wash or has the potential of costing them considerably more. This puts us in a somewhat better position, but I'm not thinking this was what everyone had in mind and was probably the basis of the strongest support for the bill.
BonosSaint is offline  
Old 06-12-2010, 12:55 PM   #628
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,146
Local Time: 02:07 PM
Obama and GOP bicker over doctors' Medicare pay - Yahoo! News

Quote:
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is asking Republican lawmakers to approve billions of dollars in new spending to avert a scheduled 21 percent cut in payments to doctors who treat Medicare patients.

If GOP senators don't allow the stalled proposal to pass, some doctors will stop treating Medicare recipients, Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday.
Well, the doc fix bill has finally come. Remind me again why these billions were not included in 'comprehensive' health reform?



Keep Your Health Plan Under Overhaul? Probably Not, Gov't Analysis Concludes - IBD - Investors.com

Quote:
Internal administration documents reveal that up to 51% of employers may have to relinquish their current health care coverage because of ObamaCare.

Small firms will be even likelier to lose existing plans.

The "midrange estimate is that 66% of small employer plans and 45% of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfathered status by the end of 2013," according to the document.

In the worst-case scenario, 69% of employers — 80% of smaller firms — would lose that status, exposing them to far more provisions under the new health law.
We had to pass the bill to see what was in it.
Bluer White is offline  
Old 06-12-2010, 01:45 PM   #629
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 12:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluer White View Post
Well, the doc fix bill has finally come. Remind me again why these billions were not included in 'comprehensive' health reform?
Only a teabagging racist would ask that question.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 06-12-2010, 09:33 PM   #630
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 12:07 PM
It's encouraging that everyone is out enjoying a June weekend rather than reading internet posts but hopefully one of the vocal supporters of Obamacare will answer BW's question.
Not that he and I don't know the answer but we'd love to hear y'all's explanation anyway.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 06-12-2010, 10:51 PM   #631
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 01:07 PM
That's funny coming from the two of you, the Kings of fleeing once a question gets too tough

Quote:
However, the source conceded: "It is difficult to predict how plans and employers will behave in the coming years, but if plans make changes that negatively impact consumers, then they will lose their grandfather status."
Republican staffers talking about rumors, etc, etc...

A lot of speculation. Personally, I think we'll see some big ammendments before things start going in effect.
BVS is offline  
Old 06-12-2010, 11:47 PM   #632
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 12:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Personally, I think we'll see some big ammendments before things start going in effect.
Like a complete repeal.

So how's come the "doctor fix" wasn't in the actual Health Care Reform Bill passed earlier this year? Why were Republican amendments to do so defeated?
INDY500 is offline  
Old 06-13-2010, 12:04 AM   #633
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 01:07 PM
Not a complete repeal, I still don't understand how you of all people don't understand the need for this... but you won't answer THAT question.

Why weren't the Republican "ammendments" defeated? Well to be honest, they sucked.
BVS is offline  
Old 06-17-2010, 05:29 PM   #634
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,146
Local Time: 02:07 PM
Karl Rove: The Bad News About ObamaCare Keeps Piling Up - WSJ.com

Quote:
This was brought home to me when I asked the CEO of a major restaurant chain about health reform's effect on his company, which now spends $25 million a year on employee health insurance. That will jump to at least $90 million a year once the new law is phased in. It will be cheaper, he told me, for the company to dump its coverage and pay a fine—$2,000 for each full-time worker—and make sure that no part-time employee accidentally worked 31 hours and thereby incurred the fine.

This reality is settling in at businesses across America. A Midwestern contractor told me he pays $588,000 for health insurance for 70 employees, contributing up to $8,400 a year for a family's coverage. If he stops providing health insurance, he'll pay $2,000 per employee in fines, and the first 40 employees are exempt from fines altogether.

Employees who lose coverage get to select a policy from a government-sponsored insurance marketplace called the "exchange." This will be subsidized by taxpayers. Depending on his income, a worker will have to pay between 8% and 9.8% of the cost.

But there are a few hitches. Employers now pay for employee health plans with pre-tax dollars, but workers who buy into one on the exchange pay with after-tax dollars. Families making less than $30,000 and individuals making less than $15,000 a year will be dumped into Medicaid, widely viewed as second-class health care.

Either Mr. Obama was stunningly blind to these perverse effects when he promised people could keep their coverage, or he felt that admitting his plan would collapse employer-provided health coverage could keep it from passing. Either way—self-deception or deliberate deceit—health reform is going to turn out far differently than was promised. And because more workers will be dumped into subsidized coverage, taxpayers are likely to pay much more than the $1 trillion-plus price tag claimed by ObamaCare advocates for its first 10 years.

It doesn't end there. Another way the new health reform will have consequences that are the opposite of what was promised can be found in new draft regulations (its Interim Final Rule) from the Department of Health and Human Services. The proposed rules could cause as many as half of all workers to lose their existing coverage.

Health-care plans that existed before the new law are "grandfathered" with regard to some of its provisions. The rules released Monday spell out how little these plans can change without losing their protected status.

Health plans would no longer be grandfathered if a business changes insurance companies (a common practice when employers shop for lower prices), raises deductibles more than 5%, drops any existing benefits, or even increases co-pays by as little as $5.

Complying with these new rules would raise costs for companies who provide coverage, reduce competition among health insurance companies, and discourage efforts to make employees more price conscious. The Obama administration itself estimates that these draft rules could cost up to 80% of small employers and 64% of large employers their grandfathered status. This translates to between 87 million and 115 million Americans losing their current coverage.
Bluer White is offline  
Old 06-17-2010, 05:40 PM   #635
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,715
Local Time: 01:07 PM
Quote:
CEO of a major restaurant chain
I think this bit is worth taking into account. I don't exactly have sympathy for CEOs who whine about maybe having to pay a bit more-if they're running major businesses, I'm guessing they're able to afford parting with a bit of their earnings.

And I find it really hard to believe Karl Rove is all that concerned about middle class people like my family (who would be on the lower end of the middle class, upper-middle class we are not).

Also, Medicaid is a "second-class" health program? Again, were it not for Medicaid/Medicare, my family'd be really screwed in terms of hospital bills right now. They helped pay off quite a bit of our burden of bills.

Angela
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 06-17-2010, 05:50 PM   #636
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 01:07 PM
Maybe it will force private sector health insurance and employers to become competitive again. What a concept...

Maybe privatie sector insurance will actually become truly competitive instead of working in cahoots to drive up health costs like they have for decades.
BVS is offline  
Old 06-17-2010, 06:41 PM   #637
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 01:07 PM
Why would it cost companies more to insure their workers under the new law?
maycocksean is offline  
Old 06-17-2010, 06:57 PM   #638
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,146
Local Time: 02:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
I think this bit is worth taking into account. I don't exactly have sympathy for CEOs who whine about maybe having to pay a bit more-if they're running major businesses, I'm guessing they're able to afford parting with a bit of their earnings.
Maybe they can afford it, maybe not. Smaller companies are less able to afford it. But in the end it's simply cheaper to pay the fines and dump their employees' coverage. It's reality and it's incentivized under this legislation. It calls into question the promise that you can keep your own insurance if you like it.

Quote:
Also, Medicaid is a "second-class" health program? Again, were it not for Medicaid/Medicare, my family'd be really screwed in terms of hospital bills right now. They helped pay off quite a bit of our burden of bills.
Angela
True, but doctors increasingly turn away Medicaid patients due to the poor reimbursement rate. Particularly specialists. A doctor's office can't run at a loss.

What about the promise not to increase taxes to families making under $250K? Or $200K, or $175K...how far was the bar lowered? The individual mandate is a new tax for everyone.
Bluer White is offline  
Old 06-17-2010, 07:16 PM   #639
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 01:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluer White View Post
It calls into question the promise that you can keep your own insurance if you like it.
But really, employer-provided insurance really isn't MINE to begin with. What assurances did I have that my employer wouldn't choose to drop coverage for me prior to this law?
maycocksean is offline  
Old 06-17-2010, 09:45 PM   #640
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,392
Local Time: 02:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluer White View Post
True, but doctors increasingly turn away Medicaid patients due to the poor reimbursement rate. Particularly specialists. A doctor's office can't run at a loss.

my cardiopulmonologist has just announced that they will be unable to accept my private insurance.

there's another doctor i see who likewise refuses my private insurance.
__________________

Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Dog Lovers.... Part 3 U2Fanatic4ever Lemonade Stand 1019 05-19-2012 03:35 AM
Hell-th Insurance WARNING: LONG POST! BluRmGrl Zoo Confessionals 7 10-26-2006 09:04 PM
On (not) having health insurance wolfeden Zoo Confessionals 14 03-24-2004 11:15 AM
White House seeks control on health, safety Scarletwine Free Your Mind Archive 1 01-13-2004 04:54 PM
Bono today at the conference in Africa U2Kitten Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive 9 01-15-2002 09:29 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×