New Republican Health Care

[Spirit]

8 minutes ago, RallyMo said:

Speaking of Republicans and health care, this is wonderful to think about:

http://www.businessinsider.com/house-gop-employers-demand-workers-genetic-test-results-2017-3

 

[Taylor]

2 hours ago, RallyMo said:

Speaking of Republicans and health care, this is wonderful to think about:

http://www.businessinsider.com/house-gop-employers-demand-workers-genetic-test-results-2017-3

Gattaca in real life. Scary stuff.

[Tank]

4 minutes ago, Taylor said:

Gattaca in real life. Scary stuff.

think of it as your own olympic testing.

 

except there's no race and no medals to be won and some stranger gets to see your junk.

[Taylor]

5 minutes ago, Tank said:

think of it as your own olympic testing.

 

except there's no race and no medals to be won and some stranger gets to see your junk.

And employers will use your results to make hiring and firing decisions.

[mtangelsfan]

4 hours ago, RallyMo said:

Speaking of Republicans and health care, this is wonderful to think about:

http://www.businessinsider.com/house-gop-employers-demand-workers-genetic-test-results-2017-3

Doesn't matter who is running the asylum, our personal rights continue to be stolen.  F U GOP.

 

[Spirit]

Always look to Snopes.

What's true:  H.R. 1313 would allow employers to offer substantial health insurance premium rebates to workers who take part in company wellness programs that may include submitting to "health risk assessments."

What's false: HR 1313 does not allow employers to force all their workers to submit to genetic testing.

 

 

[Ordos]

I don't really see that as different than the article, though. The article points out the intention of using the testing, but as an "optional" part of the coverage. While employers wouldn't be able to force the test, employees would be stuck in a higher pool without. 

It would not allow hiring/firing decisions, it seems, which would still be covered under ADA.

[Spirit]

9 minutes ago, Ordos said:

I don't really see that as different than the article, though. The article points out the intention of using the testing, but as an "optional" part of the coverage. While employers wouldn't be able to force the test, employees would be stuck in a higher pool without. 

It would not allow hiring/firing decisions, it seems, which would still be covered under ADA.

The headline of the article is bullshit, though.  "The House GOP is pushing a bill that would let employers demand workers' genetic test results"

"Demand workers genetic test result?"  No.

 

 

 

[gotbeer]

4 hours ago, Taylor said:

Gattaca in real life. Scary stuff.

[RallyMo]

1 hour ago, Geoff said:

The headline of the article is bullshit, though.  "The House GOP is pushing a bill that would let employers demand workers' genetic test results"

"Demand workers genetic test result?"  No.

 

 

 

The headline is BS. If they'd change it, the whole thing would be spot on. It's still concerning.

[Ordos]

1 hour ago, Geoff said:

The headline of the article is bullshit, though.  "The House GOP is pushing a bill that would let employers demand workers' genetic test results"

"Demand workers genetic test result?"  No.

 

 

 

So... you're saying that someone is using a headline that conflicts with the rest of the message, just to drive eyes to the story?

Get the f*ck outta here!

[Spirit]

6 hours ago, RallyMo said:

The headline is BS. If they'd change it, the whole thing would be spot on. It's still concerning.

 

If you remove the parts of the piece that aren't true, then it's all true.

 

 

 

[Glen]

13 hours ago, Geoff said:

Always look to Snopes.

What's true:  H.R. 1313 would allow employers to offer substantial health insurance premium rebates to workers who take part in company wellness programs that may include submitting to "health risk assessments."

What's false: HR 1313 does not allow employers to force all their workers to submit to genetic testing.

 

 

 

We all know Snopes is unreliable.

[fan_since79]

TrumpCare (or is it RyanCare?) just got a big endorsement. Anthem is on board.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/2017/03/donald_trump_mum_as_health_bill_lands_biggest_backer

[Blarg]

7 hours ago, colt4405 said:

 

I've worked for companies who do this. Works out great. Everyone turns into a healthier/happier non-smoker. Submit to the blood testing, heart rate, BMI, etc and you get your healthcare for close to free. Fail and you're stuck paying the general rate 50-100 per pay period.

 

I've grown to hate the media. I'm no conspiracy theorist, I believe the media is driven by the almighty dollar, but it's really fucking up both sides of the story.

So fake news, right? 

 

[Spirit]

57 minutes ago, Glen said:

 

We all know Snopes is unreliable.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2017 by Geoff

[Vegas Halo Fan]

My belief is that the Republicans have misjudged the opinions of the American public on the Affordable Care Act. They believed that they had convinced everyone that it is such a total piece of crap that repealing it would be enough to satisfy most people, and they didn't need to have a concrete plan for replacement (despite Trump's claims during the campaign that he had a superior plan ready to go). In particular, the provisions ensuring coverage for pre-existing conditions and allowing children to remain on their parents' policy until age 26 have been very popular. The ACA is definitely a flawed program, and it needs to be fixed. Handing control of our health care system back to insurance companies is not the answer, though.

[Crampknees]

Still confused over the you get to pick your provider thing being that terrific a selling point.  I could be in the dark having employer insurance forever basically but if I want it they offer one provider.  Take it or leave it. 

[Stradling]

Yea, I only have two options at work, and if I left California, I would have to get rid of Kaiser, which is basically all I have had for 25 years.  

[Taylor]

2 hours ago, Stradling said:

Yea, I only have two options at work, and if I left California, I would have to get rid of Kaiser, which is basically all I have had for 25 years. 

We have Kaiser in Colorado (and no In-N-Out ... yet).

[Tank]

#poortaylor

[fan_since79]

Breaking: Congressional Budget Office releases its cost estimate of the Republican health care plan.

It will cut the budget deficit by $337 billion over the next ten years, but 21 million more people will be uninsured by 2020.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/03/13/breaking-cbo-n2298086

[Jason]

13 minutes ago, fan_since79 said:

Breaking: Congressional Budget Office releases its cost estimate of the Republican health care plan.

It will cut the budget deficit by $337 billion over the next ten years, but 21 million more people will be uninsured by 2020.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/03/13/breaking-cbo-n2298086

The Republicans only have themselves to blame for this one 

[mtangelsfan]

I am not a fan of the Republican plan but I am also not a fan giving stuff away.  Insurance should be available and it should be affordable.  The ACA did a fine job of making it affordable for low income but it was screwing the middle-class, as usual.

The mandate is a joke.  

Like I have said in previous posts, this process should have taken a year and a half.  The goal should have been to have a replacement in before the 2018 elections.  That would have at least given enough time to come up with something thoughtful.

[red321]