Obamacare/Trumpcare Horror Stories

[yk9001]

Do we still at least get the death panels out of this thing?  That was one good selling point I heard during the rhetoric.

[Bruce Nye]

Do we still at least get the death panels out of this thing?  That was one good selling point I heard during the rhetoric.

 

 

Yep, my wife and I are scheduled to go next week. I was really hoping for a date after spring training.  But Obama is the Messiah, so what can we say.  I'll miss you guys.

[Jay]

Yep, my wife and I are scheduled to go next week. I was really hoping for a date after spring training.  But Obama is the Messiah, so what can we say.  I'll miss you guys.

 

And the 47% who don't pay taxes will miss you, too.

[Crampknees]

Then they could also have left alone the folks who simply didn't want it.

===================================

 

Another good point.  A poll of the people who don't have health care would have been good to ask is it not affordable for you or do you just elect not to have it.

[Jay]

Maybe I'm wrong but I think the "public option" was an actual government run health insurance provider, not the "option" to participate.

[saangels]

"The public health insurance option, also known as the public insurance option or the public option, was a proposal to create a government-run health insurance agency which would compete with other health insurance companies within the United States of America."

 

Per Wikipedia.  [italics mine]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_health_insurance_option

Edited October 10, 2013 by saangels

[mtangelsfan]

I think my problem is the the whole "compete" idea.  Why would the public option need to compete with the private ones?  The could have coextsted without competing.  That is where a lot of the blowback came from.

 

If the government is involved there really isn't a real competition since they can vote, repeal, pass or get from the courts whatever they want to get their own favor.

[HaloMagic]

Coexisting in the business world is still competing. How would "competing" look different from "coexisting" in your public option model?

[nate]

"The public health insurance option, also known as the public insurance option or the public option, was a proposal to create a government-run health insurance agency which would compete with other health insurance companies within the United States of America."

 

Per Wikipedia.  [italics mine]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_health_insurance_option

 

Only two providers competing in CA.  Problem is most of us can't compete because prices are so high with the new mandates, it isn't worth the risk.  Two companies is hardly a competition.

[mtangelsfan]

Coexisting in the business world is still competing. How would "competing" look different from "coexisting" in your public option model?

 

The government chose the word, not me.  It's not competing if the government is covering folks who wouldn't have coverage otherwise.

[Adam]

You cannot compete with the government because it can run at a loss forever

[saangels]

Nate: you're right.  Two companies is hardly a competition.  On the contrary, two companies is one company away from a monopoly.  My question is: assuming that we had a public option, wouldn't that lower the cost of health care across the board and consequently allow for more private insurance groups to compete?  If not, could you explain to me your rational?  If the public option is catering to the poor, I don't see how it could possibly be more expensive than regular health insurance.  However, you're the expert here.  I don't claim to have all the answers.  I'm just trying to explore different avenues and learn something.  Please, teach me.      

 

MtAngelsfan: I understand your concern.  My objective isn't to defend the public option inasmuch as I'd like to point out its benefits in relation to Obamacare.     

 

Adam: Interesting point.  There is definitely some truth to that.    

Edited October 10, 2013 by saangels

[nate]

The problem in CA is with the CA govt.  They add more mandates on top of what the feds did.  Insurance premiums in CA are twice as much as most other states.

 

Having the public option does nothing to premium rates.  The fact is, nothing changed with how premiums are determined.  Everything has to be approved by the DOI, including premiums.  Premiums are much higher now because of all the added mandates.

 

The two companies that are still offering coverage in CA are likely operating at a loss but it is important to their brand because they have such huge memberships in CA.  It also has to do with what their off exchange numbers are.  CA would not allow companies to offer off exchange private insurance unless they also offered exchange insurance.  I know my company had NO confidence in CA getting setup with their exchange.  From what I have heard it is a gigantic mess.

 

There is a huge amount of exposure for the companies offering coverage through this, it will likely be negative due to the exchanges failure.  People will still blame the insurance companies though, that is because the govt has done nothing but bad mouth the insurance companies, so the public follows.

[Jay]

You cannot compete with the government because it can run at a loss forever

 

This is why there's no public option.  1) The government cannot possibly compete on a level playing field and 2) it can run at a loss without folding.

[arch stanton]

I think my problem is the the whole "compete" idea.  Why would the public option need to compete with the private ones?  The could have coextsted without competing.  That is where a lot of the blowback came from.

 

If the government is involved there really isn't a real competition since they can vote, repeal, pass or get from the courts whatever they want to get their own favor.

So now only the corporations can do this.

[saangels]

Thank you, Nate.  

[Jay]

http://news.yahoo.com/1-800-t-o-t-l-f-l-070000807.html

Interesting story

[mtangelsfan]

So now only the corporations can do this.

 

This is a solid point, but adding one more corrupt party will not make it better.

[arch stanton]

This is a solid point, but adding one more corrupt party will not make it better.

The only way any of this changes is to get the money out of politics. I still think the pols should dress NASCAR style with a list of sponsors all over their jumpsuits. Scroll the donor lists under their mouths when they talk. Or just get rid of private contributions all together.

[Adam]

I believe freedom dictates that anyone should be able to donate to any cause they see fit, and anyone should be able to accept contributions. That said, I would support more transparency when it comes to who donated to who. 

[arch stanton]

Anywhere else in the world it's called bribery, influence peddling, graft. corruption, collusion......But in politics it's called free speech. 

[DowningRules]

I don't care who's right/wrong on this issue.  I'm concerned only with myself and my issue is this:  My insurance carrier is cancelling my current plan as of Jan. 1, 2014.  Their new, similar plan will nearly double in cost.  I can't afford it, and my current doctor who I've been seeing for years, doesn't do HMOs.  So, yesterday was likely my last visit with him.

 

Obama told me I would be able to keep my doctor.  That won't happen unless I pay alot more money.  So, like many other Americans, I think I will just not pay for insurance and pay the fine.  I have zero incentive to sign up for a new carrier (at a higher cost than what I'm paying now).  I'll just find a new doctor when the government takes mine away...only, the doctor will essentially be Obama's choice.  Not mine.

 

Lied to.

[Bruce Nye]

The libs say "It's a law" and that is technically correct, but the law Congress voted is different in so many aspects.  Obama said we could keep our doctor, there would be multiple payers, it would be affordable and may even save the country money.  Then he has made unilateral exceptions for his cronies.  Over $600 million spent on a website that is not operationally functioning. 

 

Now even the MSM is skeptical.  Anderson Cooper is claiming BS on the WH's saying that tens of thousands have signed up - but no real numbers to prove it.

 

This law needs to be re-worked. 

[HaloMagic]

Then rework it. By abiding by current laws. You can't just drop it and start over without a vote.

[Docwaukee]

and we'll have fun fun fun till daddy takes the t-bird away.  AWAAAAAAAAAY.  ooooooohhhooooohhooohhoooohooo.