RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate

RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DesideriScuri -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 10:17:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance Actually my insurance costs are less then 175 a month, I only have gone to the doctor 7 times in the last 5 years...(4 of those 7 times were to planned parnethood where i paid those out of pocket because i didnt like the insurance balance and paying for it with out my insurance was less then if they billed my insurance) I havent been to the hospital since i was 19... The only thing ive used my insurance for is to cover my birth control and that was only in the last 6 months.. So Yes I do believe the 175 ive been paying into my insurance for the last 3 years and the 203 a month i was paying for the two years previous.. More then covers the expenses ive used my insurance for... Ive paid 11,172 into my insurance in the last 5 years. Birth control costs my insurance(in a perfect world) one doctors visit a year at 48 dollars after insurance adjustment and 53 dollars for the prescription of which i pay 20.. so 33 dollars. So because my company is morally opposed, ive had two doctors visit at 48 a piece and 33 dollars twice so 162 The other 3 doctors visit were 48 a piece so 144.. plus the 162 makes my total insurance costs so far 306 dollars. then the hospital visit, it was 645 dollars after insurance adjustment, 100 of which i had to pay via copay. so 545 dollars... So my total insurance costs in the last 5 years have been 851 dollars total. so that other 10,321 dollars ive paid in... Where has that gone, and why am I not entitled to use it... Do kindly stop trying to say what I do and dont use via my insurance and what comes out of someone elses pocket.. so far.. Everyone else has taken over 10 grand out of mine to use for things like smoking, cancer, and babies... I have no problems sending you copies of all the bills if youd like... (Edited because i have math issues and issues with numbers) Congratulations on being able to stay healthy (no snark, sarcasm, or anything; simply honest props there). I'm not saying you have, but I sure hope you haven't used the "it would be cheaper to cover BC than to not" argument. In your case, it certainly wasn't cheaper for you. Now, imagine you had access to set aside the premium dollars you paid into the system into an account that you could pay for medical care out of. At the end of the year, you could pull all that money out or leave it in. It would be your choice. You wouldn't lose it until you used it. Imagine what you would do with that $10k you would have accumulated over those 5 years. It's too bad that Obamacare essentially bans HSA's, too. Holy cow, what would you do with the money you could have had you pulled that money out at the end of each year and used it to buy physical gold? Essentially, what you have done is subsidized (to the tune of $10k over 5 years) someone else's health care. If you have no problem with that, way to go. I can tell you that while I worked for Employer X (2 jobs ago; an international retailer), my monthly insurance premium of $176 was merely 25% of the monthly premium, my employer paid the other 75%. The monthly premium cost to insure me was $704. If you weren't paying your entire premium and were paying just the 25% like I was, that's $30k the employer paid in for you that it no longer has and only the insurance company has gotten any benefit from. So, not only have you "lost" $10k, but your employer has lost quite a bit, too. And, won't that be just so excellent when they start counting health dollars spent towards your insurance as income? I mean, hey, would I have felt having to pay the taxes on $6336 (the part of the premiums paid for by the company) that I never actually received? How cool would that be? In your specific case, it would have been cheaper for you to go out and buy BC on your own compared to the insurance coverage.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 10:31:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Catholics don't like Birth Control. You seem to be saying that it is their right to not offer it to non Catholics as part of employment . This would have the effect of forcing non Catholics to follow their religion. There is a difference between not paying for BC and not allowing the use of BC. The Catholic Employee Terms of Employment, I'm assuming, do not require one to not use BC as a qualification for employment. That would be discriminatory and akin to forcing one's religious beliefs on believers or non-believers. Not paying for BC for any of their employees is not discriminatory, and not forcing religious beliefs on anyone. The employees (and covered family members) will not have their BC paid for, but are not barred from using BC.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 10:35:14 AM)
Dude, we should start a whole nother thread on the demise of HSAs and what effect that is going to have (I'm a licensed agent) Peace and comfort, Michael

SpiritedRadiance -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 10:38:41 AM)
Incorrect DS With out insurance and buying my healthcare at some place other then planned parenthood my costs in the last five years would have been 7500. just to get my depo shot alone....375 per visit every 10 to 12 weeks. Because The thing about insurance that most people dont know or understand unless they work in insurance is a large part of the balance is adjusted. A doctors visit is 135 dollars... Add the insurance adjustment its 43 add the copay its 23 that the insurance pays out.. Remove the insurance and the adjustments, the price goes way up. Planned parent hood covered my shot for free, because my insurance refused to cover it, and it was medically necessary. If it would have covered my birth control my costs would have been higher. I pay 112 dollars for car insurance, Ive been in one not fault accident, however ive paid since i was 16 for insurance, I have it In case i need it. Same with disability insurance, I have it in case i need it. If i need knee surgery that 10k i paid in will be eaten up... My issue is with all the shit thats going on, they have made planned parenthood change their policies, what was once offered for free... is now 97 dollars. thats my Electric bill for 4 months, thats almost my car payment... I can now have my life saving shot covered because i fought my employer on the grounds his moral belief was not mine and forcing me to follow his when he is a business was discrimination. He could either get it covered, or he could face a lawsuit... Its now covered... With out the laws that are there to protect me, Id have to pay out of pocket for something that should be covered by what i pay for. Because he is a catholic, mind you the business isnt catholic nor does it have any religious base.. just his ideals

xssve -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 10:50:16 AM)
That's just an argument against insurance in general, not an argument against what should be insured - in that argument, BC is vastly cheaper than no BC for a whole host of very practical reasons. I suspect next you'll want to opt out of paying any medical expenses for pregnancy itself, since without BC, they should have stayed celibate. i.e., what it really boils down to, and this became pretty obvious when Rush made his slut comments, is the right wants to make it harder for anybody to be anything but celibate. Which works from both the fiscal and religious angles from the rights POV, given that children under 18 are the biggest bunch of freeloaders on the planet: they do not produce but only consume, nothing but a drain on our pocketbooks, and thus are deserving only of ridicule and prejudice. Hey, don't look at me, you guys said it. [:D] And, the right would be pushing BC like the Chinese if weren't for he fact they need more taxpayers to pay off the debt we're incurred to finance their lavish lifestyles, they want all the benefits they're accrued, they just don't want to pay for any of it. Kind of a quandary there, I'd say - you wanna guess who's gonna get the squeeze?

farglebargle -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 11:54:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Not paying for BC for any of their employees Stop lying. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. STOP LYING. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS.

kalikshama -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 4:04:09 PM)
quote: I fail to see why, when operating a business for the purpose of earning a profit, a church should not be subject to the same laws as every other employer. Otherwise, they are being granted a competitive advantage. If they don't like the rules an employer has to follow, then they shouldn't run a business. [sm=applause.gif]

Iamsemisweet -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 4:13:18 PM)
That is exactly right, SpiritedRadiance. I had a case a few months ago where a health insurance company denied an obviously valid claim. My client started getting collection letters from the hospital, so he paid the bill, while continuing to contest the denial with the insurance company. Once the insurance company came to their senses, and agreed to pay, we requested they reimburse my client, since the hospital wasn't owed anything. That started another hassle with the insurance company, since it turned out that the rate they paid was about a third less than what a patient was billed. God I hate insurance companies. quote: ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance Incorrect DS With out insurance and buying my healthcare at some place other then planned parenthood my costs in the last five years would have been 7500. just to get my depo shot alone....375 per visit every 10 to 12 weeks. Because The thing about insurance that most people dont know or understand unless they work in insurance is a large part of the balance is adjusted.

dcnovice -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 4:47:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead The simple answer to that one is "No, of course not." Anybody who thinks otherwise is making an argument for special privileges. WTF is there any debate about? Christians are used to getting special privileges, pointing out the inequality isn't going to phase a group that expects things to be that way. Indeed, I have wondered if one of the things agitating the bishops--and my friend mentioned in the OP--is the loss of that privileged position in a pluralistic, secular society.

farglebargle -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 4:55:29 PM)
How about if they want to participate in our secular political world, they pony up all those back taxes for the past... Oh, just call it 200 years, since there's no reason to be dicks about it...

dcnovice -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 5:20:39 PM)
quote: Paychecks are an exchange. The employee works (hopefully) and the employer pays them (hopefully, well). Insurance, vacations, company cars, etc. used to be called "percs". They're little "gimmes" thrown in to sweeten the pot (presumably to lure the best of the best to that company). I've had the good fortune to score some nice perks over the years: two trips to New Zealand, a stint at adventure school, an interview with the guy who found the Titanic, a lovely afternoon with Jane Goodall, a staring contest with a lion (he won), the chance to feed an anteater. Also some nice offices and access to a fine library. No car, though. I'm very grateful for the cool perks that my work life has thrown my way. Not for a minute, though, would I count my health insurance among them. Perhaps I'm one of those "professional victim" employees, but I have always considered my insurance to be part of my compensation--and my employers have always framed it that way, taking pains to point out that my total compensation comprised far more than my paycheck. To my "entitled" mindset, compensation ceases to be the employer's money once it's paid to a worker or to a third party on behalf of that employee. So it's really not the church's money that's being used to fund contraception or blood transfusions or what-have-you.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 5:24:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: Paychecks are an exchange. The employee works (hopefully) and the employer pays them (hopefully, well). Insurance, vacations, company cars, etc. used to be called "percs". They're little "gimmes" thrown in to sweeten the pot (presumably to lure the best of the best to that company). I've had the good fortune to score some nice perks over the years: two trips to New Zealand, a stint at adventure school, an interview with the guy who found the Titanic, a lovely afternoon with Jane Goodall, a staring contest with a lion (he won), the chance to feed an anteater. Also some nice offices and access to a fine library. No car, though. I'm very grateful for the cool perks that my work life has thrown my way. Not for a minute, though, would I count my health insurance among them. Perhaps I'm one of those "professional victim" employees, but I have always considered my insurance to be part of my compensation--and my employers have always framed it that way, taking pains to point out that my total compensation comprised far more than my paycheck. To my "entitled" mindset, compensation ceases to be the employer's money once it's paid to a worker or to a third party on behalf of that employee. So it's really not the church's money that's being used to fund contraception or blood transfusions or what-have-you. But, DC, once again: it isn't the money. It's asking the church to be a "middle man". It is only through the existence of the job, created by the church that the employees get group health rates. That access ... that "middle man service" means their hands are "dirty" also (in their mind). My guns analogy was pretty dead on. Surely, you wouldn't want to help me do something that you felt was a blight to mankind? Peace and comfort, Michael

dcnovice -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 5:28:52 PM)
quote: But, DC, once again: it isn't the money. It's asking the church to be a "middle man". It is only through the existence of the job, created by the church that the employees get group health rates. Is the church acting as a middleman if an employer uses part of his or her wages--which orginially came from the church--to buy birth control? Why does the church still "own" part of an employee's compensation but not other parts?

DaddySatyr -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 5:36:00 PM)
No. Once the payment is made. The transaction is complete. The conduit remains in operation or the insurance coverage stops. I'm not saying the church "owns" the insurance coverage. Please read what I took a while to type. The *only* reason that employee has access to that insurance plan (group rates) is because of the job which the church created.. What's going to wind up happening is the church is going to wind up firing people, needlessly. Peace and comfort, Michael

SpiritedRadiance -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 5:49:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet That is exactly right, SpiritedRadiance. I had a case a few months ago where a health insurance company denied an obviously valid claim. My client started getting collection letters from the hospital, so he paid the bill, while continuing to contest the denial with the insurance company. Once the insurance company came to their senses, and agreed to pay, we requested they reimburse my client, since the hospital wasn't owed anything. That started another hassle with the insurance company, since it turned out that the rate they paid was about a third less than what a patient was billed. God I hate insurance companies. quote: ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance Incorrect DS With out insurance and buying my healthcare at some place other then planned parenthood my costs in the last five years would have been 7500. just to get my depo shot alone....375 per visit every 10 to 12 weeks. Because The thing about insurance that most people dont know or understand unless they work in insurance is a large part of the balance is adjusted. If hes still having issues on that, the insurance is required to reimburse the entire amount regardless of adjustments.

dcnovice -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 6:18:06 PM)
quote: What's going to wind up happening is the church is going to wind up firing people, needlessly. Why?

SpiritedRadiance -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 6:19:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: What's going to wind up happening is the church is going to wind up firing people, needlessly. Why? Because they instead of complying with federal laws on how to run a business, are going to fire those that demand they follow those laws and only keep employees that follow their belief...

xssve -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 6:35:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: searching4mysir If you actually look at the numbers, though, that doesn't come to fruition. As the use of birth control rose, so did abortions. [sm=idea.gif] Huh? Every time I've actually looked at the numbers I've never seen that. I only spent about 5 seconds at it this time but that was long enough to notice the exact opposite. quote: ORIGINAL: http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-women/2009/10/14/abortion-down-contraception-up-recipe-for-health-reform Global abortion rates are down—from an estimated 45.5 million in 1995 to 41.6 million in 2003, according to a report issued Tuesday by the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit research center that supports abortion rights. A key reason for that drop, the report said, was that the proportion of married women using contraception worldwide increased from 54 percent in 1990 to 63 percent in 2003 as pregnancy prevention methods became more available and socially acceptable. They lie because they're being lied to: told not to listen to liberals, they have their own sources of "news" that lie to them day and night.

xssve -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 6:38:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve quote: Do you really think that your insurance cost is only $175 a month? You are ignoring the part that your EMPLOYER pays. That is only YOUR cost, not the total cost. And THAT is part of the problem. Employers share of benefits including FICA and other health insurance premiums, is commonly passed on to the employee in the view of mainstream economics, i.e., if they didn't have to pay half of FICA, they would use the extra money to retain employees by paying them higher wages. The loophole in mandated insurance coverage is that it only applies to full time employees, which has led to a relative scarcity of full time positions (which include healthcare benefits) being offered, leading to people working 60 hours a week in Two part time jobs, with no benefits, making too much money to qualify for medicare, but not enough to pay for adequate healthcare, or cover the expenses of catastrophic illness. These are the people who are bankrupted by a difficult delivery or the birth of a medically fragile child, and even without that, having a child in a hospital is practically like buying a car. There are basically huge gaps in the middle. quote: You think what comes out of your pocket is the only thing that matters. You don't give a shit about what comes out of someone else's pocket as long as you get what you want. Couldn't have said it better. Here's a number for you: Between 1981 and 2001 medical related bankruptcies increased by 2,200%.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Catholic Bishops' Fight Against HHS Mandate (3/19/2012 7:43:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Not paying for BC for any of their employees Stop lying. NO ONE BUT THE INSURED PAYS FOR THEIR BENEFITS. Really? What about those who are "too poor" to pay? Damn. There I go again. Using logic and facts to break apart fallacy.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625