RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but...

RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (Full Version)

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

Message

DomKen -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 1:07:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Bullshit. The plans that could not be grandfathered were junk plans that offered almost no coverage. Proof? Read the story I linked above it demonstrates the reality for one of the right's stories about someone losing their coverage. You could also go looking for the percentage of plans that did not qualify to be grandfathered before any price hikes. Those plans were all junk plans. So, I have to go prove your allegations? One "story" about someone losing coverage doesn't mean all those plans were junk plans. Why would anyone buy a "junk plan" to begin with? Methinks you're passing judgement about a plan that someone else very well could have happily chosen. Now? No choice for you! I already proved junk plans existed. I already demonstrated that one of the right wing's stories was actually about someone with one of those junk plans. People bought junk plans because they wanted some insurance coverage and either had no choice in what they could get, a lot of the junk plans were employer provided, or was all they could afford or they didn't understand what the policy they were buying covered, see the woman in the article I previously linked to. The reason to get rid of those plans is two fold. First the plans only gave the illusion of coverage. If someone did get ill enough to be hospitalized or needed virtually any diagnostic testing they would find themselves paying out of pocket despite having paid who knows how much in premiums. It is simple consumer protection. Second people with these policies will not seek medical care when appropriate, once they find out how little coverage is provided, It is well known that early treatment and/or preventative care offer much better outcomes over waiting till a person is so sick they have no choice but to seek care.

Phydeaux -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 1:42:26 AM)
Sure. There are junk plans out there. Like the ACA.

Lucylastic -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 1:50:49 AM)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2013/11/12/estimate-of-junk-health-insurance-market-over-1200-plans-covering-almost-4-million-people/ Estimate Of 'Junk' Health Insurance Market - Over 1,200 Plans Covering Almost 4 Million People With names like “Mini-Meds,” “Discount Health Cards,” “Medical Discount Plans” and “Fixed Benefit Indemnity Plans,” they sort of sound like health insurance. In fact, that’s exactly how they were marketed and sold – often on late night television. One such company called HealthcareOne LLC had a particularly effective TV ad that pushed “A Real Healthcare Plan Starting As Little As 25 Cents A Day.” Operating primarily out of a suburb of Phoenix, it was estimated that HealthcareOne was taking in about $500,000 to $600,000 per month – before the FTC shut it down. The list of DBA’s was impressive:

Lucylastic -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 1:53:18 AM)
http://news.msn.com/us/insurers-using-obamacare-confusion-to-sell-junk-plans The insurance industry, that ever-resilient sector, has found a way to turn America's confusion about Obamacare into a business opportunity. As Talking Points Memo's Eric Lach reports on Friday morning, some companies are taking advantage of that confusion to scare people away from the exchanges and sell them non-compliant fixed benefit plans.

Lucylastic -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 1:54:32 AM)
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/insurance-companies-misleading-letters-obamacare A 56-year-old Seattle resident with a 57-year-old husband and 15-year-old daughter, Donna had been looking forward to the savings that the Affordable Care Act had to offer. But that's not what she found. Instead, she'd be paying an additional $300 a month for coverage. The letter made no mention of the health insurance marketplace that would soon open in Washington, where she could shop for competitive plans, and only an oblique reference to financial help that she might qualify for, if she made the effort to call and find out. Otherwise, she'd be automatically rolled over to a new plan -- and, as the letter said, "If you're happy with this plan, do nothing." If Donna had done nothing, she would have ended up spending about $1,000 more a month for insurance than she will now that she went to the marketplace, picked the best plan for her family and accessed tax credits at the heart of the health care reform law. "The info that we were sent by LifeWise was totally bogus. Why the heck did they try to screw us?" Donna said. "People who are afraid of the ACA should be much more afraid of the insurance companies who will exploit their fear and end up overcharging them."

Lucylastic -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 1:55:53 AM)
The news was fraught with insurers breaking the law to cancel applicants’ policies. In August of 2008, Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield agreed “to pay a total of $13 million in fines and to offer new health coverage to more than 2,200 Californians the companies dropped after they became ill.” Later that same year, Health Net Inc. reached a settlement with the California Department of Insurance, agreeing “to offer new coverage to 926 customers who were dropped from individual or family policies in the years since 2004.” And in 2010, even after the Affordable Care Act was signed into law, an investigation revealed that WellPoint — the nation’s largest insurer — stretched the nation’s lose anti-rescission laws to cancel health insurance coverage for individuals when they need it most. The insurer used a computer algorithm that automatically targeted “policyholders recently diagnosed with breast cancer” and investigated them for “fraud.” To make matters worse, the company lied to prosecutors about the practice, falsely stating that it had changed its procedures for canceling the policies of patients after they become ill. Remember, this was a system in which more than 60 percent of medical bankruptcies occurred to people who already had insurance: the coverage just wasn’t good enough and shifted too much cost to the consumer. http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/10/29/2850701/coverage-good-thing/

DomKen -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 6:56:01 AM)
Thanks Lucy.

tj444 -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 8:06:25 AM)
Humana is advertising like crazy on tv and they have a standing (nightly?) infomercial going.. eck! imo all insurance corps are suspect.. and yesterday I see an article headline saying "Obama is brainstorming with health insurance corps" over the cancellations.. "brainstorming"???? wtf? I guess they really meant, Obama was gonna be taking orders from the health insurance corps, cuz that is the way it seems to be working.. health insurance corps are not gonna do anything that doesn't benefit themselves.. this is the Land of Massive Corporate Greed, after all.. I would classify those plans with very high deductibles as "junk plans" also and yes, I know they are considered to be more for a catastrophe and some people are ok with that (rather than pay extremely high premiums).. This Obamacare is certainly turning out to be a lesson in what not to do..

Moonhead -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 9:02:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 This Obamacare is certainly turning out to be a lesson in what not to do.. Trying to reach a compromise with the Republicans is always a bad idea, true enough: you wouldn't have seen Johnson bending over and lubing his arse like the Kenyan seems keen to whenever possible.

DesideriScuri -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 10:51:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen I already proved junk plans existed. I already demonstrated that one of the right wing's stories was actually about someone with one of those junk plans. No one disputed junk plans existed. One of the RW stories being about someone with a junk plan and that junk plans existed don't show that the "plans that could not be grandfathered were junk plans that offered almost no coverage." quote: People bought junk plans because they wanted some insurance coverage and either had no choice in what they could get, a lot of the junk plans were employer provided, or was all they could afford or they didn't understand what the policy they were buying covered, see the woman in the article I previously linked to. No choice? They chose to purchase those plans. Apparently, the choice to purchase a plan was there, so there was choice. If you don't like the plan your employer offers, you can go out and buy your own, can you not? quote: The reason to get rid of those plans is two fold. First the plans only gave the illusion of coverage. If someone did get ill enough to be hospitalized or needed virtually any diagnostic testing they would find themselves paying out of pocket despite having paid who knows how much in premiums. It is simple consumer protection. Second people with these policies will not seek medical care when appropriate, once they find out how little coverage is provided, It is well known that early treatment and/or preventative care offer much better outcomes over waiting till a person is so sick they have no choice but to seek care. Those who bought the plans were stupid, and don't know wtf they are doing, eh? If the plans were from the employer, obviously, then, the employer's HR or whoever negotiated the plans, were too stupid to know they weren't getting plans with coverage. You might think that Obamacare is giving people a "real" choice, but it isn't a "free" choice. Obamacare says, you have to choose (or else face a penalty), and you must choose from only certain plans. That's not freedom of choice, Ken.

tj444 -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 11:48:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri You might think that Obamacare is giving people a "real" choice, but it isn't a "free" choice. Obamacare says, you have to choose (or else face a penalty), and you must choose from only certain plans. That's not freedom of choice, Ken. choosing to take the penalty is a choice.. [;)]

DesideriScuri -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 12:19:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri You might think that Obamacare is giving people a "real" choice, but it isn't a "free" choice. Obamacare says, you have to choose (or else face a penalty), and you must choose from only certain plans. That's not freedom of choice, Ken. choosing to take the penalty is a choice.. [;)] Not a "free" choice, though (notice I had that in the part you quoted, too?). So, the choice for a woman who gets pregnant, despite any attempts (or lack thereof) to prevent that pregnancy gets to either raise the baby, or give it up for adoption. That's giving women a choice, too, isn't it?

DomKen -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 2:49:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri You might think that Obamacare is giving people a "real" choice, but it isn't a "free" choice. Obamacare says, you have to choose (or else face a penalty), and you must choose from only certain plans. That's not freedom of choice, Ken. choosing to take the penalty is a choice.. [;)] Not a "free" choice, though (notice I had that in the part you quoted, too?). So, the choice for a woman who gets pregnant, despite any attempts (or lack thereof) to prevent that pregnancy gets to either raise the baby, or give it up for adoption. That's giving women a choice, too, isn't it? false equivalency. The real comparison is that one may buy car insurance or one will pay fines when caught driving without.

DesideriScuri -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 4:28:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri You might think that Obamacare is giving people a "real" choice, but it isn't a "free" choice. Obamacare says, you have to choose (or else face a penalty), and you must choose from only certain plans. That's not freedom of choice, Ken. choosing to take the penalty is a choice.. [;)] Not a "free" choice, though (notice I had that in the part you quoted, too?). So, the choice for a woman who gets pregnant, despite any attempts (or lack thereof) to prevent that pregnancy gets to either raise the baby, or give it up for adoption. That's giving women a choice, too, isn't it? false equivalency. The real comparison is that one may buy car insurance or one will pay fines when caught driving without. No, it isn't. When it comes to auto insurance, do you have to have insurance if you don't drive? No. No, you don't. You aren't forced to purchase insurance to pay for the coverage of others if you aren't going to participate. Is that the case when it comes to health insurance? Didn't think so. Nice try. You failed.

DomKen -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 8:23:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri No, it isn't. When it comes to auto insurance, do you have to have insurance if you don't drive? No. No, you don't. You aren't forced to purchase insurance to pay for the coverage of others if you aren't going to participate. Is that the case when it comes to health insurance? Didn't think so. Nice try. You failed. No. It is accurate. Much more accurate than an asinine abortion comparison,.

DesideriScuri -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 8:31:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri No, it isn't. When it comes to auto insurance, do you have to have insurance if you don't drive? No. No, you don't. You aren't forced to purchase insurance to pay for the coverage of others if you aren't going to participate. Is that the case when it comes to health insurance? Didn't think so. Nice try. You failed. No. It is accurate. Much more accurate than an asinine abortion comparison,. No, Ken, it isn't accurate. Where do I sign up for my auto insurance subsidies? And, since you obviously couldn't see the comparison, it wasn't comparing health insurance to abortion, but that calling what US Citizens are being granted "choice" would be the same as pigeon-holing pregnant women into carrying a pregnancy to term is still choice. Sorry you couldn't grasp that concept, Ken.

DomKen -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 8:39:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri No, it isn't. When it comes to auto insurance, do you have to have insurance if you don't drive? No. No, you don't. You aren't forced to purchase insurance to pay for the coverage of others if you aren't going to participate. Is that the case when it comes to health insurance? Didn't think so. Nice try. You failed. No. It is accurate. Much more accurate than an asinine abortion comparison,. No, Ken, it isn't accurate. Where do I sign up for my auto insurance subsidies? And, since you obviously couldn't see the comparison, it wasn't comparing health insurance to abortion, but that calling what US Citizens are being granted "choice" would be the same as pigeon-holing pregnant women into carrying a pregnancy to term is still choice. Sorry you couldn't grasp that concept, Ken. I can grasp it. That's why I called it asinine. Americans have many choices in regards to health insurance under the ACA. If they don't get health insurance from their or their spouses employer they may qualify for Medicaid or they may get private insurance outside the exchanges or they may go through the exchanges or they may choose to not get insurance in which case they will see a reduction in any federal tax return they get. They will never be pursued to pay a fine but will only not get as big a refund.

DesideriScuri -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/16/2013 9:19:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri No, it isn't. When it comes to auto insurance, do you have to have insurance if you don't drive? No. No, you don't. You aren't forced to purchase insurance to pay for the coverage of others if you aren't going to participate. Is that the case when it comes to health insurance? Didn't think so. Nice try. You failed. No. It is accurate. Much more accurate than an asinine abortion comparison,. No, Ken, it isn't accurate. Where do I sign up for my auto insurance subsidies? And, since you obviously couldn't see the comparison, it wasn't comparing health insurance to abortion, but that calling what US Citizens are being granted "choice" would be the same as pigeon-holing pregnant women into carrying a pregnancy to term is still choice. Sorry you couldn't grasp that concept, Ken. I can grasp it. That's why I called it asinine. Americans have many choices in regards to health insurance under the ACA. If they don't get health insurance from their or their spouses employer they may qualify for Medicaid or they may get private insurance outside the exchanges or they may go through the exchanges or they may choose to not get insurance in which case they will see a reduction in any federal tax return they get. They will never be pursued to pay a fine but will only not get as big a refund. They don't have free choice, though, Ken (which was my point). They are still being forced to choose to pay this, or pay that. WTF kind of choice is that? (Just a hint: it's a homophone with "knot free") Thus, the choice for a pregnant woman to have the child and raise it or have the child and give it up for adoption is still giving her a choice, but it isn't a free choice. You have, once again, shown that you fail to grasp the point.

tj444 -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/17/2013 7:49:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri No, it isn't. When it comes to auto insurance, do you have to have insurance if you don't drive? No. No, you don't. You aren't forced to purchase insurance to pay for the coverage of others if you aren't going to participate. Is that the case when it comes to health insurance? Didn't think so. Nice try. You failed. If you don't drive, you do have the choice to buy uninsured/underinsured insurance to protect yourself from drivers/accidents even if you don't drive.. also, for a few years I had non-owners insurance cuz it was cheaper to go that way than to pay the daily insurance rates for car rentals.. I never had any claims but of course the pricks would raise my rate every 6 months until it was double what I started with! so eventually I didn't renew, then they were sending me emails claiming not renewing was illegal and they were ratting me out to the CA dmv if I didnt.. [8\|] with insurance of any kind, you are indirectly paying for others coverage including your own cuz it goes into the same pot and the insurance corps play the odds on what is paid out, they don't really care who gets claim payments, you or someone else.. (that doesn't mean it is easy to get it outta them tho..).. The only way you wont be paying for others is if you self-insure.. which in CA (for autos) you can do but you need a surety bond, cash deposit or self-insurance certificate to provide proof of the minimum coverage.. There are also self-insured health plans to cut out the insurance corps.. There is no lack of "choice" here in the US (of course I am not saying there are "good" choices..) [;)]

Yachtie -> RE: TICK-TOCK to the AHA as we know it... White House changes its mind but... (11/17/2013 9:20:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen They will never be pursued to pay a fine but will only not get as big a refund. Lovely[;)] how you put it. So palatable. [:'(]

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875