A Calming Wave has Swept the Debris Away Today ...

[Barndog56]

I didn't notice my insurance costs going down when everyone was required to have insurance........

 

[Tree Spud]

I didn't notice my insurance costs going down when everyone was required to have insurance........

That's because they were required to sign-up, but not pay. The so called penalty that was applied when they did not sign up to even out the economic balance was waived.

You were required to pay more, so others could refuse to pay,m then claim pre-existing condition to get free healthcare ...

Keep working hard so others don't have to ...

 

[Scott S]

First and foremost - I'm on the side of what's right - as in correct. I fully understand that no DNA proof exists to say Kavanaugh assaulted Ford. I'm not disputing that. There was no evidence, period. None of the witnesses that Dr. Ford named corroborated her story. Two of them denied it completely and the other said they had no knowledge of the supposed party that the assault took place at. Also, Dr. Ford changed her story on a number of things several times. Making her credibility extremely questionable. The other two accusations were even less credible. The man has had now 7 FBI background checks with no findings. ( And I know what this feels like because I once had a girl accuse me of being " all grabby & all over her " when I did no such thing. When her friends told me what she told THEM I supposedly did, I never spoke to her again. ) So I get the feeling of being wrongly accused. But all these women who have come forward in the past year or so aren't all liars either. Women in the workplace have been preyed on for decades by men in positions of power. Nobody said all women are liars, and nobody denies that women in general have been abused by men in power. However it's not reasonable or good for a society to hold Brett Kavanaugh responsible for what other men have done. It's immoral and contrary to the very foundation of western civilization.

Second - I'm not foaming at the mouth with a hot temper.. Both sides screaming at each other accomplishes what ?? Only name calling.

Third - When Gov. Mitt Romney in Mass. started the very same mandatory participation in health care in that state - why did no Republican from anywhere in the whole U.S.A. quickly condemn that move?? No politician jumped on his / her soapbox to rail against Romney's plan. There absolutely was (and still is) opposition to Romney's MassHealth plan from the political right, I live in New Hampshire, and worked in healthcare in Massachusetts for 10 years. Maybe you missed it, because it likely wasn't national news..Forget politics ……….. look at the arithmetic.I also enjoy arithmetic. Obama said the ACA would lower heathcare costs by $2500 a year per family. Healthcare costs have gone up since the ACA was passed pretty much everywhere, exponentially in more than a few states. Millions of Americans had healthcare plans they liked that were subsequently cancelled after the passing of the ACA. Then there's the cost. The ACA's cost to the taxpayer is in the trillions. As it has been for decades, we ALL are paying for other people that have no insurance by our constantly rising costs of health insurance. Hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, and doctors aren't going to provide services for free. Correct. So if all people need health insurance, why shouldn't all people throw something in the pot ?? Sure people should throw into the pot. That's math - not politics. The ACA forces people to buy a product at gun point. That's tyranny- not math. How much more do we all have to pay out because a large number of folks don't, or can't because they're paid so little ?? How many employers can't or won't offer health insurance ?? And because so many are uninsured, premiums keep rising, and employers are making employees pay more out of pocket. Please name one time adding 20,000 pages of regulations to anything has made that something cheaper. Yes, heathcare costs are a problem. Drowning an already over-regulated industry in more regulations will never lower the cost. It's an economical impossibility. So we're ALL paying more to cover the uninsured - like it or not. Of course, but if there was more competition in the market the prices for healthcare plans would be cheaper. That's simple economics. Unfortunately, making someone else's goods or services a "right" is not only evil, but it's economically unsustainable. The statistical mathematicians & economists who drafted the plan for "Obama-care" looked at the numbers - not the politics - to see what would best add more $$$ into the insurance system pool to cover most folks. The people who wrote this law have openly admitted they lied about what the ACA would actually do. ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber said, "Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage". It sure wasn't a perfect plan, and needed improvements, but numbers don't lie and they don't care about politics.The plan is fundamentally flawed, regardless of it's constitutionality. Taking money from the young and healthy to pay for the sick and old while simultaneously allowing the young and healthy people to stay on the sick and old people's health insurance until they're 26 is mathematical idiocy at best, designed to fail at worst. The plan also pays doctors and hospitals less, incentivizing early retirement of practicing doctors and making the best and brightest young people go into more lucrative professions. The whole country was bitching about rising health care costs before Obama even ran for President. We're still bitching because the costs are still going up and there are less choices now. Offering "choices" that cover little more than the simplest of things won't solve the overall problems. The Federal Government couldn't manage "Cash for Clunkers" without bankrupting the program 3 times. Medicare and Medicaid are bankrupt. Social Security is Bankrupt. Is that what you want for your healthcare? When was the last time the federal government really knocked it out of the park for you? Meanwhile the free market has raised more people out of poverty than anything else, and it's not even close.

Kavanaugh's past judicial decisions have very consistently favored corporate interests. Individuals' cases are almost always declared "without merit". So who do you think he'll vote for when insurance companies lobby to get pre-existing condition coverage nixed ?? Or coverage for certain medical conditions and/or treatments ?? His past decisions have favored Constitutionality, not political activism. If insurance companies weren't so heavily regulated they would be incentived to sell plans at competitive prices to everyone, including people with pre-existing conditions, and the plans would be much cheaper because of competition.

I noticed nobody here addressed the fact that Mitch thumbed is nose at the lawful right of any president to nominate a person to the Supreme Court. How was he abiding by the law ?? Never before in the history of our country has this happened. Laws apply to both / all sides, do they not ?? The Senate's Constitutionally mandated role is to "advise and consent". They advised President Obama that they did not consent. Politically greasy? Sure. Completely Constitutional? Yes. What Mitch didn't do at all is try to destroy Merrick Garland's, Justice Keagan's, or Justice Sotomayor's personal and professional life with completely unsubstantiated gang-rape claims. There is no moral equivalency here.

Ikeman from Texas - Is name-calling & inflammatory comments the best you can come up with ?? I don't hate you ………. why do you talk trash like that ?? My point ( of post #4 ) was that Kavanaugh will probably - based on his past voting record and public comments - vote in favor of insurance companies getting rid of coverage for pre-existing conditions. If that happens, ALL of us AND OUR FAMILIES will suffer - R, D, Ind., Lib., GP labels won't matter. I don't want to see that happen for any of us - regardless of political affiliation.

The Constitution & Bill of Rights guarantee the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. My pursuit of happiness would include health coverage for my family, their kids, and grandkids. Is that different for anyone here ?? The Constitution and Bill of Rights do not guarantee the right to have the government force people at gun point to help you pay for your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Besides, the free market can make your life and pursuit of happiness cheaper and more accessible than any government plan ever can. And seriously....Do you really want Donald Trump involved in your health care?

No hate here …………… peace to all of you guys.

ALL LOVE, ALL THE TIME. It's communities like HT that give me hope.

 

[Bowsnbucks]

Gsquared 23, Post # 20 - You said Obamacare and the mandate was unconstitutional - The Supreme Court with Chief Justice John Roberts casting the deciding vote said it was.

I never said I wanted the government to be in charge of our health care either. But there has to be a better system than we have now so most folks can be covered - and I'm not talking about bumps and bruises as someone claimed. If anyone doesn't like their prescription drug plan that lets you pay less - then pay full price for your drugs. U.S citizens pay WAY more for our prescriptions than the rest of the world does for the same medications made by the same companies. Does that make you smile ?? If you like the "every man for himself, and if you can't swim - then sink" mentality, I ask this : Are you all filthy rich enough to be able to withstand a serious medical condition ?? Can you take a bill of maybe $250,000 to $500,000 ?? Are you going to say, " Well, I'll just quietly die ( or my family member can die ) because the insurance company has a profit goal they want to reach ?? "

There are already lots of insurance companies out there, as well as hospitals & doctors. "Competition" hasn't seemed to have lowered anyone's bills that I've ever heard celebrations for. There is a saying in business that goes way back - " There's room at the trough." That means there's lots of money to be made - so nobody spoil the game.

Tree Spud, Post #22 - I can't disagree with you on that one. For the system to come close to working, all should pay something into it. Otherwise, we're left with what we've had for so long - rising premiums to cover those with no coverage.

Buckly, post #12 - Wasn't the insurance market the place where all folks were supposed to buy their insurance ?? The Federal gov. wasn't the entity offering insurance, they were requiring people to buy coverage. Isn't that what some of the guys on this thread are saying - they don't want to pay for someone else ?? So ……. either everyone "puts some skin in the game" & buys insurance, or we keep paying higher premiums to cover them ( or our employers do ). Just by simple fact - someone has to pay. So do we want each citizen to pay in ………….. or do we pay FOR them ???

There's another thing that'll play into the economic picture, affecting more than just being able to pay for your own healthcare. Economists and business leaders from all political stripes say automation has already, and will continue to eliminate millions more jobs. How do people RAPIDLY re-educate themselves for fewer jobs, that pay less ( due to job competition ) at a pace that at least keeps up with the pace of technology and automation ?? How many millions of folks are working 2 or 3 jobs that pay crap, and so can't save enough to pay for their own college if they wanted to re-train for some other field ?? ( When asked a similar question, a conservative, syndicated columnist answered by saying those people are either stupid, lazy, or went to the wrong school. I cut & saved the article. It appeared in a newspaper about 3 years ago. ) AI and automation replace humans faster than humans can adapt. I've never heard or read of any economist that says " no problem " to that question. So under those economic conditions, how does a growing population pay for healthcare ?? ( I realize there is no easy, simple answer. ) But those who suggest that folks who can't afford to pay for insurance are lazy, stupid, or need to work harder at more jobs, are just looking to dismiss those people and / or the problem.

Incidentally - For those of you who think I'm a flaming liberal who wants to give everything away ………… I've worked for everything I've gotten. Nobody gave me anything - including my parents. I paid for almost all of my college education myself. 39+ years as a big construction and industrial electrician and I've done numerous "side jobs" over all those years. Steel, concrete, heavy equipment, machinery, conduit, switchgear, etc. and voltages up to 33,000 volts. I don't want to hand money over to people who won't work, take drugs, & all that sh*t either. I'm a centrist who likes several things from both party's ideologies.

What bothers me is when people who are working hard at their job(s), paying their taxes, obeying the laws, raising families, doing all the right stuff ……….. get cancer - say - and their insurance company says they won't pay for the necessary treatment. And getting rid of the coverage for pre-existing conditions IS VERY MUCH what has been in the proposed changes !!! That's what the ins. companies want, and the Republican party has backed. Most of us remember Paul Knox - aka "Lickcreek" - on here. He had ALS. If the law gets changed to avoid paying for pre-existing conditions, would any of us have said, " Well, Paul - you should have worked at a higher paying job so you could have paid for all your necessary treatments. " ???? Where does humanity enter the picture …………. or doesn't it for some of you ???

If anyone takes the stance that " My employer pays for my insurance ", or " I can afford to buy my own insurance , so what do I care if those other people won't be treated for their conditions ? " - may I direct you to the Gospel of Luke, chapter 10, vs. 29-37 ( The Good Samaritan ). And also James, chapter 5, vs. 1-6, for the ones who think everything must "make good business sense." It seems God wants us to care for others as we would want to be treated ourselves. So ………. How do we find a solution ?? More name - calling ???

I won't comment further - I don't pretend to have "the" answer. I just think we ought to try and find the best one to cover the most people fairly.

 

[4wanderingeyes]

BNB, I suggest you change the channel once on a while. The world isnt coming to an end, and everything you enjoy in life isnt going to stop just because their is now a right leaning justice system. Believe it or not, they cant just change things on a whim. They system sways back and forth, as does the presidency, and here we are, the world hasnt ended, like CNN, MSNBC, and most colleges have warned about. There is a reason about every 8 years things shift the other direction, to even things out, the way our constitution was designed to do. Our last president brought things a tad to far left, so now it swings back right to even things out, I predict in about 6 more years it will swing back left again. Dont let politics drag you down, stay off daily political sites, and life will be so much better!

Chances are in the next 6 years of the republican president, your life wont be drastically effected.

As for the health care swindle that has been going on, about 10 years ago, I had great coverage, then about 8 years ago, my option for coverage disappeared, because there was now a market. Well the first couple years my insurance on the market was about the same, then 4 years ago, it more then tripled, and with a $7000 deductible. I was paying $300 for family per month, with a $15 copay, and $500 deductible, to $1400 for just to cover myself, with $100 copay, and a $7000 deductible. Sounds like a much better option! NOT!

So 4 years ago I chose to go without, and pay the penalty, the non constitutional part of the deal, because I could no longer afford insurance, make me pay a penalty, so other lazy people can get free insurance! There is no longer a incentive for smaller businesses to rpovide health coverage, and pay a portion like they use to. Now I am stuck paying a penalty, and also my own dr bills. Thanks Obama!

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

We paid the penalty for years. We have insurance now basically because my boss forced me to get it. The premium is about $1900 a month and when we do go to the Dr. we dont use the insurance and pay cash. The medical institutions will charge at least double and many times more than that if you are running it through insurance. We would never reach our deductible in a years time and if something major was to happen the deductible would be met in one visit.

We are blessed and cursed to live down the road from the best medical center in the world. Great health care, but it is the reason our insurance is so high. That and South Minneapolis.

 

[IkemanTx]

Gsquared 23, Post # 20 - You said Obamacare and the mandate was unconstitutional - The Supreme Court with Chief Justice John Roberts casting the deciding vote said it was.

I never said I wanted the government to be in charge of our health care either. But there has to be a better system than we have now so most folks can be covered - and I'm not talking about bumps and bruises as someone claimed. If anyone doesn't like their prescription drug plan that lets you pay less - then pay full price for your drugs. U.S citizens pay WAY more for our prescriptions than the rest of the world does for the same medications made by the same companies. Does that make you smile ?? If you like the "every man for himself, and if you can't swim - then sink" mentality, I ask this : Are you all filthy rich enough to be able to withstand a serious medical condition ?? Can you take a bill of maybe $250,000 to $500,000 ?? Are you going to say, " Well, I'll just quietly die ( or my family member can die ) because the insurance company has a profit goal they want to reach ?? "

There are already lots of insurance companies out there, as well as hospitals & doctors. "Competition" hasn't seemed to have lowered anyone's bills that I've ever heard celebrations for. There is a saying in business that goes way back - " There's room at the trough." That means there's lots of money to be made - so nobody spoil the game.

Tree Spud, Post #22 - I can't disagree with you on that one. For the system to come close to working, all should pay something into it. Otherwise, we're left with what we've had for so long - rising premiums to cover those with no coverage.

Buckly, post #12 - Wasn't the insurance market the place where all folks were supposed to buy their insurance ?? The Federal gov. wasn't the entity offering insurance, they were requiring people to buy coverage. Isn't that what some of the guys on this thread are saying - they don't want to pay for someone else ?? So ……. either everyone "puts some skin in the game" & buys insurance, or we keep paying higher premiums to cover them ( or our employers do ). Just by simple fact - someone has to pay. So do we want each citizen to pay in ………….. or do we pay FOR them ???

There's another thing that'll play into the economic picture, affecting more than just being able to pay for your own healthcare. Economists and business leaders from all political stripes say automation has already, and will continue to eliminate millions more jobs. How do people RAPIDLY re-educate themselves for fewer jobs, that pay less ( due to job competition ) at a pace that at least keeps up with the pace of technology and automation ?? How many millions of folks are working 2 or 3 jobs that pay crap, and so can't save enough to pay for their own college if they wanted to re-train for some other field ?? ( When asked a similar question, a conservative, syndicated columnist answered by saying those people are either stupid, lazy, or went to the wrong school. I cut & saved the article. It appeared in a newspaper about 3 years ago. ) AI and automation replace humans faster than humans can adapt. I've never heard or read of any economist that says " no problem " to that question. So under those economic conditions, how does a growing population pay for healthcare ?? ( I realize there is no easy, simple answer. ) But those who suggest that folks who can't afford to pay for insurance are lazy, stupid, or need to work harder at more jobs, are just looking to dismiss those people and / or the problem.

Incidentally - For those of you who think I'm a flaming liberal who wants to give everything away ………… I've worked for everything I've gotten. Nobody gave me anything - including my parents. I paid for almost all of my college education myself. 39+ years as a big construction and industrial electrician and I've done numerous "side jobs" over all those years. Steel, concrete, heavy equipment, machinery, conduit, switchgear, etc. and voltages up to 33,000 volts. I don't want to hand money over to people who won't work, take drugs, & all that sh*t either. I'm a centrist who likes several things from both party's ideologies.

What bothers me is when people who are working hard at their job(s), paying their taxes, obeying the laws, raising families, doing all the right stuff ……….. get cancer - say - and their insurance company says they won't pay for the necessary treatment. And getting rid of the coverage for pre-existing conditions IS VERY MUCH what has been in the proposed changes !!! That's what the ins. companies want, and the Republican party has backed. Most of us remember Paul Knox - aka "Lickcreek" - on here. He had ALS. If the law gets changed to avoid paying for pre-existing conditions, would any of us have said, " Well, Paul - you should have worked at a higher paying job so you could have paid for all your necessary treatments. " ???? Where does humanity enter the picture …………. or doesn't it for some of you ???

If anyone takes the stance that " My employer pays for my insurance ", or " I can afford to buy my own insurance , so what do I care if those other people won't be treated for their conditions ? " - may I direct you to the Gospel of Luke, chapter 10, vs. 29-37 ( The Good Samaritan ). And also James, chapter 5, vs. 1-6, for the ones who think everything must "make good business sense." It seems God wants us to care for others as we would want to be treated ourselves. So ………. How do we find a solution ?? More name - calling ???

I won't comment further - I don't pretend to have "the" answer. I just think we ought to try and find the best one to cover the most people fairly.

Competition isn’t even allowed, because insurance companies have been told exactly what they HAVE to cover or else. There is no availability to build plans tailored to an individual... there isn’t even real competition. When I can’t can’t even buy a plan from 40 miles away from me (because it crosses a border), you can’t claim that completion hasn’t helped.
Just look at the “co-medical plans that have popped up. They are a TON cheaper than an insurance plan, so basically the same thing, but allow people to buy plans that don’t subsidize every medical expense they don’t need covered in the first place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bowsnbucks]

4Wanderingeye - I'm not ready to jump off a cliff !! And I don't watch TV constantly - I read newspapers, books & articles by investment gurus like Jack Bogle, Burton Malkiel, Paul Samuelson (the late professor of economics at M.I.T. and a Nobel laureate ), Arthur Levitt ( former chairman of the S.E.C. ), magazines like Money, Kiplinger's, Time and U.S. News & World report, and scan the internet. Thanks to years of such reading, I've gained more financially with my brain than my back !!

IkemanTx - Did you notice I said I didn't have "the" answer ?? ( and I'm not jabbing at you here !! Just things to think about. ) When you said the co-med plans are cheaper and don't cover things you don't need covered anyway ……….. How can anyone predict when a serious condition will arise so you can hurry up and buy better coverage ?? What happens to a young married ( healthier ) couple with a cheaper, basic co-med plan and their Dr. tells them their 2 yr.- old has a brain tumor ?? Or your wife has MS ?? If ins. companies can deny coverage if they try to buy a better plan, ( pre-existing condition ), do they make funeral plans ?? And if a hospital says they'll treat the kid - somebody's paying for that. We're ALL paying for others now - and have been for decades. Do we want everyone to pay in, contribute, "have skin in the game" - or continue as it's been ?? I'm honestly interested to hear from the statistical experts, mathematicians, economists, etc. to come up with a best plan / outline / blueprint.

I just don't want to see the coverage for pre-existing conditions get voted away. Lots of people of all ages, political leanings, & faiths will suffer and / or die needlessly. Anyone think hospitals or Big Pharma will treat for free ??

 

[H20fwler]

I have a question, has the Trump regime ever said that they are looking at a plan that would not honor pre-existing health issues? All I can remember hearing about is that the current system is not sustainable and that something needs to replace it that is fair for all.
I know I have seen commercials that show the old lady in a wheelchair being pushed off a cliff and a lot of doomsday left rhetoric propaganda that looks like fear mongering more than anything. What does the current POTUS have in mind as far as health care? So far I have been pleased with the campaign promises made and kept and I try not to pay much attention to Trumps foot in mouth blunders and focus more on the results.
I also think that what most of the MSM has done along with the majority of the Dem politicians and quite a few of the Republican ones has been about criminal with the slander-back stabbing and "resist" crap, it is setting an extremely dangerous and idiotic precedence.

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

Trump Just talked about pre existing conditions being covered at his rally in Rochester Mn.