mnealtx 0 #26 December 4, 2009 Quote>Or if I don't have a plan that fed.gov thinks sufficient. Correct. And 99% of current healthcare plans will be sufficient. Joe's Health Care and Bait Shop policies may not be enough though. Well, of course they will be... as long as they don't enroll anyone else after Obamacare starts, never change their coverage or premiums... The smarmy comment equating those who don't support Obamacare to ignorant rednecks sorta put the kibosh on your attempt to look reasonable, though.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #27 December 4, 2009 >Well, of course they will be... as long as they don't enroll anyone >else after Obamacare starts, never change their coverage or premiums... Nope, sorry. If you have any reasonable health care plan - even if you change it - you will not have to pay the additional tax, since you won't need government help for healthcare. Cool, eh? Sure does sound scary when you put it that way, though! Good to see the politics of fear and disinformation still alive and well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #28 December 4, 2009 Quote>Well, of course they will be... as long as they don't enroll anyone >else after Obamacare starts, never change their coverage or premiums... Nope, sorry. If you have any reasonable health care plan - even if you change it - you will not have to pay the additional tax, since you won't need government help for healthcare. Cool, eh? I wasn't talking about taxes, Bill. Nice attempt at a misdirect, though. QuoteSure does sound scary when you put it that way, though! Good to see the politics of fear and disinformation still alive and well. Then why do you keep doing it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #29 December 4, 2009 QuoteQuote Compare that to the house healthcare plan, where you pay only if you do not have your own health insurance. That seems to ignore the substantial debt associated with it. Taxpayers pay for this regardless. And when revenues get further into the red, more will pay direct taxes for it. We don't ignore it. We accept it. It's going to cost more no matter what we do. Without a public option, the insurance companies will get too big to fail, and when they do, our health care system (or lack thereof) will destroy us. Taxpayers will pay dearly. Then we will finally join the rest of the developed world and have a single payer system. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #30 December 4, 2009 >I wasn't talking about taxes, Bill. Then you apparently seriously misunderstand the discussion. The current house plan includes a tax penalty if you do not have health insurance. If you do, the tax penalty does not apply. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #31 December 4, 2009 Quote>I wasn't talking about taxes, Bill. Then you apparently seriously misunderstand the discussion. Thread drift happens - like how YOU pulled it onto the penalty tax. QuoteThe current house plan includes a tax penalty if you do not have health insurance. If you do, the tax penalty does not apply. As long as it's an insurance plan that fed.gov deems sufficient. And as long as it never enrolls any more people or changes the coverages or premiums.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #32 December 4, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Compare that to the house healthcare plan, where you pay only if you do not have your own health insurance. That seems to ignore the substantial debt associated with it. Taxpayers pay for this regardless. And when revenues get further into the red, more will pay direct taxes for it. We don't ignore it. We accept it. It's going to cost more no matter what we do. Without a public option, the insurance companies will get too big to fail, and when they do, our health care system (or lack thereof) will destroy us. Taxpayers will pay dearly. Then we will finally join the rest of the developed world and have a single payer system. That's besides the point. It may be true, but the statement being addressed was Bill's claim that you only have to pay for this new plan if you didn't have your own insurance. I think the math says that those people are the ones paying the least additional amount in this. Taxpayers (those who pay income taxes and therefore the debt payments) get a load. So the benefit versus the cost is quite germane, even if you already have a plan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #33 December 4, 2009 Quote You say this plan will reduce health care costs. What if it doesn't? Who said that? What I heard is that the bill should slow down or temporary stop the healthcare cost _increase_. The average insurance premiums doubled during last ten years, meaning that private industry is not able (or does not want) to do that. Quote You say it won't result in rationing of care. What if it does? You already have rationing of care - people kicked out of plans, insurance denies claims, and so on. What exactly is your concern? Quote You say this won't add to the deficit. What if it does? Who said that? Quote You say this won't put the insurance companies out of business. What if it does? This would mean existing insurance companies are run so badly that they cannot compete even with shitty, wasteful and poorly-run service provided by the government (as Republicans tell us, everything run by government runs shitty comparing to Private Industry, excluding AIG and GM). If service provided by UPS was worse and more expensive than the one provided by USPS, I wouldn't have no problem with them going out of business. What if it does? A new company would take their market share instead. Would it mean something dramatic to you? Only if you invested into the failed company. Quote Whether you think it will accomplish it's goals or not, what do you think will be done to remedy the situation if it fails miserably? Will it be repealed? Will the next group of bureaucrats decide they're the ones that can "fix" it? Will it continue to stay in place even if it results in the exact opposite of it's stated goals? Probably exactly the same what was done after spending billions of dollars and a bunch of lives lost it was obvious there are no WMDs in Iraq. Quote Will politicians continue to pour money into a failing program? Likely, as they did it with Iraq. At least Republican money would be used for something useful for the citizens of America, not just for something harmful for others.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #34 December 4, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Compare that to the house healthcare plan, where you pay only if you do not have your own health insurance. That seems to ignore the substantial debt associated with it. Taxpayers pay for this regardless. And when revenues get further into the red, more will pay direct taxes for it. We don't ignore it. We accept it. It's going to cost more no matter what we do. Without a public option, the insurance companies will get too big to fail, and when they do, our health care system (or lack thereof) will destroy us. Taxpayers will pay dearly. Then we will finally join the rest of the developed world and have a single payer system. That's besides the point. It may be true, but the statement being addressed was Bill's claim that you only have to pay for this new plan if you didn't have your own insurance. I think the math says that those people are the ones paying the least additional amount in this. Taxpayers (those who pay income taxes and therefore the debt payments) get a load. So the benefit versus the cost is quite germane, even if you already have a plan. It isn't fair to claim that we ignore the substantial debt associated with one feature of the plan while ignoring the substantial debt associated with not implementing the plan at all. Anyway, if what you say is really true, that those who stubbornly refuse to buy any insurance at all will end up paying the least into this, then their tax should be much higher than what is being proposed in order to balance things out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #35 December 4, 2009 Quote Or if I don't have a plan that fed.gov thinks sufficient. Whether I need it or not. So are you going to show us a link for such a plan, provided by a reputable insurance company? So many of you talking about those ghost plans, but nobody so far provided a link. Which likely means that such plans do not exist.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #36 December 4, 2009 QuoteQuote Or if I don't have a plan that fed.gov thinks sufficient. Whether I need it or not. So are you going to show us a link for such a plan, provided by a reputable insurance company? So many of you talking about those ghost plans, but nobody so far provided a link. Which likely means that such plans do not exist. Sounds more like a straw man than a ghost plan.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #37 December 4, 2009 QuoteQuote Or if I don't have a plan that fed.gov thinks sufficient. Whether I need it or not. So are you going to show us a link for such a plan, provided by a reputable insurance company? So many of you talking about those ghost plans, but nobody so far provided a link. Which likely means that such plans do not exist. Blue Cross / Blue Shield good enough for you, George? Sorry no link, it's on one of those online quote sites. Look for Foundation Hospital only plan. QuoteHospital only plan Office Visit for Primary Doctor - Not Covered Office Visit for Specialist - Not Covered Prescription Drugs Generic: Not Covered Brand: Not Covered Non-Formulary: Not Covered Preventive Care Coverage Periodic Health Exam - Not Covered Periodic OB-GYN Exam - Not Covered Well Baby Care- Not Covered Prescription Drug Coverage Generic Prescription Drugs - Not Covered Brand Prescription Drugs - Not Covered Non-Formulary Prescription Drugs Coverage - Not Covered Mail Order for Prescription Drugs - Not Available Separate Prescription Drugs Deductible - None Hospital Services Coverage Emergency Room - 20% of Allowable amount after $200 Copayment amount (waived if admitted) and Calendar Year Deductible Outpatient Lab/X-Ray - Not Covered Outpatient Surgery - Not Covered Hospitalization - 20% of Allowable amount after deductible Maternity Coverage Pre & Postnatal Office Visit - Not Covered Labor & Delivery Hospital Stay - Not Covered Additional Coverage Chiropractic Coverage - Not Covered Mental Health Coverage - Not Covered Enjoy that humble pie. Edit to add: You too, perfesser.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #38 December 5, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Or if I don't have a plan that fed.gov thinks sufficient. Whether I need it or not. So are you going to show us a link for such a plan, provided by a reputable insurance company? So many of you talking about those ghost plans, but nobody so far provided a link. Which likely means that such plans do not exist. Blue Cross / Blue Shield good enough for you, George? Sorry no link, it's on one of those online quote sites. Look for Foundation Hospital only plan. Quote Hospital only plan Office Visit for Primary Doctor - Not Covered Office Visit for Specialist - Not Covered Prescription Drugs Generic: Not Covered Brand: Not Covered Non-Formulary: Not Covered Preventive Care Coverage Periodic Health Exam - Not Covered Periodic OB-GYN Exam - Not Covered Well Baby Care- Not Covered Prescription Drug Coverage Generic Prescription Drugs - Not Covered Brand Prescription Drugs - Not Covered Non-Formulary Prescription Drugs Coverage - Not Covered Mail Order for Prescription Drugs - Not Available Separate Prescription Drugs Deductible - None Hospital Services Coverage Emergency Room - 20% of Allowable amount after $200 Copayment amount (waived if admitted) and Calendar Year Deductible Outpatient Lab/X-Ray - Not Covered Outpatient Surgery - Not Covered Hospitalization - 20% of Allowable amount after deductible Maternity Coverage Pre & Postnatal Office Visit - Not Covered Labor & Delivery Hospital Stay - Not Covered Additional Coverage Chiropractic Coverage - Not Covered Mental Health Coverage - Not Covered Enjoy that humble pie. Edit to add: You too, perfesser. Sorry, I thought you were going on about health plans. Clearly what you posted is something quite different since it isn't a health plan by any stretch of the imagination.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #39 December 5, 2009 Quote Blue Cross / Blue Shield good enough for you, George? Sure, good enough. Quote Sorry no link, it's on one of those online quote sites. Look for Foundation Hospital only plan. "This plan is not available in California" And apparently it seems to be available only in Texas. Looking through the plan brochure it sounds like extremely shitty plan, and I wonder how many people actually getting it. Do you have one? Do you know anyone who has one? So far it looks exactly like a "ghost plan".* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #40 December 5, 2009 QuoteLooking through the plan brochure it sounds like extremely shitty plan, and I wonder how many people actually getting it. Your opinion. Works just fine for younger people that only need catastrophic coverage. QuoteDo you have one? Do you know anyone who has one? That's exactly the type of plan I was covered under as a child - my folks paid cash when we went in to the family doctor for minor shit. QuoteSo far it looks exactly like a "ghost plan". Evidently NOT a 'ghost plan', since it exists. Here's one for you: Anthem Basic PPO 2500, from California. Covers more than the Foundation one I showed before, but still not Obamacare-compliant: Quote Office Visit for Primary Doctor - Not Covered until out-of-pocket limit met; then no charge Office Visit for Specialist - Not Covered until out-of-pocket limit met; then no charge Coinsurance - 20% after deductible Annual Deductible Individual: - $2,500 Separate Prescription Drugs Deductible - None Prescription Drugs Generic: Not Covered Brand: Not Covered Non-Formulary: Not Covered Annual Out-of-Pocket Limit Individual:$5,000 Includes deductible Lifetime Maximum$5 Million per person Health Savings Account (HSA) Eligible - No Out-of-Network Coverage - Yes Out of Country Coverage - Emergency Care Only Preventive Care Coverage Periodic Health Exam Healthy Check Centers: $25 Copay for basic screenings or $75 Copay for premium screenings (ages 7 to adult), deductible waived Periodic OB-GYN Exam - 20% Coinsurance, deductible waived Well Baby CareNot Covered Prescription Drug Coverage Generic Prescription Drugs Not Covered Brand Prescription Drugs Not Covered Non-Formulary Prescription Drugs Coverage Not Covered Mail Order for Prescription Drugs Not Available Separate Prescription Drugs Deductible None Hospital Services Coverage Emergency Room$100 Copay (waived if admitted) Plus 20% Coinsurance after deductible Outpatient Lab/X-Ray - No Charge after out-of-pocket maximum is met Outpatient Surgery - 20% Coinsurance after deductible Hospitalization - 20% Coinsurance after deductible Maternity Coverage Pre & Postnatal Office Visit-Not Covered Labor & Delivery Hospital Stay-Not Covered Additional Coverage Chiropractic Coverage-Not Covered Mental Health Coverage-Plan pays $25 per visit after out-of-pocket is met, up to 20 visits per calendar year Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #41 December 5, 2009 Quote That's exactly the type of plan I was covered under as a child - my folks paid cash when we went in to the family doctor for minor shit. At this time you probably didn't pay $450 for drugs. Unfortunately glorious private industry raised the drug costs so high that a plan without drug coverage is pretty much meaningless now. Quote Evidently NOT a 'ghost plan', since it exists. It may exist as a deprecated plan from old times, or as a requirement from some local authorities. The important question is, if the bill passes and this plan gets removed, how many people would it affect? Quote Anthem Basic PPO 2500, from California. Covers more than the Foundation one I showed before, but still not Obamacare-compliant: Personally I would not consider "catastrophic coverage" a plan which does not provide ANY drug coverage even after a large deductible is met. Drugs are expensive, and for some diseases drug costs may easily exceed treatment costs. And unlike emergency room healthcare, a pharmacy will not provide you drugs for free. Anyway, I wonder how many people really got this one? I'm serious, each insurance company has a bunch of plans no one is using, which stay there just to increase the portfolio, or follow some regulations. For example, there is a bunch of plans, and for $7 more ($143 versus $136) one can get a HSA plan which covers everything after the deductible is met. Or for $3 less one can get a PPO plan with larger deductible which covers generics. Yet another "ghost plan". If we remove this plan from this list, it would hardly affect anyone.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #42 December 5, 2009 QuoteQuote That's exactly the type of plan I was covered under as a child - my folks paid cash when we went in to the family doctor for minor shit. At this time you probably didn't pay $450 for drugs. Unfortunately glorious private industry raised the drug costs so high that a plan without drug coverage is pretty much meaningless now. Again, in your opinion. QuoteQuote Evidently NOT a 'ghost plan', since it exists. It may exist as a deprecated plan from old times, or as a requirement from some local authorities. The important question is, if the bill passes and this plan gets removed, how many people would it affect? Obviously, as many people as it covers, to begin with - they'll end up having to pay for coverage they don't want/need. QuoteQuote Anthem Basic PPO 2500, from California. Covers more than the Foundation one I showed before, but still not Obamacare-compliant: Personally I would not consider "catastrophic coverage" a plan which does not provide ANY drug coverage even after a large deductible is met. Drugs are expensive, and for some diseases drug costs may easily exceed treatment costs. And unlike emergency room healthcare, a pharmacy will not provide you drugs for free. Anyway, I wonder how many people really got this one? I'm serious, each insurance company has a bunch of plans no one is using, which stay there just to increase the portfolio, or follow some regulations. For example, there is a bunch of plans, and for $7 more ($143 versus $136) one can get a HSA plan which covers everything after the deductible is met. Or for $3 less one can get a PPO plan with larger deductible which covers generics. Yet another "ghost plan". If we remove this plan from this list, it would hardly affect anyone. Again, your opinion.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #43 December 5, 2009 QuoteQuote At this time you probably didn't pay $450 for drugs. Unfortunately glorious private industry raised the drug costs so high that a plan without drug coverage is pretty much meaningless now. Again, in your opinion. What about your opinion? Would you consider it reasonable catastrophic coverage? Would you get one yourself instead of getting a HSA plan which costs $7 more, and why? And please define what YOU consider "catastrophic coverage"? Quote Obviously, as many people as it covers, to begin with - they'll end up having to pay for coverage they don't want/need. Sure, but if it currently covers zero people, this would mean that nobody is affected. That's why it is important to understand how many people are covered. Even if there are some, switching to HSA plan for $7 more looks like a much better option, as potential savings from HSA will far exceed extra $82 a year. QuoteAgain, your opinion. Versus your opinion. Fair game then.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #44 December 5, 2009 I will do something conservatives don't; answer questions. Not saying you, but the other side usually refuses questions and answers questions not asked; Plain style. Quote You say this plan will reduce health care costs. What if it doesn't? Then we will have the satisfaction of knowing we are now considered a normal industrialized country instead of the bastardized version we now have. Quote You say it won't result in rationing of care. What if it does? We now have rationing of care, so what would be the diff? Truth is, Mr Capitalist, there would be more people eligible for all kinds of care, so there would be more demand, hence the supply would adapt to the demand and expand as well. It would open up jobs and general well-being for most. Point is, WE HAVE RATIONING, SO WHAT'S YOUR POINT WITH THIS QUESTION? Shouldn't it read, "What if we have a different version of rationing?" Quote You say this won't add to the deficit. What if it does? Virtually every admin has a debt increase, the whoppers have come under presidents with an R next to their name other than of course WWII and other times like that. Quote You say this won't put the insurance companies out of business. What if it does? Then we'll have fewer CEo's maing 10-digit salaries as they trade American health for corporate profit. Quote Whether you think it will accomplish it's goals or not, what do you think will be done to remedy the situation if it fails miserably? That is such a general hypothetical question that it's ridiculous to expent anyone to answer. What kind of failure? What area; cost, svs availability, etc? Failure comes in so many flavors with a system this large. Right now we're addressing the failure that HC has already provided: cost overruns, denial, exclusion, etc. So we ARE NOW addressing failures, just because your glasses are rosey and you have HC doesn't mean we all have rosey glassses. Quote Will it be repealed? Are you asking if it will be repealed in full if it fails? They will probably tweak it as needed. It's so fun to converse with conservatives: HC will pass or fail. What if it has problems that are rectified? Quote Will the next group of bureaucrats decide they're the ones that can "fix" it? Or the previous ones ignoring the gross failure HC has been. Quote Will it continue to stay in place even if it results in the exact opposite of it's stated goals? So if the plan excludes more than are excluded already, all the millions currently excluded? Then tehy will tweak it but keep in mind, excluding more than 40 mill will be tough, I commend your system for being able to do it as long as they have - good work. And the partial exclusions, people who have catastrophe insurance but cannot go unless it's grave because they don't have coverage for smaller issues. Quote Will politicians continue to pour money into a failing program? Gee, they have with so many others, why not? BTW, I love your tone, it's as if, I dunno, you want Obama to fail. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #45 December 5, 2009 QuoteI could 10 similar questions to ask GWB about the wars and the state of the economy, all things that happened on his watch. the thread is meaningless. Right, I have asked questions before too, they go unanswered. Conservs don't like being pinned down to the truth - just look at Palin under fire with the debates, Couric, etc. That is your garden variety conserv running and refusing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #46 December 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI don't favor mandatory government health care. (Which is good, since no one is proposing that.) except... if you opt out of the government "option" you still have to pay for it. helluvan option... Seems to work for schools and colleges. Plenty of people choose private. ... and if you opt out of private schools, you still have to pay property taxes to make up for what they don't pay ;) And if you don;t have kids your proerty taxes still pay for schools. So it's just a matter of gross, impersonal collectivism and redistribution regardless of whether you use that service. Other option is to go live in the mountains. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #47 December 5, 2009 QuoteVarious estimates between 2.5 and 6 trillion. Quit listening to Hannity, it'll rot your brain. Or teh Cato institute, who thinks FDR tripled taxes when it was in fact Hoover who nearly did so. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #48 December 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Compare that to the house healthcare plan, where you pay only if you do not have your own health insurance. That seems to ignore the substantial debt associated with it. Taxpayers pay for this regardless. And when revenues get further into the red, more will pay direct taxes for it. We don't ignore it. We accept it. It's going to cost more no matter what we do. Without a public option, the insurance companies will get too big to fail, and when they do, our health care system (or lack thereof) will destroy us. Taxpayers will pay dearly. Then we will finally join the rest of the developed world and have a single payer system. Kinda like when Hoover fucked up the GD recovery and we had 5 consecutive terms of Dems, 7 of 9 as well. I was kinda hoping "Tax cuts my friends" would have been elected so we could slam hard the other way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #49 December 5, 2009 QuoteWho said that? What I heard is that the bill should slow down or temporary stop the healthcare cost _increase_. The average insurance premiums doubled during last ten years, meaning that private industry is not able (or does not want) to do that. Right, the rattle from the RW is that of, what if Obamacare fails. They are in such stark denial that HC isn't a current failure and a raving success that they can't grasp WE ARE IN A MAJORLY FAILED MESS NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #50 December 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteVarious estimates between 2.5 and 6 trillion. Quit listening to Hannity, it'll rot your brain. Or teh Cato institute, who thinks FDR tripled taxes when it was in fact Hoover who nearly did so. Quit reading huf'n'puff and dkos, yours is already gone.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
