Keep Talking Ted Cruz! KILL OBAMACARE BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!

Something the Dog Said wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Why would you choose to change your doctor? Let me explain our situation. The wife's company, a state agency, is trying to decrease costs by moving everyone over to Kaiser Permanente instead of the Aetna plan which let you choose your GP's and specialists. So if you aren't on the Kaiser plan, the deductibles have tripled, and her MRI went from a $100 co-pay to a $1000 co-pay. So due to higher costs, we are moving to the Kaiser Permanentee system of doc in a box.
Dog, this is real life, not puff cheerleader pieces written by a media that wants to support ACA versus objectively breaking it down with serious analysis.

And that is between you and your employer, not the ACA. The ACA is not demanding your wife's company decision to switch insurers.

But by ACA requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, "children" up to 26, going from a one million dollar limit to no limit, they are raising the costs of insurance.

Do you think if you went from a million dollar life insurance policy to a billion dollar policy you wouldn't have to pay more per month?

Employers have been moving people to different plans and insurers for decades. Back in the 70s Kodak jacked the rate for BC/BS by double and offered us Kaiser at much less. We tried Kaiser for a year but we didnt like the docs or how Kaiser was run so we elected to pay the extra and go back to our original plan. That is between the employer and the employee.....blaming that on Obamacare is dishonest.

Totally anecdotal: But I was just reading from a couple different sources of health insurance providers adding armed guards and bulletproof glass.
lol
ACA is a jobs program, hiring armed guards, buildings making improvements, and all the new levels of bureaucracy.

FredHayek wrote: Totally anecdotal: But I was just reading from a couple different sources of health insurance providers adding armed guards and bulletproof glass.
lol
ACA is a jobs program, hiring armed guards, buildings making improvements, and all the new levels of bureaucracy.

NO surprise there...I'd hire armed guards too if I was an insurance co, you cant trust conservatives to behave when they are throwing a collective temper tantrum.

FredHayek wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Why would you choose to change your doctor? Let me explain our situation. The wife's company, a state agency, is trying to decrease costs by moving everyone over to Kaiser Permanente instead of the Aetna plan which let you choose your GP's and specialists. So if you aren't on the Kaiser plan, the deductibles have tripled, and her MRI went from a $100 co-pay to a $1000 co-pay. So due to higher costs, we are moving to the Kaiser Permanentee system of doc in a box.
Dog, this is real life, not puff cheerleader pieces written by a media that wants to support ACA versus objectively breaking it down with serious analysis.

And that is between you and your employer, not the ACA. The ACA is not demanding your wife's company decision to switch insurers.

But by ACA requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, "children" up to 26, going from a one million dollar limit to no limit, they are raising the costs of insurance.

Do you think if you went from a million dollar life insurance policy to a billion dollar policy you wouldn't have to pay more per month?

Yet more nonsense from Fred. Why do I waste my time with you? According to numerous reports, insurance premiums have risen less than 1% due to the ACA. Overall, insurance premiums for health care have risen less than 4% last year, the lowest increase in fifty years. So it is just more conservative propaganda that the health insurance premiums have risen dramatically due to the ACA. Because they have not.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/21/busin ... .html?_r=0

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Totally anecdotal: But I was just reading from a couple different sources of health insurance providers adding armed guards and bulletproof glass.
lol
ACA is a jobs program, hiring armed guards, buildings making improvements, and all the new levels of bureaucracy.

NO surprise there...I'd hire armed guards too if I was an insurance co, you cant trust conservatives to behave when they are throwing a collective temper tantrum.

Like the Obama supporter who shot up the Navy Yard with a shotgun?
Or the Obama supporter who shot up an Aurora theatre?
Or the Dem who shot up a Gifford's rally?

Something the Dog Said wrote: Toad, that is one of the most idiotic statements in awhile, which is quite the feat considering the amout of such statements being made. I hate to tell you this (not really) but the ACA (commonly referred to as ObamaCares and I am assuming that you are trying to call Barrycare) passed several years ago. It is the law of the land.

The ACA (affordable care act) is affordable in name only. It is only more affordable to those with huge expenses due to preexisting conditions, or those who get subsidies. That $$ to pay for those 2 groups is $$ transferred from the rest of us, which means costs for us go up. There is no free lunch.

It appears that you really hate the idea of lower income individuals actually being able to have access to medical care. The ACA does not create more patients, it only ensures that medical providers will be paid for taking care of their patients. Why that is a bad thing, I just don't understand.

Nope, but this is a horrible way to do it. We need people to have a vested interest in what their medical costs are. A vastly superior way to do "universal healthcare" would have been to have medical savings accounts for all with insurance for major medical. Then you might be right. (u)ACA DOES create more patients, because when people don't have to pay for things, they tend to go to the doc more often, even for things they could have stayed home and had some rest and gotten better, but because someone else (the insurance company) is paying for it, and not them, they go anyway. Ask any primary care doc that question.

It is sad that you would prefer that those in lower incomes be denied access to medical treatment.

It is sad that you use false statements to disparage those who happen to disagree with you. Just because some of us believe there is a much better way doesn't put us in the camp of denying medical care. It has never been denied to anyone...ever.

RenegadeCJ wrote: It is sad that you use false statements to disparage those who happen to disagree with you. Just because some of us believe there is a much better way doesn't put us in the camp of denying medical care. It has never been denied to anyone...ever.

That's all the left has... disparaging remarks. "Climate Denier," "clinging to their guns and bibles," "Tea Bagger (as an insult)."

Need I go on?

RenegadeCJ wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote:
It is obvious from your previous posts that you do not understand the ACA. Try sources other than right wing blogs.

??? Right wing blogs? You mean seminars put on by industry associations? What about ones put on by our insurance company??

This has nothing to do with right wing anything, and you are right. I don't understand the ACA. Nobody does. You yourself have proven time after time that you don't understand it because you believe it is full of free unicorns and puppies. You can't acknowledge the struggle a small business has in complying with this massive law. Govt runs nothing well, affordable, or efficient.

I'll bet you in 10 yrs it will be another huge entitlement program burdening our economy. Of course, I think you would like that so we are all forced into single payer.

You have made false statement and outright lies throughout, such as claiming that the penalty beginning in January 1, 2014 is $95 per month when it is clearly and unequivocally $95 per YEAR, then lying about it being a quote from MSN. So yes it is obvious that you are either ignorant or deceitful in your posts about the ACA. You simply have no credibility. I have provided complete documentation on the FACTs about the ACA which you simply dismiss as unicorns and puppies with not a single bit of factually evidence about why my facts are wrong. So yeah, your posts about this subject are pure BS.

There is adequate information readily available to those who truly would like to be informed on the subject. You were unable to comprehend these "insurance seminars" or they were poorly run.

Information on the individual mandate is readily and easily explained at this website:
http://kff.org/infographic/the-requirem ... -care-act/

Information on health care exchanges in Colorado for individuals and small businesses is readily and easily explained at this website (beginning in one week there will be personal support to walk you through the process and assistance with selecting the best plan for you):
http://www.connectforhealthco.com/

Information on health care exchanges overall is readily and easily explained at this website:
http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories ... e-aca.aspx
https://www.healthcare.gov/am-i-eligibl ... rketplace/

Information on the business "mandate" is easily and readily explained here:
http://www.nfib.com/business-resources/ ... e/mandates

It is fairly straightforward despite the propganda being put out.
If you have insurance and you like it, then keep it.
If you don't have insurance and would like to, then go the exchange and shop for individual policies on an apples to apples basis. There will be assistance there to guide you through the process. If you are eligible, you may qualify for tax credits to reduce your premium.
If you choose not to have insurance, and you meet certain exemptions, then you do not have to have it. If you do not meet those exemptions, then beginning in January 1, 2014, you will be subject to a fine of up to $95 or 1% of your income whichever is greater. This gradually rises over the years. The IRS has no enforcement mechanism and will not imprison you if you do not pay the fine.

If you are a business with 50 or less full time equivalent employees, you are not required to provide employer subsidized insurance. If you choose to do so, then you may shop on the exchanges, and you may be eligible for tax credits.
If you are business with 51 or more full time equivalent employees you must offer minimal essential coverage or begin paying a penalty in 2015 of $2000 times (number of employees minus 30) if any of the employees purchases a plan on an exchange and receives a tax credit. The minimal essential coverage employee contribution must not be more than 9.5% of the employee's income.
The only "centralized database" is your application for tax credits to determine if you are eligible for such a tax credit.

That is it. The government does not determine your medical diagnosis, does not insure you unless you fall under a government program such as medicare, does not force you into a particular insurance plan, does not keep a centralized database of your medical history.

Something the Dog Said wrote:
It is obvious from your previous posts that you do not understand the ACA. Try sources other than right wing blogs.

You seem to have a good grasp of this, so maybe you can answer this question.

Will young folks premiums go up higher than the same coverage would cost them currently?