SCOTUS and ACA

Dumbass pinko-nazi-neoconservative-hippy-capitalists.
Post Reply
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Partha »

If he considers the poor shiftless and lazy, and his parents were poor (since he describes himself as poor), then that's entirely correct by his own stated beliefs. It's not entirely a personal attack as much as it is pointing out that his previous statements on why people are poor are pretty goddamned stupid and narrow.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7183
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Kulaf »

And when he sees you complaining about insurance companies not wanting to insure you and your self decribed health issues......

You know what, it's just not worth the effort to point out your own hypocrisy that you can only seem to see in others.
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Partha »

Kulaf wrote:And when he sees you complaining about insurance companies not wanting to insure you and your self decribed health issues......

You know what, it's just not worth the effort to point out your own hypocrisy that you can only seem to see in others.
Kulaf, I wasn't demanding free healthcare. I have the money IN HAND, willing to give over. I accept that being a fat guy means I pay more. That's not an issue. The issue is that they can refuse you insurance for no reason with no explanation and you have no recourse. I was willing to pay out of pocket for my throat - if it had turned out to be cancerous, it had to be taken care of. But there's no reasonable way you can ask someone who doesn't make in the hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to be able to go to the doctor every time he needs to when a week in the hospital will cost you 100k. And that doesn't even count the folks who live paycheck to paycheck who don't even get yearly exams because they can't afford to walk into the doctor's office, and so a health problem that could probably be fixed for a couple of thousand dollars turns into a serious problem that now will cost everyone every time that serious condition flares up, and a lot more than it could have cost had it been checked early.

Every study that they've done on the issue shows we're doing it wrong. Every country that offers some form of nationalized health care spends less per person and most of them get much better life expectancy and outcomes. This is not news. I'm just tired of having people who don't have to deal with the problem standing in the way of a reasonable solution to the problem so that people like me don't BECOME a problem.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

How did you become uninsurable in the first place? Have you never had coverage?

Maybe its different in my state (CA), but if you're employed, and the employer offers insurance, they can't deny you coverage. Group coverage plans typically don't allow for selective insurables. And if you for some reason become unemployed, there is COBRA, and they can't drop you during the COBRA benefit timeframe either. I suggest you also look into Aflac if your employer offers it. I offer it to my employees and those who take advantage of it swear by it. Its relatively afforadable, and there haven't been issues with claims, at least so far.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

Harlowe wrote:I missed the mother thing. I just wish we could all stick to just being assholes that disagree on ideaology and what not.
Ahhhhh... no.

C'mon Harlowe, there have been personal issues here since the board started. Both good and bad. I know you remember things with Select, your friend who passed, charity bets, the issues with Rellbeek an Eidolon, etc. This isn't so much an idealogy discussion board as it is a dysfunctional family that dreads Thanksgiving but keeps doing it anyway, every year, year after year. Hell, your comment on the personal attack mosh pit Partha and I were in wasn't politically idealogical. It was an expression of your internal feeling about how we should treat one another here. Lurker too, in his snarky, throw an elbow kinda way.

All of you show there is an emotional attachment to the participants on this board. How many active old school posters do we have on the board... maybe a dozen or so? Why do we continue to engage one another when our responses are so predictable? Dd has a relatively new child, yet he still finds time to post here. I've been through two wives, Im still here. I know some about Harlowe's life and a few others, but they haven't posted about it herre so I wont either, but they are still posting. Here we are, 13 years after EQ started (I think), still talking, still bitching, still throwing elbows.

I love that. :)
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17516
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Ddrak »

I thought Embar's post was awesome because in Aus, that is exactly the type of thing you'd offer to someone to make them laugh - not to piss them off. I know Embar and Partha have issues, but damn, that string of insults was crazy creative.

And the kid's the easy part. It's having a new CEO at work that's crazy energized about the role, and being made acting COO that's sucking all my time and energy right now (not that it's not lots of fun and I'm enjoying every minute).

Dd
Image
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Harlowe »

You're right Embar and ....Ddrak, yea that was crazy creative. I think the "attachment thing" after all this time, is what makes me occasionally wince. Can't be helped, I'm given to occasional bouts of inner marshmallow.
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

@ Partha

Don't know what state you live in, but try this.

https://www51.aetna.com/iqs/costco/aimquote.do

Join Costco and be elgible for insurance.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Partha »

Embar, my current employer is very small (fewer than 20 employees) and does not offer insurance. I haven't had insurance in about 10 years, and COBRA is too damned expensive for too little coverage. I can look into AFLAC, but I'm afraid I'm going to run into the same problem there as elsewhere - I'm a 40+ year old with weight issues, and until 2014 they have the right to not take my money if they think I'm going to cost more than they'll make in premiums. And so it goes.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17516
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Ddrak »

they have the right to not take my money if they think I'm going to cost more than they'll make in premiums.
And this is exactly why there should be socialized health insurance, with private options on top.

Dd
Image
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

Just a suggestion Partha, but maybe ask your employer if he/she would at least open up the company to an insurance plan, even if the company doesn't pay for any of the insurance. Employers don't have to pay for a dime of the insurance if they don't want to, they cna shift the entire cost onto employees. But at least if they offered a plan, even if they didn't pay for it, you'd be able to get coverage. Group coverage plans typically don't allow for selective insureds.

I also forgot to mention, that trade associations sometimes offer access to health insurance plans. So for a couple hundred a year you join the group, and then you get access to the coverage plans.

I can tell you this, the insurance industry, in antcipation of ACA, is changing the way they offer plans. They are pushing everyone to something I call shared expense plans. This is where you cover the first $5,000 in medical expenses yourself, and then the insurance kicks in, covering about half of the insurance costs until you spend about another two or three thousand, at which point the insurance covers everything. The old $10 copay plans are hideously expensive now, and many employers are not offering them anymore.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Partha »

Just a suggestion Partha, but maybe ask your employer if he/she would at least open up the company to an insurance plan, even if the company doesn't pay for any of the insurance.
Three things.

1) I work in a business that typically doesn't have insurance. Even the best ones only offer Starbridge type insurance, with benefits capped at $1k a year.

2) The owner is currently working through a divorce, so he's a bit distracted.

3) Of course the insurance companies would love me to pay the first $5k off the top so they don't have to pay a dime. If I could do that now, I wouldn't need insurance. Like most Americans, it's a real squeeze right now just to fit in the $160 it costs to walk into the doctor's office with an appointment, let alone have an emergency happen. I really really wish you'd get this now and again, not everyone has a few K in disposable income and lots more in places where it can be made liquid.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

Three other things:

1) Consider changing industries if yours typically doesn't offer adequate insurance;

2) Offer to do the research for your boss. You have no idea how powerful being in the driver's seat can be. Take the approach of "Hey boss, I know you're busy, but I've come up with a way that we can offer insurance to all employees, increasing morale, and it won't cost you a dime! I'd be happy to be point person on this and make it happen for you." Then you develop whatever plan works best for you, and the other employees benefit. Whether or not your industry only offers crap insurance is irrelevant if the employees pick up the entire cost.

3) I'm telling you man, there are other avenues to insurance other than your employer. Did you check out Costco or explore the trade associations?

I tell you what, give me your industry type and state you live in, and I bet I can find you insurance.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
Torakus
Ignore me, I am drunk again
Posts: 1295
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:04 am

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Torakus »

Embar Angylwrath wrote:I tell you what, give me your industry type and state you live in, and I bet I can find you insurance.
Ding fries are done! Illinois. :lol:
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Partha »

Embar, I've been working the last two years under the assumption that I will not get insurance at my current job...but my current job offers me stability and the money to afford insurance. I'm not living on Ramen noodles here. I have the money in hand, and if things got really desperate, I have a CareCredit account with GE with a small amount available.

Once again, my only problem is that no one can force an insurance company to offer me insurance that will give me the ability to take care of my most pressing needs without going broke in the meantime. I've also got the misfortune of being rejected by BC/BS, which here in Illinois is the kiss of death to getting insurance that isn't shady as fuck. I'm also confident in the fact that in a climate where big businesses and small ones are both reducing insurance to their employees (By 2014, some 30 percent of businesses plan to drop employee coverage) that the boss isn't going to be gung-ho looking to add insurance. It's even less likely now that I know the owner has sold off two of the five businesses he owns (the underperforming ones), and the payroll is sitting at somewhere around 25 employees. I'm safe because I do the dirty jobs at the main place, but your scenario is slightly less likely than Batman appearing at my job in full costume.

I'll keep looking, especially that you've mentioned Costco, but I'm becoming more and more convinced with every rejection without a given reason that Obamacare is going to be how I end up with insurance. I'm not ecstatic about it, because I think the subsidies were toned too far down by the Senate in the final version of the bill and I end up in an uncomfortable place as far as premiums/subsidies go, but that's how it goes. I've had everything in my employment history from full medical/dental as a young man to Starbridge (eesh) to nothing at all, and I'm tired of being uninsured and unable to work on my health problems. Without Obamacare, though, I have no means to coerce insurance companies into giving me a decent policy for a decent amount of money.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17516
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Ddrak »

Without Obamacare, though, I have no means to coerce insurance companies into giving me a decent policy for a decent amount of money.
Here's the fundamental problem that all conservatives have with Obamacare. The government coercing private companies to sell stuff rubs the wrong way, and logically ends up in one of two places:

- The insurance premiums for everyone go up, possibly dramatically, to cover this new risk.
- The insurance companies decide to close shop.

Dd
Image
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Partha »

Another way to look at it is that the government guarantees private industry 40 million or so new customers, which should be a large enough pool to spread risk around quite effectively. I don't see anyone selling car insurance worrying much about their bottom line, that's coercive as hell, and Republicans don't seem to have much of a problem with requiring car insurance.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7183
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Kulaf »

You choose to drive. It's a privilege. If you want the privilege of driving you have the responsibility to have insurance to cover others. I don't believe there is any state that requires you to have coverage to pay for damages to yourself or your vehicle, only to cover others and their property.
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

Partha - You're probably not going to qualify for the Costco plan, since you've been uninsured for so long. Have you tried the CHIP program in Illinois? Its specifically for uninsureds, and rates are capped at 125%-150% of similar insurance policies.

http://www.chip.state.il.us/planfacts.html#PRESUME
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17516
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and ACA

Post by Ddrak »

Partha wrote:Another way to look at it is that the government guarantees private industry 40 million or so new customers, which should be a large enough pool to spread risk around quite effectively. I don't see anyone selling car insurance worrying much about their bottom line, that's coercive as hell, and Republicans don't seem to have much of a problem with requiring car insurance.
Car insurance allows for driver history. If you could offer health insurance with premiums based on health history then there would be no argument either.

Dd
Image
Post Reply