I got an idea. Let's increase the financial hardships on women while they continue the human race by induring months of pain.


Ya that makes sense.


Also to add to this. Insurance has always been someone subsidizing someone else. That is the way the system works. It just so happens to be affecting you now so you're getting all complainy pants.

[Edited on November 8, 2013 at 9:25 AM. Reason : G]

11/8/2013 9:20:28 AM

Quote :

"You've legislated into law a bunch of stuff that makes no mathematical sense, of course there will be completely illogical results."

11/8/2013 9:26:51 AM

^^ People can agree or disagree with socializing the medical costs of pregnancy and giving birth. I would think that most people will agree. Even conservatives. They're more often pro-life, QED. So there's a broad social mandate for that, sure.

But using the health insurance market to socialize these costs is pure. fucking. insanity.

There's a reason we implemented a progressive income tax. That's because of our sense of social responsibility. The wealthy are benefited more by our fundamental social arrangement so they should contribute more to the maintenance thereof. It is, and always was, a sensible way to distribute the cost of things we all agreed should be paid for collectively.

It is beyond me how this plain logic goes out the door in our modern political discussion. If something should be covered collectively, then fucking do it. That's not what you're arguing for. The proposition is that people pick up the tab through unrelated health insurance. You know what that makes people do? Not get health insurance.

I feel like my entire goddam country is being intentional dense about this. It's both sides. One side can't tolerate the idea of socializing the cost of anything, and the other side feels fine with tacking those costs on wherever they fucking feel like it. That is slash-and-burn governance. You will destroy the markets you screw with in this way.

You know how we PAY for something without screwing up incentives? Normal god damn taxes! Like Warren Buffet says, no one has ever turned down an opportunity to make money because they have to pay taxes on it. But they do turn down such an opportunity when there's another possibility that isn't taxed similarly.

You're not arguing that we should pay for pregnancies collectively, you're arguing that men should have the right to opt out of paying their share by not buying health insurance. God damn you're a lunatic!

11/8/2013 10:32:32 AM

Quote :

"Yes, but even without maternity coverage women are more expensive to cover based on prescription coverage costs, more frequent doctor visits, things like mammograms, etc."

yeah, exactly. this shows how people arguing about maternity coverage are missing the point.

11/8/2013 10:34:42 AM

When we socialize pregnancy Ill eat my shoe.

11/8/2013 10:53:22 AM

I agree with mrfrog. If Paula needs to be subsidized then subsidize her with government money. Don't fuck up whole industries in an effort to force Paul to subsidize Paula.

The medicaid expansion by itself would have been a good idea (well, nearly anything would have been a good idea compared to the ACA). What we got instead was a fucked up industry WITHOUT medicaid expansion. Way to go idiots.

[Edited on November 8, 2013 at 11:12 AM. Reason : .,.]

11/8/2013 11:11:11 AM

Was the industry running smoothly in your opinion?

11/8/2013 11:34:15 AM

lol. fuck no.

11/8/2013 12:16:42 PM

Quote :

"Was the industry running smoothly in your opinion?"

Here's an argument that I've been really pissed about:

It was argued that our health care system was regressive in a certain unfair sense, and this justified a large part of the bill. The Cadillac health care plans can only benefit those really well off, and they have always been tax free. So point granted on that.

I really think we're seeing something which is a microcosm of our tax system. The different levels, and the subsidies that come with them, resemble our income tax system. It's just not funding something external, it's only redistributing within itself. Of course, the most glaring problem with the kind of system is that people will opt out if it doesn't benefit them, and that's what the mandate is for. Only the rich (without a subsidy) will have room to complain, and they're much less likely to opt out.

The uncomfortable truth, I think, is that if we were to start from 0 with the income tax code today, it would be dramatically less progressive, and I think Obamacare is also insufficiently progressive. Our income tax, social security, and medicaid, were all passed in times where there was a much stronger progressive wave. I think those were times when the politicians better aligned with the will of the people, which is drastically more progressive than what people give credit for. Ever since these programs were implemented, they have been slowly eroded (like with tax deductions and credits) to benefit the powerful interests, and in some cases, raided. When we shifted to "progressive" in 2008 and got this passed, it was numbskull progressive. Nationalized health care is progressive. This is a mini-income tax system that is not very good.

You can't excuse the fact that you are taxing the uninsured by mandating that they buy more stuff. The way people get out of poverty starts with buying less stuff. Our government policy has made a full-out assault on upward mobility, and this is a component of it.

I still want to know, will the "expanded medicaid" have a "resource limit"

http://www.ncdhhs.gov/dma/medicaid/Medicaid_eligibility_0713.pdf

This is a tool of perpetual poverty. It is poverty ENFORCED by our government. It takes away assistance if you accumulate wealth, and accumulating wealth is how you get out of poverty. I'm going to continue to drill this point, because it is important and irrefutable.

Medicaid (and its expansion) is one of the programs that excuses the existence of the individual mandate. But wait, you're going to have to fit a certain profile to get that program. So it's not net-zero for the poor. It's on net extremely negative, or at least has the potential to be so for many people.

This is ultimately because our politics are insane and very divorced from what people want. I think we will get more progressive over time. That's the demographic reality. Obamacare is faux progressive. It will be touted as wealth redistribution to the poor, but that doesn't mean it really will be. The tide that will drive all of this is the price increase in health care costs. That will make the adjustments happen sooner vs later. Gutting specific parts of this kind of bill is extremely dangerous, and that's likely what we'll do.

I need to stop ranting on all this.

11/8/2013 12:38:12 PM

I agree with parts of your argument but it's just never going to happen the way you want it to. I like being optimistic but let's get real.

11/8/2013 12:46:42 PM

[Edited on November 8, 2013 at 1:26 PM. Reason : .]

11/8/2013 1:12:31 PM

Quote :

"Because of the ACA, pregnant women can no longer be turned down when applying for maternity health coverage, or charged more for coverage."

Obama's next conquest? Making it illegal for homeowner's insurance companies to deny new policies to a person whose house is currently on fire. Then, your car insurance can't use your driving history, speeding tickets, accident history, or vehicle cost, in calculating your premium.

Quote :

"I got an idea. Let's increase the financial hardships on women while they continue the human race by induring months of pain. Ya that makes sense."

I got an idea. Let's take a product whose costs are intrinsically based on risk and not allow it to be priced based on any of those risk factors. Ya that makes sense.

11/8/2013 11:13:08 PM

Good one bro.

[Edited on November 9, 2013 at 1:04 AM. Reason : I bet you slay with the ugly fat ladies. ]

11/9/2013 1:03:41 AM

The most important prediction:

Nothing really major will happen. Availability and cost of health care will not change significantly except for a few outliers.

Most of this is wasted breath. I'm not well educated, but most people I talk to are even less-so. The majority of the impact will come from details too small for a layman to master reading stuff on the internet. This causes my own mental picture to be confusing and contradictory.

11/10/2013 1:31:20 PM

http://reason.com/archives/2013/11/09/obamacare-leaves-doctors-on-the-hook-for

Well, this seems like a great way to bankrupt doctors and insurers.

11/10/2013 7:39:54 PM

How is this different from the uninsured who currently seek emergency room treatment with no ability and/or intention of paying?

Also, I love the leading language: "individuals who choose to default".

I also love that 'Reason' uses quotes from the Discovery Institute.

11/10/2013 8:59:15 PM

Very different.

11/10/2013 9:52:34 PM

Yes, thank you. Fantastically elucidating response.

11/10/2013 10:02:16 PM

http://gawker.com/psychotherapist-is-unable-to-understand-what-medical-in-1462401830

11/11/2013 6:54:19 PM

doh!

11/11/2013 6:57:06 PM

Glad that got posted

11/11/2013 8:37:07 PM

3% of target

11/11/2013 8:40:28 PM

Poor Lori Gottlieb who probably rakes in hundreds of thousands a year from all her various writing and speaking gigs, along with book royalties. "I got mine, bitches!"

11/11/2013 10:26:09 PM

Im sure she would charge me 200 bucks an hour to complain in a similar fashion on her couch.

11/11/2013 10:47:08 PM

Well it probably wont be fixed by January; that's a big problem.

Then they will come up with some plan that may or may not "fix" it by next summer.

Can't wait to see the November elections based on those two potential failures.

11/12/2013 1:46:28 PM

why is it a problem if its not fixed by January? What is special about that deadline?

11/12/2013 1:47:49 PM

Lol, see?

You're such a fucking joke I don't even know why you post.

Google it you stupid asshole; I'm getting tired of pandering to someone who thinks he's edgy and smart.

11/12/2013 1:49:12 PM

i'm just wandering if you aren't aware that the deadline was extended. are you aware that the penalty deadline was extended?

[Edited on November 12, 2013 at 1:50 PM. Reason : i see that you are in the middle of another angry tantrum. ]

11/12/2013 1:50:08 PM

I give up.

I'm just going to pretend you don't exist. Have a good life protesting the existence of homeless in Raleigh.

You'll make more of a mark there than you will here for sure.

At least I'm 100% positive now you are the stupidest person on this board that doesn't know they're stupid. It truly isn't a gimmick and that scares the shit out of me.

I'm not angry with you and rarely have been; it's simply shock.

Good day, sir.

11/12/2013 1:55:08 PM

so, no, you did not realize the mandate was delayed

11/12/2013 2:05:27 PM

I'm not talking about the mandate.

11/12/2013 2:06:32 PM

When are you two going to fuck?

11/12/2013 3:40:59 PM

Aw, enrollment fell a little short.

11/13/2013 3:41:40 PM

I'm not sure if this is real, but somehow, it looks legit, unfortunately

http://doyougotinsurance.com/

11/14/2013 6:33:09 AM

I'm sure his picture was used with permission

11/14/2013 7:27:41 AM

Quote :

"I'm not sure if this is real, but somehow, it looks legit, unfortunately"

are you really not sure? really?

11/14/2013 7:30:48 AM

Apparently they are real but they're not official government ads (http://www.denverpost.com/politics/ci_24514667/colorado-obamacare-ads-not-paid-state-funds-backers). Just ads from tone deaf supporters.

11/14/2013 2:15:35 PM

we can tell they are real (things that exist) because they exist

they are obviously not real though, calling it obamacare instead of ACA should have been the red flag in case all of the other ones didn't tip you off.

11/14/2013 2:23:54 PM

I would agree with you, if it wasn't for the fact that ProgressNow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProgressNow) has already claimed responsibility for them, and they link to the site directly from the front page of their colorado web site (http://progressnowcolorado.org/). To all appearances, ProgressNow is not a troll site. So like I said, real ads intended to promote the ACA, just very tone deaf.

11/14/2013 4:46:54 PM

you are under the impression that progressnow is a government agency?

11/14/2013 5:11:10 PM

Ahahaha, "administrative fix."

Keep the gag-reel rolling fellas.

11/14/2013 5:17:00 PM

Still waiting on Democrats to show up in this thread and pretend they aren't butthurt.

Those whose plans were canceled due to non-compliance were the people that exchanges depend on to work. That's gonna be a problem.

11/14/2013 5:32:34 PM

They're waiting for Ed Schultz to tell them what to say.

Unfortunately tonight he's spent the last 35 minutes shitting his pants.

TWW liberal marching orders might be postponed.

[Edited on November 14, 2013 at 5:39 PM. Reason : -]

11/14/2013 5:36:28 PM

Quote :

"you are under the impression that progressnow is a government agency?"

If only there were some way for you to read other posts in this thread above the one you're writing at any given time. Almost like an on screen element where you could maybe "scroll" the "window" "up" to read previous posts. Oh well. until they invent such a control, I'll just have to quote my own posts for you:

Quote :

"Apparently they are real but they're not official government ads ... Just ads from tone deaf supporters."

(Emphasis added just in case it's you missed it in that giant wall of text)

11/14/2013 5:44:54 PM

mention it in feedback forum, this is the wrong forum for feature requests

11/14/2013 6:14:26 PM

Quote :

"Still waiting on Democrats to show up in this thread and pretend they aren't butthurt. Those whose plans were canceled due to non-compliance were the people that exchanges depend on to work. That's gonna be a problem."

Nope, the people the exchange depended on to work were healthy young people without any insurance at all. Hence the mandate. This "fix" changes nothing, except shifting the blame from the law to the insurance companies for people who lose their plans. It's actually smart politics, and really nothing but a PR move. Most insurance companies that are cancelling plans will continue to do so. Still waiting for a critic of the ACA to demonstrate any factual knowledge of the law whatsoever.

[Edited on November 14, 2013 at 6:52 PM. Reason : :]

11/14/2013 6:49:43 PM

Quote :

"Most insurance companies that are cancelling plans will continue to do so"

That's right. How dare insurance companies (corporations) insist on not acting without planning ahead while the government repeatedly changes course and then complains the private sector refuses to make drastic changes to the healthcare of their customers on two weeks notice.

11/14/2013 6:56:20 PM

Quote :

"Obama's next conquest? Making it illegal for homeowner's insurance companies to deny new policies to a person whose house is currently on fire. Then, your car insurance can't use your driving history, speeding tickets, accident history, or vehicle cost, in calculating your premium."

I guess we should kill off the entire population that have cancer markers or at least bankrupt them.

[Edited on November 14, 2013 at 7:05 PM. Reason : a]

11/14/2013 7:05:17 PM

Quote :

"Still waiting on Democrats to show up in this thread and pretend they aren't butthurt."

if they are butthurt, it in no way takes away from their position or makes them hypocrites.

you should make your decisions from behind a veil of ignorance, not based on how you would personally gain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_ignorance

11/14/2013 7:16:55 PM

I don't see what the Veil of ignorance has to do with chosen political philosophies. I seriously doubt d357r0y3r chose to not be a democrat because being one might result in butthurtedness on this day in history.

11/14/2013 8:11:53 PM