|
so what's your income level arkane? I like how you just ignore the questions that you know will expose how completely full of poo poo you are. If you aren't getting a subsidy but can afford coverage then you that means you make a pretty decent amount of money, and are probably just mad that poors and minorities are helped by the ACA.
empty whippet box fucked around with this message at 03:20 on May 5, 2017 |
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
Somebody post that twitter feed where the guy is asking how to make his house payments but he's spending 1600 dollars a month on candles or whatever
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Does this mean I'm not forced to buy health care anymore because I just straight up can't afford it now or probably for the foreseeable future
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
Someone could be below 400% FPL & qualify for $0 subsidies if they were young and thus the premiums for the Second Lowest Cost Silver Plan were already considered affordable (below 9.69% income). But that would mean that person from NV would be paying a pretty affordable premium for a bronze plan. If he/she is over 400% & the premium of a bronze plan is not affordable (over 8.66%, yes I know that's a different number than the % from before), he/she would qualify for a waiver & not have to pay a penalty for going without coverage. So the only really valid complaint would be someone that doesn't qualify for a subsidy & qualifies for a fee waiver who actually wants to pay for affordable insurance. In which case I agree, subsidies should be expanded to those over 400% to expand the market. Nooooooot gonna happen now though unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
Teikanmi posted:Does this mean I'm not forced to buy health care anymore because I just straight up can't afford it now or probably for the foreseeable future the good news: at some point, all your problems will be over
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
empty whippet box posted:so what's your income level arkane? I like how you just ignore the questions that you know will expose how completely full of poo poo you are. If you aren't getting a subsidy but can afford coverage then you that means you make a pretty decent amount of money, and are probably just mad that poors and minorities are helped by the ACA. He's a literal millionaire.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:He's a literal millionaire. Why the gently caress would a millionaire buy a bronze level plan and then whine about it? Is he also retarded?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
empty whippet box posted:Why the gently caress would a millionaire buy a bronze level plan and then whine about it? Is he also retarded? Yes, and he has documented it well many times over his posting history.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
empty whippet box posted:Why the gently caress would a millionaire buy a bronze level plan and then whine about it? Is he also retarded? Arkane is a literal parody of the selfish cheap FYGM HENRY made flesh.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
Nice to see that after all these years Arkane can still effortlessly disrupt a thread like a bull in a china shop.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
empty whippet box posted:Why the gently caress would a millionaire buy a bronze level plan and then whine about it? Is he also retarded? That should qualify as proof of a preexisting condition. Highbrow Slick posted:Someone could be below 400% FPL & qualify for $0 subsidies if they were young and thus the premiums for the Second Lowest Cost Silver Plan were already considered affordable (below 9.69% income). But that would mean that person from NV would be paying a pretty affordable premium for a bronze plan. If he/she is over 400% & the premium of a bronze plan is not affordable (over 8.66%, yes I know that's a different number than the % from before), he/she would qualify for a waiver & not have to pay a penalty for going without coverage. So the only really valid complaint would be someone that doesn't qualify for a subsidy & qualifies for a fee waiver who actually wants to pay for affordable insurance. In which case I agree, subsidies should be expanded to those over 400% to expand the market. Yeah, there were a bunch of weird gaps people could fall into under the ACA, and it didn't help that the response to ACA from health insurance companies was to jack up the deductibles to insane amounts. I don't think Arkane is that old, but the worst gap is people approaching Medicare age who are self-employed making slightly over 400% FPL. Couple of two, age 59 and 60 making 399% of FPL pay $500/mo on average in the US because of subsidies. They make 401% and suddenly they pay $1,500/mo because the subsidies go away. They really should have instituted a better gradient for that.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 04:05
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:
Exactly correct.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
How does this bill affect hospital systems?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
Highbrow Slick posted:Someone could be below 400% FPL & qualify for $0 subsidies if they were young and thus the premiums for the Second Lowest Cost Silver Plan were already considered affordable (below 9.69% income). But that would mean that person from NV would be paying a pretty affordable premium for a bronze plan. If he/she is over 400% & the premium of a bronze plan is not affordable (over 8.66%, yes I know that's a different number than the % from before), he/she would qualify for a waiver & not have to pay a penalty for going without coverage. I considered that, but paying less than 10% of your income in a low cost-of-living state like Nevada is actually pretty good unless you're at "Candles $3600/month" territory, so I assumed this wasn't the case. But if this guy is an actual irl literal millionaire then  the essential health benefits and guaranteed issue provisions are huge wins for him
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
Yug posted:How does this bill affect hospital systems? This is our 2019 hospital system 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
My biggest problem with the ACA is that it totally screwed people with individual health insurance plans. Every November, my premiums would jump up at least $120.00, until this past year, my health insurance company (Coventry One) just didn't offer coverage in my state anymore. This forced me to get coverage under Blue Cross Blue Shield, by far the most expensive (and only) insurance company left. This is the first year that I get any kind of subsidy ($50.00), but from paying $90.00 a month when I first got insurance to paying $300.00 now with the same deductible is utter bullshit. Unfortunately, whether if it's the complete mess that is the ACA or this new abomination the Republicans are trying to get through, health care will blow for the next few years.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Azhais posted:This is our 2019 hospital system I am worried.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Tommy_Udo posted:My biggest problem with the ACA is that it totally screwed people with individual health insurance plans. Every November, my premiums would jump up at least $120.00, until this past year, my health insurance company (Coventry One) just didn't offer coverage in my state anymore. This forced me to get coverage under Blue Cross Blue Shield, by far the most expensive (and only) insurance company left. This is the first year that I get any kind of subsidy ($50.00), but from paying $90.00 a month when I first got insurance to paying $300.00 now with the same deductible is utter bullshit. Unfortunately, whether if it's the complete mess that is the ACA or this new abomination the Republicans are trying to get through, health care will blow for the next few years. Insurance companies need profits.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
BlueBlazer posted:Insurance companies need profits. Is that why they all came out against the house republican plan?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
Yug posted:Is that why they all came out against the house republican plan? You can't get money from dead people, and people not having insurance.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
Yug posted:Is that why they all came out against the house republican plan? I mean their profits are almost double what they were in 2008 so ponder that calculus.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
Noctone posted:I mean their profits are almost double what they were in 2008 so ponder that calculus. Seems like Obamacare did really well for them then.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
Don't get confused, the ACA is a pretty garbage piece of legislation. It's just that Republican healthcare plans somehow always manage to be worse.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 06:02
|
|
|
Simplex posted:Don't get confused, the ACA is a pretty garbage piece of legislation. It's just that Republican healthcare plans somehow always manage to be worse. A lot of the problems are due to the Supreme Court case that made the Medicaid expansion optional and deliberate sabotage of the funding sources. You should reserve "garbage" for what the house just passed. The AHCA did far more good than ill.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 06:12
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:A lot of the problems are due to the Supreme Court case that made the Medicaid expansion optional and deliberate sabotage of the funding sources. I think that's kind of my point. It seems good in comparison to a deliberately malicious bill that even people who voted for it apparently needed assurance would never come into fruition. It's better than pre-Obamacare GOP "solutions" like tort reform. But that is an awfully low bar to get over.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
I always figured that the problems with the ACA started when they removed the public option just before passing it but please correct me if I'm wrong. Also it took me less then a day to get called an idiot on Facebook for posting about the vote yesterday.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 10:48
|
|
|
The real danger I see deriving from the House victory is that both chambers know the base was promised repeal/replace. What specific form that takes isn't as important as dealing a devastating blow to Obama's legacy. The Senate knows this. The HFC are saber rattling trying to dissuade the Senate from making sweeping changes to the bill, but at the end of the day Trump and Ryan are going to whip hard as can be once the Senate's version—should it pass—makes it back down to the House. Please tell me why I'm wrong so I can relax a lil' bit, tia.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
BlueBlazer posted:Insurance companies need profits. No no no! They need constantly increasing profits! Stable profit year over year is not enough.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 12:25
|
|
|
Here's a crazy belief that gets me shouted down all the time, people shouldn't profit off the poor, sick and dying. How dare I be anti capitalism.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 12:31
|
|
|
This is the strangest plan to address climate change.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
Rad Valtar posted:Here's a crazy belief that gets me shouted down all the time, people shouldn't profit off the poor, sick and dying. How dare I be anti capitalism. For-profit entities should be banned from operating in the Healthcare sector.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 13:11
|
|
|
Alligator Horse posted:The real danger I see deriving from the House victory is that both chambers know the base was promised repeal/replace. What specific form that takes isn't as important as dealing a devastating blow to Obama's legacy. The Senate knows this. The HFC are saber rattling trying to dissuade the Senate from making sweeping changes to the bill, but at the end of the day Trump and Ryan are going to whip hard as can be once the Senate's version—should it pass—makes it back down to the House. You're not wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
There's a quote that I read years ago that I can't find any more. I only remember the general idea, it was a republican saying something like "we have to keep the government from offering health care, if people get it and realize it's good they'll never believe us again". Does anyone recognize this, remember who said it, remember anything more about it? Google is failing me.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
Alligator Horse posted:The real danger I see deriving from the House victory is that both chambers know the base was promised repeal/replace. What specific form that takes isn't as important as dealing a devastating blow to Obama's legacy. The Senate knows this. The HFC are saber rattling trying to dissuade the Senate from making sweeping changes to the bill, but at the end of the day Trump and Ryan are going to whip hard as can be once the Senate's version—should it pass—makes it back down to the House. This whole mess is because eight years of Republican hysterics (is that gendered slur?) Made repealing Obamacare a hot potato that the House couldn't keep holding. So they passed it to the Senate. If the Senate is smart they'll drop it, but more likely they'll try to keep passing it onears to someone else. If the potato makes it all the way around, Trump catches it because he's that stupid, and everyone dies.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
You're thinking of horrible rear end in a top hat Bill KristolEat a dick, Bill Kristol posted:The long-term political effects of a successful... health care bill will be even worse—much worse.... It will revive the reputation of... Democrats as the generous protector of middle-class interests. And it will at the same time strike a punishing blow against Republican claims to defend the middle class by restraining government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_1993#Criticism
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
CNN report says the AHCA is good for young people and upper middle. Screw the poor and elderly.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 13:51
|
|
|
gohmak posted:CNN report says the AHCA is good for young people and upper middle. Screw the poor and elderly. NPR reported it as Good but also Bad. There will be winners from the AHCA, but it's the people that already have 0 medical bills. That's it
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
Arkane posted:If the choice is between a plan costing me hundreds per month + a large deductible or uninsured, I'll take uninsured. Well, maybe you need to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and get a better job. Or skip buying the newest iPhone and vidya game system and put that money towards insurance. For 99% of people, that's insulting. For you, it's true.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 13:59
|
|
|
gohmak posted:CNN report says the AHCA is good for young people and upper middle. Screw the poor and elderly. As a young person with multiple preexisting conditions, I'd like to contest this.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
Alligator Horse posted:The real danger I see deriving from the House victory is that both chambers know the base was promised repeal/replace. What specific form that takes isn't as important as dealing a devastating blow to Obama's legacy. The Senate knows this. The HFC are saber rattling trying to dissuade the Senate from making sweeping changes to the bill, but at the end of the day Trump and Ryan are going to whip hard as can be once the Senate's version—should it pass—makes it back down to the House. You are not wrong. Start freaking out.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 14:16
|
|