President Obama can NOT shut up about how great his precious Affordable Care Act is, just because of how great his Affordable Care Act is. The White House has been in full Hells Yeah! celebration mode, in honor of the fifth anniversary of the law that is going to destroy the nation any day now, and then we'll see who's laughing, WON'T WE, AMERICA? (Spoiler: It'll probably still be Obama.)
It was some "guilt by association" nitwitterage - apparently, if one librul tweeted something critical of what became the ACA, then, by extension, everybody on the left is a hypocrite.
Gosh, haven't you listened to every major Democratic strategist? If Obama took an aggressive strategy towards Republicans, Republicans who would have voted for the Republican anyway might not vote for the Democrat! Amatuer
It was my pleasure and I enjoyed it fully... I agree with you, they need to move forward and implement a total solution to health care in the US in a very timely manner...
It was a great pleasure with our discussion and agree it is becoming rare where this type of discussion happens...
You also take care friend... One day we may have opportunity for a civil discussion again... Maybe we will have opportunity to celebrate as congress finally does implement a total health care solution...
Okay... To make a few points come to light... 1. I don't care how many gained insurance I care how many can AFFORD HEALTHCARE!... Reality, yes they can afford insurance thanks to our tax dollars at work... I am okay with this... But with family deductibles starting around $10,000 how many can afford to pay this? if they can't afford to pay this then it does nothing for uninsured expenses... 2. I don't care what it has done to the nation's deficit... I care what is has done to our DEBT!
Having a mother who was denied being put on a transplant list because she was "too old", educated me to "death panels" long before ACA was ever approved.... YES those are in the ACA...
Finally I don't credit or blame Obama.... OUR CONGRESS PASSES LAW.... Our president only SIGNS IT!
Yes, they still have noses, but they sold their hearts to the Lord of Darkness to acquire power. On another note, doesn't Dick Cheney look chipper since his latest heart replacement surgery.
What would your deductible be if you had no insurance, because no company would sell you a policy?
I am sincerely sorry about your mother's medical situation, but the ACA didn't cause her to be rejected for a transplant. The sad reality is that there has always been a severe shortage of suitable organs ever since transplantation became a viable option. Because of that, donor registries had to create priority lists and triage the cases who were awaiting transplants. This practice predated the ACA by decades. There have always been vastly more potential recipients of transplants than there have been donors, requiring transplant registries to make some tough decisions regarding organ allocation. This did not come about as a result of the ACA -- it has always been the case with transplants. Again, you have my sympathy concerning your mother's situation.
Yes if someone is faced with a major medical situation, they have insurance to pay for it. Unfortunately the majority will never reach their deducible in any given year leaving them to pay for this out of pocket with the insurance expense... This isn't a solution to uninsured expenses
As for Mom, she was mentioned because in the ACA there is wording allowing "teams" or what sensationalism calls "death panels" to make a decision at some point if your life is worth spending more money on to save. In the ACA it has NOTHING to do with a shortage of organs...
To answer your question about what my deductible would be without insurance... I wouldn't have a deductible and everything would be out of pocket.... Regarding refusal of insurance and prior existing... I am diabetic, had a heart attack 11 years ago, have high blood pressure and have NEVER been refused insurance or NEVER had it claimed as "previous existing"...
Oh, so in reality we exposed yet another problem... I never had this happened because I always had employer insurance and signed up in open enrollment when starting my job.... So the problem wasn't insurance it was availability of insurance from employers... Yet still even after the ACA employers can get out of offering insurance...
Not everyone could get insurance, or get insurance that they could afford, under the old system. I have had a few medical problems myself over the years. (I am 61.) I lost my previous employer-based insurance several years prior when I lost the job. I had several jobs in my field over the next decade but was always laid off just as I was becoming eligible for the employer health insurance. Funny thing about that. Maybe it really was just a coincidence, but it happened six times in a row. In the years and months between my last job and the roll-out in October 2013 I looked into buying insurance on the individual market. Like you, I was never out-and-out denied a policy (many thousands of people around the country were, though) but I was always shunted into the high-risk pool (because of my age and slight but existing medical history), where even the cheapest policies had skyrocket high deductibles and monthly premiums that exceeded my monthly income. So I did without. I never went to the doctor or the dentist for six years.
I do know what you mean about deductibles. When I applied for insurance via my state exchange during the first enrollment period in 2013 I made an error when I stated my income (using a figure that was much higher than it should have been), and ended up getting a policy with a deductible each year that would take me several years to pay off given my income. That was obviously unsustainable. The monthly premium also claimed every single dollar that remained after I paid my other monthly bills. It was a good policy otherwise. If I really did have the income that I had erroneously stated then I would have been able to afford the premiums and the deductible with little difficulty.
As for transplant lists, I do know what I was talking about. During my long career I worked as a social worker on a local hospital's renal dialysis unit and I saw many patients who were trying to negotiate their way through the kidney transplant system. I had several who were denied due to age. This was almost a decade prior to the passage of the ACA.
And still not everyone can get insurance... I myself am 54 so years aren't a major factor between us. A few medical problems, I wish when talking of my parents I could even think of using "few"....
My comment is not about healthcare. The ACA doesn't go near far enough and in many ways didn't solve problems they in this article are claiming they have. I too have had times I was without insurance for various reasons in my life. Actually when I had my heart attack 14 years ago I was just laid off after 9/11 sometime in early October 2001... December 2001, heart attack, no insurance...
I truly can relate to insurance nightmares including some additional nightmares I deal with having employer sponsored insurance after the ACA was passed that don't account for what this article claims is so good.... Fortunately as a vet I have some additional help with these new and higher expenses from the ACA otherwise I frankly am not sure I could afford insurance today...
To put further to rest my ability... I am well educated with degrees in engineering, architecture and computer science so it is more a problem of society with wages keeping up with cost of living then my needing to do more to give myself better opportunities...
Actually, I believe we are kind of on the same page. I just think we need to get rid of the ACA with a plan that solves more problems than it creates. If we can't replace it with one solving more problems than it the ACA creates, then keep the ACA where it is at because yes some things have been made better.... But not the glowing improvement this article is trying to claim.
Republicans have always been afraid of healthcare.
Remember what happened when the first caveman used a stick to brush his teeth for the first time?
http://media0.giphy.com/med...
but the tyranny... won't anyone think of the tyranny?????
Pres. Obama punching republicans right in their tea bags like a boss.
Totally dig how he straight up mocks republicans with their own cynical buzz words, e.g., "secure," "freedom," etc.
It was some "guilt by association" nitwitterage - apparently, if one librul tweeted something critical of what became the ACA, then, by extension, everybody on the left is a hypocrite.
Sort of like because Robert Byrd was a racist 60 years ago, the Democrats are the real racists.
Someone's seen the 13th Warrior.
Gosh, haven't you listened to every major Democratic strategist? If Obama took an aggressive strategy towards Republicans, Republicans who would have voted for the Republican anyway might not vote for the Democrat! Amatuer
Err... for freedom?
Awww...!!!
I missed it too. Was it funny? I bet it was funny.
Maybe we'll find out in a Special Weekend Edition of "Dear Shit-fer-brains". You feelin' me, 'Becca?*
*(If so, knock it off you shameless hussy, and keep your hands to yourself. I'm happily married, secret 'Becca crush notwithstanding.)
It was my pleasure and I enjoyed it fully... I agree with you, they need to move forward and implement a total solution to health care in the US in a very timely manner...
It was a great pleasure with our discussion and agree it is becoming rare where this type of discussion happens...
You also take care friend... One day we may have opportunity for a civil discussion again... Maybe we will have opportunity to celebrate as congress finally does implement a total health care solution...
Okay... To make a few points come to light... 1. I don't care how many gained insurance I care how many can AFFORD HEALTHCARE!... Reality, yes they can afford insurance thanks to our tax dollars at work... I am okay with this... But with family deductibles starting around $10,000 how many can afford to pay this? if they can't afford to pay this then it does nothing for uninsured expenses... 2. I don't care what it has done to the nation's deficit... I care what is has done to our DEBT!
Having a mother who was denied being put on a transplant list because she was "too old", educated me to "death panels" long before ACA was ever approved.... YES those are in the ACA...
Finally I don't credit or blame Obama.... OUR CONGRESS PASSES LAW.... Our president only SIGNS IT!
Yes, they still have noses, but they sold their hearts to the Lord of Darkness to acquire power. On another note, doesn't Dick Cheney look chipper since his latest heart replacement surgery.
What would your deductible be if you had no insurance, because no company would sell you a policy?
I am sincerely sorry about your mother's medical situation, but the ACA didn't cause her to be rejected for a transplant. The sad reality is that there has always been a severe shortage of suitable organs ever since transplantation became a viable option. Because of that, donor registries had to create priority lists and triage the cases who were awaiting transplants. This practice predated the ACA by decades. There have always been vastly more potential recipients of transplants than there have been donors, requiring transplant registries to make some tough decisions regarding organ allocation. This did not come about as a result of the ACA -- it has always been the case with transplants. Again, you have my sympathy concerning your mother's situation.
Thank you for your words about my Mom....
Yes if someone is faced with a major medical situation, they have insurance to pay for it. Unfortunately the majority will never reach their deducible in any given year leaving them to pay for this out of pocket with the insurance expense... This isn't a solution to uninsured expenses
As for Mom, she was mentioned because in the ACA there is wording allowing "teams" or what sensationalism calls "death panels" to make a decision at some point if your life is worth spending more money on to save. In the ACA it has NOTHING to do with a shortage of organs...
To answer your question about what my deductible would be without insurance... I wouldn't have a deductible and everything would be out of pocket.... Regarding refusal of insurance and prior existing... I am diabetic, had a heart attack 11 years ago, have high blood pressure and have NEVER been refused insurance or NEVER had it claimed as "previous existing"...
Oh, so in reality we exposed yet another problem... I never had this happened because I always had employer insurance and signed up in open enrollment when starting my job.... So the problem wasn't insurance it was availability of insurance from employers... Yet still even after the ACA employers can get out of offering insurance...
Not everyone could get insurance, or get insurance that they could afford, under the old system. I have had a few medical problems myself over the years. (I am 61.) I lost my previous employer-based insurance several years prior when I lost the job. I had several jobs in my field over the next decade but was always laid off just as I was becoming eligible for the employer health insurance. Funny thing about that. Maybe it really was just a coincidence, but it happened six times in a row. In the years and months between my last job and the roll-out in October 2013 I looked into buying insurance on the individual market. Like you, I was never out-and-out denied a policy (many thousands of people around the country were, though) but I was always shunted into the high-risk pool (because of my age and slight but existing medical history), where even the cheapest policies had skyrocket high deductibles and monthly premiums that exceeded my monthly income. So I did without. I never went to the doctor or the dentist for six years.
I do know what you mean about deductibles. When I applied for insurance via my state exchange during the first enrollment period in 2013 I made an error when I stated my income (using a figure that was much higher than it should have been), and ended up getting a policy with a deductible each year that would take me several years to pay off given my income. That was obviously unsustainable. The monthly premium also claimed every single dollar that remained after I paid my other monthly bills. It was a good policy otherwise. If I really did have the income that I had erroneously stated then I would have been able to afford the premiums and the deductible with little difficulty.
As for transplant lists, I do know what I was talking about. During my long career I worked as a social worker on a local hospital's renal dialysis unit and I saw many patients who were trying to negotiate their way through the kidney transplant system. I had several who were denied due to age. This was almost a decade prior to the passage of the ACA.
And still not everyone can get insurance... I myself am 54 so years aren't a major factor between us. A few medical problems, I wish when talking of my parents I could even think of using "few"....
My comment is not about healthcare. The ACA doesn't go near far enough and in many ways didn't solve problems they in this article are claiming they have. I too have had times I was without insurance for various reasons in my life. Actually when I had my heart attack 14 years ago I was just laid off after 9/11 sometime in early October 2001... December 2001, heart attack, no insurance...
I truly can relate to insurance nightmares including some additional nightmares I deal with having employer sponsored insurance after the ACA was passed that don't account for what this article claims is so good.... Fortunately as a vet I have some additional help with these new and higher expenses from the ACA otherwise I frankly am not sure I could afford insurance today...
To put further to rest my ability... I am well educated with degrees in engineering, architecture and computer science so it is more a problem of society with wages keeping up with cost of living then my needing to do more to give myself better opportunities...
Actually, I believe we are kind of on the same page. I just think we need to get rid of the ACA with a plan that solves more problems than it creates. If we can't replace it with one solving more problems than it the ACA creates, then keep the ACA where it is at because yes some things have been made better.... But not the glowing improvement this article is trying to claim.