- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Killing Americans... why Bobby Jindal needs to stop his lies regarding Medicaid
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:09 pm to CamdenTiger
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:09 pm to CamdenTiger
quote:
Now this is sound, why can't our legislators do this?
Because of legalized bribery known as "lobbying". Both parties are guilty.
The ironic thing about Obamacare? Republicans, eventually, would have proposed the exact same thing, just as Romney had done in Massachusetts.
4
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:16 pm to Rex
quote:
The ironic thing about Obamacare? Republicans, eventually, would have proposed the exact same thing, just as Romney had done in Massachusetts.
Costs are the problem IMO. Its just too expensive if you work, and have a family. If I had to leave my current plan, it goes from 500 a month to 1500, with a higher deductible...I look at that, and can only imagine what others will have to pay. This is flying on the backs of working people who are strapped to the hilt. This isn't a good plan IMO.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:21 pm to Rex
quote:
Because of legalized bribery known as "lobbying". Both parties are guilty.
The ironic thing about Obamacare? Republicans, eventually, would have proposed the exact same thing, just as Romney had done in Massachusetts.
Once again, we are trained to think within the boundaries of the already broken insurance system we have in this country.
We had a shitty system when it came to insurance. So what did we do? We turned around and added an additional layer of govt bureaucracy on top to further complicate the process and make it more costly all while decreasing efficiency. Forward!!!!
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:25 pm to Rex
quote:Not a chance in Hell.
Republicans, eventually, would have proposed the exact same thing, just as Romney had done in Massachusetts.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:25 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
We turned around and added an additional layer of govt bureaucracy on top to further complicate the process and make it more costly all while decreasing efficiency.
You might think that. I think it's a VAST improvement because it guarantees coverage to people regardless of pre-existing conditions and has eliminated lifetime maximums. I care about people.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:31 pm to Rex
quote:
You might think that. I think it's a VAST improvement because it guarantees coverage to people regardless of pre-existing conditions and has eliminated lifetime maximums. I care about people.
You care about people in the here and now, Rex.
I care about people now but also in the future. Once the system goes bankrupt, we will all suffer, not just a small percentage as is now.
It's not a vast improvement. It's a petri dish that's set up to incubate corruption, waste and crony capitalism.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:32 pm to Rex
quote:
I think it's a VAST improvement because it guarantees coverage to people regardless of pre-existing conditions and has eliminated lifetime maximums. I care about people.
So, how much longer will some have to work to pay more for Healthcare, or do you only care for certain people, or income class? And this law has done nothing for care, people still won't be able to see some of the best Docs, or get into the best centers, its going to be a crap-shoot finding care, now...Can't wait for the stories of people not being able to find an accepting physician...This bill has done nothing for care, just insurance if they can find accepting care...
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:37 pm to CamdenTiger
quote:
So, how much longer will some have to work to pay more for Healthcare, or do you only care for certain people, or income class?
Some will work longer but in exchange they get a guarantee of lifetime coverage. That's worth quite a lot. Some will work less, because insurance companies can not deny them, they can get off high-priced state plans, they can avoid personal financial catastrophe, and their premiums can not be radically more because of pre-existing conditions.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:40 pm to Rex
quote:~40 million say you're wrong
it guarantees coverage to people
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:40 pm to SSpaniel
quote:
Ahh... ok. So stuff that healthcare insurance was originally designed to cover. Which is to say... NOT doctor visits and NOT prescriptions.
Ding.
Winner.
This is a big problem with health insurance.
It should have been modeled to pay things the person insured can't afford out of pocket such as surgery and major illness.
It should have never paid for routine office visits, check ups and prescriptions. Those should be treated like getting new tires or your AC unit going out: things that pop up from time to time that you have to go out of pocket for.
Health insurance should never have covered anything below what necessitates a hospital admission.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:43 pm to Scoop
quote:
ing.
Winner.
This is a big problem with health insurance.
It should have been modeled to pay things the person insured can't afford out of pocket such as surgery and major illness.
It should have never paid for routine office visits, check ups and prescriptions. Those should be treated like getting new tires or your AC unit going out: things that pop up from time to time that you have to go out of pocket for.
Health insurance should never have covered anything below what necessitates a hospital admission.
I completely agree, but until you get the industry to share that same mentality, it's not economically viable. Doctors charge a ton of money because of the hassle of going through insurance.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:51 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Are you crazy? The ACA got rid of catastrophic coverage and mandates overbroad, unnecessary coverage for a lot of people in order to subsidize others.
This. It's crazy that even an Obamacare supporter would deny this.
This post was edited on 4/14/14 at 6:52 pm
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:54 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
I completely agree, but until you get the industry to share that same mentality, it's not economically viable. Doctors charge a ton of money because of the hassle of going through insurance.
Yep.
I've been in healthcare for 20 years. I have intimate knowledge of where the system works and where it is broken.
It is broken in areas such as compliance with the complete and utter counter intuitiveness of Medicare regulations, the mindless behemoth that is Medicare coupled with insurance companies that charge a premium for coverage and then fight every claim tooth and nail.
Obamacare has only made these problems exponentially worse and any a-hole that would disagree doesn't work in healthcare.
Obamacare has turned a problem into a cataclysm while claiming to fix the problem.
Anyone is free to disagree with me, but anyone that does is some pie in the sky ideologue who has no actual idea with regards to what is actually happening in the real world.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:55 pm to moneyg
The ACA did not get rid of coverage against catastrophes. Every policy includes that coverage.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 6:56 pm to Antonio Moss
Honestly, I don't believe either side is the way to go. Because of the ACA, insurance companies as a whole are denying more and more to save money. Expanding medicaid, as you said, is financially ridiculous for states. But, the feds will make life hell for states that don't comply. Its a lose-lose situation for the people. But, truthfully, none of this is about my son or people like him. It's all political. Bobby wants to make a presidential run and doesn't want any hint at agreeing with or cooperating with the current administration. We the people don't matter to either side.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 8:14 pm to Rex
quote:
. I'm very willing to appropriate $1000 of my tax dollars to keep people from dying for lack of healthcare.
Sadly, your $1,000 appropriation was already spent, several times over, long before this law was passed...
Posted on 4/15/14 at 11:47 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
I stand corrected BHP, thanks for snapping me back to reality.I apolog1ize for the baby killer comment Rex. 
Posted on 4/15/14 at 12:39 pm to Rex
quote:
I care about people.
No. You don't. You don't care one whit. Not about Charlene Dill nor anyone else. You do, however like the perceived opportunity to throw stones at conservatives. Of that, I'm certain.
This post was edited on 4/15/14 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 4/15/14 at 12:43 pm to SSpaniel
do people who care about people called disabled babies "freaks of nature"?
Posted on 4/15/14 at 12:51 pm to Rex
quote:Sadly you must think that's a coy response. It was addressed earlier. As you know and with the exception previously cited, Obama did away with all cost-efficient Catastrophic Plans.
The ACA did not get rid of coverage against catastrophes. Every policy includes that coverage.
Page 13 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News