Understanding Obamacare

And they're government funded!


Gawdammit I fucking hate LEACHES

 

It will be too late. It will be a gigantic roll of red tape too big to get rid of. Someone please jog my memory, but what has the government involved itself in which hasn't proven to be a vastly inefficient, money-sucking quagmire? Examples please?

 

The US Military?

Yes there are many examples of waste and abuse, but as far as being mission efficient I would say it is highly successful. Perhaps not entirely due to the desk jockeys, but because of those with "boots on the ground" who make it happen. The most ironic part is the efficiency gets better with less political involvement. Go figure.

 

Exactly, that's one example where the politicians are usually trying to cut spending. And when our gov't gets involved in conflicts, they usually end up screwing the military in a major way. So yeah, I agree they didn't get it all wrong with the military. I would still challenge that there are too many gov't bureaucrats involved in military affairs. Our interstate highway is an example of good gov't, I guess. I'm guessing it could still be done better and more efficiently by private industry.

 

I'm somewhat involved in the Interstate system. My job is a perfect example of why it works so well. The government sets standards and agrees to give the states funding if they meet those standards. The states outsource most of the work (including my job) to private companies that agree to do the job for a fixed bid. We work our tails off to get in on time and under budget and in exchange we get to keep any excess as profit.

The model works great. The jobs get done, the citizens receive better service, the state saves money. Everybody wins except the old state employees who were downsized because their bloated, inefficient, out of date model didn't work.

 

Can somebody who knows explain to me why I cant forgo insurance through my company and instead just pay the penalty (1% of household income) instead?

 

You would have to talk to your company, but I am sure they would allow you to reject the coverage. Do you think the defualt coverage (with fine) is a better deal for you?

 

I don't think it's that simple. I believe the deal is that the company has to have a large percentage of their employees on their plan or they incur a fine.
Let me read through the 26,000 pages and get back to you.

 

Ok, that was pretty funny. If only our politicians had done that to begin with.

 

Ain't nobody gat time fa dat! Least of all a bunch of douchebags in congress.

 

Got this notice from our Benefits Dept. the other day:

"Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), employers are required by the U.S. Department of Labor to provide you with the attached notice by October 1, 2013.

This notice relates to coverage options available through a Health Insurance Marketplace (often referred to as the “Exchange”). As you review this notice, please keep in mind that under the ACA, any employee who has access to affordable coverage (as the law defines it) is not eligible for subsidized coverage through a state health insurance marketplace. Since %%%%% provides affordable coverage, a covered %%%%% employee would not be eligible for “Exchange” Marketplace insurance.


For more information about healthcare reform and the operation of state health insurance marketplaces, please visit: https://www.healthcare.gov/"

 

So basically, if your a dedicated full time employee, thanks for subsidizing everyone elses coverage. Got it.

 

One thing to keep in mind is that regardless of what is in the legislation, the regulations post implemetation will change depending on the agency(ies) charged with administering this train wreck and the courts. As bad as it appears to be now, it could easily get worse.

 

I am looking at a total of a 38% increase. This if f***ing f****d.

 

You're getting a deal then! Forbes says 99% increase for men, 62% increase for women. How's that for hopey-changey?

Double Down: Obamacare Will Increase Avg. Individual-Market Insurance Premiums By 99% For Men, 62% For Women - Forbes
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...-by-99-for-men-62-for-women/?partner=yahootix

 

Guaranteed that it will. Obama will attempt to delay it some to get past the midterm election in hope of getting Pelosi in rather than the pansy in charge now. Then regardless of the outcome it is full pedal for his last two years. That is unless the Republicans gain the Senate and Boehner and McConnell provide a strong opposition

 

With all the ACA rate talk, I've yet to see anyone detail the coverage. I was curious so I did some googling:

Bronze: 60/40 Participate pays 40% up to $6350 individual max
Silver: 70/30
Gold: 80/20
Platinum: 90/10

So the Bronze plan pays a smaller percentage than current individual plans, has a higher premium and is more limiting on available pool of doctors.

So someone please explain the value this is providing? We are forcing people that don't want/can't afford insurance to buy crappy insurance plans. So is anyone other than the insurance companies getting anything out of this? The insurance lobby is ridiculously good.

 

:Off:

A friend sent me this video today. I don't now if this has been posted in the dungeon before, as I don't pay close attention to the healthcare threads. I thought it was interesting, but I didn't want to start a thread just for this.

 

Could Arizona Repblicans please get rid of this liberal toad
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ate-floor-says-the-people-spoke-on-obamacare/

 

Don't make me fuckin laugh that hard. You used Boehner and strong opposition in the same sentence. Those two are mutually exclusive.

I've dated mentally unstable women that blubbered up and cried less than he does.