Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

    Originally posted by USCitizen View Post
    E,
    I honestly haven't followed O's every utterance.
    The issue is our economic infrastructure.
    Thriving industries used to drive health care.
    Reagan and Congress turned emergency rooms into primary physician havens.
    Everybody's right to their day in court has driven up liability costs.
    We have a rising blue collar working class.

    Let's just eliminate health care altogether.
    Now you are presenting the FALSE CHOICE of either Obamacare / single payer system or NO health care at all.

    I call you on this.
    These are NOT the only choices. Not choosing Obamacare or its follow on single payer system IS NOT the same as no health care at all.
    A false choice. BS.

    Could have left the previous system largely in tact, and made some changes that would have resulted in the improvements that are / were needed.

    You are also assuming that Obamacare is going to result in addressing those issues that you are so concerned about. I'll wager that it'll be much like nearly every other big government created and run plan, in that the results will be exactly opposite of the desired and stated goals. We are seeing this already now.

    The stated goal of Obamacare was to provide insurance to those that don't have insurance. Correct? About what? 15M people?

    Well, more people have lost the health care plans that they wanted, that they could afford than have gained insurance from Obamacare, by nearly a fact of 10. The largest number of people that have used the web site have signed up for medicare! Not insurance.

    I stand by my previous post.

    ?


    • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

      And the magic number is (drum roll if you please...)

      Fewer than 27,000...



      It?s Official: Obamacare Enrollment Is Super Low - NationalJournal.com

      ?


      • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

        I'm so happy I am paying much more for everyone else, and almost no one to signs up.

        ?


        • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

          Many are sensing relief with the Congressman Upton's legislation and similar legislation proposed by Senator Mary Landrieu.

          One proposal introduced by Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-Louisiana, would require insurance companies to continue offering plans so long as customers stayed up to date with their payments.

          Another put forward by Rep. Fred Upton, R-Michigan, would give health insurance companies the option to continue offering plans currently available on the individual market, while also allowing customers to continue to enroll in those plans. Republicans in the House of Representatives plan to hold a vote on Rep. Upton's proposal on Friday.
          Can Congress really save insurance plans lost under Obamacare? CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

          Do please note that:

          Democrats / Progressives / Liberals require insurance companies to continue offering plans A Dictate (government taking control of health care)

          Conservatives give health insurance companies the option to continue offering plans currently available An Option

          We have seen how Old Dirty Harry takes House legislation, replaces all the text with legislation of his own choosing, then sending it back to the House for an up or down vote. This is how Obamacare came into being, skirting the laws regarding that the house has to originate any tax related legislation.
          Heres what is going to happen.

          The House, with the help of a good number of Democrats, will pass the Upton plan and send it to the Senate. Harry Reid will substitute the Landrieu plan and send it back to the House. The House will be forced to either vote for the Landrieu plan or be characterized as siding with insurance companies against people.

          In one fell swoop, the Democrats will have the GOP on record saving Mary Landrieus re-election in Louisiana by casting her as the one who saved Americans health care plans, and also getting on record as really being in favor of fixing Obamacare with the use of mandates.

          In truth, Obamacare is not fixable. The only solution is to fully repeal it. The Republicans should not be helping Democrats with their re-election plans, which is all the are doing with Upton/Landrieu.

          The GOP is walking right into the trap.
          Its a Trap! | RedState

          Let's see how well Boehner manages this situation. Let's see if Boehner can avoid this political maneuvering by the Democrats.

          I sure hope that it doesn't work out as the author of the article outlines.

          If it does work out this way, it would call in to question if the Republican leaders actually want Obamacare, the big government intrusion, the big government control over 1/6th of the economy, the big government control over the people's health care.

          ?


          • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

            Originally posted by tsquare View Post
            And the magic number is (drum roll if you please...)

            Fewer than 27,000...



            It?s Official: Obamacare Enrollment Is Super Low - NationalJournal.com
            Now, now.... let's not make things out to be worse than they actually are.

            That's 27K on the federal exchange and 79K on the State exchanges plus another 400K who are now Medicaid eligible. Of course that also includes people who have selected a plan but not purchased it and we really don't know how many of those there are but we can reasonably expect 135% of them to sign up (2014 is an election year so that's allowed).

            I get a kick out of the HHS report. They go to great lengths to explain that the numbers include people who have yet to start paying premiums but they don't bother to say what that figure is and then they dedicate the last half of the report to comparing the ACA to Romneycare. The other thing that they utterly fail to address is how they are going to handle all the new Medicaid beneficiaries who are signing up at a 4:1 rate over self pay and subsidized payers. Furthermore, 67% of the eligible enrollees so far either get "free" coverage under Medicaid or a subsidy. This is going to be WAY more expensive than we have been told.

            ?


            • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

              Originally posted by tsquare View Post
              Yeah... ain't it cool...

              Karma... it is a bitch!
              I guess i am as guilty as anyone else for someone who would be on par with ideology when it comes to Obama but have turned something rotten on him as soon as Romney was out of the way. (I'm not apologizing for it btw, glad to see Obama suffer like this).

              ?


              • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

                Originally posted by USCitizen View Post
                What's the fix?
                Why does there need to be a fix? He is your average 2 term President who hits the lame duck status at this point.

                ?


                • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

                  Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                  Of course. If it hits the fan in one's home district and the calls flood into the Rep's office, he must respond. Doesn't matter who the president is, if the Rep's position is on the line.
                  Yeah but in the days of Bush that kind of loyalty was unreal...somehow, some way, he always found a way to keep people in line and they went against principles of spending and agreed to buy out Dem votes to fund wars and all sorts. Must have driven the likes of Sluggo up the wall. Clinton held the ranks over impeachment even though he banged a tubby intern so you really have to fuck up pretty bad to lose your own party.

                  ?


                  • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

                    Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                    Many are sensing relief with the Congressman Upton's legislation and similar legislation proposed by Senator Mary Landrieu.


                    Can Congress really save insurance plans lost under Obamacare? CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

                    Do please note that:

                    Democrats / Progressives / Liberals require insurance companies to continue offering plans A Dictate (government taking control of health care)

                    Conservatives give health insurance companies the option to continue offering plans currently available An Option

                    We have seen how Old Dirty Harry takes House legislation, replaces all the text with legislation of his own choosing, then sending it back to the House for an up or down vote. This is how Obamacare came into being, skirting the laws regarding that the house has to originate any tax related legislation.

                    Its a Trap! | RedState

                    Let's see how well Boehner manages this situation. Let's see if Boehner can avoid this political maneuvering by the Democrats.

                    I sure hope that it doesn't work out as the author of the article outlines.

                    If it does work out this way, it would call in to question if the Republican leaders actually want Obamacare, the big government intrusion, the big government control over 1/6th of the economy, the big government control over the people's health care.
                    And wait until people start finding out that their new exchange policies aren't accepted at the hospitals they like. I'm starting to hear that these plans at "minimum required coverage" (or however they're phrasing it) means Medicaid level coverage. It means that instead of getting treatment at your top (or middle) shelf University hospital or Mayo clinic you're only going to be covered for your community health hospital.

                    ?


                    • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

                      Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                      Now you are presenting the FALSE CHOICE of either Obamacare / single payer system or NO health care at all.

                      I call you on this.
                      These are NOT the only choices. Not choosing Obamacare or its follow on single payer system IS NOT the same as no health care at all.
                      A false choice. BS.

                      Could have left the previous system largely in tact, and made some changes that would have resulted in the improvements that are / were needed.

                      You are also assuming that Obamacare is going to result in addressing those issues that you are so concerned about. I'll wager that it'll be much like nearly every other big government created and run plan, in that the results will be exactly opposite of the desired and stated goals. We are seeing this already now.

                      The stated goal of Obamacare was to provide insurance to those that don't have insurance. Correct? About what? 15M people?

                      Well, more people have lost the health care plans that they wanted, that they could afford than have gained insurance from Obamacare, by nearly a fact of 10. The largest number of people that have used the web site have signed up for medicare! Not insurance.

                      I stand by my previous post.

                      NYS, the Evil Empire State, according to my Pediatrician, has added, due to the ACA, the following Insurance Carriers...

                      From the e-mail>>>
                      Empire BCBS
                      United Healthcare
                      Oxford
                      American Progressive
                      Health Republic Insurance
                      Oscar Insurance Corp
                      North Shore-LIJ

                      We are still participating in all of our current insurance plans. The above plans are an addition to our current insurance plan list.
                      <<<From the e-mail

                      If YOUR State doesn't give a shit about it's constituents, complain to your State Assembly.
                      OR
                      If an Insurance Company can't make a profit in your State, maybe your State legislatures can come to our Liberal Hell Hole and learn a thing or two about attracting such firms.

                      ?


                      • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

                        If I were the Republicans I'd wait till December 1st. When the end of November rolls around and the website is still garbage, put forward a bill for repeal of Owebamacare.

                        Then see if the Democrats have the balls to vote against it.

                        ?


                        • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

                          Originally posted by USCitizen View Post
                          NYS, the Evil Empire State, according to my Pediatrician, has added, due to the ACA, the following Insurance Carriers...

                          From the e-mail>>>
                          Empire BCBS
                          United Healthcare
                          Oxford
                          American Progressive
                          Health Republic Insurance
                          Oscar Insurance Corp
                          North Shore-LIJ

                          We are still participating in all of our current insurance plans. The above plans are an addition to our current insurance plan list.
                          <<<From the e-mail

                          If YOUR State doesn't give a shit about it's constituents, complain to your State Assembly.
                          OR
                          If an Insurance Company can't make a profit in your State, maybe your State legislatures can come to our Liberal Hell Hole and learn a thing or two about attracting such firms.
                          That's great...our state doesn't give a shit about subsidizing your Liberal Hell Hole insurance costs.

                          ?


                          • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

                            Originally posted by Lutherf View Post
                            And wait until people start finding out that their new exchange policies aren't accepted at the hospitals they like. I'm starting to hear that these plans at "minimum required coverage" (or however they're phrasing it) means Medicaid level coverage. It means that instead of getting treatment at your top (or middle) shelf University hospital or Mayo clinic you're only going to be covered for your community health hospital.
                            Yeah, some pundits are saying that after the employer mandate kicks in, heath care will become fractured. The top 20% will have much of what they had before, except greater expenses which they won't notice all that much, but the rest of the 80% are going to be lumped in with Medicare level care, at greater expense as well, and will be less well cared for.

                            Well, shit. Why'd we fuck with this to begin with? Which idiot's idea was this? (Rhetorical, I know who)

                            We as a country are ending up serving a great number of people less effectively, less well, at greater expense. Tell me this isn't a fucked up government run operation? Is this what passes now for progress? Seriously?

                            Government idiots are always spending the 80% on top of everything else to try and get that last 20% and fail miserably. You'd think they'd be intelligent enough to learn from experience. I guess not.

                            If you think that the howling was bad with 5% of the population having their plans cancelled and their only options are more expensive plans? Can you imagine what the howling is going to be with the employer mandate kicks in, which applies to some 85% of the population?
                            Expecting riots? You may get them.

                            ?


                            • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

                              Originally posted by 9aces View Post
                              That's great...our state doesn't give a shit about subsidizing your Liberal Hell Hole insurance costs.
                              Straw...
                              NYS doles out more than it gets.

                              ?


                              • Re: Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

                                Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                                Yeah, some pundits are saying that after the employer mandate kicks in, heath care will become fractured. The top 20% will have much of what they had before, except greater expenses which they won't notice all that much, but the rest of the 80% are going to be lumped in with Medicare level care, at greater expense as well, and will be less well cared for.

                                Well, shit. Why'd we fuck with this to begin with? Which idiot's idea was this? (Rhetorical, I know who)

                                We as a country are ending up serving a great number of people less effectively, less well, at greater expense. Tell me this isn't a fucked up government run operation? Is this what passes now for progress? Seriously?

                                Government idiots are always spending the 80% on top of everything else to try and get that last 20% and fail miserably. You'd think they'd be intelligent enough to learn from experience. I guess not.

                                If you think that the howling was bad with 5% of the population having their plans cancelled and their only options are more expensive plans? Can you imagine what the howling is going to be with the employer mandate kicks in, which applies to some 85% of the population?
                                Expecting riots? You may get them.
                                The purpose of the ACA was never to make health care better or more affordable. The only real purpose it ever had was to make more people reliant on the federal government and to relieve the states of some of their power. This is all just another small step toward nationalization of all major industries and the destruction of the Republic.

                                We are dealing with a rather large faction in this country that is anti-capitalist and anti-individualism. Their goal is creating a direct democracy. What they generally fail to realize is that such a political model is only one step removed from totalitarianism but they seem bound and determined to find out the hard way.

                                In some ways I look at this as the "rebellious teen" years of our nation. These people are saying "we've done it your way and now we want to do it our way" but, like most teenagers, they fail to see that their ideas are not new and that their forebears set things up the way they did to protect from the dangers of starry eyed ideological utopianism.

                                ?

                                Working...
                                X