Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Same place the subsidies are coming from now...we the people. The CBO has some sobering statistics regarding the cost of the ACA. I doubt the republican plan will be more. So looks like some AIDS patients will no longer be covered under the ACA if they receive funds from the Ryan White org. Can of worms it is.....
Actually - the Ryan White funding issue is interesting. The government trying to pass off its obligations under the federal law to private insurance companies by paying ACA premiums for AIDs patients. And I thought I was the only person who read about this (perhaps it was linked on the Drudge Report - and that's where we both read about it). Robyn
P.S. If the federal government can get away with this - then I think the private insurers in the ACA will be toast/history.
The no liability isn't because Chase is a nice company, it's because of credit card laws...if those laws were not on the books, they wouldn't be dismissing these charges like they are...but a good lawyer would know that already....
Oh - and the new Chase credit cards - and Target paying for identity fraud protection are required by law too? I absolutely shudder to think what would happen if personal info like my SS # is stolen as a result of filing my taxes electronically.
IMO - it used to be the norm that people would use withholding to insure they'd get a little bonus when they filed their tax returns and got a refund. These days - I would always make sure I owed the IRS money on 4/15 - instead of the other way around. Because some people who commit fraud may get to your refund before you do. And possession is 9/10ths of the law. Robyn
No one is losing insurance, they just have to change their policy...which happens ALL the time, before the ACA. How is a new law going to help website issues and how does the website have any bearing on the care or policies???
Again, what would you do to change things--be specific? You seem to have a lot of criticisms but no solutions..
Not true. Many people are being told that their current policy is not ACA compliant and that they must get a new, more expensive one that is ACA compliant. Many of these people cannot afford the new ACA compliant policies, even though they could afford their policy prior.
The people who need a subsidy are forced to use a website that is riddled with problems and has been called, "a hacker's wet dream" by security experts. It puts people in a very vulnerable position.
Repeal the law and start over. I think we need to destroy the box and start over from scratch.
So, MissTerri, there were no alternative policies available for you?
Millions have used the web site now. Perhaps your computer has some issues. Then there is the phone and the mail.
All personal documentation may be mailed in if you don't want to submit it online.
No alternatives that I could afford, or that I liked. The new plans in my price range are high deductible (like my old plan) so the added cost in premiums makes them not worth it. They are also HMO. I don't want an HMO.
The info still goes into a database. I have seen how things have been going. Do I really want to give these people all of my personal info when they have proven that they can not be trusted to keep it secure?
Not true. Many people are being told that their current policy is not ACA compliant and that they must get a new, more expensive one that is ACA compliant. Many of these people cannot afford the new ACA compliant policies, even though they could afford their policy prior.
The people who need a subsidy are forced to use a website that is riddled with problems and has been called, "a hacker's wet dream" by security experts. It puts people in a very vulnerable position.
Repeal the law and start over. I think we need to destroy the box and start over from scratch.
No, losing insurance means they don't have insurance any more. What is wrong with having to have an ACA compliant plan? See, "afford" means many different things and could you really "afford" your plan...that doesn't mean you can pay your premiums but what if something major happened, could you really "afford" your plan...probably not....
Too bad they would not delay the individual mandate until they could get a working and secure website. People who signed up on the exchange are now at great risk of having all of their personal information stolen.
After my husband signed up we got Lifelock. I don't know how else to protect ourselves.
Not true. Many people are being told that their current policy is not ACA compliant and that they must get a new, more expensive one that is ACA compliant. Many of these people cannot afford the new ACA compliant policies, even though they could afford their policy prior.
The people who need a subsidy are forced to use a website that is riddled with problems and has been called, "a hacker's wet dream" by security experts. It puts people in a very vulnerable position.
Repeal the law and start over. I think we need to destroy the box and start over from scratch.
The system we had before wasn't working. You can pretend until you are blue in the face that it was. Too many of us on the ground could see otherwise.
There won't be any repeal even if the democrats lose a majority of seats in the Senate in 2014. Obama can veto the repeal and there won't be a 2/3's majority to override.
No, losing insurance means they don't have insurance any more. What is wrong with having to have an ACA compliant plan? See, "afford" means many different things and could you really "afford" your plan...that doesn't mean you can pay your premiums but what if something major happened, could you really "afford" your plan...probably not....
Yeah, a lot of people don't have insurance anymore. An ACA compliant plan has things that we don't need and the deductible is still very high, it just costs more now.
The system we had before wasn't working. You can pretend until you are blue in the face that it was. Too many of us on the ground could see otherwise.
There won't be any repeal even if the democrats lose a majority of seats in the Senate in 2014. Obama can veto the repeal and there won't be a 2/3's majority to override.
I'm not pretending that the old system was great, it was not but the new system is causing as many problems as it is solving. It is not a solution or a fix to our old problems.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
