U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-04-2013, 12:21 PM
 
30,794 posts, read 17,138,898 times
Reputation: 6804

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
I am not Harry Reid. I did not vote for Harry Reid. Harry Reid does not speak for me and I do not speak for him. What Harry Reid says has no impact on my beliefs on the issue.

My beliefs are that since no other employer is required to put their employees in the exchange, neither should the government. If the government can get a better price by negotiating with insurers, then they should go with the better price, and save money.

Why should the government employees be treated any different than the employees at any other company? My company doesn't have to buy through the exchange, why should any other employer?
ALL employers should be treated the same.

THen why the heck are you in this thread...this thread is not about you or your beliefs, it is what about harry reid said and is now doing...

If you wnat to talk about your beliefs go start another thread, because you are only derailing this thread...

It's not about buying, it about what reid stated he was going to do....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-04-2013, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
19,463 posts, read 9,832,079 times
Reputation: 7551
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee View Post
What are they and explain why I need them? I'm a guy...so please explain why I need all those minimum's...and have to pay for those, not needed...
Read the law.

I am a female why should I have to pay for prostate exams to be covered or ED treatment? My policies have covered these for years. It is called an insurance pool. There are both males and females in that pool. Males have medical issues that females don't , and females have medical issues that males don't. We all pay in to one big pot called insurance. I may not need cancer treatments that someone else does need, I may have issues that they don't need treatment for. We still pay in even if we might never need or use those things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 12:24 PM
 
3,537 posts, read 2,219,959 times
Reputation: 1021
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Is any other employer REQUIRED to provide insurance through the exchange? If not then why should any employer be required to use the exchange?
So Reid is saying our Healthcare plan is so tremendous we will just keep that while the minions can have the doo doo.

Plutocracy- Look it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 12:44 PM
 
14,298 posts, read 7,786,868 times
Reputation: 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Read the law.

I am a female why should I have to pay for prostate exams to be covered or ED treatment? My policies have covered these for years. It is called an insurance pool. There are both males and females in that pool. Males have medical issues that females don't , and females have medical issues that males don't. We all pay in to one big pot called insurance. I may not need cancer treatments that someone else does need, I may have issues that they don't need treatment for. We still pay in even if we might never need or use those things.
You probably have a one-sized-fits-all group policy, where everyone agreed to covering all those things. but in private plans you can tailor them to fit your needs, or you used to be able to; but not anymore.

There was a lady on TV who had her private health insurance canceled because it did not cover pregnancy. The woman had a full hysterectomy, and can never have children, and yet she is now forced to buy new insurance covering all those things she will never, ever use.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 12:47 PM
 
1,729 posts, read 1,442,903 times
Reputation: 886
I know I wont be needing maternity care


Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
I don't know what medical condition I will need covered until it happens. At that point it would be a pre-existing condition, and before the ACA I would be denied coverage for that condition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 12:47 PM
 
30,794 posts, read 17,138,898 times
Reputation: 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Read the law.

I am a female why should I have to pay for prostate exams to be covered or ED treatment? My policies have covered these for years. It is called an insurance pool. There are both males and females in that pool. Males have medical issues that females don't , and females have medical issues that males don't. We all pay in to one big pot called insurance. I may not need cancer treatments that someone else does need, I may have issues that they don't need treatment for. We still pay in even if we might never need or use those things.
I have, now you are using the well look what I have to buy....and what makes it any better?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 02:37 PM
 
71,504 posts, read 30,370,725 times
Reputation: 14089
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
I am not Harry Reid. I did not vote for Harry Reid. Harry Reid does not speak for me and I do not speak for him. What Harry Reid says has no impact on my beliefs on the issue.

My beliefs are that since no other employer is required to put their employees in the exchange, neither should the government. If the government can get a better price by negotiating with insurers, then they should go with the better price, and save money.

Why should the government employees be treated any different than the employees at any other company? My company doesn't have to buy through the exchange, why should any other employer?
ALL employers should be treated the same.
The one and only reason employee's have not been impacted is because Obama ignored the parts of the law he didn't like at the moment and employers have been exempt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 04:30 PM
 
14,298 posts, read 7,786,868 times
Reputation: 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
I don't know what medical condition I will need covered until it happens. At that point it would be a pre-existing condition, and before the ACA I would be denied coverage for that condition.
You would not be denied in a group plan from your employer. My employer has hired many people with severe preexisting conditions and they never get refused.

BTW, if all we did was address preexisting conditions and portability of insurance between jobs, 90% of all the arguments for ObamaCare proponents disappear. This would have not increased federal spending one dime. there would be no dysfunctional trillion dollar web site, and we'd not see millions of canceled polices.


But noooooooooo, we had to wreck the health care insurance system for 300 million people and add about $2 trillion in taxpayer expenditures over ten years. And even after all of this, the CBO projects we will still have 31 million uninsured in 2023. so in the end, what the **** did ObamaCare do for us, except illustrate how disastrous liberal policies are when they get a super majority in the senate, the house and the presidency?


Thanks lib'tards, thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 05:02 PM
 
Location: Maui County, HI
4,131 posts, read 6,093,446 times
Reputation: 3357
Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38 View Post
Congratulations to those of you who like this type of government. I'm sure things like this dont bother you!







Some Reid staffers exempt from Obamacare - CNN.com

Uh no. Since they get insurance through their job, that meets the law's requirements, they normally would not be able to buy insurance from the exchanges.


The EXCEPTION is the one that requires Congress to buy their insurance from the exchange, even though they do not meet the requirements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 05:59 PM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
21,185 posts, read 15,355,588 times
Reputation: 11849
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
I pay taxes, and I'm not forced to buy on the exchange. Any taxpayer has the ability to get insurance from their job, or directly from the insurance company. Not one person or employer is FORCED to purchase insurance through the exchange.
Exactly.

The lies and misinformation just never end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top