Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
 
Old 10-29-2013, 10:45 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,878,374 times
Reputation: 14345

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Sorry, NO.
No Obamacare subsidies in 34 states


"It's the Law of the Land!"

So say liberals.
We'll see how the court rules.

Since those 34 states chose not to set up their own exchanges, the federal exchange becomes those states' exchanges de facto. You're jumping way ahead of yourself if you think otherwise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-29-2013, 10:48 AM
 
21,476 posts, read 10,575,891 times
Reputation: 14128
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Like what sort of minor change?

Insurance companies helped write the law.

It's only "all on the Democrats and President Obama" if you are willfully blind to the reality of the situation. Which one would be if they were entrenched partisans, rather than rational people assessing what's happening.
Oh, I'm sure insurance companies helped write some of the law, which is why I said they didn't pass it or sign it, but left out that they didn't write it. If Obama and the Democrats didn't like portions of what was written, then they should have taken it out of the law in the first place. Oh, that's right...they couldn't because they didn't read it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 10:54 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,878,374 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by katygirl68 View Post
Oh, I'm sure insurance companies helped write some of the law, which is why I said they didn't pass it or sign it, but left out that they didn't write it. If Obama and the Democrats didn't like portions of what was written, then they should have taken it out of the law in the first place. Oh, that's right...they couldn't because they didn't read it!
Still waiting for you to tell us the "minor changes" that insurance companies couldn't do for the "grandfathered" policies. Adding and losing policy holders? Check, they could do that. Make minor changes in language, prices, coverage? Check, they could do that, too. Change a policy from 80/20 to 70/30? Um, that's not a minor change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 10:56 AM
 
Location: The #1 sunshine state, Arizona.
12,169 posts, read 17,647,423 times
Reputation: 64104
Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124 View Post
Seems King Obama lied to his kool-aid drinkers that they would be able to keep their insurance.
I double the lame-stream media will report on it because they need to defend their king from any attack.

see this.
http://www.politisite.com/2013/10/28...urance-period/
How much longer can the MSM admire the emperors' new clothes? After all, an insurance rate hike will also effect the spin doctors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 10:56 AM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,481 posts, read 10,222,878 times
Reputation: 2536
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Still waiting for you to tell us the "minor changes" that insurance companies couldn't do for the "grandfathered" policies. Adding and losing policy holders? Check, they could do that. Make minor changes in language, prices, coverage? Check, they could do that, too. Change a policy from 80/20 to 70/30? Um, that's not a minor change.
Does not really matter does it. The president said if we liked our insurance we could keep it. Did not say if we liked it we could keep it with minor changes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Meggett, SC
11,011 posts, read 11,024,526 times
Reputation: 6192
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
How do you figure? Do you think cutting peoples hours are a benefit? Do you think increasing deductibles is a benefit? Do you think making people work part time, rather than full time employment is a benefit? Do you think increased taxes are now a benefit?When will you just give it up and admit THIS plan is destined to failure..
Agree.

Also, if the new policies are SO much better, as some on here have claimed, then why couldn't Obama sell that instead? Perhaps because the new policies are NOT better? I think the insanely high deductibles and reduced networks due to very low reimbursement rates both point to an insurance that is not so great.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 11:07 AM
 
21,476 posts, read 10,575,891 times
Reputation: 14128
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Still waiting for you to tell us the "minor changes" that insurance companies couldn't do for the "grandfathered" policies. Adding and losing policy holders? Check, they could do that. Make minor changes in language, prices, coverage? Check, they could do that, too. Change a policy from 80/20 to 70/30? Um, that's not a minor change.
If you get a letter that your monthly premium is going up unless you change your deductible from $1,000 to $1,500, what choice do you have if you live paycheck to paycheck?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 11:10 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Like what sort of minor change?

Insurance companies helped write the law.

It's only "all on the Democrats and President Obama" if you are willfully blind to the reality of the situation. Which one would be if they were entrenched partisans, rather than rational people assessing what's happening.
No, a handful of indidividuals wrote the law, who had ties to the insurance industry.. The insurance industry didnt have some big meeting where they discussed writing the law to the benefit of the consumer or the citizens.. You should be smart enough to know that those involved, would have written the law, that would have made it more difficult for the COMPETITION, you know, the ones who didnt help write the law, to compete.. thus you end up with millions of policies being cancelled by insurance companies who had nothign to do with writing the bill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 11:11 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,878,374 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
Does not really matter does it. The president said if we liked our insurance we could keep it. Did not say if we liked it we could keep it with minor changes
Katy said the insurance companies couldn't make even minor changes to existing insurance policies if they wanted to grandfather them in.

The President isn't forcing insurance companies to choose to cancel policies rather than grandfather them in. The insurance companies even could make minor changes to those grandfathered policies. It is the INSURANCE companies that are choosing to cancel them.

And it matters because you are blaming the President for the choices made by insurance company management. The President isn't sitting in on the insurance companies' meetings where they are CHOOSING to cancel people's coverage. The President doesn't get to vote at their board meetings.

I can understand anger over the ACA. It's not a law I particularly like, either. I've said over and over that it fails to address the real problems. I don't think most Americans even understand the real problem of our out-of-control healthcare costs.

But in terms of insurance companies cancelling people's coverage. That's a choice that insurance companies are making. They have the luxury of blaming the ACA, but the ACA allows the insurance companies to grandfather in existing policies. The insurance companies are CHOOSING not to. And they are accountable for that choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 11:13 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,878,374 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by katygirl68 View Post
If you get a letter that your monthly premium is going up unless you change your deductible from $1,000 to $1,500, what choice do you have if you live paycheck to paycheck?
You have the choice of shopping around.

Again, are you going to answer the question about minor changes?
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:51 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top