Obama Admin knew millions could not keep their health ins.

[seekerz]

Saw the fake apology on the news last night. Is anyone surprised that they flat out lied and then did nothing to save peoples option to be grandfathered in.

Flat out lied? My plan was not discontinued - and no, it does not meet the specifications of the ACA. I will have to pay the fine if I decide to keep it, but that amount is nothing compared to what other users might have to pay my healthcare providers if I get really sick.

This whole issue (of losing plans people want) seems to be analyzed very superficially in the media. If I promise my spouse to grow old with him and I’m hit by a drunk driver at age 25, did I lie? No, I simply made a promise about a matter that was not in my hands alone.

In this case, the president promised people could keep their plans without considering how much junk ‘insurance’ (a misnomer to call those plans insurance, really) is being sold out there or what decisions insurance companies would make based on their bottom line.

 

[HoneyBea]

Flat out lied? My plan was not discontinued - and no, it does not meet the specifications of the ACA. I will have to pay the fine if I decide to keep it, but that amount is nothing compared to what other users might have to pay my healthcare providers if I get really sick.

This whole issue (of losing plans people want) seems to be analyzed very superficially in the media. If I promise my spouse to grow old with him and I’m hit by a drunk driver at age 25, did I lie? No, I simply made a promise about a matter that was not in my hands alone.

In this case, the president promised people could keep their plans without considering how much junk ‘insurance’ (a misnomer to call those plans insurance, really) is being sold out there or what decisions insurance companies would make based on their bottom line.

Wow this post explains exactly why government has no business in healthcare. Thank you.

 

[seekerz]

Wow this post explains exactly why government has no business in healthcare. Thank you.

“No business in healthcare”? That’s a sweeping statement when one considers a system in which millions of people working hard every day could not afford to access the “business” charged with making them well!

Shoot, “no business in healthcare” means getting rid of the CDC, FDA, HHS etc and just let the market decide who lives, who dies, who buys snake oil and who peddles it.

 

[HoneyBea]

I deleted my comment. I realize I don’t care enough.

 

[Jeanne_S]

I deleted my comment. I realize I don’t care enough.

Good plan,pick your battles…

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Flat out lied? My plan was not discontinued - and no, it does not meet the specifications of the ACA. I will have to pay the fine if I decide to keep it, but that amount is nothing compared to what other users might have to pay my healthcare providers if I get really sick.

This whole issue (of losing plans people want) seems to be analyzed very superficially in the media. If I promise my spouse to grow old with him and I’m hit by a drunk driver at age 25, did I lie? No, I simply made a promise about a matter that was not in my hands alone.

In this case, the president promised people could keep their plans without considering how much junk ‘insurance’ (a misnomer to call those plans insurance, really) is being sold out there or what decisions insurance companies would make based on their bottom line.

If people read the fine print, took the chance and were still happy with it - why should we do away with it? It is better than nothing.

Or do you think the electorate is too stupid to make their own healthcare decisions and big brother government has to make it for them?

 

[Ridgerunner]

This whole issue (of losing plans people want) seems to be analyzed very superficially in the media. If I promise my spouse to grow old with him and I’m hit by a drunk driver at age 25, did I lie? No, I simply made a promise about a matter that was not in my hands alone.

/QUOTE]

I’m surprised you don’t give this administration credit for any more intelligence than this. How stupid would they have had to be not to know?

When some little one-horse town considers an ordinance, they get advice of counsel, they consult with people affected, they study it upside down and sideways. They read it three times in open session for public comment, and sometimes change it when the comment is well taken.

Do you honestly believe that, having adopted a regulation that very clearly cuts off most non-employer private insurance, and were told that it did during the comment period, they were so stupid they didn’t see that it did?

If one believes that, then one has to believe they didn’t realize the HHS mandate would violate the conscience of Catholics; that they were so stupid they didn’t realize they defined “religious organizations” so narrowly that almost none would qualify. And after being told so by virtually every bishop and Catholic organization in the country, still couldn’t fathom it?

I give them credit for more intelligence than that.

And I think we already know not all (maybe not many) non-complying insurance plans were “junk insurance”. Ours sure wasn’t. But we aren’t going to be able to keep it because it isn’t an Obamacare clone.

 

[Orogeny]

If I promise my spouse to grow old with him and I’m hit by a drunk driver at age 25, did I lie? No, I simply made a promise about a matter that was not in my hands alone.

Not a good analogy. The President knew (or should have known unless perhaps even HE didn’t read the law) that plans that didn’t meet the ACA requirements would be cancelled. Therefore, he did lie. This isn’t something that was unknown at the time the law was passed and signed. When one knowingly makes a false statement, it is a lie.

In this case, the president promised people could keep their plans without considering how much junk ‘insurance’ (a misnomer to call those plans insurance, really) is being sold out there or what decisions insurance companies would make based on their bottom line.

So is he ignorant or a liar? Either way, it is not a comfort to me that one of those describes my president.

Peace

Tim

 

[Darryl1958]

The two are not mutually exclusive in this case.

 

[estesbob]

Flat out lied? My plan was not discontinued - and no, it does not meet the specifications of the ACA. I will have to pay the fine if I decide to keep it, but that amount is nothing compared to what other users might have to pay my healthcare providers if I get really sick.

This whole issue (of losing plans people want) seems to be analyzed very superficially in the media. If I promise my spouse to grow old with him and I’m hit by a drunk driver at age 25, did I lie? No, I simply made a promise about a matter that was not in my hands alone.

In this case, the president promised people could keep their plans without considering how much junk ‘insurance’ (a misnomer to call those plans insurance, really) is being sold out there or what decisions insurance companies would make based on their bottom line.

Was this statement true or false:

**“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.” – Barack Obama, June 15, 2010
**

It was a flat out lie.

I would also like to know who defines what is “junk”. If a 50 year old man lost his health insurance because it didn’t cover pediatric dental care and maternity coverage does that mean his policy was" junk".

Because you are covered by your employer the new law has had little or no effect on you-yet. The hammer comes down on employer provided policies next year. I can tell you from personal experience the ACA has been a nightmare for the self-employed and small buisnesses

 

[estesbob]

Not a good analogy. The President knew (or should have known unless perhaps even HE didn’t read the law) that plans that didn’t meet the ACA requirements would be cancelled. Therefore, he did lie. This isn’t something that was unknown at the time the law was passed and signed. When one knowingly makes a false statement, it is a lie.So is he ignorant or a liar? Either way, it is not a comfort to me that one of those describes my president.

Peace

Tim

They knew full well he was lying. :

Yet the NBC report said the government knew that wasn’t true, saying that buried in regulations from the July 2010 law was an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to keep their policy.

So what is normal turnover? Per the Law , for instance,if your copay increased $5 you were no longer grandfathered in you would lose the policy when the law sent in effect. If you decided that you no longer needed maternity care(say your wife had a hysterectomy) and dropped the coverage you were no longer grandfathered and would lose your polict once the went in effect.

 

[qui_est_ce]

In this case, the president promised people could keep their plans without considering how much junk ‘insurance’ (a misnomer to call those plans insurance, really) is being sold out there or what decisions insurance companies would make based on their bottom line.

Not sure what you consider “junk insurance.” My sister is self-employed. She has a policy with high deductibles and no co-pays. Since she is in her sixties, this keeps her monthly payments to less than $300.00. She puts money tax free into an HSA.

Do you think my sister is too stupid to figure out what’s best for her?

 

[qui_est_ce]

Was this statement true or false:

**“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.” – Barack Obama, June 15, 2010
**

It was a flat out lie.

I would also like to know who defines what is “junk”. If a 50 year old man lost his health insurance because it didn’t cover pediatric dental care and maternity coverage does that mean his policy was" junk".

I’d like an answer to that too. How can someone blithely say that a policy was junk if they haven’t even looked at it? How can you assume the person who chose the policy didn’t know what was in it? Why does the government assume they can do better than you can in picking plans?

Because you are covered by your employer the new law has had little or no effect on you-yet. The hammer comes down on employer provided policies next year. I can tell you from personal experience the ACA has been a nightmare for the self-employed and small buisnesses

Very well said, speaking from experience.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Not sure what you consider “junk insurance.” My sister is self-employed. She has a policy with high deductibles and no co-pays. Since she is in her sixties, this keeps her monthly payments to less than $300.00. She puts money tax free into an HSA.

Do you think my sister is too stupid to figure out what’s best for her?

I don’t know what Seekerz thinks about that, but this administration and its political party certainly does.

After all, her policy might not cover maternity or Viagra coverage.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Not sure what you consider “junk insurance.” My sister is self-employed. She has a policy with high deductibles and no co-pays. Since she is in her sixties, this keeps her monthly payments to less than $300.00. She puts money tax free into an HSA.

Do you think my sister is too stupid to figure out what’s best for her?

Yes, liberals do.

 

[estesbob]

I don’t know what Seekerz thinks about that, but this administration and its political party certainly does.

After all, her policy might not cover maternity or Viagra coverage.

Which is at the core of this law. People are too stupid to know what is best for them.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I don’t know what Seekerz thinks about that, but this administration and its political party certainly does.

After all, her policy might not cover maternity or Viagra coverage.

That’s part of it. In order to cover these mandates, everyone has to pay in. Before the ACA, there were no such federal mandates. People think, “Great, now my policy pays for such and such!” But nothing is free.

What I am really worried about is the disincentive for people to work. The less they work, the more free subsidies they get. I work my tail off at one full-time job and two part-time jobs. I do it for the money, but also because these people need me. I’m worried about my employer provided insurance. I’m worried I’m going to be in a big hole due to taxes and subsidizing. I give generously to charity in time and money. I don’t want govt to redistribute my income. I’m not going to let myself sink to what I can live on in govt subsidized provisions.

 

[Holly3278]

Wow. I was not expecting this. Thankfully I am on Medicaid and so I hopefully won’t be affected by the new law.

 

[St_Francis]

Flat out lied? My plan was not discontinued - and no, it does not meet the specifications of the ACA. I will have to pay the fine if I decide to keep it, but that amount is nothing compared to what other users might have to pay my healthcare providers if I get really sick.

Your plan was not discontinued, but you have to pay a fine, oops, excuse me, *tax, *to keep it? Do you know how much that “tax” will be in 3 years? Cause it’s going up…

This whole issue (of losing plans people want) seems to be analyzed very superficially in the media. If I promise my spouse to grow old with him and I’m hit by a drunk driver at age 25, did I lie? No, I simply made a promise about a matter that was not in my hands alone.

In this case, the president promised people could keep their plans without considering how much junk ‘insurance’ (a misnomer to call those plans insurance, really) is being sold out there or what decisions insurance companies would make based on their bottom line.

You are misinformed on this point. Many of the plans were perfectly good plans, some were better than what the ACA offers, and all of them whether better or worse or the same, cost more than the people were paying before.

This is the reality: Obama said, and I quote: ** “No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”**

This *clearly *implies that the intention is to create a situation in which people *will be able to keep their doctors, their health plans, *and that the law will *only *affect those who do not like their current situations of poor or no policies and doctors they would like to change.

This is, at best, an unkept promise, since it comes from 2009; however, Obama *continued * to tell the American people that they would be able to keep their current plans well after it was clear to those around him that this would not be the case. *That, *then, was a *lie. *

Moreover, do you think that the law would have received the paltry support that it did had people known that Obama was promising what he would not deliver? Would Obama have won the 2012 election had people known he was lying about his signature legislation?

 

[markomalley]

From Pro Publica:

Loyal Obama Supporters, Canceled by Obamacare

San Francisco architect Lee Hammack says he and his wife, JoEllen Brothers, are “cradle Democrats.” They have donated to the liberal group Organizing for America and worked the phone banks a year ago for President Obama’s re-election.

Since 1995, Hammack and Brothers have received their health coverage from Kaiser Permanente, where Brothers worked until 2009 as a dietitian and diabetes educator. “We’ve both been in very good health all of our lives –exercise, don’t smoke, drink lightly, healthy weight, no health issues, and so on,” Hammack told me.

The couple — Lee, 60, and JoEllen, 59 — have been paying $550 a month for their health coverage — a plan that offers solid coverage, not one of the skimpy plans Obama has criticized. But recently, Kaiser informed them the plan would be canceled at the end of the year because it did not meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act. The couple would need to find another one. The cost would be around double what they pay now, but the benefits would be worse.

Apparently Lee’s solution is to reduce his income so they will qualify for subsidies.

The New American Dream: to make 399.99% of poverty.