longball Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 (edited) Furious.......Fear of the unknown is very real....It is a shame we don't understand what is in the law...like your "government plan"....what is that? Edited July 26, 2012 by longball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Read it, it has been available on the net for a long time. Quit worrying about the number of pages it is, just sit and read it because it is law, and it does apply to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 you made the statement about going on the government plan.....what did you mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 There is nothing to get. If a business owner who employs more the 50 people fails to provide coverage then they will be fined $2,000 per head, that does not mean that, that employee goes without coverage, they will be on the government plan. Companies applying for waivers might get a pass initially if they meet certain criteria, but they will have to be compliant by a future detonate date. They don't get a perminant exemption. My current employer had to apply for a waiver for EPA regulation, it was allowed, but they have to bring their equipment in compliance by 2014. They are not perminantly exempt, or grandfathered. This angle if obfuscated. The owner of this company is personal friends with the brass on the hill too. Joe Biden's family and several unnamed senateors were guests of some events we held last year. That still does not buy my Boss a perminant exemption to government regulation. Here is what you wrote..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 They will be provided with coverage the same as a welfare recipient, and the fines generated by the company that employs them and failed to comply will go to fund their care. Just like in divorce court. If my employer does not provide me coverage, then my children will get Care Source, and Child support will increase what I owe weekly to fund the care they are providing my children. I have already been through this during periods where I was without coverage. Everyone will have medical coverage, everyone. Even strippers working at your local gentleman's club. If you think the care in the US is good now, then you obviously haven't had to use it, cause everything they threaten will happen under a government plan is already happening under private care. Long wait times, others deciding what care you will receive. That is what insurance have been doing for years. The sticking point is cost, and compared to every other country it cost you more for treatment in the U.S. This effort to repeal the law, and the creation of the imaginary "Tea Party" is just an effort by the insurance industry to stop price caps & controls. I lobbied really hard for this legislation, and will vote however I have to to make sure it stays. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I think you may be hoping that this is what the ACA does but if you think about it .....the only way to get these insurance companies to insure these 30 million new clients is to have many more millions of healthy people enrolled to offset these people who by everyone's admission must be in bad shape since they haven't had insurance before this time.... By design the ACA encourages businesses that now offer coverage, to drop it for a small $2000 penalty. That way the insurance companies that are participating in your government plan will have a new pool of previously insured clients to offset the hard to insure. Our present government doesn't feel it is fair for some to have good coverage as an employment benefit ....while others go with little or no benefits. Also business would like nothing more then to get rid of the medical benefits from their tab....Its simple really..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 (edited) It doesn't matter because welfare recipients enjoy better medical coverage then your BCBS plan that Ford provides you with, and without the out of pocket cost. I'd rather have the government plan if I was on rolls at an auto plant. Right now they don't qualify for coverage cause their income level is too high. Edited July 27, 2012 by Furious1Auto 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 You're talking in circles now.....why do we need this at all if that is the case.... "government plan"....your explanation of ACA is as vague and uninformed as any I have ever heard. Our President would be giddy if he knew how distracted by the noise you are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I don't need it, and neither do you. However millions of hard working Americans without coverage do need it. Your just worried it might cost you something extra, and I could care less what it cost me extra because it is my children that benefit once they are no longer covered under my insurance plan. If I want to see anyone kicked off, it would be the lazy people sitting on welfare. You can imply what you like, but I have been very clear on this subject for many years. Your hearing in circles, and trying to twist my words Douchebag. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pulse Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 You're talking in circles now.....why do we need this at all if that is the case.... "government plan"....your explanation of ACA is as vague and uninformed as any I have ever heard. Our President would be giddy if he knew how distracted by the noise you are. Sorry bro...you have been intellectually *bizatch slapped* by Furious. And quite frankly...he exposed your panties as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Furious.....why the lack of respect.... douche bag???? I thought I was discussing this with an adult...I've said from the start of this whole healthcare debate that we all should have the same coverage.and it should be fully funded....not another promise of benefits from our government with inadequate funding.....maybe you are willing to accept another bad government decision....But I think we can do better than this...If you can't talk to me like a MAN ....you don't deserve to read my words...now you can go and play your video games or what ever you kids do.....by the way....you couldn't support your opinion on this bill with any details...but you still had the lack of intelligence to misspell douche bag....what a joke....you and your cosigners....pulse and decker...The three of you couldn't come up with an original idea on your own if your life depended on it....what a shame....I love you keyboard cowboys ....You and I both know you wouldn't talk to me like that in person Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I don't need it, and neither do you. However millions of hard working Americans without coverage do need it. Your just worried it might cost you something extra, and I could care less what it cost me extra because it is my children that benefit once they are no longer covered under my insurance plan. If I want to see anyone kicked off, it would be the lazy people sitting on welfare. You can imply what you like, but I have been very clear on this subject for many years. Your hearing in circles, and trying to twist my words Douchebag. You and I will both need this....you don't understand what this bill does....you will someday and I hope you remember how naive you were Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I do understand, and my employer came to my vessel and talked with us about the additional taxes we will pay. I know what it is, and what it will cost me personally. If not for this mandate my kids likely would never be offered medical coverage from their employer once they join the workforce. Suck it up, cause your going to contribute whether you like it and agree with it or not. People cannot control getting sick, and should not be extorted for something they don't have control over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marginal Economist Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 They will be provided with coverage the same as a welfare recipient, and the fines generated by the company that employs them and failed to comply will go to fund their care. Just like in divorce court. If my employer does not provide me coverage, then my children will get Care Source, and Child support will increase what I owe weekly to fund the care they are providing my children. I have already been through this during periods where I was without coverage. Everyone will have medical coverage, everyone. Even strippers working at your local gentleman's club. If you think the care in the US is good now, then you obviously haven't had to use it, cause everything they threaten will happen under a government plan is already happening under private care. Long wait times, others deciding what care you will receive. That is what insurance have been doing for years. The sticking point is cost, and compared to every other country it cost you more for treatment in the U.S. This effort to repeal the law, and the creation of the imaginary "Tea Party" is just an effort by the insurance industry to stop price caps & controls. I lobbied really hard for this legislation, and will vote however I have to to make sure it stays. Can you link to this plan? I've been looking through healthcare.gov and can't find this. According to a Forbes article from May 2012 - If employees are not offered health insurance coverage, they will have to purchase their health insurance on the health insurance exchange. This is basically an open market (pay attention free market advocates) where a person can compare policies and easily make a purchase. - http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolynmcclanahan/2012/05/30/will-employers-dump-health-insurance-coverage/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 (edited) The Bill is on the net, if you search you will find it. You got allot of reading to do Marge! I use to have a link to it, and took the time to read portions but that was when the bill first passed. I'm not about to waste my time doing leg work for people who are so concerned that they want others to give them the answers rather then taking the time to read it their selves. Your link is to a third party interpretation. It's not a link to the bill. As far as the fines. The prices quoted are per person, per anum. In theory yes it is possible for a corporation to drop coverages choosing the risk of a fine over the cost of providing their workforce coverage. However if a fine is levied against said corp, it will be accompanied with a guideline or time table for which the employer must be compliant, unless they want to risk additional fines, and or maybe risk losing their ability to do business at all to include any licenses that may be required to operate. If you don't comply with government regulation, then they will shut you down. Ford Motor company failed to pull building permits at a city level, and the city building dept. issued an order to cease, in addition to fining them. Now this is one of the big 3, and some piss ant city official. I know Jack Murphy personally, he was the city of Lorain's head building inspector at the time. I also listened to him tell the story, and why he had to make the call. You think the federal government wont take action? Edited July 28, 2012 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I do understand, and my employer came to my vessel and talked with us about the additional taxes we will pay. I know what it is, and what it will cost me personally. If not for this mandate my kids likely would never be offered medical coverage from their employer once they join the workforce. Suck it up, cause your going to contribute whether you like it and agree with it or not. People cannot control getting sick, and should not be extorted for something they don't have control over. You keep attacking me like I don't want us ALL to have great healthcare....I do and have said it many times...what don't you understand? I think the administration could have done a much better job of actually taking control of the problem, which is the cost of healthcare, not the cost of insurance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I had a much better plan, I had laid out an entire system that would have outlawed the sale of healthcare insurance, and would have been administered without the component of profit, and it would have only been available to people who work, elderly, and disabled. It would have cut out the expense for people who just plain refuse to work. However I don't work on the hill, and cant make a proposal. This is what we have, and although it needs improvement, it is better then what we had. Not only do I want everyone working to have great health care, I also don't mind doing my part to fund it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 (edited) Your plan sucks...You still don't know what the problem is....the cost of healthcare.....Passing these escalating costs off on an insurance company or a government doesn't help the patient who needs care....If you put forth a solution it should address the problem.....There is a rumor out there about supply and demand.....maybe you've heard of it....adding more clients to an already overcrowded health system is not going to lower the cost of care....that's the problem....You must come from that rare group of individuals who think the millions of people who are unemployed, are jobless because of something they have control over.....good luck with that Edited July 28, 2012 by longball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 (edited) Are you attacking me, boo boo? My plan rocks, and covers only those who contribute. It also gives buying power to the one entity that sets the rates they are whiling to pay for common procedures, in effect driving costs down. I totally understand the issue, but thanks for your misguided condescension :~) Edited July 28, 2012 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marginal Economist Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 (edited) The Bill is on the net, if you search you will find it. You got allot of reading to do Marge! I use to have a link to it, and took the time to read portions but that was when the bill first passed. I'm not about to waste my time doing leg work for people who are so concerned that they want others to give them the answers rather then taking the time to read it their selves. Your link is to a third party interpretation. It's not a link to the bill. Healthcare.gov is not a third party interpretation. The full text is listed on healthcare.gov as well as the Supreme Court's ruling. The current welfare program for health insurance is Medicaid. Under ACA, medicaid is expanded to cover people with incomes under 133% of the poverty level. This is also dependent on the state complying with the new requirements. The SCOTUS ruled that the gov't could withhold additional funds from states for non compliance, but not their existing funds. There is a large section on the penalty an individual will pay if they don't buy health insurance. Why would there be a section on penalties for individuals not having health insurance if these people are going to be placed on this gov't health care plan? Edited July 28, 2012 by Marginal Economist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Are you attacking me, boo boo? My plan rocks, and covers only those who contribute. It also gives putting power to the one entity that sets the rates they are whiling to pay for common prodeedures, in effect driving costs down. I totally understand the issue, but thanks for your misguided condesention :~) I think your iPhone is messing with you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I'll leave for a while, and let you argue amongst your selves, Then I will reappear to annoy you later. My iPhone is auto correcting the hell out of my posts, and none of the changes are correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pulse Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Your plan sucks...You still don't know what the problem is....the cost of healthcare.....Passing these escalating costs off on an insurance company or a government doesn't help the patient who needs care....If you put forth a solution it should address the problem.....There is a rumor out there about supply and demand.....maybe you've heard of it....adding more clients to an already overcrowded health system is not going to lower the cost of care....that's the problem....You must come from that rare group of individuals who think the millions of people who are unemployed, are jobless because of something they have control over.....good luck with that Just by chance...do you think that "...adding more clients to an already overcrowded health system..." might just create some openings due to the increased demand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Just by chance...do you think that "...adding more clients to an already overcrowded health system..." might just create some openings due to the increased demand? What openings are you talking about? Openings for what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marginal Economist Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Just by chance...do you think that "...adding more clients to an already overcrowded health system..." might just create some openings due to the increased demand? Supply and price both increase as a response to increased demand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.