AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 24, 2013 7:09:48 GMT -5
Seven Demcorats Now Side With GOP On Delaying Obamacare
1. Sen. Manchin 2. Rep. Cuellar 3. Rep. Deb "the frizz" Schultz 4. Rep. Barrow 5. Sen. Shaheen 6. Sen. Begich 7. Sen. Landrieu
Bottom line here is that if the GOP had 45 united Senators determined during the shutdown to stand with the House- the outcome would have been different. It's the DEMOCRATS that were in trouble on this issue, and because the GOP establishment fails to see that- they sabotaged themselves and now we're going to see infighting and chaos for the next several cycles in the GOP. It's going to cost them at election time, and they're going to blame it on the TEA Party- but the reality is that they're going to pay a price for caving, not for fighting.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 24, 2013 7:18:29 GMT -5
It's always easier to unwind a horrible mistake EARLY rather than allow pride and arrogance to hinder you from doing what's right. That's where we are now with Obama and the Democrats- they just have to admit that this ill-conceived, hastily written, fraudulently sold, train wreck of a law now simply must be repealed and replaced with something workable. OK, what would you replace it with? You had a whole thread on the issue and never gave an answer? What solves the same issues as the ACA, but is your preferred solution? I've never been against a better solution. I have just never seen one offered. I've offered the only solution there really, realistically is: deregulation. 1. Make insurance- insurance. It won't cover maintenance and the sniffles- it is there to cover catastrophic losses that could not possibly or reasonably be expected to be borne by an individual- like totaling a car, or a house fire. 2. Shift from third party payer to a market-based, consumer-driven delivery of health services.
3. Allow consumers to form buyers co-ops, and buy across state lines for insurance and health services. 4. Make healthcare and health insurance tax deductible. 5. Make health insurance, and the delivery of health services the responsibility of the individual. 6. Allow charitable organizations, doctors, and hospitals to fill in the gaps and begin to phase out Medicare and Medicaid as well- because they've both failed and can no longer be sustained.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 1, 2024 1:24:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2013 7:43:11 GMT -5
It's always easier to unwind a horrible mistake EARLY rather than allow pride and arrogance to hinder you from doing what's right. That's where we are now with Obama and the Democrats- they just have to admit that this ill-conceived, hastily written, fraudulently sold, train wreck of a law now simply must be repealed and replaced with something workable. OK, what would you replace it with? You had a whole thread on the issue and never gave an answer? What solves the same issues as the ACA, but is your preferred solution? I've never been against a better solution. I have just never seen one offered. Well, in terms of actually making Obamacare work, they could simply take down the website, fix it, and then reintroduce it. Instead, they want people to continue wasting their time. They seem to think this will "save face", but in reality, they're just making it worse. Also, the website supposedly worked correctly until the gov't decided to change it at the last minute to force people to apply and give all their info before seeing prices. If this is true, they could simply switch back to the previous version. But again, in an attempt to "save face", they are instead making themselves look like fools. By the way, it's ironic given that this administration claims to love transparency so much, that they are making it so difficult to just find out prices. I mean, this is akin to you having to sign a contract to buy a house, show up at closing, and find out the price at the last minute. This is something I'd expect from people that have no freaking idea how the world works and due to overconfidence in themselves, think that nobody will notice what they are doing. Even so, I am still blown away at the total incompetence with which the marketplace has been produced and rolled out. It far exceeds any of my expectations.
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Oct 24, 2013 7:47:28 GMT -5
i got two mailings yesterday fro NYS. Apparently there are two accounts for me as the only difference in the mailings was part of the account numbers 016 and 017. I'm hoping that didn't happen to everybody as the administration cost, paper, envelope, postage, ink, manpower, costs were just doubled. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/angry.png)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 1, 2024 1:24:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2013 7:48:55 GMT -5
All I see are ifs and maybes- but if it leads to large deficits then we find a way to pay for it- we do not ration care.
I don't think the device tax is that big of deal- just another way to shuffle money around- it's not a drain- that tax money will be spent right back in the health care system through the subsidies. What it really does is raise the cost of premiums a little to offset.
I will say one thing about medical devices- these companies really have people by the balls- I deal with some medical equipment- and they will sell you a couple rivets for the price a box of 100 costs- at least some of them will. A part they make- bend over. It's like marine parts- take any run of the mill auto part or hardware and sell it for a marine application and the price doubles. If it is a medical application it goes 10X. Doubt any of those companies are hurting- it's a great time for any company in the medical field- and whether they like it or not- the law should actually increase their business. There are no ifs or maybes. Obamacare has been purposely insufficiently funded. And you don't seem to understand the medical device tax issue. The gov't will collect $1. The medical device company will incur $1 tax plus a bit of overhead. The gov't will spend part of the $1 administering the tax and moving the money over to help pay subsidies. So in effect, costs go up $1.01 in order to transfer money and pay $0.95 in subisides. Numbers hypothetical of course.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 24, 2013 7:58:15 GMT -5
OK, what would you replace it with? You had a whole thread on the issue and never gave an answer? What solves the same issues as the ACA, but is your preferred solution? I've never been against a better solution. I have just never seen one offered. Well, in terms of actually making Obamacare work, they could simply take down the website, fix it, and then reintroduce it. Instead, they want people to continue wasting their time. They seem to think this will "save face", but in reality, they're just making it worse.Also, the website supposedly worked correctly until the gov't decided to change it at the last minute to force people to apply and give all their info before seeing prices. If this is true, they could simply switch back to the previous version. But again, in an attempt to "save face", they are instead making themselves look like fools. By the way, it's ironic given that this administration claims to love transparency so much, that they are making it so difficult to just find out prices. I mean, this is akin to you having to sign a contract to buy a house, show up at closing, and find out the price at the last minute. This is something I'd expect from people that have no freaking idea how the world works and due to overconfidence in themselves, think that nobody will notice what they are doing. Even so, I am still blown away at the total incompetence with which the marketplace has been produced and rolled out. It far exceeds any of my expectations. I have to insist that you be a tad more cynical about this- this is a government make-work program that they hope drags on as long as possible. I got my first government contract recently and I went in full bore with the object of getting it done and meeting the stated objectives. As a result of my attitude, I almost lost the contract. Though never openly stated, it immediately became clear to me through numerous wasteful meetings, spec changes, and new data collection requirements every other ten minutes that the objective was to drag it out. I complied, and things are going swimmingly. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png)
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 24, 2013 8:03:08 GMT -5
And the medical device tax is yet another lesson in behavioral economics. It will do for American medical innovation and manufacturing what the "luxury tax" did for the Eastern Seaboard- devastation. The three mandatory outcomes of such taxes are:
1. Go out of business 2. Move manufacturing overseas 3. Pay it
#3 is of course the least likely- but like the big three automakers, there are some who through waivers, favors, and sheer size will pay it- using it like a billy club to beat their competition which of course impacts price (demand goes up, or stays contant, supply goes down- prices go up), and innovation- fewer players, less drive to compete, less fear of being outmaneuvered and beaten-- ask the Big Three automakers how this works out long term...
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 24, 2013 8:07:57 GMT -5
OK, what would you replace it with? You had a whole thread on the issue and never gave an answer? What solves the same issues as the ACA, but is your preferred solution? I've never been against a better solution. I have just never seen one offered. Well, in terms of actually making Obamacare work, they could simply take down the website, fix it, and then reintroduce it. Instead, they want people to continue wasting their time. They seem to think this will "save face", but in reality, they're just making it worse. Also, the website supposedly worked correctly until the gov't decided to change it at the last minute to force people to apply and give all their info before seeing prices. If this is true, they could simply switch back to the previous version. But again, in an attempt to "save face", they are instead making themselves look like fools.By the way, it's ironic given that this administration claims to love transparency so much, that they are making it so difficult to just find out prices. I mean, this is akin to you having to sign a contract to buy a house, show up at closing, and find out the price at the last minute. This is something I'd expect from people that have no freaking idea how the world works and due to overconfidence in themselves, think that nobody will notice what they are doing. Even so, I am still blown away at the total incompetence with which the marketplace has been produced and rolled out. It far exceeds any of my expectations. Or, if you want to be more cynical- it's not socialism, it's not communism, it was never designed to work at all- or more accurately, it was designed very well, but to meet an other than stated objective: destory the greatest healthcare system in the history of humanity simply because our angry little snot nosed anti-colonialist President has a chip on his shoulder and he thinks cutting America down to size- economically, politically, culturally and militarily will bring peace and harmony to a planet so long under the thumb of American hegemony. It's not a healthcare plan at all- it's a suicide attack. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png)
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Oct 24, 2013 8:12:32 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 1, 2024 1:24:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2013 8:17:52 GMT -5
Paul--If they don't fix it quick, this debacle will basically become ingrained in people. Something they will have a hard time shaking. And no, I don't think they broke it on purpose. I'm not that cynical.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 24, 2013 8:18:36 GMT -5
Yep- and the best part? The estimates can be off by more than 60% (low). More Democrats unwilling to defend ObamaCare. The wheels are coming off. Does anyone think that the American People are going to trust these clowns to create a database of our medical records? Democrats flipping...
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 24, 2013 8:25:25 GMT -5
Paul--If they don't fix it quick, this debacle will basically become ingrained in people. Something they will have a hard time shaking. And no, I don't think they broke it on purpose. I'm not that cynical. I think we're past the point of no return. It's broken, the people have turned against it- and you're seeing the irrefutable evidence this as Democrats turn on the program. It's going to slowly dawn on the Democrats, and the GOP establishment that the only election-critical thing they're charged with doing is ending this mess right now. And no, I'm not realistically thinking it'll get repealed all at once- it won't. Step one is going to be a bi-partisan compromise to extend the enrollment period, followed by a full-blown one year delay. Little by little ObamaCare is going to be beaten back and while it may always remain law, it will be so effectively neutered that it will be like anti-sodomy laws. They're there, but the idea that anyone would actually enforce them is a joke. That's the end of ObamaCare as I see it- no, the Democrats will never be held fully accountable, and the GOP will never be able to declare victory via unconditional surrender and the total defeat of ObamaCare. However, this thing is going to be pared down, pruned back- to the point where it has no teeth, and then some real reforms with respect to portability, buying insurance across state lines, small business and association health plans, and the full reinstatement of HSAs will be passed further erroding ObamaCare.
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Oct 24, 2013 8:30:58 GMT -5
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,660
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 24, 2013 8:38:35 GMT -5
... 1. Make insurance- insurance. It won't cover maintenance and the sniffles- it is there to cover catastrophic losses that could not possibly or reasonably be expected to be borne by an individual- like totaling a car, or a house fire. ... If only our bodies were like a house or car. You replace the totaled car with new one. The burnt house is rebuilt. Granted there are certain injuries of the body that can be completed fixed. But there are others which can't. Do I wish to trade my circulatory system in on a new one that doesn't clog up just as I would a car with repeated oil problems? Of course I do. It isn't an option.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 1, 2024 1:24:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2013 8:43:15 GMT -5
Consistent with the findings of existing research, the analysis presented here appear to show that significant shares of profits are being reported in tax preferred countries and that these shares are disproportionate to the location of the firm’s business activity as indicated by where they hire workers and make investments. For example, American companies reported earning 43% of overseas profits in Bermuda, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Switzerland in 2008, while hiring 4% of their foreign workforce and making 7% of their foreign investments in those economies. In comparison, the traditional economies of Australia, Canada, Germany, Mexico and the United Kingdom accounted for 14% of American MNCs overseas’ profits, but 40% of foreign hired labor and 34% of foreign investment. This report also shows that the discrepancy between where profits are reported and where hiring and investment occurs, as examples of business activity, has increased over time.
from the first article....
so US conglomerates hire in Australia, Canada, Germany, and Mexico, and then declare profits from those countries in Bermuda, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Switzerland
The article doesnt list any company names....nor did it say US companies are moving profits FROM the US to other countries (it says they are moving them from one non US country to another non US country)
The tax rules in other countries are much more lax than in ours, so moving profits from Germany to Switzerland may be a norm in the european theatre...i am not familiar at all with their tax laws
Both articles are using the same basic data
MNC's are the articles call them, invest small amounts in tax haven countries.....and large amounts in tax heavy countries......they then take the profits from the heavily invested foreign companies, and move them to the lower tax base countries
Not one thing in either article shows, lists, or says that US based profits (money made in the US) is being transferred to tax haven countries
|
|
luckyme
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 28, 2010 14:05:59 GMT -5
Posts: 826
|
Post by luckyme on Oct 24, 2013 8:51:11 GMT -5
" Also, the website supposedly worked correctly until the gov't decided to change it at the last minute to force people to apply and give all their info before seeing prices. If this is true, they could simply switch back to the previous version. But again, in an attempt to "save face", they are instead making themselves look like fools. "
Yeah, heard this last night on one of the news programs. Supposedly this claim was being made by the contractors. Is it true? IDK. Will be interesting to see what comes out.
Reasoning for the move was Obamacare was not going to be all that affordable for a great many people. They didn't want this known at the launch so then required registering first. This would stop many people from just searching around to see what there was out there, thereby limiting criticism.
On one or two other sites I'm on, this is also a big topic. There are threads for just those who are happy with Obamacare. Seems the only ones posting are those who couldn't get insurance before, pre-existing conditions, or it was way too expensive.
I am waiting for our open enrollment paperwork to come through. A few friends have received theirs already and they have significant increases, with much larger deductibles.
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Oct 24, 2013 9:04:36 GMT -5
with much larger deductibles
that's what took me aback. $3000 ded. that's $250 a month on top of $300+ premiums.
$7200 a year for an individual. that's not affordable for me at $35000 income a year before taxes. My rent's $10000 a year. so half my pre tax income goes for housing and health insurance?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 24, 2013 9:41:35 GMT -5
All I see are ifs and maybes- but if it leads to large deficits then we find a way to pay for it- we do not ration care.
I don't think the device tax is that big of deal- just another way to shuffle money around- it's not a drain- that tax money will be spent right back in the health care system through the subsidies. What it really does is raise the cost of premiums a little to offset.
I will say one thing about medical devices- these companies really have people by the balls- I deal with some medical equipment- and they will sell you a couple rivets for the price a box of 100 costs- at least some of them will. A part they make- bend over. It's like marine parts- take any run of the mill auto part or hardware and sell it for a marine application and the price doubles. If it is a medical application it goes 10X. Doubt any of those companies are hurting- it's a great time for any company in the medical field- and whether they like it or not- the law should actually increase their business. There are no ifs or maybes. Obamacare has been purposely insufficiently funded. And you don't seem to understand the medical device tax issue. The gov't will collect $1. The medical device company will incur $1 tax plus a bit of overhead. The gov't will spend part of the $1 administering the tax and moving the money over to help pay subsidies. So in effect, costs go up $1.01 in order to transfer money and pay $0.95 in subisides. Numbers hypothetical of course. costs on devices may go up $1.01, but costs on procedures don't. it is impossible to say how much those costs go up without knowing the utility of the machine.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 24, 2013 9:42:52 GMT -5
Paul--If they don't fix it quick, this debacle will basically become ingrained in people. Something they will have a hard time shaking. And no, I don't think they broke it on purpose. I'm not that cynical. I think we're past the point of no return. It's broken, the people have turned against it can you cite any poll which shows that the ACA is LESS popular than it was in, say....August?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 24, 2013 9:44:31 GMT -5
many Democrats are concerned about the deficit, too. that does not make them Tea Partiers.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 24, 2013 10:00:34 GMT -5
you know what is so lame about this? if the states had just set up their own exchanges, there would probably be no complaints. their refusal to do that has overburdened the federal website, and caused the complaints.
this is a typical tactic: sabotage the government then point at it and say "it doesn't work".
edit: the reason i posted this is that the federal site worked well enough for me this morning that it directed me to the CA site, which works perfectly, according to everyone i have spoken to.
edit2: if someone has the time, could they please run a total of the population of the 16 states that have their own exchanges, and the 7 that have partnership exchanges?
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,056
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Oct 24, 2013 10:04:16 GMT -5
you know what is so lame about this? if the states had just set up their own exchanges, there would probably be no complaints. their refusal to do that has overburdened the federal website, and caused the complaints. this is a typical tactic: sabotage the government then point at it and say "it doesn't work". edit: the reason i posted this is that the federal site worked well enough for me this morning that it directed me to the CA site, which works perfectly, according to everyone i have spoken to. The feds still created the problem. Even some states that wanted to set up exchanges backed out at the end because the feds were too slow providing system and policy requirements for the programmers.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 24, 2013 10:08:09 GMT -5
you know what is so lame about this? if the states had just set up their own exchanges, there would probably be no complaints. their refusal to do that has overburdened the federal website, and caused the complaints. this is a typical tactic: sabotage the government then point at it and say "it doesn't work". edit: the reason i posted this is that the federal site worked well enough for me this morning that it directed me to the CA site, which works perfectly, according to everyone i have spoken to. The feds still created the problem. true. but there would likely not BE a problem if the states ran their own exchanges. those that DO have had very few complaints, TTBOMK.Even some states that wanted to set up exchanges backed out at the end because the feds were too slow providing system and policy requirements for the programmers. i would like to read about that, if you can provide a link.
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,056
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Oct 24, 2013 10:31:23 GMT -5
It was in the news last year when the deadline to decide was approaching and all the rules and regulations hadn't been released yet. I can't find anything that provides all of the specifics anymore, but the general information about the deadline extension and the missing regulations is included in this article. www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2012/November/15/deadline-extended.aspx
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,852
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 24, 2013 10:44:06 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 24, 2013 11:15:59 GMT -5
It was in the news last year when the deadline to decide was approaching and all the rules and regulations hadn't been released yet. I can't find anything that provides all of the specifics anymore, but the general information about the deadline extension and the missing regulations is included in this article. www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2012/November/15/deadline-extended.aspxkaiser has been amazing on this. i should have thought to look there.
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Oct 24, 2013 11:22:36 GMT -5
NYS state has one. it is plagued with errors. as of now 0 people have been able to enroll. i'm getting duplicate mailings with different acct numbers, regarding my account. the cheapest option(individual, 53 years old) is over $300 a month with a $3000 deductible. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/tongue.png) concerned with deficit, concerned with ACA, concerned with taxes..... what does make one a "tea partier(i used the derogatory term and the board "auto corrected" it to "partier) being labeled so by the likes of jon stewart? ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/cool.png)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 1, 2024 1:24:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2013 11:29:05 GMT -5
you know what is so lame about this? if the states had just set up their own exchanges, there would probably be no complaints. their refusal to do that has overburdened the federal website, and caused the complaints. this is a typical tactic: sabotage the government then point at it and say "it doesn't work". edit: the reason i posted this is that the federal site worked well enough for me this morning that it directed me to the CA site, which works perfectly, according to everyone i have spoken to. edit2: if someone has the time, could they please run a total of the population of the 16 states that have their own exchanges, and the 7 that have partnership exchanges? Just like the feds wanted states to accept the expansion of medicaid.....they CANT AFFORD ITA number of governors, particularly in red states, have stood their ideological ground and chosen not to expand, citing concerns about the additional financial burden. The federal government will pay for 100% of the expansion for the first three years, then gradually reduce its subsidy to 90% by 2020. (lets add a shitload more people to the ever expanding number already on medicaid, and then slowly cut how much the state gets reimbursed by the feds.....yeah.....sounds like a wonderful program for the state.....NOT!Some governors have said that expansion would involve additional costs that they couldn't afford and enlarge a program that they consider broken. In many states, however, various analyses show that states would stand to gain millions of dollars by expanding the program, at least initially. money.cnn.com/2013/07/01/news/economy/medicaid-expansion-states/same thing for the websites....if the feds WANT the program, let them freaking pay for it.....not a dime should come out of the states coffers for this program the states are already broke and going bankrupt before any of this crap came into view
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,852
|
Post by Tennesseer on Oct 24, 2013 11:33:13 GMT -5
NYS state has one. it is plagued with errors. as of now 0 people have been able to enroll. i'm getting duplicate mailings with different acct numbers, regarding my account. the cheapest option(individual, 53 years old) is over $300 a month with a $3000 deductible. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/tongue.png) concerned with deficit, concerned with ACA, concerned with taxes..... what does make one a "tea partier(i used the derogatory term and the board "auto corrected" it to "partier) being labeled so by the likes of jon stewart? ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/cool.png) N.Y. Exchange Says 40,000 Have Applied For Coverage
The above link/article is from October 9. The below link is from October 23. 174,000 have applied for coverage in NY through health care exchange
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,503
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 24, 2013 11:34:10 GMT -5
NYS state has one. it is plagued with errors. as of now 0 people have been able to enroll. i'm getting duplicate mailings with different acct numbers, regarding my account. that's right. i forgot about NY.the cheapest option(individual, 53 years old) is over $300 a month with a $3000 deductible. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/tongue.png) concerned with deficit, concerned with ACA, concerned with taxes..... i am not sure that many Democrats are concerned with taxes- unless you mean that they think they are too low.what does make one a "tea partier(i used the derogatory term and the board "auto corrected" it to "partier) being labeled so by the likes of jon stewart? ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/cool.png) no, i think "self identifying" is the best way.
|
|