ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Washington DC and The Holy Land (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   Obama Obamacare using "deductibles" to prey on the middle class (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=278016)

petegz28 10-28-2013 08:42 AM

Obamacare using "deductibles" to prey on the middle class
 
So looking at plans pre and post Obamacare, reading stories and such here was I see it coming down too. Obamacare is touting "you may pay more but you will have a smaller deductible".

That there is what you call Used Car Salesman talk. If you are generally a healthy person a low deductible is actually costing you more in premiums.

Example:

For coverage for 1 person you now pay $210 a month for an HSA eligible plan with Humana that has a $5000 deductible.

Prior to Obamacare you could get the same plan only with a $6500 deductible for $110 a month.

So that's $100 a month more or $1200 a year more and for what?

I tend to always carry high deductibles because I am not chronically ill and visit the doctor very little. I just want coverage in case I have a heart attack or get in a car accident.

This is but 1 example and if you think $100 month extra for something you most likely won't benefit from won't hurt this economy then you are fooling yourself.

KILLER_CLOWN 10-28-2013 08:44 AM

Basically the only thing that improves are the Insurance companies getting richer...everyone else gets ****ed.

suzzer99 10-28-2013 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28 (Post 10133609)
So looking at plans pre and post Obamacare, reading stories and such here was I see it coming down too. Obamacare is touting "you may pay more but you will have a smaller deductible".

That there is what you call Used Car Salesman talk. If you are generally a healthy person a low deductible is actually costing you more in premiums.

Example:

For coverage for 1 person you now pay $210 a month for an HSA eligible plan with Humana that has a $5000 deductible.

Prior to Obamacare you could get the same plan only with a $6500 deductible for $110 a month.

So that's $100 a month more or $1200 a year more and for what?

I tend to always carry high deductibles because I am not chronically ill and visit the doctor very little. I just want coverage in case I have a heart attack or get in a car accident.

This is but 1 example and if you think $100 month extra for something you most likely won't benefit from won't hurt this economy then you are fooling yourself.

What was your lifetime cap under the old plan? If you do get really sick or in a bad car accident, how much is it worth to not have a claims adjuster poring over your application looking for any reason to deny you coverage?

petegz28 10-28-2013 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzzer99 (Post 10133701)
What was your lifetime cap under the old plan? If you do get really sick or in a bad car accident, how much is it worth to not have a claims adjuster poring over your application looking for any reason to deny you coverage?

While this is a fair point that doesn't exclude the way this is being sold. The plans don't keep the same deductible and remove caps. They lower the deductible and remove caps.

So in other words I am forking over money for something I do no want in the form of a lower deductible.

petegz28 10-28-2013 09:31 AM

I think it's safe to say this bill was not very well thought out. The Dems and Obama were more worried about it being passed than dealing with the details of the bill. As Pelosi said, the bitch had no idea what was in it and once it passed it was too late.


This bill is the perfect example of politicians taking a well intentioned effort and ****ing it up as much as they can.

BucEyedPea 10-28-2013 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzzer99 (Post 10133701)
What was your lifetime cap under the old plan? If you do get really sick or in a bad car accident, how much is it worth to not have a claims adjuster poring over your application looking for any reason to deny you coverage?

Sounds like you're willing to allow insurance firms to go bankrupt in order to provide as if they're a charity. This is implied in your post. Logic suggests you're willing to bankrupt the govt aka taxpayers too.

Oh, we're already bankrupt. Even the IMF is calling on its member govts to initiate more aggressive revenue collection due to so many bankrupt govts. ( http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/...f/fm1302.pdf)* Ya' know those developed countries aka socialist democracies.

Higher taxes and more controls will be coming. Welcome to global aka international socialism. Exactly what the communists were trying to implement but just thru conquest.

We may have won the Cold War militarily but not at the level of ideas.

IMF'as October Fiscal Monitor Report. Titled “Taxing Times,” the report paints a dire picture for advanced economies with high debts that fail to aggressively “mobilize domestic revenue.” It goes on to build a case for drastic measures and recommends a series of escalating income and consumption tax increases culminating in the direct confiscation of assets.~ By By Bill Frezza, Forbes.com via post here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/10/b...-confiscation/
I know this has been done in Greece already directly from people's bank accounts...sounds like it's coming here.

Pretty ****ed up situation if you ask me.

BucEyedPea 10-28-2013 10:24 AM

Time to do away with the IMF. What right do they have to tell us what to do?

BucEyedPea 10-28-2013 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN (Post 10133616)
Basically the only thing that improves are the Insurance companies getting richer...everyone else gets ****ed.

Yup!

Isn't it ironic how the left screams about corporations or corporatism and/or insurance companies while they make them richer and fatter under the guise of regulation in the form of mandates which gaurantees them more markets, money and riches. They are the penultimate enablers of corporatism. LMAO

mlyonsd 10-28-2013 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28 (Post 10133732)
I think it's safe to say this bill was not very well thought out. The Dems and Obama were more worried about it being passed than dealing with the details of the bill. As Pelosi said, the bitch had no idea what was in it and once it passed it was too late.


This bill is the perfect example of politicians taking a well intentioned effort and ****ing it up as much as they can.

Of course it wasn't thought out. Obama, Reid, and Pelosi knee all along their backers would never hold them accountable for the numerous lies they spewed out.

This forum is evidence of that.

Prison Bitch 10-28-2013 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea (Post 10133890)
Time to do away with the IMF. What right do they have to tell us what to do?

The IMF tells us what to do?

KC native 10-28-2013 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 10133935)
The IMF tells us what to do?

They don't. That bitch is as dumb as you are.

KC native 10-28-2013 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea (Post 10133861)
Sounds like you're willing to allow insurance firms to go bankrupt in order to provide as if they're a charity. This is implied in your post. Logic suggests you're willing to bankrupt the govt aka taxpayers too.

Oh, we're already bankrupt. Even the IMF is calling on its member govts to initiate more aggressive revenue collection due to so many bankrupt govts. ( http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/...f/fm1302.pdf)* Ya' know those developed countries aka socialist democracies.

Pretty ****ed up situation if you ask me.

Two things, we're not bankrupt and no one is asking you for an opinion because you're stupid.

Prison Bitch 10-28-2013 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Race Card native (Post 10133957)
They don't. That bitch makes me every bit as angry and insane as you do

FYP

BucEyedPea 10-28-2013 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch (Post 10133935)
The IMF tells us what to do?

Well, it says in that post that it "recommends." I don't see that they have any right to do even that and is a form of interference or attempted interference. However, it has also repeatedly criticized our govt's fiscal situation since 2011 calling it "unsustainable." It is charged with managing the global economy. ( Remember it was once run by a French socialist too. ) Obama supports a number of its recommendations. That there shows it's influence. To me when any international institution criticizes, influences and recommends it's a form of telling us what we should do. I didn't say it forces us to do. But it's there for a reason.

In the meantime it's banking technocrats that have been running Italy and Greece.

Oh and we are effectively bankrupt. That happened in 2008!

petegz28 10-28-2013 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Race Card native (Post 10133957)
They don't. That bitch is as dumb as you are.

Need a refill of piss and vinegar?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:16 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.