The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Those poor, poor, poor rich people, who have to pay a little more to fund healthcare.

Like the members of Congress who make $174,000 annually yet were unwilling to comply with that section of PPACA that required them to live under the same rules as anyone else who is forced to acquire coverage through state / federal exchanges? you seemed eager to defend them receiving a continued subsidy even though their income levels are too high to qualify for subsidized coverage.

i guess consistency is not your strong suit, eh?

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

can one of the attorneys here explain why the "navigators" who supposedly are helping people sign up don't have to comply with HIPAA?

Meanwhile, regarding one of these "navigators":

The nonprofit Seedco ... snagged lucrative multimillion-dollar navigator contracts in Georgia, Maryland, Tennessee and New York.
....
less than a year ago, Seedco agreed to settle a civil fraud lawsuit “for faking at least 1,400 of 6,500 job placements under a $22.2 million federally funded contract with the city.”

Seedco’s behavior is said to have gone far beyond defrauding taxpayers through abuse of New York programs, federal Labor Department funding and federal stimulus dollars.

only after the US attorney’s office in Manhattan brought suit did the organization acknowledge systemic, repeated wrongdoing. Seedco forked over a $1.7 million settlement in December 2012.

The Nonprofit Quarterly said Seedco’s fraud was “kind of breathtaking” in its “creativity and illegal audacity.

Just the kind of company we'd all trust with our SSN and medical history, eh?

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Just curious. Do you also consider Exxon on the dole? Lockheed? ADM? Monsanto?

Don't know about him, but I would, yes. Though the term "crony capitalism" is more generally used. Any major bank, any green energy company, yes, any company that uses connenctions and influence to receive favorable special treatment from the government for themselves that isn't generally available. "Equal protection under the law" is now a farce. There are so many exceptions and "special cases" that it seems like no law is applied equally to everyone any more.

The Secretary of the Treasury doesn't pay all the income taxes he owes, no big deal. The Senate and the President haven't submitted a budget in five years and counting, so what.

The President doesn't even bother asking for an inconvenient law to be changed, he now just arbitrarily announces he won't enforce it. his sycophants here cheer him on; Congress shrugs its shoulders and does nothing, the courts rule that no one has "standing" to sue to stop it.

[Priceless]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

can one of the attorneys here explain why the "navigators" who supposedly are helping people sign up don't have to comply with HIPAA?

Meanwhile, regarding one of these "navigators":

Just the kind of company we'd all trust with our SSN and medical history, eh?

How dare you criticize a private company! Communist!

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

If by your definition young people overpay now, and will continue to do so, how is this a travesty of Obamacare?

"Travesty" is your word, not mine. That seems a bit hyperbolic. and how does it become "my" definition? I didn't write the law.

Generally, insurance pricing is proportionate to risk. The concept is to pool risk so that each person puts up a relatively small, known amount in exchange for the prospect of receiving a large sum if certain adverse events occur. When you pool risk, you typically pool together people with similar risk profiles.

The law is written so that young healthy people are asked to pay more than what their risk profile warrants. It is also written so that older, sicker people are asked to pay less than what their risk profile warrants. The excess of the former is supposed to cover the shortfall of the latter.

All of this is well-known and widely reported. It has nothing to do with me.

There is a far better way to accomplish the desired ends.

[Priceless]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

There is a far better way to accomplish the desired ends.

Death panels?

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Just curious. Do you also consider Exxon on the dole? Lockheed? ADM? Monsanto? Am I on the dole? Who do you consider to be "on the dole"?

Any individual or organization receiving transfer payment or grant money from the government, yes.

[Priceless]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Any individual or organization receiving transfer payment or grant money from the government, yes.

So basically, everyone is on the dole at one time or another.

[unofan]

Like the members of Congress who make $174,000 annually yet were unwilling to comply with that section of PPACA that required them to live under the same rules as anyone else who is forced to acquire coverage through state / federal exchanges? you seemed eager to defend them receiving a continued subsidy even though their income levels are too high to qualify for subsidized coverage.

i guess consistency is not your strong suit, eh?

You mean like the employees of Walgreens who are similarly being subsidized by their employer? Which you posted literally one day before you first brought up this talking point?

I'll take old pio's acerbic nature over your disingenuity any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[unofan]

Any individual or organization receiving transfer payment or grant money from the government, yes.

So essentially the entire country, then. Between Medicare, social security, Medicaid, mortgage interest deduction, student loan subsidies and forgiveness, research grants, corporate subsidies, farm subsidies, and traditional welfare, pretty much everyone's on the dole in one form or another.

[Rover]

You mean like the employees of Walgreens who are similarly being subsidized by their employer? Which you posted literally one day before you first brought up this talking point?

I'll take old pio's acerbic nature over your disingenuity any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

The best part is The Boner got busted writing e-mails saying he wanted to preserve the ability of the feds to help staff pay for health care! Give Fishy a break. His ideology is once again being used as toilet paper and he expected riots in the streets when Obamacare went live. Ol' fishbreath hasn't had a good week this week.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

So essentially the entire country, then. Between Medicare, social security, Medicaid, mortgage interest deduction, student loan subsidies and forgiveness, research grants, corporate subsidies, farm subsidies, and traditional welfare, pretty much everyone's on the dole in one form or another.

I'm not. Not yet, anyway.

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

So essentially the entire country, then. Between Medicare, social security, Medicaid, mortgage interest deduction, student loan subsidies and forgiveness, research grants, corporate subsidies, farm subsidies, and traditional welfare, pretty much everyone's on the dole in one form or another.

Close to it, yeah. Although I'd debate the mortgage interest deduction as it's a tax deduction, not a transfer payment or grant. And your list goes to show just how insidious it all is. There are majore economic impacts to all of these things because of government involvement and yet it's not really needed. Even the mortgage deduction impacts mortgage rates, acting as a price support for mortgage companies, so they can charge higher rates because people know they'll get some of their money back when filing taxes.

[jerphisch]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

"Travesty" is your word, not mine. That seems a bit hyperbolic. and how does it become "my" definition? I didn't write the law.

Generally, insurance pricing is proportionate to risk. The concept is to pool risk so that each person puts up a relatively small, known amount in exchange for the prospect of receiving a large sum if certain adverse events occur. When you pool risk, you typically pool together people with similar risk profiles.

The law is written so that young healthy people are asked to pay more than what their risk profile warrants. It is also written so that older, sicker people are asked to pay less than what their risk profile warrants. The excess of the former is supposed to cover the shortfall of the latter.

All of this is well-known and widely reported. It has nothing to do with me.

There is a far better way to accomplish the desired ends.

If by well known and widely reported you actually mean not what happens in real life then sure. For people who pay for their insurance (not uninsured or on a government program) about 80% of them get it through their employer. Employer provided insurance does not pool people together based on their risk profile, period. So the law is written to match the current practice that most of us already use. So how is this a big deal now?

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

I'm not. Not yet, anyway.

You hold no mortgage? You've never attended a university? (unless you went to that school in western MI [Hillman?] that refuses all government money)? Your children haven't gone to college or public K-12 schools?