What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

joecct said:
The Alma Mater of a few of our posters and a service fee if you don't use their health plan.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/02/1...l-health-care-opt-out-fees/?intcmp=latestnews

I think it makes sense. If you get sick on campus and have the Cornell plan everything is already in the system. The administrative cost to add a non plan individual into the system can be expensive.
Click to expand...

I guarantee Cornell students are not "in a fervor." The only thing that creates a fervor at Cornell is raising hockey ticket prices or when the Hot Truck is late.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Kepler said:
I guarantee Cornell students are not "in a fervor." The only thing that creates a fervor at Cornell is raising hockey ticket prices or when the Hot Truck is late.
Click to expand...

Didn't they raise them this year, from $18 to $20?
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

FlagDUDE08 said:
Didn't they raise them this year, from $18 to $20?
Click to expand...

Not sure. I know there was much grousing (a fervor, if you will) that prices have been raised even as sales have decreased. Of course, the real issue is that prices have been raised even as wins have decreased.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Kepler said:
Not sure. I know there was much grousing (a fervor, if you will) that prices have been raised even as sales have decreased. Of course, the real issue is that prices have been raised even as wins have decreased.
Click to expand...

I know that's what I ended up paying for this year's game, but at least RPI decided to actually play, despite it being a tie.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Priceless said:
"Remember the other day, when you were asking me about the definition of irony?"
Click to expand...

No, that must have been someone else. I long ago gave up about asking you anything, I can see better dancers in lots of other places.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Chastising Republicans for signing up for government handouts is as pointless as chastising Democrats for not going ahead and paying taxes according to the tax brackets they would like to see. Both "opposite" actions would be perfectly legal (not signing up or overpaying your taxes), but it would be silly to expect people to do either one.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

LynahFan said:
Chastising Republicans for signing up for government handouts is as pointless as chastising Democrats for not going ahead and paying taxes according to the tax brackets they would like to see. Both "opposite" actions would be perfectly legal (not signing up or overpaying your taxes), but it would be silly to expect people to do either one.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the Tories want the White House to stop touting the successes of the program because some of their followers might realize the ACA isn't the work of Satan and might start to figure out that other things aren't the work of Satan either...
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Another unintended consequence, perhaps, but maybe this time in a good way!

States opposed to PPACA may not need SCOTUS to rule in favor of the plaintiffs in King v Burwell after all....

Section 1332 of ObamaCare allows states to craft their own health-care reform plans while waiving many of the law’s most onerous requirements. If a state drafts its own plan, it is exempt from enforcing both the individual and employer mandates, having to furnish the law’s tax credits and cost-sharing coverage subsidies, and enforcing the law’s essential health-benefits requirement mandating that plans cover a nationally standardized suite of medical benefits.
Click to expand...

Parts of PPACA are great, and parts are nonsensical. At least they provided a way out of the mess entirely.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

busterman62 said:
.
Click to expand...

From your article. Saving per person in US = $135. There's approx 310M people in the US. Even using this estimate, that's pretty **** good. I thought the ACA was supposed to bust the budget???
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Rover said:
From your article. Saving per person in US = $135. There's approx 310M people in the US. Even using this estimate, that's pretty **** good. I thought the ACA was supposed to bust the budget???
Click to expand...

Just give it time, and allow the insurance companies to merge and buy each other out. We'll soon be at single payer. Meanwhile, costs are still skyrocketing, and only seem to decline because of the people losing coverage.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

FlagDUDE08 said:
Just give it time, and allow the insurance companies to merge and buy each other out. We'll soon be at single payer. Meanwhile, costs are still skyrocketing, and only seem to decline because of the people losing coverage.
Click to expand...


No offense but you knucks have been warning about this for year, and it never comes true. Could you kindly site some evidence? Particularly about the people losing coverage. I await your reply.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Rover said:
No offense but you knucks have been warning about this for year, and it never comes true. Could you kindly site some evidence? Particularly about the people losing coverage. I await your reply.
Click to expand...

Oh right, because mergers take six months. They take a heck of a lot longer than that. You have a short term memory.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Rover said:
From your article. Saving per person in US = $135. There's approx 310M people in the US. Even using this estimate, that's pretty **** good. I thought the ACA was supposed to bust the budget???
Click to expand...

Costs are down the question is why. CMS and CEA think it's due to many reasons, mainly the economy. The ACA is most likely one of the reasons costs are down but its impact is thought to be minimal at this time by all but the most ardent of the Flavor Aid drinkers.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

busterman62 said:
Costs are down the question is why. CMS and CEA think it's due to many reasons, mainly the economy. The ACA is most likely one of the reasons costs are down but its impact is thought to be minimal at this time by all but the most ardent of the Flavor Aid drinkers.
Click to expand...

Could probably also include delivery costs being lower as a part of it.

Of course, when the GOP gets into office in 2017 (it will happen because the NWO demands constant change to put their plan into place), Grover will start blaming republicans for awful health care.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

busterman62 said:
Costs are down the question is why. CMS and CEA think it's due to many reasons, mainly the economy. The ACA is most likely one of the reasons costs are down but its impact is thought to be minimal at this time by all but the most ardent of the Flavor Aid drinkers.
Click to expand...


Sorry but you're extrapolating one take on this and saying "all but the most ardent"...uh, no. The economy has been picking up for several years now but we're still seeing reducting in expected costs. Again $135 X 310M is not chump change. I thought this thing was supposed to lead to skyrocketing costs, not cost reductions???

Flaggy, as I said show me the wide spread drops in coverage. That has nothing to do with hypothetical mergers that I'm sure are just around the corner. :rolleyes:

PS - Have you gotten over being Mr Sensitive yet?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top