letsgocards89 wrote:Spending other people's money, insisting that the alternative is better. Based on what? You don't know what that lady needs, nor anyone else. It's entirely possible, and highly likely, she had the insurance she wanted based on her needs as well as an extra $140 a month in her pocket.
Again, she's pregnant. Her insurance was not going to meet her needs. I'm not spending anyone's money. If she wants to go without insurance, she can pay the fine. If she wants to buy real insurance, she has her options. Eliminating half assed policies is doing everyone a favor, because most people don't read the fine print and realize just how little is covered until it is too late.
The idea of insurance is spending others peoples money when they need it, ie there house burns down, they get in a car crash, they get an illness.
Its shared risk. It's all it is. If you've ever filed an insurance claim, you've "spent other people's money", is I believe how you put it.
letsgocards89 wrote:Spending other people's money, insisting that the alternative is better. Based on what? You don't know what that lady needs, nor anyone else. It's entirely possible, and highly likely, she had the insurance she wanted based on her needs as well as an extra $140 a month in her pocket.
Again, she's pregnant. Her insurance was not going to meet her needs. I'm not spending anyone's money. If she wants to go without insurance, she can pay the fine. If she wants to buy real insurance, she has her options. Eliminating half assed policies is doing everyone a favor, because most people don't read the fine print and realize just how little is covered until it is too late.
The idea of insurance is spending others peoples money when they need it, ie there house burns down, they get in a car crash, they get an illness.
Its shared risk. It's all it is. If you've ever filed an insurance claim, you've "spent other people's money", is I believe how you put it.
I can't tell if you are referring to me or LGC. LGC brought up the idea of spending other people's money and more with regards to people saying what this lady can or can't afford. I don't really know what she can truly afford, although based on her 80K income and the amount of her Obamacare premium of $230 or whatever I would say that should be doable. All I was saying is the notion that her old insurance was good enough to meet her needs is false. She can either buy insurance that has reasonable minimum standards for coverage or go without. Her $100 a month insurance from some company I've never heard of isn't going to cut it, and bringing up the increase she is facing is more about shock value than a reality check that a lot of companies are selling garbage policies.
For the record, I've never made a single insurance claim on my vehicle or house and have never had a major medical event. I've paid in way more than I've ever benefited. If anyone should be against insurance it should be me. But I still think everyone should have sufficient car and health insurance. It's not just sharing risk from a personal perspective, it's a moral obligation to others in my opinion. If I hit someone with my car it's not fair for them to have to use their own insurance to cover the damage because I don't have any. In the same vein, I don't know anyone who has had a major medical issue just shrug and say "I don't have insurance, guess I'll just die." They go to the hospital and get treated and the costs get passed on to everyone else. I don't think that's right.
letsgocards89 wrote:Spending other people's money, insisting that the alternative is better. Based on what? You don't know what that lady needs, nor anyone else. It's entirely possible, and highly likely, she had the insurance she wanted based on her needs as well as an extra $140 a month in her pocket.
Again, she's pregnant. Her insurance was not going to meet her needs. I'm not spending anyone's money. If she wants to go without insurance, she can pay the fine. If she wants to buy real insurance, she has her options. Eliminating half assed policies is doing everyone a favor, because most people don't read the fine print and realize just how little is covered until it is too late.
The idea of insurance is spending others peoples money when they need it, ie there house burns down, they get in a car crash, they get an illness.
Its shared risk. It's all it is. If you've ever filed an insurance claim, you've "spent other people's money", is I believe how you put it.
I can't tell if you are referring to me or LGC. LGC brought up the idea of spending other people's money and more with regards to people saying what this lady can or can't afford. I don't really know what she can truly afford, although based on her 80K income and the amount of her Obamacare premium of $230 or whatever I would say that should be doable. All I was saying is the notion that her old insurance was good enough to meet her needs is false. She can either buy insurance that has reasonable minimum standards for coverage or go without. Her $100 a month insurance from some company I've never heard of isn't going to cut it, and bringing up the increase she is facing is more about shock value than a reality check that a lot of companies are selling garbage policies.
For the record, I've never made a single insurance claim on my vehicle or house and have never had a major medical event. I've paid in way more than I've ever benefited. If anyone should be against insurance it should be me. But I still think everyone should have sufficient car and health insurance. It's not just sharing risk from a personal perspective, it's a moral obligation to others in my opinion. If I hit someone with my car it's not fair for them to have to use their own insurance to cover the damage because I don't have any. In the same vein, I don't know anyone who has had a major medical issue just shrug and say "I don't have insurance, guess I'll just die." They go to the hospital and get treated and the costs get passed on to everyone else. I don't think that's right.
Cardsfansince82, I assume the '82 is your year of birth. I'm ten years older than you and I applaud your maturity and empathy for your community. Health insurance is a moral obligation and it will only manifest itself into economic prosperity. We are a rich country and our health coverage for the less fortunate or independently insured has been overlooked for too long. All that's missing is the cost controls...
Cost controls for sure, as well as better wages. It's sad that people can work full time and still not afford basic necessities like insurance, let alone actual care.
Has anyone gotten insurance through this? Mrs. AW needs insurance and I was gonna add her to my work plan. We looked at the exchange and it was $280/month for catastrophic coverage (which was the cheapest coverage). That seems not good.
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:Has anyone gotten insurance through this? Mrs. AW needs insurance and I was gonna add her to my work plan. We looked at the exchange and it was $280/month for catastrophic coverage (which was the cheapest coverage). That seems not good.
I will be using the exchange but I haven't decided what plan to go with yet. I've been busy lately so I haven't really weighed out the options. It looks like I will be paying quite a bit less than $280 a month though.
cardsfansince82 wrote:Cost controls for sure, as well as better wages. It's sad that people can work full time and still not afford basic necessities like insurance, let alone actual care.
It's sad we live in a country that doesn't value others life but rather profit. It's sad we live in a country where an entire political party and their media arm whom all claim to be followers of Jesus Christ who went around feeding and healing the poor do everything they can to hurt the poor. It's really sad that we've seen the largest transfer of wealth in history from the poor, working, and middle class to the rich in the last 10 years and yet many of the poor, working, and middle class have been convinced that they have to make cuts while the rich keep getting our money. It's sad that we live in a country where most people are too [expletive] stupid to do anything about it.
Slow and steady wins the race, according to the old Aesop fable, and that's also what happened in the state of Massachusetts, when it rolled out its new health-coverage plans in 2007. Today, 97 percent of people in the state have health insurance of one type or another. But when the state's bid for universal coverage got started, it launched to a very slow start, according to those oversaw the rollout in the state. And that's without all the website issues that have plagued Healthcare.gov.
"To my friends in the media, I have one message: please take a chill pill. You won't see 7 million enrollees for a while, and that's not failure, that's real world," John McDonough, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health who was deeply involved in the passage and implementation of Massachusetts' 2006 health reform law, wrote of the new Obamacare program in mid-October. In Massachusetts, getting people signed up "was a slow crawl, not a sprint."
I don't know if it's a great strategy to try and use Romneycare to prop up Obamacare, when you consider that Romneycare sucks too.
Why does Romneycare suck? Because it apparently does not cover the cost of razors?
Costs are up, deductibles are up, wait times are up, all that fun stuff.
When it went into effect seven years ago, polls showed a skeptical, if not hostile, view of Romneycare. Now you couldn’t pull the health plan out of the people’s cold dead hands. The latest Massachusetts Medical Society poll has 84 percent of state residents happy with their health coverage, versus national polls showing only 67 percent of Americans so content.
The poll she is referencing was from September of this year, I believe.
cardsfansince82 wrote:Cost controls for sure, as well as better wages. It's sad that people can work full time and still not afford basic necessities like insurance, let alone actual care.
It's sad we live in a country that doesn't value others life but rather profit. It's sad we live in a country where an entire political party and their media arm whom all claim to be followers of Jesus Christ who went around feeding and healing the poor do everything they can to hurt the poor. It's really sad that we've seen the largest transfer of wealth in history from the poor, working, and middle class to the rich in the last 10 years and yet many of the poor, working, and middle class have been convinced that they have to make cuts while the rich keep getting our money. It's sad that we live in a country where most people are too [expletive] stupid to do anything about it.
I am glad you all invoke the teachings of Jesus. I will go back to one of my favorite lessons in the bible in which Jesus said that if you are a good person you go to heaven. Unless of course you studied from a substandard bible, in which case you need to be grandfathered in. But here's a far better bible, it just costs a lot more. Enjoy your tax credit though to help defray the cost.
