That's not the part I am talking about. He does not get to demand a subsidy if he had signed up.
Forum > General Discussion > Politics and Religion > Going blind, an Obamacare critic now needs a bailout
Hey, if the guy in the OP had simply signed up for The Gift from Heaven that we refer to as Obamacare, he would be perfectly healthy and better off financially. That legislation was easy to understand and made insurance dirt cheap! Because he was an Obamacare critic, and therefore and obvious racist, we should not even look into the likelihood that this procedure would be covered if he signed up at the most basic level or even if he could have afforded to.
*high fives my liberal peeps*
*high fives my liberal peeps*
Cuivienen
offline
offline
foo, it doesn't help that he admittedly didn't even look into it.
I would be more sympathetic if he had and had determined that he still couldn't afford it.
I would be more sympathetic if he had and had determined that he still couldn't afford it.
Originally posted by Cuivienen
foo, it doesn't help that he admittedly didn't even look into it.
I would be more sympathetic if he had and had determined that he still couldn't afford it.
Sure, I think he is irresponsible for not having insurance, and that applies to whether or not Obamacare exists.
I just hate the whole idea that somehow the shit legislation would be his savior, and not his own decisions. It is a complicated clusterfuck that is way too difficult for average people to comprehend.
foo, it doesn't help that he admittedly didn't even look into it.
I would be more sympathetic if he had and had determined that he still couldn't afford it.
Sure, I think he is irresponsible for not having insurance, and that applies to whether or not Obamacare exists.
I just hate the whole idea that somehow the shit legislation would be his savior, and not his own decisions. It is a complicated clusterfuck that is way too difficult for average people to comprehend.
Cowpoker
offline
offline
Originally posted by foofighter24
Hey, if the guy in the OP had simply signed up for The Gift from Heaven that we refer to as Obamacare, he would be perfectly healthy and better off financially. That legislation was easy to understand and made insurance dirt cheap! Because he was an Obamacare critic, and therefore and obvious racist, we should not even look into the likelihood that this procedure would be covered if he signed up at the most basic level or even if he could have afforded to.
*high fives my liberal peeps*
I would have to agree. A 49 year old smoker with diabetes would probably pay what for a monthly premium for health insurance ? I am guessing $500-$750+ a month for a policy with maybe a $5,000 deductible, high copays, some restrictions, spotty drug coverage ? I'm not an insurance agent so I could be way off in either direction.
Assuming that he makes too much to receive certain benefits and too little for federal subsidies, if he had actually signed up under healthcare.gov, he would have needed to come up with 6-9K worth of premiums for a year and still pay 5 K in deductibles. That isn't exactly a solution to his problem if he is struggling to come up with 18-30K to save his eyes, I would imagine that would be very good motivation for any of us to come up with the money needed.
Hey, if the guy in the OP had simply signed up for The Gift from Heaven that we refer to as Obamacare, he would be perfectly healthy and better off financially. That legislation was easy to understand and made insurance dirt cheap! Because he was an Obamacare critic, and therefore and obvious racist, we should not even look into the likelihood that this procedure would be covered if he signed up at the most basic level or even if he could have afforded to.
*high fives my liberal peeps*
I would have to agree. A 49 year old smoker with diabetes would probably pay what for a monthly premium for health insurance ? I am guessing $500-$750+ a month for a policy with maybe a $5,000 deductible, high copays, some restrictions, spotty drug coverage ? I'm not an insurance agent so I could be way off in either direction.
Assuming that he makes too much to receive certain benefits and too little for federal subsidies, if he had actually signed up under healthcare.gov, he would have needed to come up with 6-9K worth of premiums for a year and still pay 5 K in deductibles. That isn't exactly a solution to his problem if he is struggling to come up with 18-30K to save his eyes, I would imagine that would be very good motivation for any of us to come up with the money needed.
Edited by Cowpoker on May 17, 2015 11:53:07
Cuivienen
offline
offline
It would probably be much, much more than that in terms of both premium and deductible.
Cowpoker
offline
offline
Originally posted by Cuivienen
It would probably be much, much more than that in terms of both premium and deductible.
I sort of figured that, especially without belonging to a larger employer group.
So basically this poor bastard, as impressionable as he might be, can not afford his surgery, would not be able to afford insurance and his deductible under ACA (or prior to ACA for that matter ) to get health insurance that may or may not pay for the care he needs to save his sight. So removing the political blinders for a minute, what the hell good is ACA ?
It would probably be much, much more than that in terms of both premium and deductible.
I sort of figured that, especially without belonging to a larger employer group.
So basically this poor bastard, as impressionable as he might be, can not afford his surgery, would not be able to afford insurance and his deductible under ACA (or prior to ACA for that matter ) to get health insurance that may or may not pay for the care he needs to save his sight. So removing the political blinders for a minute, what the hell good is ACA ?
Originally posted by Cuivienen
It would probably be much, much more than that in terms of both premium and deductible.
Just judging from my aunt who is around the same age with diabetes, it would be much less than that.
It would probably be much, much more than that in terms of both premium and deductible.
Just judging from my aunt who is around the same age with diabetes, it would be much less than that.
Originally posted by Cowpoker
I sort of figured that, especially without belonging to a larger employer group.
So basically this poor bastard, as impressionable as he might be, can not afford his surgery, would not be able to afford insurance and his deductible under ACA (or prior to ACA for that matter ) to get health insurance that may or may not pay for the care he needs to save his sight. So removing the political blinders for a minute, what the hell good is ACA ?
The ACA is nothing more than the first step to Medicare for all. It is total shit, but now they have hundreds of pages of laws they can tinker and toy with using executive powers and constantly hold what is currently on the books over everyone's head so they can pass new, bigger government stuff.
It is the equivalent of telling your high school sweetheart "I am just gonna put the tip in".
I sort of figured that, especially without belonging to a larger employer group.
So basically this poor bastard, as impressionable as he might be, can not afford his surgery, would not be able to afford insurance and his deductible under ACA (or prior to ACA for that matter ) to get health insurance that may or may not pay for the care he needs to save his sight. So removing the political blinders for a minute, what the hell good is ACA ?
The ACA is nothing more than the first step to Medicare for all. It is total shit, but now they have hundreds of pages of laws they can tinker and toy with using executive powers and constantly hold what is currently on the books over everyone's head so they can pass new, bigger government stuff.
It is the equivalent of telling your high school sweetheart "I am just gonna put the tip in".
Originally posted by foofighter24
It is the equivalent of telling your high school sweetheart "I am just gonna put the tip in".
That sure is a slippery slope.
It is the equivalent of telling your high school sweetheart "I am just gonna put the tip in".
That sure is a slippery slope.
krisdaschwab912
offline
offline
Originally posted by foofighter24
The ACA is nothing more than the first step to Medicare for all
If by Medicare you mean a single-payer health care system, where do I sign up?
The ACA is nothing more than the first step to Medicare for all
If by Medicare you mean a single-payer health care system, where do I sign up?
Originally posted by krisdaschwab912
If by Medicare you mean a single-payer health care system, where do I sign up?
Out of curiosity, why is single payer so important to you? If you want insurance, go pay for it. No need to drag others into it unless you want a free ride.
If by Medicare you mean a single-payer health care system, where do I sign up?
Out of curiosity, why is single payer so important to you? If you want insurance, go pay for it. No need to drag others into it unless you want a free ride.
Originally posted by foofighter24
Out of curiosity, why is single payer so important to you? If you want insurance, go pay for it. No need to drag others into it unless you want a free ride.
Exactly.
If you want a road, go build one, unless you want a free ride.
Out of curiosity, why is single payer so important to you? If you want insurance, go pay for it. No need to drag others into it unless you want a free ride.
Exactly.
If you want a road, go build one, unless you want a free ride.
Lurchy
offline
offline
Originally posted by Cuivienen
No?
You know, people often use logical fallacies as a crutch, when their argument fails them and it's easier to make up something to attack instead of what the other person actually said, or when it's easier to attack the character of the other rather than the facts of the debate.
You seem to spend a whole lot of time on crutches. Have you thought about signing up for the ACA?
No?
You know, people often use logical fallacies as a crutch, when their argument fails them and it's easier to make up something to attack instead of what the other person actually said, or when it's easier to attack the character of the other rather than the facts of the debate.
You seem to spend a whole lot of time on crutches. Have you thought about signing up for the ACA?
Lurchy
offline
offline
Originally posted by Cuivienen
That's not the part I am talking about. He does not get to demand a subsidy if he had signed up.
The point you are trying (badly) to make is that insurance doesn't cover the full cost of healthcare. This is kind of a no-shit Sherlock point, and it's essentially irrelevant to the ACA discussion since insurance has not covered the full costs since the inception of health insurance.
That's not the part I am talking about. He does not get to demand a subsidy if he had signed up.
The point you are trying (badly) to make is that insurance doesn't cover the full cost of healthcare. This is kind of a no-shit Sherlock point, and it's essentially irrelevant to the ACA discussion since insurance has not covered the full costs since the inception of health insurance.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
