OK Health Care Freedom Amendment, State Question 756

Created by CitizenTopix on Oct 11, 2010

1,567 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34445 Nov 27, 2012
Dusty, you gotta admit though, that Tamara makes more sense than most of her hick brothers and sisters on here. They are about as clueless as it gets.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#34446 Nov 27, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
No, Okieabroad indicated Obamacare would be a good thing and you said to her, "So from what you are saying I donot think our Obamacare will be like what you are talking", but as it is now you would be wrong.
My comment was not saying Obamacare was wrong but that it was not like what OlkieAbroad had and that she was wrong. She said that where she live that country's healthcare system took care of everyone and that none of the employers provided health insurance and everyone there paid their own way for government healthcare.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#34447 Nov 27, 2012
DustyOutlaw wrote:
<quoted text>
Boy for someone that claims to know something it amazes me that you will claim you "went to the open market" and bought health insurance when Oklahoma is locked up tighter than a jug with the monopoly of Blue Cross.
I was talking before Medicare! Before Medicare when we did shop and buy our own health ins. BCBS would not take me. This was long before we found out my husband had canser. They not insure me because I had an accident that broke my nose and caused me to have sinus surgery and that same accident damaged disk in my neck and had to have surgery for that. You do know there are more than BCBS for health ins.?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34448 Nov 27, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
<quoted text>My comment was not saying Obamacare was wrong but that it was not like what OlkieAbroad had and that she was wrong. She said that where she live that country's healthcare system took care of everyone and that none of the employers provided health insurance and everyone there paid their own way for government healthcare.
==========
Her point to you was that Obamacare would not cost employers more---as you seemed to think, but might even cost them less.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#34449 Nov 27, 2012
DustyOutlaw wrote:
<quoted text>
Boy for someone that claims to know something it amazes me that you will claim you "went to the open market" and bought health insurance when Oklahoma is locked up tighter than a jug with the monopoly of Blue Cross.
You can buy other health ins. besides BCBS here in Oklahoma. Dusty your statements amazes me. You are so bent on putting Oklahoma down and telling me what an old bat I am that you are sounding out right stupid! Also the health ins. we had when my husband fought his high stage 3 colon cancer was not BCBS or MEDICARE! But that company could not have done any better in paying the bills. The only thing that could have been better was if the premium was not so high.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#34450 Nov 27, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
Her point to you was that Obamacare would not cost employers more---as you seemed to think, but might even cost them less.
No that was not her point. Go back and read her first post on the subject about taken the burden of the employers and my post of asking how and her answer was the the government would be supplying the health ins. and in her country no employer supplies their employees with health ins. that everyone is covered by the government health plan and everyone provides for their own healthcare government ins.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#34451 Nov 27, 2012
WMCOL:

Here are the post I referred to!

Oklie...POST 34359

Mine post 34362

Oklie..POST 34410

Undoubtly you and I read Oklie's post differenly!

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34452 Nov 27, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
WMCOL:
Here are the post I referred to!
Oklie...POST 34359
Mine post 34362
Oklie..POST 34410
Undoubtly you and I read Oklie's post differenly!
==========
Here are the posts where you said she was wrong. She said companies do not pay or subsidize workers because it would be double insuring.

OkieAbroad wrote:

<quoted text>
Tamara,
My source is my common sense. The whole entire purpose of any health care system is to make health care insurance affordable and legally the responsibility of the individual. I live in the Dutch health care system, which is what Obama said he used to model his health care plan. Companies here do not pay and have no reason to pay or subsidize health insurance for their workers, because every individual here has to pay their own insurance.(people taking responsibility for themselves) Lower income families here get their health insurance subsidized by the government. Companies pay NOTHING.
Do YOU have information on Obama's healthcare plan that states otherwise?? Then I would be interested in seeing that because it makes no sense to me that companies would have to DOUBLE insure their workers.[quote/]

YOU RESPONDED saying you don't think Obamacare will be like that:

>>>Obama's health care plan will include the employers with a certain total of employees working for the to provide health insurance for their employees. If the employer does not then they will be fined so much each year they do not just like any individual that does not carry health insurance.. The way it stands now the government will not be the total health insurance carrier. You will be able to get health insurance thru private health insurance companies. About all the Obamacare really did as it stands now is make it illegal not to have health insurance. If you are in a certain income bracket you will get help pay for it or be put on the medicaid program. One good thing is no one can be turn down for health ins. because of pre-existing conditions. if you go to Obama Health care.gov . So from what you are saying I donot think our Obamacare will be like what you are talking about.<<<
Dana

United States

#34453 Nov 27, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
Employer fine and charge are the same thing. It is cost of doing business and for company or individual the amount of fine and charge is not an incentive to get insurance. Read the posts, it was layed out for you, twice. Are you really that opaque? You must be.
Hello? You are the one giving facts and figures that are incorrect and misleading. The individual fees are different than a employer failing to provide insurances to employees. So you need to read your own posts again before you start lecturing every one on this thread.

Your still an arrogrant,self-righteous,self- serving ass.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34454 Nov 27, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
WMCOL:
Here are the post I referred to!
Oklie...POST 34359
Mine post 34362
Oklie..POST 34410
Undoubtly you and I read Oklie's post differenly!
==========
Another thing you are doing here is ignoring the explanations and clarifications that came after the above posts, which you asked for. So you ask someone what they mean, and they tell you, and you ignore the very thing you asked for and received?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34455 Nov 27, 2012
Dana wrote:
<quoted text>
Hello? You are the one giving facts and figures that are incorrect and misleading. The individual fees are different than a employer failing to provide insurances to employees. So you need to read your own posts again before you start lecturing every one on this thread.
Your still an arrogrant,self-righteous,self- serving ass.
==========
There is NOTHING "misleading" about facts that show employers are much better off rejecting insuring their employees and paying a penalty instead. If you want to get specific with actual numbers, which are estimates at his point, your $2000 figure is incorrect too, but any figure used still shows the point being made that employers are much better off, just like healthy individuals, to reject Obamacare and pay a penalty. That's what you have to get off of you, and you can't.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#34456 Nov 27, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
Here are the posts where you said she was wrong. She said companies do not pay or subsidize workers because it would be double insuring.
OkieAbroad wrote:
<quoted text>
Tamara,
My source is my common sense. The whole entire purpose of any health care system is to make health care insurance affordable and legally the responsibility of the individual. I live in the Dutch health care system, which is what Obama said he used to model his health care plan. Companies here do not pay and have no reason to pay or subsidize health insurance for their workers, because every individual here has to pay their own insurance.(people taking responsibility for themselves) Lower income families here get their health insurance subsidized by the government. Companies pay NOTHING.
Do YOU have information on Obama's healthcare plan that states otherwise?? Then I would be interested in seeing that because it makes no sense to me that companies would have to DOUBLE insure their workers.[quote/]
YOU RESPONDED saying you don't think Obamacare will be like that:
>>>Obama's health care plan will include the employers with a certain total of employees working for the to provide health insurance for their employees. If the employer does not then they will be fined so much each year they do not just like any individual that does not carry health insurance.. The way it stands now the government will not be the total health insurance carrier. You will be able to get health insurance thru private health insurance companies. About all the Obamacare really did as it stands now is make it illegal not to have health insurance. If you are in a certain income bracket you will get help pay for it or be put on the medicaid program. One good thing is no one can be turn down for health ins. because of pre-existing conditions. if you go to Obama Health care.gov . So from what you are saying I donot think our Obamacare will be like what you are talking about.<<<
Yes I did say she was wrong because she said under Dutch government's Health care that Companies there DO NOT pay and have no reason to pay or subsidize health insurance for their workers because individuals here [Dutch] HAS to pay their OWN way. This is point I disagree with her because our companies are suppose to pay 100% of their employees health insurance. If they opt not to they will be fined. Also employees can opt out of companies health plan offer if the want to go out on their own to buy. The only thing as Obamacare stands now that everyone is required to have Health insurance with or without the help of the government or they also will be fined. I agree with you it maybe cheaper for the employer to do the governments fine rather than provide health insurance. The same with many individuals.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#34457 Nov 27, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
Another thing you are doing here is ignoring the explanations and clarifications that came after the above posts, which you asked for. So you ask someone what they mean, and they tell you, and you ignore the very thing you asked for and received?
I disagreed with what her concept was to how Obamacare worked here for employer and employee to how she said it was where she lived, Dutch.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34458 Nov 27, 2012
There is nothing misleading about using any figures from a range when any of the figures in the range prove the claim being deduced from it that employers and individuals can be better off paying a penalty rather than participate in Affordable Healthcare plan.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34459 Nov 27, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
<quoted text>I disagreed with what her concept was to how Obamacare worked here for employer and employee to how she said it was where she lived, Dutch.
==========
Well that would be so, and an overstatement, as no two countries will have exactly the same plan. Stating the overwhelmingly obvious like, the sun is seen and not seen or no two countries are exactly the same, was not the point, but that Obamacare would cost employers less, and based on how it works in Holland, and I'll add other countries that have national healthcare as well.
Jesse

United States

#34460 Nov 27, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
There is NOTHING "misleading" about facts that show employers are much better off rejecting insuring their employees and paying a penalty instead. If you want to get specific with actual numbers, which are estimates at his point, your $2000 figure is incorrect too, but any figure used still shows the point being made that employers are much better off, just like healthy individuals, to reject Obamacare and pay a penalty. That's what you have to get off of you, and you can't.
conjecture? No. More likely since we have a HUGE LAW called the AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT. So there are REAL NUMBERS for fines and cost for failing to follow the rules of this law. According to people who have actually READ THE ENTIRE LAW it will cost an employers a least 2000.00 dollars to fail and provide healthcare to an employees so "dana" had it correct on that part. Not all companies would be required to provide healthcare coverages for their employees depending on the number of employees a company has, another thing you have to consider is in this new law a full time employee is anyone working 30 hrs a week. That sounds like France's work "full time" work week to me!
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#34461 Nov 27, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
Well that would be so, and an overstatement, as no two countries will have exactly the same plan. Stating the overwhelmingly obvious like, the sun is seen and not seen or no two countries are exactly the same, was not the point, but that Obamacare would cost employers less, and based on how it works in Holland, and I'll add other countries that have national healthcare as well.
I am sorry if you thought I was arguing the good or bad of Obamacare. That was not what I was doing. It is a fact now and a waste of time to keep doing that. I merely was disagreeing that Obamacare was not the same to what Oklie.. has in Holland. It will take time to see how Obamacare pans out when it comes down to the time companies/employers decide what they will do. It will take time to see exactly where for everyone the Obamacare does what it is promising. For the sake of our country I hope it will better than what I feel it will be. I would love to be proven wrong on this deal! I just hope everyone on capital hill gets their heads on straight and works together to get this country back on a stronger footing.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34462 Nov 27, 2012
Jesse wrote:
<quoted text>
conjecture? No. More likely since we have a HUGE LAW called the AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT. So there are REAL NUMBERS for fines and cost for failing to follow the rules of this law. According to people who have actually READ THE ENTIRE LAW it will cost an employers a least 2000.00 dollars to fail and provide healthcare to an employees so "dana" had it correct on that part. Not all companies would be required to provide healthcare coverages for their employees depending on the number of employees a company has, another thing you have to consider is in this new law a full time employee is anyone working 30 hrs a week. That sounds like France's work "full time" work week to me!
==========
Nope, you are missing the point too that it does not matter whether the figure is $678 or $2068, the point remains that it is much cheaper for employer or healthy individual to pay a fine rather than insure. The only thing that changes with the number whatever it may eventually be is how much an employer can save by not insuring. Numbers within the range are given for perspective only to show how much an employer or individual may save. Any number in range of fine amount give employer a huge amount of savings to not insure.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#34463 Nov 27, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
<quoted text>I am sorry if you thought I was arguing the good or bad of Obamacare. That was not what I was doing. It is a fact now and a waste of time to keep doing that. I merely was disagreeing that Obamacare was not the same to what Oklie.. has in Holland. It will take time to see how Obamacare pans out when it comes down to the time companies/employers decide what they will do. It will take time to see exactly where for everyone the Obamacare does what it is promising. For the sake of our country I hope it will better than what I feel it will be. I would love to be proven wrong on this deal! I just hope everyone on capital hill gets their heads on straight and works together to get this country back on a stronger footing.
==========
You could feel positive just as easy as you feel negative, and it would be better for you, and for everyone who comes in contact with you, and thus good for the country.

If the end brings Obama out right all of your criticism and doubt won't mean a thing, but if he is wrong all the Angels in the world singing his praises won't change a thing.
Hate ignorant ppl

United States

#34464 Nov 27, 2012
Well why can't have tags like truckers where they dont expire

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Tuttle Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
snapchat usernames! (Nov '13) 23 hr hannah 344
Zoo Sun Visitor 1
News Downtown Oklahoma City music venue and restaura... Sun Ben Hurr 1
News Oklahoma City to host Republican presidential c... Sun BFD 5
Eyebrow Threading (May '12) May 23 Shan 16
Review: Labor Finders OKC South OKC South (Jan '13) May 21 lf mgmt 2
Need new connect May 20 Coco6879 3
More from around the web

Tuttle People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]