Gay community 'Coming Out' to enroll in Obamacare

Oct 11, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: WTVR Richmond

The Kentucky resident is like a lot LGBT citizens who have not had access to affordable health insurance in the past.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of41
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Chance

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Oct 11, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Of course, they are. Maybe Obama has even given them a special way to navigate the website so they don't run into those pesky website down messages. And when they have a lot more people with chronic health problems like HIV enrolled in the system than they do healthy citizens, then it will crash as most thinking people already believe that it will. Then Obama and his minions, letting no crisis go to waste, will usher in the single-payer system and we will be pushed far left. If the country survives that long. But watch out for the IRS, gays. Are you really ready for the IRS to have fully access to intimate information about you? And, by the way, thanks a bunch for helping to bring us to this point of disaster. Obama couldn't have done it without you.

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Oct 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chance wrote:
Of course, they are. Maybe Obama has even given them a special way to navigate the website so they don't run into those pesky website down messages. And when they have a lot more people with chronic health problems like HIV enrolled in the system than they do healthy citizens, then it will crash as most thinking people already believe that it will. Then Obama and his minions, letting no crisis go to waste, will usher in the single-payer system and we will be pushed far left. If the country survives that long. But watch out for the IRS, gays. Are you really ready for the IRS to have fully access to intimate information about you? And, by the way, thanks a bunch for helping to bring us to this point of disaster. Obama couldn't have done it without you.
Honestly, I do appreciate this comment, but I have some issues upon which I disagree. I think the ethical provisions of Obamacare- no lifetime caps, and one cannot be denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions, are necessary and will benefit this country. However, I've been appalled at the legislation's requirement that everyone purchase insurance or face a fine... Well, at least I'm against that provision without the public option, which never made it into law. That said, I voted against Hillary Clinton in the primary precisely for the fact that she supported the individual mandate and opposed the public option. Instead, the guy I helped elect gave us her plan!? My thinking on the matter is along the lines that with an individual mandate, the public option is necessary or else premiums will skyrocket. You see, there is no such thing as the "invisible hand" when someone is faced with a life or death decision over health care, and the industry knows this as fact. Therefore, I consider a government-sponsored health insurance plan essential to balancing costs among health insurance policies for two reasons. First, in the presence of an individual mandate, what is to keep health care costs from rising unbridled? After all, since everyone *MUST* get health insurance, that seems like quite a boon to the industry. Second, anything run by government generally sucks ass. Countervailing the anticipated effect of the individual mandate, should Obamacare have offered the public option, methinks many would have opted for premium plans that offer better service than Uncle Sam is willing to offer, even if the government plan is cheaper. Last, I have to admit that I think the law as written will be an utter F'ing disaster. Once everyone is required to have health insurance or else pay a fine, insurance companies will start raping all of us on a level unprecedented in the past. That is why I oppose Obamacare.
Chance

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Oct 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Shortened to make space:
Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
Honestly, I do appreciate this comment, but I have some issues upon which I disagree. I think the ethical provisions of Obamacare- no lifetime caps, and one cannot be denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions, are necessary and will benefit this country.... Last, I have to admit that I think the law as written will be an utter F'ing disaster. Once everyone is required to have health insurance or else pay a fine, insurance companies will start raping all of us on a level unprecedented in the past. That is why I oppose Obamacare.
Josh, I believe this is the best-stated analysis of the situation I have seen anywhere. I hope you don't mind if I copy this and learn from it. It seems people are already finding out that their premium costs are going up. Worse, some policies are being cancelled and companies are opting out of employee coverage and/or spousal coverage. That includes major employers like the University of Virginia and UPS. And then there are the companies who have busted full-time employees to part-time status, hire only part-time, or have increased the number of hours a person can work and still be considered part-time. There are far-reaching consequences, and I'm quite sure we've just begun to see the "raping," which is sure to result in all of us screwed. This government interference will be like college tuition. Once the government got involved to try to make sure everyone had a chance at a college education, we ended up with skyrocketing tuition costs. Without free market principles, the schools charge whatever they want with the assurance that the government will provide the cash. Supply and demand no longer apply, resulting in an overabundance of educated people flooding a job market that is mostly service jobs. Hence, we ended up with college-educated folks pushing out the people who would normally be hired for jobs like retail and food service. Yet they aren't making enough money to make a living and pay back the government for their enormous debt. You said it so succinctly: "anything run by government generally sucks ass." This insurance SNAFU coupled with the education SNAFU is going to make it very hard for anyone to truly succeed in the future. US citizens will all be a bunch of government-owned slaves, working hard but all held to the same level of mere subsistence while the IRS keeps a careful watch on everything we do. And if we get out of line, they and other government agencies will have trained armed enforcers to put us back in. At that rate, maybe we'll even welcome the whole "push grandma off a cliff" scenario when we get older. I weep for my children and grandchildren.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Oct 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

OBAMACARE is nothing more than "Stalinism-lite".

And the unions are screaming bloody murder over this because it's ending the health plans that the unions fought so hard for, and reducing the hours and wages of it's employees.
Chance

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Oct 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fa-Foxy wrote:
OBAMACARE is nothing more than "Stalinism-lite".
And the unions are screaming bloody murder over this because it's ending the health plans that the unions fought so hard for, and reducing the hours and wages of it's employees.
I guess there is an upside to it, after all. That looks like justice to me. Unions played such a big hand in getting Obama elected - twice. I think there is more justice to go around, but I still hate to see it happen to our once great nation.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Oct 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess there is an upside to it, after all. That looks like justice to me. Unions played such a big hand in getting Obama elected - twice. I think there is more justice to go around, but I still hate to see it happen to our once great nation.
I'm a Libertarian so I don't have to go into a long exposition of my beliefs for you to know where I stand on The Obamaniac, his Stalinist cohorts and minions in congress, and his fellow travelers.

PURE EVIL.
Chance

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Oct 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a Libertarian so I don't have to go into a long exposition of my beliefs for you to know where I stand on The Obamaniac, his Stalinist cohorts and minions in congress, and his fellow travelers.
PURE EVIL.
No, you don't have to go into a long exposition for me. I've been a fan of yours for quite some time now. You do a great job standing up for your beliefs and standing against PURE EVIL. I agree with you almost all of the time. You and I both know our country is in the grips of something really awful. There are a few good people in government. I particularly like Rand Paul, Ron Paul, and Trey Gowdy, but Democrats and Republicans alike have done a number on us. The Old Guard Republicans are just as destructive as the Democrats. Interesting how both try to marginalize the likes of Rand Paul.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Oct 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you don't have to go into a long exposition for me. I've been a fan of yours for quite some time now. You do a great job standing up for your beliefs and standing against PURE EVIL. I agree with you almost all of the time. You and I both know our country is in the grips of something really awful. There are a few good people in government. I particularly like Rand Paul, Ron Paul, and Trey Gowdy, but Democrats and Republicans alike have done a number on us. The Old Guard Republicans are just as destructive as the Democrats. Interesting how both try to marginalize the likes of Rand Paul.
I agree. Ultimately, armed revolution may be the only way to retake our country from these socialists and return it to what the Founders envisioned. We have the RIGHT to do tat as proclaimed so eloquently in our Founding Document.

“... from a ...”

Since: Mar 09

GREAT HEIGHT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Oct 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
Honestly, I do appreciate this comment, but I have some issues upon which I disagree. I think the ethical provisions of Obamacare- no lifetime caps, and one cannot be denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions, are necessary and will benefit this country. However, I've been appalled at the legislation's requirement that everyone purchase insurance or face a fine... Well, at least I'm against that provision without the public option, which never made it into law. That said, I voted against Hillary Clinton in the primary precisely for the fact that she supported the individual mandate and opposed the public option. Instead, the guy I helped elect gave us her plan!? My thinking on the matter is along the lines that with an individual mandate, the public option is necessary or else premiums will skyrocket. You see, there is no such thing as the "invisible hand" when someone is faced with a life or death decision over health care, and the industry knows this as fact. Therefore, I consider a government-sponsored health insurance plan essential to balancing costs among health insurance policies for two reasons. First, in the presence of an individual mandate, what is to keep health care costs from rising unbridled? After all, since everyone *MUST* get health insurance, that seems like quite a boon to the industry. Second, anything run by government generally sucks ass. Countervailing the anticipated effect of the individual mandate, should Obamacare have offered the public option, methinks many would have opted for premium plans that offer better service than Uncle Sam is willing to offer, even if the government plan is cheaper. Last, I have to admit that I think the law as written will be an utter F'ing disaster. Once everyone is required to have health insurance or else pay a fine, insurance companies will start raping all of us on a level unprecedented in the past. That is why I oppose Obamacare.
Insurance, originally designed to curb healthcare costs, only works if EVERYBODY enrolls.

Much the same complaints were made about Social Security in it's beginnings, and it WAS voluntary.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Oct 12, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Insurance, originally designed to curb healthcare costs, only works if EVERYBODY enrolls.
Much the same complaints were made about Social Security in it's beginnings, and it WAS voluntary.
OBVIOUSLY wrong on both counts. Gee. What a surprise.

Since: Jan 09

Central NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Oct 12, 2013
 
Gee! At 10% of the population, that will make a big difference! That's assuming that every Gay person supports it. They Don't! Many Gay people can see what's wrong with it and don't want it. Also, There are many gays who are Republican (Gopride, Log Cabin)
This means nothing! More Lipstick for the pig!
My president was elected by Dead people!
Regards, Terri

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Oct 12, 2013
 
TerryE wrote:
Gee! At 10% of the population, that will make a big difference! That's assuming that every Gay person supports it. They Don't! Many Gay people can see what's wrong with it and don't want it. Also, There are many gays who are Republican (Gopride, Log Cabin)
This means nothing! More Lipstick for the pig!
My president was elected by Dead people!
Regards, Terri
I'm gay and DON'T support OBAMACARE. It's nothing more than "Stalinism-lite".

And I'm a Libertarian.

The Obamaniac is Evil. PURE EVIL.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Oct 12, 2013
 
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Insurance, originally designed to curb healthcare costs, only works if EVERYBODY enrolls.
Massachusetts claims to have 97% of it's population enrolled. It didn't cause heath care bills to decrease, they're still rising. More than once I've read that hospitals blamed free care and uncollectable bills for the high costs to others. Now, with just about everyone insured, what's their excuse?

Per capita health care expenditures are at least two times those of the next highest developed country and we rank low on the list for quality.
Wilson

San Gabriel, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Oct 12, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm gay and DON'T support OBAMACARE. It's nothing more than "Stalinism-lite".
And I'm a Libertarian.
The Obamaniac is Evil. PURE EVIL.
You're not gay you're just confused. Why don't you give up the gay lifestyle?

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Oct 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Massachusetts claims to have 97% of it's population enrolled. It didn't cause heath care bills to decrease, they're still rising. More than once I've read that hospitals blamed free care and uncollectable bills for the high costs to others. Now, with just about everyone insured, what's their excuse?
Per capita health care expenditures are at least two times those of the next highest developed country and we rank low on the list for quality.
The last time I went to a hospital was not a happy experience. In mid-December, 2011 I was living in Albuquerque, New Mexico and there was about 2 inches of snow on the ground. While foolishly volunteering to help somebody, I slipped in the snow (and the mud underneath it), fell, and broke my leg.

I assumed that I had just sprained my ankle, but after 9 days of the swelling not going down and still in pain, I decided to get a good nite's sleep, get up early in the morning, shower and dress, and find a nearby hospital to get my leg looked at.

LORDY, I WISH I KNEW WHAT TO EXPECT !:( I thought perhaps it would take 2 or 3 hours of waiting at the hospital, so I didn't prepare at all for te wait. I signed my name, took a number, and was told they would call my name when the time came.

As time dragged on though, I was afraid that if I left the hospital to get food and a book to read while waiting, I would lose my place, and wind up having to sign in again, and wait even longer.

So I waited. FOR 10-1/2 HOURS ! While having them put the plaster cast on my leg, I BEGGED for food since it had been about 12 hours since I had eaten anything. They gave me an orange.

After stopping at a Friendly's for food, and getting home finally, the whole thing from leaving my apartment to finally getting back, took about 14 hours. NOT HAPPY ! Right then and there, I decided to leave Albuquerque, and move to southern Arizona because Albuquerque turned out to be much colder than I anticipated.

It shouldn't have to take 10 hours of waiting in a hospital just to get a broken leg put in a cast.

On another occasion some years ago I cut myself at work badly enough that it looked like it needed a bunch of stitches. I waited so long at Nassau County Medical Center that it finally just stopped bleeding on it's own and I left. Two months later, they sent me a bill !

OBAMACARE is going to make Stalin's salt mines look like a paradise !

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Oct 12, 2013
 
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
.
OBAMACARE is going to make Stalin's salt mines look like a paradise !
The Republican who initiated the precursor to Obama-care in his own state rather liked it, didn't he? Wasn't the individual mandate that the conservative squeal about initially a Republican idea?

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Oct 12, 2013
 
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
The Republican who initiated the precursor to Obama-care in his own state rather liked it, didn't he? Wasn't the individual mandate that the conservative squeal about initially a Republican idea?
NO

And I'm a Libertarian, not a Republican.

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Oct 12, 2013
 
Chance wrote:
Shortened to make space: <quoted text>
Josh, I believe this is the best-stated analysis of the situation I have seen anywhere. I hope you don't mind if I copy this and learn from it.
Thanks Chance, you may certainly do that. I'm glad to offer my opinion as a moderate independent. It's not all liberals and conservatives, pro versus anti-Obama up in here. There are some things l like about him as president, and there are other things he's done that I despise, including how health care reform was handled, but not the least of which also the revelations of government spying. Not to drift away onto different topics, but I think the rise of the survailence state is the biggest threat to our country and rights above all else.

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Oct 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Insurance, originally designed to curb healthcare costs, only works if EVERYBODY enrolls.
Much the same complaints were made about Social Security in it's beginnings, and it WAS voluntary.
Snyper, my only argument here is that if everyone is required to have health insurance then not having a public option is too imbalanced an approach. Other countries implement strict price regimens to curb prices in the market, but that's not a very American way to go about it. I think the public option would have offered a cheaper and viable option to people shopping for their insurance and could have worked as a good price and quality control mechanism. I could envision insurance companies trying to compete with it by offering better service and coverage, albeit, perhaps a bit more costly.

“... from a ...”

Since: Mar 09

GREAT HEIGHT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Oct 12, 2013
 
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Massachusetts claims to have 97% of it's population enrolled. It didn't cause heath care bills to decrease, they're still rising. More than once I've read that hospitals blamed free care and uncollectable bills for the high costs to others. Now, with just about everyone insured, what's their excuse?
Per capita health care expenditures are at least two times those of the next highest developed country and we rank low on the list for quality.
I agree. You will note that I posted that cost-reduction was insurance's original intent ... waaay back in the Baylor University Hospital days.

100% enrollment at a State level just means that whatever the costs are is amortized over a larger number of people. All things being equal, this allows premiums to drop. But that isn't the way PRIVATE insurance runs themselves. They run for PROFITS so as to meet expectations of their owners and stockholders. All you need to do is glance at the published overhead costs of the various companies to see this. The percentages will shock you.

Next, compare that with the well-published overhead costs of the administration of the Medicare program ... 3%. Even factoring-in those aspects of it's overhead which are hidden in other programs (employee insurance and retirement pensions) the percentage still only rises to 9% on the dollar.

It would have been most rational to have simply removed the "over 65" age restriction on Medicare.

What would the fallout be? Lots of healthcare insurance employees would have to find other employment. Lots of insurance executives would have to find other places to wet their beaks. Lots of investment portfolios would have to be reworked.

Would this have reduced healthcare costs? Having eliminated the greed of insurance execs, and the lazy parasitism of the stock market, their part of the costs would be eliminated as well.

That brings us to the prima donas ... the physicians and other ancillary service staff. There is much waste, and LOTS of overspecialization in the support services. For example, an ultrasound machine (waaay overpriced) costs about $8000, and has almost no maintenance overhead. A very easy to use bit of hardware requiring only an easy-to-get certificate of proficiency to operate. So why does an ultrasound cost @$800.? That's just one small example. Another is the staff dedicated exclusively to handling the multiplicity of forms and requirements of the multiplicity of insurance carriers. Comb through the staff and services of the average hospital and you'll see the unnecessary cost hikes everywhere.

There are five areas to look for healthcare costs, each with their own contribution to the problem.

The Coverage/payments area is just one of them.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of41
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••