Bush is a hero

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#171416 Nov 6, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text>If a broker - an alleged professional - doesn't know "what the hell is going on", after three years of discussion and opportunity to brush-up, I think I'd be looking for a new broker. Just sayin'.....
Does that go for Senators and Congressmen on both sides of the aisle as well?

That's on hell'uv a can you're opining up there.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#171417 Nov 6, 2013
Rider on the Storm wrote:
And lets not forget. Obama and the insurance companies worked together to get this passed.
Assuming of course he "knew anything about" working with them.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#171418 Nov 6, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text>Obama was right in this regard. You CAN keep your insurance provider (for those that HAVE it) even IF you're content to be gouged and consider it the unique American way.
Wrong again, johnny. Obama just over-explained himself yesterday on camera. If your present insurance provider doesn't measure up to the strict guidelines of the ACA, you will NOT be allowed to keep it.

Because the Fed knows better, what kinda healthcare you need.
Chris Clearwater

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#171419 Nov 6, 2013
Rider on the Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
That really doesnt work there, but oh well..........
Speaking of God... This is on point concerning the economy. Just got off the phone with a rep for a mission I've been helping for 8 years. They were very understanding that at this time we have to bow out with helping. They had been deferring my monthly amount since last Feb and has hoped something would break by September. It hasn't. I have faith and am living proof direction can change in a New York min. But I'd be lying if I said I wasn't heartbroken that right now we can do little more. Been helping Compassion intl longer than I've been married. Just isn't n right.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#171420 Nov 6, 2013
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#171421 Nov 6, 2013
“As democracy is perfected, the office of the President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and complete narcissistic moron.” —- H.L. Mencken, The Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
Chris Clearwater

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#171422 Nov 6, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong again, johnny. Obama just over-explained himself yesterday on camera. If your present insurance provider doesn't measure up to the strict guidelines of the ACA, you will NOT be allowed to keep it.
Because the Fed knows better, what kinda healthcare you need.
They don't. This reminds me of Obama's day of service and the many times hack libs have talked about helping when they really mean a forced tax.

“Pillars of Creation....”

Since: Jan 11

Into this world we're thrown

#171423 Nov 6, 2013
Chris Clearwater wrote:
<quoted text>Speaking of God... This is on point concerning the economy. Just got off the phone with a rep for a mission I've been helping for 8 years. They were very understanding that at this time we have to bow out with helping. They had been deferring my monthly amount since last Feb and has hoped something would break by September. It hasn't. I have faith and am living proof direction can change in a New York min. But I'd be lying if I said I wasn't heartbroken that right now we can do little more. Been helping Compassion intl longer than I've been married. Just isn't n right.
Hopefully things get better, but with HC costs on the rise and our extreme debt, any extra income we get is gonna go to the government probably for our foreseeable future and unfortunately our kids foreseeable future.

But not to worry CC, our government knows how to spend our money better then we do.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#171424 Nov 6, 2013
Rider on the Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
Hopefully things get better,
but with HC costs on the rise and our extreme debt,

any extra income we get is gonna go to the government probably for our foreseeable future and unfortunately our kids foreseeable future.
Walmart isn't going to be to happy with that decision sir!

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#171425 Nov 6, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
The point IS, she was happy with her doctors and her insurance until the government butted in. What is WRONG with you?
What's wrong with me is that insurance companies are taking advantage of the situation to carry on their reason for being - profit on people's misery. This is what they do, and in our system, they have had few constraints of humanity. So it goes. No doubt a portion of my retirement funds are invested in one or two, so I also profit from misery. Happy days in the US of A.

What IS deplorable is to use this one story for political points. How many thousands of stories of uninsured or dropped cancer patients have we ever seen in the WSJ?

What is even more deplorable is the selective placement of facts.

See, I looked into this a little further. Notice this one little bit,

"My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31." End and period. Written on Nov. 3, 2013, what is the assumption here?

That she will be canceled this coming Dec. 31, 2013. Reasonable assumption, right?

But she wasn't. United Health Care dropped her LAST January 1, 2013. Why did the WSJ muddy this point, you might well ask?

But what's more, UHC stated the reason for dropping these people LAST October.

“The company’s plans reflect its concern that the first wave of newly insured customers under the law may be the costliest,” UHC Chief Executive Officer Stephen Helmsley told investors last October (2012).“UnitedHealth will watch and see how the exchanges evolve and expects the first enrollees will have ‘a pent-up appetite’ for medical care. We are approaching them with some degree of caution because of that.”

In other words, just like oil companies jack up prices because a Saudi prince has a UHC took advantage of the situation. They dropped all their sick people, will hold back until the bigger suckers in the exchange snatched them up, and then they'll move back in for the healthier late-comers.

Why she'd be happy with a company this blatant is beyond me. What's more blatant is for a "news" organ, esp. one known for journalistic prestige once upon a time, to selectively edit the story in order to slant it for political points. To use the raw emotion aroused by a cancer patient only adds to the shame.

If Murdoch's WSJ had any shame, that is.

What shouldn't be surprising is that people swallow and regurgitate these half-truths ad nauseum.

And that's the whole idea.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#171426 Nov 6, 2013
s/h/b "In other words, just like oil companies jack up prices because a Saudi prince has a cold, UHC took advantage of the situation."
lisw

Delaware, OH

#171427 Nov 6, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>What's wrong with me is that insurance companies are taking advantage of the situation to carry on their reason for being - profit on people's misery. This is what they do, and in our system, they have had few constraints of humanity. So it goes. No doubt a portion of my retirement funds are invested in one or two, so I also profit from misery. Happy days in the US of A.
What IS deplorable is to use this one story for political points. How many thousands of stories of uninsured or dropped cancer patients have we ever seen in the WSJ?
What is even more deplorable is the selective placement of facts.
See, I looked into this a little further. Notice this one little bit,
"My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31." End and period. Written on Nov. 3, 2013, what is the assumption here?
That she will be canceled this coming Dec. 31, 2013. Reasonable assumption, right?
But she wasn't. United Health Care dropped her LAST January 1, 2013. Why did the WSJ muddy this point, you might well ask?
But what's more, UHC stated the reason for dropping these people LAST October.
“The company’s plans reflect its concern that the first wave of newly insured customers under the law may be the costliest,” UHC Chief Executive Officer Stephen Helmsley told investors last October (2012).“UnitedHealth will watch and see how the exchanges evolve and expects the first enrollees will have ‘a pent-up appetite’ for medical care. We are approaching them with some degree of caution because of that.”
In other words, just like oil companies jack up prices because a Saudi prince has a UHC took advantage of the situation. They dropped all their sick people, will hold back until the bigger suckers in the exchange snatched them up, and then they'll move back in for the healthier late-comers.
Why she'd be happy with a company this blatant is beyond me. What's more blatant is for a "news" organ, esp. one known for journalistic prestige once upon a time, to selectively edit the story in order to slant it for political points. To use the raw emotion aroused by a cancer patient only adds to the shame.
If Murdoch's WSJ had any shame, that is.
What shouldn't be surprising is that people swallow and regurgitate these half-truths ad nauseum.
And that's the whole idea.
You guys just have to have someone to hate, to blame. It would never occur to you that the insurance companies are made up of nice people who care about others. But they do better than you so they must be villains. Not so smart Hip for a guy who uses big words. Careful, it'll eat you alive, this jealousy.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#171428 Nov 6, 2013
A simple search, for those who like >true< information as opposed to being glutted with "high information", turns out most of these anecdotes being foisted on Fox News are misleading and hooidly incomplete for an alleged "fair and balanced news organization.

Hannity has on a "small business" owner who claims they have to cut employee hours due to the ACA.

Turns out they employ four people. The ACA threshold is 49. There is no provision in the ACA that affects them.

Then there's the gal with a pre-existing condition who claims her former policy was canceled and her new one (same company) would be over $20,000/year.

Contacted by the author, she admits she hadn't looked at an exchange. Author helps her find a policy with better benefits AND cheaper than her pre-ACA policy.

Then there was the self-employed Christian motivational speaker, who was paying $800/mo. Insurance agent said, due to the ACA, that plan was canceled, and the new plan would be 50-75% higher, AND was required (the agent said) to contain many items they didn't need.

Again, they hadn't shopped on the exchange. Author finds them a better policy, AND 63% cheaper. "No thanks", they said, they didn't want anything to do with Obamacare. A classic case of "cutting off your nose to spite your face."

I found case after case of people with poor information, and "news organizations" selectively "reporting" on their alleged "troubles with ACA". As lisw has said, there have always been options out there, it is up to the individual to do the shopping, AND (she added) it is "elitist" to think they can't do so.

Yes, I know they can, but do they? Pre-ACA, the insurance market was a quagmire, purposely confusing by an industry that profited by the confusion. The exchanges are one step toward empowering the individual to make rational choices from a single information source. People STILL have to do the legwork, but at least it will be gathered in one convenient location.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#171429 Nov 6, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>You guys just have to have someone to hate, to blame. It would never occur to you that the insurance companies are made up of nice people who care about others. But they do better than you so they must be villains. Not so smart Hip for a guy who uses big words. Careful, it'll eat you alive, this jealousy.
As usual, your go-to is to try and deflect from the topic and personalize the discussion. Apparently you don't have a problem with the WSJ mis-representing the facts, or the insurance company to hide their plans by deflecting attention to the convenient ACA bear. It ain't got a damn thing to do with "jealousy". I'm sorry, but that's a really stupid thing to say. It's about consumer advocacy. I happen to be a consumer, not an insurance lobbyist. The insurance companies have more than enough people to advocate for them, including yourself. Looking at the profit reports, it appears you're all doing just fine.

Since my daughter-in-law works for State Farm, I don't think I need a gratuitous lecture on the "nice people" who work there. Every entity is made up of "nice people who care".

Even the government.

Right?

Difference being, no matter how "nice" they are and how much they "care", the insurance company has one mandate - profit, above all else. They will make their profit, and more power to them. As I already said, my retirement investments probably share in the profit, so that "jealousy" statement comes off as doubly stupid.

Surprise the crap out of us. Deal with the points in the post, not your cranky and self-serving "analysis" of character. THAT would be a pip.
Lost In Transition

United States

#171430 Nov 6, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text>
What have you found comparable thru the new exchanges?
I'm paying $200 a month for my high detuctible with HSA. My company spots me the first $1500 in my HSA, and I will be carrying over better than a $grand$ of that (I'm pretty anal about my health) this year. So I'll have $2500+, and the pre-tax write-off, right from the get go. As a fully employed, solidly middle class white male obamacare can't touch that. It was never intended to.
I think you might be missing the point, though. You're asking me if, after the government priced me out of my existing policy, did I go onto the government's web site to see if the government can save me any money.
Eh?
Chris Clearwater

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#171431 Nov 6, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>You guys just have to have someone to hate, to blame. It would never occur to you that the insurance companies are made up of nice people who care about others. But they do better than you so they must be villains. Not so smart Hip for a guy who uses big words. Careful, it'll eat you alive, this jealousy.
It must be his life. I remember some years back Hip moaning about the pay package of the CEO of GM. Funny thing is I don't even remember who it was now.
Chris Clearwater

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#171432 Nov 6, 2013
Rider on the Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
Hopefully things get better, but with HC costs on the rise and our extreme debt, any extra income we get is gonna go to the government probably for our foreseeable future and unfortunately our kids foreseeable future.
But not to worry CC, our government knows how to spend our money better then we do.
Indeed. As Hip just posted everything will be available in one convenient location. Might be hackable by a kid but no worry. Google complete lives system to get a look at our future.
Lost In Transition

United States

#171433 Nov 6, 2013
Chris Clearwater wrote:
<quoted text>It must be his life. I remember some years back Hip moaning about the pay package of the CEO of GM. Funny thing is I don't even remember who it was now.
Back 5 or 6 years ago, the CEO of Exxon retired. This was a man that went to work at the company when he was 18, and worked him self all the way to the top. 46 years later, he retired from a company whose worth had increased 4,000% while he was with them. His retirement package was about 205 $million$, and the press went crazy. Within a week of his retirement, the CEO of Pfizer also retired. He had been with the company for, I believe, 7 years. During his reign, the value of the company had dropped 60%. His retirement package was 212 $million$, and not a peep from the press.
People are funny.
lisw

Delaware, OH

#171434 Nov 6, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>As usual, your go-to is to try and deflect from the topic and personalize the discussion. Apparently you don't have a problem with the WSJ mis-representing the facts, or the insurance company to hide their plans by deflecting attention to the convenient ACA bear. It ain't got a damn thing to do with "jealousy". I'm sorry, but that's a really stupid thing to say. It's about consumer advocacy. I happen to be a consumer, not an insurance lobbyist. The insurance companies have more than enough people to advocate for them, including yourself. Looking at the profit reports, it appears you're all doing just fine.
Since my daughter-in-law works for State Farm, I don't think I need a gratuitous lecture on the "nice people" who work there. Every entity is made up of "nice people who care".
Even the government.
Right?
Difference being, no matter how "nice" they are and how much they "care", the insurance company has one mandate - profit, above all else. They will make their profit, and more power to them. As I already said, my retirement investments probably share in the profit, so that "jealousy" statement comes off as doubly stupid.
Surprise the crap out of us. Deal with the points in the post, not your cranky and self-serving "analysis" of character. THAT would be a pip.
No Hip I believe if you were doing better you'd have a whole different take on those evil corporations that happen to employee a bunch of people at liveable wages and provide health insurance too. You said you want anecdotal evidence but whenever someone gives that you say it's no good. You are so sour about our life in America I wonder what you are still doing here.
Your accusation of getting personal means nothing to me as when it comes to you it's okay to get personal. You are one mixed up guy.
Chris Clearwater

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#171435 Nov 6, 2013
Lost In Transition wrote:
<quoted text>
Back 5 or 6 years ago, the CEO of Exxon retired. This was a man that went to work at the company when he was 18, and worked him self all the way to the top. 46 years later, he retired from a company whose worth had increased 4,000% while he was with them. His retirement package was about 205 $million$, and the press went crazy. Within a week of his retirement, the CEO of Pfizer also retired. He had been with the company for, I believe, 7 years. During his reign, the value of the company had dropped 60%. His retirement package was 212 $million$, and not a peep from the press.
People are funny.
Yea that's true. Something else the press is a bit quiet on. Remember Global Crossing? Some dude in Virgina was mixed up in it. Think he won an election but I'm sure it's all good now.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min truth 650,558
Will Atheism defeat religion by year 2038? (Feb '15) 14 min Thinking 73
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 15 min NoStress4me 56,164
Need someone to talk here, are you in for sexua... 34 min sanchezjason48 1
Israel End is Near (Feb '15) 41 min MUQ2 445
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr Steve III 44,972
avandia 2014 (Jan '14) 1 hr Mike 383
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 hr Hangman 971,867
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 12 hr ChristineM 445,930
Moms having sex with their sons (Aug '12) 22 hr kobechi3 71
More from around the web