Obama continues to be a terrible president

D

deleted15807

Guest
Here is what has happened to my medical plan since the Affordable Health Care Act was passed in march. I had insurance on both my kids (BC/BS) individual policy - $115 per month premium for each child and $1000 ded with 80./20 ( which paid 80 percent before ded was met). In March, the ded went to $426 per child and a $2000 ded for each child which had to be met before it would pay the 80 percent). My insurance at work this year - starting this July - my premuim is $600 per month - with a $4000 ded and NO prescription coverage. The 4000 has to be met before it will pay the 80 percent and I still have to pay full price on all my meds. I am unable to get a private policy for myself due to being a diabetic, HBP. Oh, yes and my son has ADHD and his meds cost me $350 a month now since he has no insurance. To add my children to my policy it would cost $1500 for both kids and the $600 for me. I only bring home $2,100 a month clear. Thanks OBAMA for my affordable health care. I can't get my kids on medicade because I make $1.12 too much a YEAR. My gross salary a month is too much and they take so much from my check, Taxes, Retirement (30%), medicare, union dues ( mandatory), Insurance premuim.
I am a Teacher with a Masters Degree in my area and 24 years teaching experience.
Thanks again Obama and Perlosi. I would LOVE to see Obama and Perlosi live on my salary and raise a family of 4.

Are you attributing all that happened above to the Health Care Act? Most of it hasn't even been implemented.
Timeline: What's Changing and When
 

B_RedDude

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Posts
1,929
Media
0
Likes
82
Points
183
Location
California
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
This is why the U.S. needs to bite the bullet and remove the role of private insurance companies from health care finance, with the exception of supplemental coverage (and dental/vision). The immensely higher administrative costs of private health care finance alone justify this.

As a single man with no dependents, I cannot imagine being in a situation like this gentleman, although the denials of coverage based on pre-existing conditions are eliminated under the legislation.

Here is what has happened to my medical plan since the Affordable Health Care Act was passed in march. I had insurance on both my kids (BC/BS) individual policy - $115 per month premium for each child and $1000 ded with 80./20 ( which paid 80 percent before ded was met). In March, the ded went to $426 per child and a $2000 ded for each child which had to be met before it would pay the 80 percent). My insurance at work this year - starting this July - my premuim is $600 per month - with a $4000 ded and NO prescription coverage. The 4000 has to be met before it will pay the 80 percent and I still have to pay full price on all my meds. I am unable to get a private policy for myself due to being a diabetic, HBP. Oh, yes and my son has ADHD and his meds cost me $350 a month now since he has no insurance. To add my children to my policy it would cost $1500 for both kids and the $600 for me. I only bring home $2,100 a month clear. Thanks OBAMA for my affordable health care. I can't get my kids on medicade because I make $1.12 too much a YEAR. My gross salary a month is too much and they take so much from my check, Taxes, Retirement (30%), medicare, union dues ( mandatory), Insurance premuim.
I am a Teacher with a Masters Degree in my area and 24 years teaching experience.
Thanks again Obama and Perlosi. I would LOVE to see Obama and Perlosi live on my salary and raise a family of 4.
 
Last edited:

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Aren't insurance companies raising rates anticipatorily though?


Absolutely -- it's their last gasp attempt at bleeding every nickel they can get out of the working person before the Legislation goes into effect. Here again ------ a whole bunch of people blaming the wrong person: Let's blame Pelosi and the President -- not the greedy insurance bastards for raising the premium!!
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
Aren't insurance companies raising rates anticipatorily though?

If they are raising rates they cannot be used for profiteering (applies to large employers):

Bringing Down Health Care Premiums

Effective January 1, 2011

To ensure premium dollars are spent primarily on health care, the new law generally requires that at least 85% of all premium dollars collected by insurance companies for large employer plans are spent on health care services and health care quality improvement. For plans sold to individuals and small employers, at least 80% of the premium must be spent on benefits and quality improvement. If insurance companies do not meet these goals because their administrative costs or profits are too high, they must provide rebates to consumers.
 

oralslut464

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2011
Posts
228
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
Location
Missouri
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
My son's pre existing conditions are covered, but when I asked the insurance company - BC/BS and mine at work why the premuims were going up and why the coverage was changing, I was told point blank that it was due to the affordable health care act. All pre-existing conditions had to be covered, and several other things. Granted I am grateful that the pre-existing conditions are covered and when I find insurance for my kids I can afford - I won't have to worry about this problem. I may have to pay a fine for not having insurance for my kids though but I cant afford to have them on mine - it would cost more that what I bring home. Yes, the premiums are going up so when 2014 hits everyone can be covered, but will premuims go down then? I have been on a salary freeze for the past 3 years. Everything is going up except my salary so I am bring home less and paying higher bills.
Thanks God I do have a job though and can at least pay my basic bills and feed my family.,
 

B_RedDude

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Posts
1,929
Media
0
Likes
82
Points
183
Location
California
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Just hearing anecdotally, I think that there are many, many people who are in Oralslut's situation, meaning a great deal of the rate raising damage was done in 2010.

And a 15-20% exemption is still high, considering that administrative costs for Medicare/Medicaid, if I recall correctly, are in the low to mid single digits.

And who will enforce these rebate requirements, and how effective will that enforcement be? You know the insurance companies will try to find ways to get around such a requirement. And even if enforcement was extremely effective, such enforcement adds costs that would not exist if private insurers were taken out of the equation.

If they are raising rates they cannot be used for profiteering (applies to large employers):

Bringing Down Health Care Premiums

Effective January 1, 2011

To ensure premium dollars are spent primarily on health care, the new law generally requires that at least 85% of all premium dollars collected by insurance companies for large employer plans are spent on health care services and health care quality improvement. For plans sold to individuals and small employers, at least 80% of the premium must be spent on benefits and quality improvement. If insurance companies do not meet these goals because their administrative costs or profits are too high, they must provide rebates to consumers.
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
I have a friend who works for a small company and small companies are literally at the mercy of the insurance companies. His company has all of two people and they pay close to $3000 per month. It's been going up he said 20-30% a year for the past 3-4 years and they have no choice as he is HIV positive. There is a closely watched ratio in the health care business called the 'medical loss ratio' it is the ratio between what the company actually pays out in claims and what it has left over to cover sales, marketing, underwriting and other administrative expenses and, of course, profits. They watch that number VERY carefully and the moment claims start going up expect the insurance company to do all kinds of tricks to bring it back down.

The Truth About the Insurance Industry

Hey it's a business and it's run like a typical profit making venture. They just happen to be in health care making life and death decisions. The reality is they need to be run out of business but we live in a land where the gospel is private industry does everything better. But no one wants to face up to the fact that people are dying so that a company can make a profit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TomCat84

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2009
Posts
3,414
Media
4
Likes
171
Points
148
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Sure can buddy. I hope you ride a bicycle and are a vegetarian, bc you might miss our oil and beef. Also, I hope you don't get into any trouble, bc over 80% of our nations military comes from below the mason Dixon line. But, I'm sure we all would be glad to be jettisoned. Even if we are "dumb rednecks."

You kidding me man? California alone grows enough crap to feed the entire country as it is, let alone a remaining few states. We are the #1 agricultural producer in the country. In addition, the only gas sold in California is a special California blend- and guess what? California drills for oil (and doesnt charge a tax on it, unlike Texas).

And as for your 80% figure, do you just go ahead and pull stats out of your asshole? I did a quick google search, found a Heritage Foundation (VERY conservative organization) that mentioned a figure of 40% of new enlistees. Jesus fucking Christ man- you also pulled something out of your ass earlier and said that California's GDP is half that of Texas. I knew that Texas textbooks standards were nothing better than Republican propoganda- but I didn't know it was THAT bad!

Who Serves in the U.S. Military? The Demographics of Enlisted Troops and Officers | The Heritage Foundation

Oh, have fun subsidizing the rest of the South. The blue states can take back their money that's been subsidizing the red hick southern states for too long now. Have fun!
 

TomCat84

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2009
Posts
3,414
Media
4
Likes
171
Points
148
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
List of U.S. states by GDP

Granted, it shows California to be #1, but if you look at it per capita, it show Texas to have the stronger gdp

:confused: WTF? Man, you are either really ignorant, or a liar. I can't figure out which one though.

California: 51,914
Texas: 45,940
 
Last edited:

D_Davy_Downspout

Account Disabled
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Posts
1,136
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
183
Obama, a horrible president? Really.

After the moronic group of corrupt Republicans of the past decade that lead to the rapid demise of this great country. After the Bumbling Bush lied us into a war, lead the charge of deregulation of the banks and healthcare, and generally just fucked everything up for generations. This idiot critcizes Barak Obama. A man rasied by a single mom and his grandparents who holds more international respect in his fingertip than the Bumbling Bush could ever muster in 8 years? You must be kidding me. Please. Look at all the harm caused by Bush. Not to mention Bush's crush of civil and gay rights. In a word: Pathetic. In two words, completely pathetic.

Go President Obama. You have my respect, admiration and support.

Well he got raised by a single mom so we can ignore the fact that he has failed to regulate the banks to prevent another disaster, increased military spending over Bush numbers while expanding into new conflicts, and threw away a golden opportunity to actually fix healthcare by making a few token changes and largely giving a huge handout(handjob) to the industry, who wrote his bill.

But you respect him! That's wonderful! When your grandmother can't afford meds, let her know how much you respect him!


Last time I heard, Obama was still giving at least lip service to ending the tax cuts for the highest earners.

So you think the Republicans are totally bluffing, and are just taking it further down to the wire to see if they can extract anything with their scare tactics?

I appreciate the perspective of your analysis, sinwin. It certainly makes the president look insane, unless he genuinely is that big a debt hawk.

He may or may not be a debt True Believer, but he certainly is acting like one.

Letting the Bush tax cuts expire has not really been on the table for a while now.

Meanwhile, another senior Republican on Wednesday signaled a new openness to raising taxes— at least for selected special interests. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Va.) told reporters that he is now willing to consider Democratic demands to end tax breaks for corporations, hedge-fund managers and owners of corporate jets, so long as the final deal does not raise tax rates or overall federal tax collections.

“If the president wants to talk loopholes, we’ll be glad to talk loopholes,” Cantor said at his weekly roundtable with reporters. “We’ve said all along that preferences in the code aren’t something that helps economic growth overall. But listen, we’re not for any proposal that increases taxes, and any type of discussion should be coupled with offsetting tax cuts somewhere else.”

Interestingly enough, a few weeks ago I read an interview with David Stockman, of all people, who argued that the only way out of our mess is to rescind ALL of the Bush tax cuts. Its seems though like the mofo Bush knew what he was doing by cutting or eliminating income taxes at the lower end of the income scale, which makes any rescinsion of the cuts politically difficult, if not impossible.

No shit. The entire deficit comes from war spending and the Bush/Obama tax cuts. And remember, Obama was supposed in part elected on a promise to end those tax cuts, and nothing of the sort happened. In fact, the only taxes raised during his cave over the UI extension(which also would have passed no matter what) was on the poorest income bracket.

And then, he proposes a payroll tax holiday, something no president has ever done, and which the GOP hadn't even asked for. That represents the first cut to SS's funding pretty much ever. Shit, even Reagan didn't cut payroll taxes, he raised them.

Obama's tax policy is actually to the right or Reagan and Bush! He's also proposing to extend that payroll tax holiday to corporations as well now.

I think that's exactly it. The Republicans have said that he'll drive the country into unmanageable debt with his medical plans, and so he's offered them a chance to cut Medicare, knowing full well they won't erode that program because it directly affects their primary voter base. It's actually an ingenious move. The Republicans lie by saying that healthcare can't be obtained by his methods and Obama calls their bluff by giving them an unacceptable compromise. They can't accept without losing votes, and they have to be careful about how they decline to avoid looking hypocritical.

This is a political play. nothing more.

Yeah that exactly what people said before he caved on the UI extension. The ever popular "Obama is playing 11 dimensional chess like a master!"

This is nothing more than a bedtime story to make you feel like Obama is not a piece of shit, it's never come true any time I've heard this particular excuse. I don't expect it to this time either.

Sooooo..... everyone knows that the debt ceiling will be raised. No one likes it, but everyone knows that it will come to pass, pretty much no matter what is offered. The perceived cause of this increase would be Obama's programs.... except he offered them to be cut. So if Obama offers the programs to be cut, and Congress refuses, what exactly do they blame then? Even if the Republicans decide to call his bluff, he can safely make it knowing there's enough Democrats in Congress to back his play. More political smoke and mirrors.

Remember in the 2008 election when people kept criticizing Obama for not having the experience necessary to be a competent politician? He plays the game pretty well, doesn't he?

No, he's really fucking terrible, unless you look at him as a conservative, then he's doing pretty well.

Here is what has happened to my medical plan since the Affordable Health Care Act was passed in march. I had insurance on both my kids (BC/BS) individual policy - $115 per month premium for each child and $1000 ded with 80./20 ( which paid 80 percent before ded was met). In March, the ded went to $426 per child and a $2000 ded for each child which had to be met before it would pay the 80 percent). My insurance at work this year - starting this July - my premuim is $600 per month - with a $4000 ded and NO prescription coverage. The 4000 has to be met before it will pay the 80 percent and I still have to pay full price on all my meds. I am unable to get a private policy for myself due to being a diabetic, HBP. Oh, yes and my son has ADHD and his meds cost me $350 a month now since he has no insurance. To add my children to my policy it would cost $1500 for both kids and the $600 for me. I only bring home $2,100 a month clear. Thanks OBAMA for my affordable health care. I can't get my kids on medicade because I make $1.12 too much a YEAR. My gross salary a month is too much and they take so much from my check, Taxes, Retirement (30%), medicare, union dues ( mandatory), Insurance premuim.
I am a Teacher with a Masters Degree in my area and 24 years teaching experience.
Thanks again Obama and Perlosi. I would LOVE to see Obama and Perlosi live on my salary and raise a family of 4.

Don't just blame them, blame the Republicans too. Both sides sold you out to the insurance companies that wrote the bill.

Literally any other developed country in the world would get you better care for a massively smaller price tag.
 

D_Davy_Downspout

Account Disabled
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Posts
1,136
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
183
Do the math. For every 1 person in California, there is 19.26$ contributing to the national economy. In Texas, for every 1 person, there is 21.76$ being contributed.

It all adds up to nickels and dimes sure, but the ignorance being spewed forth from the northerners speaks volumes.

And y'all like to call us dumb? Bahaha

No this is still really dumb. It's a completely irrelevant number that you've invented in order to make up for your completely bullshit claim that Texas had twice the GDP of CA earlier in the which turned out to be nearly the opposite.

And that's a hurting CA economy which is still the 8th largest in the world. It was #4 at the peak.

I also wouldn't knock us for our budgetary problems, have you looked at Texas's lately?
 

Horrible

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Posts
424
Media
6
Likes
2
Points
51
Location
Texas
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Utterly meaningless. California attracts far more people than Texas driving down per capita earnings. Washington D.C. is #1 in per capita income by a long long shot. Why? It sure helps to have only .6 million people. Why don't you put Texas and Washington DC up for a match?

There's an answer for everything huh?
 

TomCat84

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2009
Posts
3,414
Media
4
Likes
171
Points
148
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
An earlier post showed the (simple) math used to come to that conclusion.

So you're saying that the figures (taken from your own posted source) showing the per capita GDP is wrong? Those numbers I posted are from YOUR OWN SOURCE, and show that California's PER CAPITA GDP is HIGHER than that of Texas. How old are you dude? I'm absolutely horrible at math, but you can't even get a basic concept like which number is more than the other.
 
Last edited: