Fire the government
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-10-2013, 12:01 PM (This post was last modified: 09-10-2013 12:13 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Fire the government
(09-10-2013 11:18 AM)frankksj Wrote:  @GirlyMan, Did you see the scanned copy of the letter I received from Anthem saying my current insurance plan will be cancelled and I _MUST_ switch to a full plan as required by ACA?

Yes, Frank I do read your posts before I just blindly respond. Girly's not a fucking idiot no matter what you might think. Tongue

(09-10-2013 11:18 AM)frankksj Wrote:  I called them and they confirmed that they are NO LONGER ALLOWED to offer this type of insurance that covers emergencies. They confirmed ALL insurance companies MUST OFFER only ACA compliant plans.

Bullshit. Buy your catastrophic coverage off shore and pay the tax if you like. I mean wotthefuck you're already paying out of pocket 'cause you like your PCP's in Mexico. Tongue

(09-10-2013 11:18 AM)frankksj Wrote:  Your entire argument lies on the assumption that I have a choice of continuing my current plan and just paying a new Obamacare tax. ...

Bullshit. I never claimed you can keep your current plan if it's not ACA-compliant. I realize that most non-ACA compliant programs will just no longer be offered stateside.

(09-10-2013 11:18 AM)frankksj Wrote:  So, again, please address the letter I got from Blue Cross, or provide some proof that these basic insurance plans are still allowed under ACA.

Here you go. And if you're poor as fuck you can purchase it regardless of your age. I suggest we expand this to cover your situation.

(09-10-2013 11:18 AM)frankksj Wrote:  Obamacare FORCES you to pay private, for-profit corporations. If you refuse, you will not only face a penalty (tax) but you will ALSO lose the affordable health insurance previously available, as mentioned above.

Bullshit. Opt out of the ACA, get your catastrophic coverage off shore on the interwebz and you can keep doing what you're doing. But you are gonna have to pay the tax if you go this route. Whether or not that's to your advantage is individual.

(09-10-2013 11:18 AM)frankksj Wrote:  You don't see a difference between being forced to pay a tax to a government vs. being forced to pay to a private for-profit corporation? If so, would you object to being forced to send money to my corporation? I could use it. Smile

But you're not forced, you can opt out and pay the tax. You're disincentivized to do so, but you ain't prohibited.

....

At least this discourse has been civil. Let's keep it that way. Thumbsup

Breathing - it's more art than science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 12:56 PM
RE: Fire the government
@Chas, yes your summary is correct. I would add that my objection is that people reject the idea of a peaceful solution (ie charity) and immediately jump to a solution that involves threats of physical force (ie government laws) without actually doing any studies to see if the peaceful solution actually worked as well or better than the violent one. Every study I've read indicates that under the old voluntary system poor people actually had better access to better care, and it was FREE, whereas today they're forced into bankruptcy. But I never see liberals even consider anything that doesn't involve force as an option anymore.

@Girlyman,
(09-10-2013 12:01 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  But you're not forced, you can opt out and pay the tax. You're disincentivized to do so, but you ain't prohibited. At least this discourse has been civil. Let's keep it that way. Thumbsup

Ok, so we more or less agree on the facts now. We agree that, since I'm not under 30, I _AM_ being forced to give up the US-based 'catastrophic' health insurance I currently have, and that it is not possible for me to keep any health plan with Blue Cross without paying at least 5x more. The only way to keep my current doctors is if I (a) find an offshore insurance company that will provide US catastrophic insurance for a comparable price ($50/month), which by the way, I think is actually impossible, and (b) pay an extra Obamacare tax/penalty. Surely you agree that it's subjective what is 'being forced'. Surely you agree there are major hoops to jump through, and the fact that it may not even be possible to find this $50/month "offshore insurance" plan, and the fact that threats of physical force are used to block Blue Cross and me from continuing our current arrangement. Therefore, I hope you concede that, from my point of view, I _AM_ being forced to give up my current plan, and thus those 4 original claims are valid if you concede that the barrier is high enough to be called 'force'. Lest you minimize the barrier, remember that Obama himself always called it a "mandate"--meaning it's designed to be an insurmountable barrier.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: