ONW
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2011
- Messages
- 19,177
- Reaction score
- 658
Small business, eight on plan, youngest32 oldest me at 62, average age 44, 1 male the rest female.
So you are a MILF pimp? Nice.
Small business, eight on plan, youngest32 oldest me at 62, average age 44, 1 male the rest female.
So you are a MILF pimp? Nice.
How does a law get enacted and then the President just gets to say "oops, don't worry about that part of it"? WTF?...
Not sure if this is rhetorical but the answer is that any president of the USA can't. He's not trying to force insurance companies to resurrect canceled policies or maintain them, he's simply punting the political football by suggesting he'd prefer it to happen. Any president is charged to execute the laws as enacted. For him, I guess the hope is that, going forward, people are stupid enough to believe that insurance companies, that have spent years investing substantial amounts of money, resources, etc. to comply with part of a law that the administration wants to delay for a year, are to blame for future policy terminations/problems.
No Beatrix, the point is that I have apparantly been subsidizing every body else for the last 30 years and if I catch a break now well good for me. Secondly, my plan is through Interactive Medical, not BCBS, and I find it somewhat amusing that the drop in my plan mirrors the cost I could find on the exchange when factoring in a similar plan that BCBS was offering to a similarly composed small group. Finally, my oldest daughter purchased a plan on the exchange for herself that was 100.00 a month less with better coverage than her previous plan as well as getting a 100.00 insurance suppliment additionaly because her income qualified her. I guess my point is that we cannot be the only people in America that this seems to work for can we?
. But it is an effort to make the individual market more fair/just compared to the (larger) employed population. To more completely cover our populace with reasonably decent insurance. And to move more in a direction where quality/value in health care delivery will be more important, quantified, and rewarded. Etc. All decent enough goals IMO. . .
To the first part, yes I agree, but altruism requires more than "we have to pass this to see what's in it" (or whatever she said) to be executed properly. Most of the key figures carrying the dirty water for this albatross have no stake in the success or failure of it. It was destined to fail because you have people that either didn't read it, were unable to understand it, or both forcing something on a populace that was smart enough to not want it. I mean a guy filled Ted Kennedy's lukewarm seat to end this thing and it was passed in a way that, at best, can be described as "unconventional."
Yea, but I blame the Pubs for that more than anyone else.
He's just wanting to suggest that cancellations (for now) shouldn't be "because of the ACA".
But you agree that they are because of the ACA, right? Sorry, new to this thread in case you said it before.
How about your own words?