GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Obama admin delays major requirement of health law (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1114273)

L-Pink 07-02-2013 04:42 PM
Obama admin delays major requirement of health law
 
"In a major concession to business groups, the Obama administration Tuesday unexpectedly announced a one-year delay, until 2105, in a central requirement of the new health care law that medium and large companies provide coverage for their workers or face fines."

"The move sacrificed timely implementation of President Barack Obama's signature legislation but may help the administration politically by blunting a line of attack Republicans were planning to use in next year's congressional elections."

So the decision was based on keeping Democratic congressional seats? That's pretty fucked up.


http://news.yahoo.com/obama-admin-de...221406945.html


.

_Richard_ 07-02-2013 04:47 PM
wonder what common sense reforms the republican leader is referring to

Rochard 07-02-2013 04:55 PM
Don't they do this in Hawaii already?

deltav 07-02-2013 05:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 19699897)
Don't they do this in Hawaii already?
Yup.

One side effect from that is that it's harder to find full-time work there - many positions are intentionally offered as part-time as those aren't subject to the mandatory coverage rules, IIRC.

I'm in support for health care reform, but there's gonna be fallout from changes like this for sure.

L-Pink 07-02-2013 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltav (Post 19699905)
Yup.

One side effect from that is that it's harder to find full-time work there - many positions are intentionally offered as part-time as those aren't subject to the mandatory coverage rules, IIRC.

I'm in support for health care reform, but there's gonna be fallout from changes like this for sure.
Some of the fallout will be workers working more than 40 hours a week but receiving no overtime. Wal-mart for a 25 hour week and then a grocery store, fast food, etc for another 25 hour week.

These new part time workers are going to really have a shitty work schedule.

.

keysync 07-02-2013 05:09 PM
Ahhhh All just so we can all be forced to buy something. Aint it grand!

Robbie 07-02-2013 05:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 19699882)
wonder what common sense reforms the republican leader is referring to
Heard it on CBS... The current ObamaCare requires employers to fill out TWENTY ONE pages of paperwork per employee so that the feds can confirm that they are indeed paying for their health insurance.

Obama administration is promising to bring that down to only THREE pages per employee...but it will take them a YEAR to be able to do that!

Not only do I have a personal issue with one person being forced to pay another person's medical health insurance (or paying for ANYTHING for another person), but this is starting to look like it's gonna be a giant bureaucratic/money wasting typical govt. clusterfuck.

People trying to run a business are already up to their necks in forms, fees, and other assorted paperwork that the govt. requires (and of course we need to be taxed more to pay for all the new bureaucrats to file and process all the paperwork).

The more this thing rolls out, the more I don't like it.

I didn't like it in the beginning when perfectly healthy young people are being forced to buy expensive health insurance (at a time in their lives when they are trying to get ahead in life and maybe even save a few dollars in the bank)...but now with thousand of NEW IRS agents being hired to "enforce" ObamaCare, and this latest 21 pages of bullshit further taking up people's time and money...it's looking bad to me.

Vendzilla 07-02-2013 07:50 PM
Obamacare needs those new IRS agents to collect from healthy people opting out of it to fund the NSA to spy on us

Rochard 07-02-2013 09:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltav (Post 19699905)
Yup.

One side effect from that is that it's harder to find full-time work there - many positions are intentionally offered as part-time as those aren't subject to the mandatory coverage rules, IIRC.

I'm in support for health care reform, but there's gonna be fallout from changes like this for sure.
So it's like a Wal Mart thing... I get it.

BiggleJones 07-03-2013 01:21 AM
Who fucking cares?

tony286 07-03-2013 05:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 19699915)
Some of the fallout will be workers working more than 40 hours a week but receiving no overtime. Wal-mart for a 25 hour week and then a grocery store, fast food, etc for another 25 hour week.

These new part time workers are going to really have a shitty work schedule.

.
They were doing that before obamacare now they just found an excuse. This is all fucked up, they just should went for a public option. But old ballless folded.

tony286 07-03-2013 05:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 19700074)
Obamacare needs those new IRS agents to collect from healthy people opting out of it to fund the NSA to spy on us
sorry wrong again:
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and...lity-Provision
25. What happens if I do not have minimum essential coverage or an exemption, and I cannot afford to make the payment with my tax return?
The IRS routinely works with taxpayers who owe amounts they cannot afford to pay. The law prohibits the IRS from using liens or levies to collect any payment you owe related to the individual responsibility provision, if you, your spouse or a dependent included on your tax return does not have minimum essential coverage. However, if you owe a shared responsibility payment, the IRS may offset that liability against any tax refund you may be due.

so you can say I cant pay and the law protects you.

PornDiscounts-V 07-03-2013 06:23 AM
This isn't you having to pay for somebody else's health care. This is the company having to pay for it so you don't have to pay for somebody else. Right now the uninsured go to the hospital, rack up thousands in care, then don't pay it. That is you paying for someone else.

tony286 07-03-2013 06:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vvvvv (Post 19700589)
This isn't you having to pay for somebody else's health care. This is the company having to pay for it so you don't have to pay for somebody else. Right now the uninsured go to the hospital, rack up thousands in care, then don't pay it. That is you paying for someone else.
good point people dont think about that.

dyna mo 07-03-2013 06:28 AM
is this what he meant when he said "change we can believe in."?

Barry-xlovecam 07-03-2013 06:37 AM
I don't eat at McDonalds or shop at Walmart.

Most jobs worth having have medical benefits now -- massive unemployment is just talking point bullshit.

You can still buy the best private insurance that you can afford and get private rooms in the hospital. But at least if you are an average worker you will have access to proper medical care. If you ever need that, you will give a shit and be glad that is there for you.

You will also be covered for pre-existing illness and not tossed under the bus if your claims are too much.

Deal with it -- it's the law now ...

The delay was because the government bureaucracy is not yet prepared to offer suitable insurance coverage to small businesses for their workers -- Obamacare is like a Chinese fire-drill.

I know because I have been on the phone with, get this: the US Department of Agriculture, the administrator of the PCIP Insurance for Obamacare -- they can't find the check my bank sent on my behalf for the new policy. On top of that, the "National Financial Center and the healthcare insurance administrator didn't have a record of me -- the state transferred the policy and fubared the paperwork -- after 2 hours on the phone and my threatening to make some calls in Washington D.C. the Administrator's office set up a conference call with the National Financial Center.

I see this as an example of their readiness after having been delayed by court case challenges and funding threats by Congress' squealing pigs -- they are not yet organised.

mardigras 07-03-2013 06:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 19699928)
Not only do I have a personal issue with one person being forced to pay another person's medical health insurance
When someone goes to the hospital for healthcare, you pay for that, and pay MUCH more than it would cost for them to go to a doctor and WAY MORE than preventative care would have been in the first place.

Do you want the person who serves your meal to expose you to TB or other illness because they couldn't afford to go to the doctor, couldn't afford to not work and didn't inform their boss so they could keep working?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 19699928)
I didn't like it in the beginning when perfectly healthy young people are being forced to buy expensive health insurance
Young people are as much if not more likely to be involved in an accident. Sudden illnesses can hit anyone regardless of age or recent health. If only older/sick people bought insurance the cost would be astronomical, if available at all.

By your logic of people waiting until they are in need of healthcare before buying insurance, then why not wait on buying car insurance until you have an accident or home insurance until there is damage?

mardigras 07-03-2013 07:00 AM
And as far as paying for someone else, I don't have children and will never have children, yet I am looking at my property tax bill for the year and the school tax is larger than the city tax. I hear people often complain about school tax when they don't have children, but I know they would be even more frustrated if everyone they dealt with was illiterate.

woj 07-03-2013 07:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mardigras (Post 19700652)
When someone goes to the hospital for healthcare, you pay for that, and pay MUCH more than it would cost for them to go to a doctor and WAY MORE than preventative care would have been in the first place.

Do you want the person who serves your meal to expose you to TB or other illness because they couldn't afford to go to the doctor, couldn't afford to not work and didn't inform their boss so they could keep working?

Young people are as much if not more likely to be involved in an accident. Sudden illnesses can hit anyone regardless of age or recent health. If only older/sick people bought insurance the cost would be astronomical, if available at all.

By your logic of people waiting until they are in need of healthcare before buying insurance, then why not wait on buying car insurance until you have an accident or home insurance until there is damage?
That seems like sound logic, but how could introducing more players into the game lower the costs? Imagine for a second that no one in the US has health insurance...now you bring insurance into the equation, obviously insurance company is a for profit business, so how could letting them get involved lower costs?

It seems pretty clear to me that if you let insurance companies suck out more money out of the healthcare system the costs can only rise.... :2 cents:

mardigras 07-03-2013 10:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by woj (Post 19700690)
That seems like sound logic, but how could introducing more players into the game lower the costs? Imagine for a second that no one in the US has health insurance...now you bring insurance into the equation, obviously insurance company is a for profit business, so how could letting them get involved lower costs?

It seems pretty clear to me that if you let insurance companies suck out more money out of the healthcare system the costs can only rise.... :2 cents:
Simple... by having all the healthy people who weren't buying insurance in the system there is more money to cover the costs of those who need it. Healthy people have low medical costs.

What keeps the insurance companies from sucking the money out are the provisions in the Affordable Care Act that require them to use a specific percentage of premiums for actual health care.

Robbie 07-03-2013 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mardigras (Post 19701080)
Simple... by having all the healthy people who weren't buying insurance in the system there is more money to cover the costs of those who need it. Healthy people have low medical costs.
Thank God this shit wasn't around to force me to buy insurance when I was a young man.

Like most young men, I was in college...had a wife and kid, a house payment, a car payment, all my bills etc. and just BARELY made ends meet each week.

I didn't want or need health insurance. And neither did 99.9% of the people that were in my age group.

I can't imagine where I would have gotten the extra money to buy health insurance on top of everything else when I was 20 years old.

Oh, wait a minute...that's right...the govt. will force your parents to pay for it until your 26 years old. Because parents in their 40's and 50's don't have anything better to spend their money on right?

Retirement savings? Going on a vacation? Keeping your own money? Hell no! lol

The real answer would have been for the govt. to put an end to the price gouging that hospitals do and stop the pharmaceutical companies from charging U.S. citizens 3 to 4 times MORE for the same medications than they do in other countries.

Then everybody could pay their own goddamn medical bills and only have "insurance" for what it was originally supposed to be: for a catastrophe (car wreck, heart surgery, etc.) instead of having to use it everytime you stub your toe.

woj 07-03-2013 10:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mardigras (Post 19701080)
Simple... by having all the healthy people who weren't buying insurance in the system there is more money to cover the costs of those who need it. Healthy people have low medical costs.

What keeps the insurance companies from sucking the money out are the provisions in the Affordable Care Act that require them to use a specific percentage of premiums for actual health care.
you pretty much nailed it, so it comes down to young healthy people being forced to pay for those that are less healthy and then on top of that insurance company takes a cut out of the whole deal...

so winners in this arrangement are:
1. insurance companies
2. those that are less healthy

doesn't sound very fair to me...

_Richard_ 07-03-2013 10:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 19699928)
Heard it on CBS... The current ObamaCare requires employers to fill out TWENTY ONE pages of paperwork per employee so that the feds can confirm that they are indeed paying for their health insurance.

Obama administration is promising to bring that down to only THREE pages per employee...but it will take them a YEAR to be able to do that!

Not only do I have a personal issue with one person being forced to pay another person's medical health insurance (or paying for ANYTHING for another person), but this is starting to look like it's gonna be a giant bureaucratic/money wasting typical govt. clusterfuck.

People trying to run a business are already up to their necks in forms, fees, and other assorted paperwork that the govt. requires (and of course we need to be taxed more to pay for all the new bureaucrats to file and process all the paperwork).

The more this thing rolls out, the more I don't like it.

I didn't like it in the beginning when perfectly healthy young people are being forced to buy expensive health insurance (at a time in their lives when they are trying to get ahead in life and maybe even save a few dollars in the bank)...but now with thousand of NEW IRS agents being hired to "enforce" ObamaCare, and this latest 21 pages of bullshit further taking up people's time and money...it's looking bad to me.
seems like corporate interests have taken this over

Sad really.. the US needs universal healthcare in a big bad way. Money can be made any way, it's just the current way has your country bankrupt in under 100 years :/

'Republicans Attack Obama For Not Implementing Health Care Reform Quickly Enough'

headline i just came across lol

dyna mo 07-03-2013 10:46 AM
my college offered medical insurance, i bought it.

Robbie 07-03-2013 10:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by woj (Post 19701128)
you pretty much nailed it, so it comes down to young healthy people being forced to pay for less healthy / older people and then on top of that insurance company takes a cut out of the whole deal... I don't see how this benefits anyone except the insurance companies and those that are less healthy / older....
It benefits the insurance companies, the hospitals (who continue to overcharge...like $50 for a small paper cup to take your $20 tylenol), the medical labs (because the insurance companies force doctors to run unnecessary tests), and of course the pharmaceutical companies who charge us many times more than the rest of the world for the same medicines.

And don't forget about the Democrat and Republican politicians who are getting billions of dollars from the lobbyists for the insurance, hospital, and pharmaceutical industries.

They ALL benefit.

But the one thing that doesn't change?
The QUALITY of our health care.

If you have a shitty doctor now...you'll still have a shitty one later. And if you have a good doctor...you'll still have a good one.

And by the way...The CBO itself is saying that 30 MILLION people will still be uninsured with ObamaCare. So that part doesn't change at all.
If you don't believe me...just google it up.

Looks like a lot of people who are already outrageously rich (pharmaceutical companies, hospital industry, insurance industry, lobbyists, politicians) are about to get even richer off the backs of the middle class.

baddog 07-03-2013 11:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 19699928)
. . . but this is starting to look like it's gonna be a giant bureaucratic/money wasting typical govt. clusterfuck.
Starting?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mardigras (Post 19701080)
Simple... by having all the healthy people who weren't buying insurance in the system there is more money to cover the costs of those who need it. Healthy people have low medical costs.

What keeps the insurance companies from sucking the money out are the provisions in the Affordable Care Act that require them to use a specific percentage of premiums for actual health care.
Communism doesn't work

dyna mo 07-03-2013 11:13 AM
i hope this doesn't mean the pre-existing condition clasue coming into effect in <100 days is going to be a nightmare.

Vendzilla 07-03-2013 11:23 AM
20,000 pages of regulations, you thought this was going to work?

mardigras 07-03-2013 01:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 19701095)
Thank God this shit wasn't around to force me to buy insurance when I was a young man.

Like most young men, I was in college...had a wife and kid, a house payment, a car payment, all my bills etc. and just BARELY made ends meet each week.

I didn't want or need health insurance. And neither did 99.9% of the people that were in my age group.

I can't imagine where I would have gotten the extra money to buy health insurance on top of everything else when I was 20 years old.
So when you were in college had you been in an automobile accident requiring a long hospital stay you would have expected the rest of us to pay for it?

One accident or illness can wipe out even the best of planned savings. No one should have to go bankrupt because they got injured or sick.

L-Pink 07-03-2013 01:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 19701233)
20,000 pages of regulations, you thought this was going to work?
T w e n t y - T h o u s a n d - P a g e s ?????? :Oh crap


.

mardigras 07-03-2013 01:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by woj (Post 19701128)
you pretty much nailed it, so it comes down to young healthy people being forced to pay for those that are less healthy and then on top of that insurance company takes a cut out of the whole deal...

so winners in this arrangement are:
1. insurance companies
2. those that are less healthy

doesn't sound very fair to me...
You pay now and benefit later when the young and healthy's premiums are subsidizing YOUR healthcare.

The ACA requires insurance companies to use 85% of premiums actually providing healthcare.

The same people against ACA are usually the ones who want to get rid of Social Security and Medicare. Are you able to pay for the care of all of your elderly or disabled relatives on top of your entire family's?

Barry-xlovecam 07-03-2013 01:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 19701210)
i hope this doesn't mean the pre-existing condition clasue coming into effect in <100 days is going to be a nightmare.
I think my transition was a paperwork foul up -- the people at the PCIP plan did seem sincere in trying to help. But, the young lady in the Plan Administrator's Office admitted to me that the dumping of the state policy holders onto the new Federal Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act (ACA) PCIP insurance plan was a total mess now.

I am sure that when Medicare began there was confusion too so I am not hostile toward the effort but very personally inconvenienced. I expect things resolved by the 10th of the month or so. I am happy I am not in need of urgent care this week ...

woj 07-03-2013 01:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mardigras (Post 19701435)
So when you were in college had you been in an automobile accident requiring a long hospital stay you would have expected the rest of us to pay for it?

One accident or illness can wipe out even the best of planned savings. No one should have to go bankrupt because they got injured or sick.
car insurance covers any injuries sustained during a car accident, so not the best example... :2 cents:

woj 07-03-2013 01:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mardigras (Post 19701441)
You pay now and benefit later when the young and healthy's premiums are subsidizing YOUR healthcare.

The ACA requires insurance companies to use 85% of premiums actually providing healthcare.

The same people against ACA are usually the ones who want to get rid of Social Security and Medicare. Are you able to pay for the care of all of your elderly or disabled relatives on top of your entire family's?
sounds great in theory, but I wouldn't count on that.... just look at social security... there are talks every year that SS is going bankrupt, talks about cutting benefits, talks about completely eliminating SS benefits in some cases ("means testing"), etc...

healthcare will play out exactly the same, I will subsidize others now, but when it comes for next generation to subsidize my healthcare I'll probably get fucked just like I will get fucked with SS...

mardigras 07-03-2013 01:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by woj (Post 19701446)
car insurance covers any injuries sustained during a car accident, so not the best example... :2 cents:
Car insurance covers up to the amount of the policy. If someone has minimal coverage and and your hospital bills exceed that, you are SOL.

When I was 20 car insurance wasn't required, so many people didn't buy it. Like health insurance now.

mardigras 07-03-2013 02:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by baddog (Post 19701199)
Communism doesn't work
So you'd rather pay someone's entire hospital bill than subsidize insurance premiums? Because when someone isn't insured, you do.:2 cents:

_Richard_ 07-03-2013 02:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mardigras (Post 19701466)
So you'd rather pay someone's entire hospital bill than subsidize insurance premiums? Because when someone isn't insured, you do.:2 cents:
then you get into military, 'too big to fail'

it's capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich

mardigras 07-03-2013 02:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by woj (Post 19701452)
sounds great in theory, but I wouldn't count on that.... just look at social security... there are talks every year that SS is going bankrupt, talks about cutting benefits, talks about completely eliminating SS benefits in some cases ("means testing"), etc...

healthcare will play out exactly the same, I will subsidize others now, but when it comes for next generation to subsidize my healthcare I'll probably get fucked just like I will get fucked with SS...
The only people talking about getting rid of Social Security are those drooling over grabbing the money and turning it over to their Wall Street cronies. Social Security currently has a $2.7 trillion and growing surplus. It does not contribute 1 cent to the deficit and if left alone can pay 100% of all promised benefits for the next near 3 decades and at least 80% after that. It could be made solvent forever by simply raising the amount of income it is applied to. Currently only the first $100k of income is subject to Social Security.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123