Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Great ObamaCare Debate, Part 237: Back to Court The Great ObamaCare Debate, Part 237: Back to Court

05-08-2014 , 05:44 PM
Scapegoat implies that those statements aren't true. What isn't true about those things.
05-08-2014 , 06:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizy
If their income is too high for Medicaid, Obamacare is viable.

Possibly even loltastic COBRA.
The individual health insurance market is a ripoff for a healthy person.

When they were working, the employer paid most of the premium. With COBRA they must pay the entire premium.
05-08-2014 , 06:34 PM
Sigh. I have no idea negs what your beef is about Obamacare but insurance being a rip off if you are healthy is is just dumb. Maybe start from the beginning and understand what the purpose of insurance is and why people buy such things.
05-08-2014 , 06:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by schu_22
Companies are also massively hiking the rates they charge employees for insurance even though their overall premium hadn't gone up nearly as much. They then just pocket the difference in profit and blame Obamacare. Pretty disgusting
What is your source for this assertion? It does not jive with this survey by Kaiser. http://kff.org/interactive/premiums-...contributions/
05-08-2014 , 06:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by schu_22
Companies are also massively hiking the rates they charge employees for insurance even though their overall premium hadn't gone up nearly as much. They then just pocket the difference in profit and blame Obamacare. Pretty disgusting
Health insurance premiums have been rising faster than inflation for at least 30 years. Also policies seem to be covering ever more procedures. The employee contribution rate has increased faster than the premiums have been rising since before Obama. The health insurance model is expensive for the user. Employers aren't pocketing the difference. They are putting most of the increase onto the employees.
05-08-2014 , 06:43 PM
Yeah I'd like a source on that too schu. Obamacare did introduce a bunch of new requirements for health insurance that obviously add to costs.
05-08-2014 , 06:49 PM
It wasn't meant to be a blanket statement and i doubt its a far-reaching problem. I've read several things about it though. To me it seems like a few ****ty companies are doing it but most don't.
05-08-2014 , 06:56 PM
Some companies will do whatever they can to shift/reduce costs and blame whatever is the hot issue.

I remember one hospital chain back in 2009 saying they needed to lay off staff and cut all benefits/pay by about 10% due to the recession. When we went into bargaining and had their numbers that showed their profits were growing by a decent amount and workers were willing to strike they backed off it all and agreed to raises instead.
05-08-2014 , 06:58 PM
There was some sheet metal company that employed 30 people that said they went out of business because of Obamacare. Wasn't that one of the first of many debunked ACA horror stories?
05-08-2014 , 07:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by schu_22
Companies are also massively hiking the rates they charge employees for insurance even though their overall premium hadn't gone up nearly as much. They then just pocket the difference in profit and blame Obamacare. Pretty disgusting
Quote:
Originally Posted by schu_22
It wasn't meant to be a blanket statement and i doubt its a far-reaching problem. I've read several things about it though. To me it seems like a few ****ty companies are doing it but most don't.

It sure as hell looked like one. Coupled with the link that denoted the shareholder reports as 'scapegoating' ACA it's kind of obvious what you meant.
05-08-2014 , 07:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
Yeah I'd like a source on that too schu. Obamacare did introduce a bunch of new requirements for health insurance that obviously add to costs.
LOL ikes remember when I asked you to explain what exactly the new requirements that Obamacare added to group insurance were and you couldn't?

That was a fun time. It's even more fun because I bet you've managed to remember that as a great victory for TEAM IKESY BABY because you're ****ing bringing it back.
05-08-2014 , 07:15 PM
lol so he means the opposite of what he says he means?
05-08-2014 , 07:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjoefish
lol so he means the opposite of what he says he means?
No, he meant what he said the first time, and backed down from it later with a pretty lame face saving attempt.
05-08-2014 , 07:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
LOL ikes remember when I asked you to explain what exactly the new requirements that Obamacare added to group insurance were and you couldn't?

That was a fun time. It's even more fun because I bet you've managed to remember that as a great victory for TEAM IKESY BABY because you're ****ing bringing it back.
I couldn't, or did I ignore the kid trying to barge into the adults table? Once you figure out there's a doctor shortage and the young are subsidizing the old maybe I'll take you seriously again.
05-08-2014 , 07:28 PM
DOCTOR SHORTAGEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EE
05-08-2014 , 07:30 PM
schu here's another chance!
05-08-2014 , 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
It sure as hell looked like one. Coupled with the link that denoted the shareholder reports as 'scapegoating' ACA it's kind of obvious what you meant.
Well, that's not what it was
05-08-2014 , 08:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
schu here's another chance!
I only fight battles I can win. Riverman is always going to be riverman. Every time someone posts "lol" or "read the thread" are you gonna come running to daddy asking me to chastise them for it? Really?
05-08-2014 , 08:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
I couldn't, or did I ignore the kid trying to barge into the adults table?
Uh, the first one, obviously. You couldn't. You still can't.
05-08-2014 , 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by schu_22
I only fight battles I can win. Riverman is always going to be riverman. Every time someone posts "lol" or "read the thread" are you gonna come running to daddy asking me to chastise them for it? Really?
No I'm making a larger point. The criticisms of my posts as brief and combative come from people who either do it themselves just as much, or come from people who just happen to ignore everyone but me doing the same thing.
05-08-2014 , 08:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
The criticisms of my posts as brief and combative come from people who either do it themselves just as much
#thingsikesactuallybelieves
05-08-2014 , 08:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
#thingsikesactuallybelieves
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
Hahahahaha you can't see the difference between the post you responded to and the post I responded to
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
Spoiler:
lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
hahahaha we broke him
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
I legit laughed out loud at connecting Benghazi to a cocaine addiction
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
hahahahaha that graph wow
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
What's funny about the HuffPo quotation that MickeyB105 is SUPER MAD about is that it's...stating what a CBO report found. LIBERAL SLANTING ON THE NUMBERS
Yes goofy, I believe it.
05-08-2014 , 08:47 PM
ikes, all you just did was prove that you have no idea what behavior we're talking about, to the surprise of nobody.

Going back to this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
Hahahahaha you can't see the difference between the post you responded to and the post I responded to
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
No goofy I can.
You very clearly cannot. Thanks for the laughs though, maybe try again?
05-08-2014 , 08:52 PM
And another one.
05-08-2014 , 09:04 PM
I mean you seriously just cited three posts where my response was longer and/or had more substance than the post I was responding to as evidence of...well, you don't really know, do you? It's like you think we laugh at you because all posts need to cross some arbitrary number of characters. There aren't enough lolikes to describe how clueless you are.

      
m