|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:48 pm
Miza_Radioaktiv 我爱你。。。(Wǒ ài nǐ...)Speaking of which...
It looks like the bill is doing very well. It was voted in to begin the long debate over it. This is a good sign. I honestly wasn't expecting it to go this far since the Independents (before all this mess) were so against the bill, but in the end they voted for it to continue. Good show. 永远。。。(Yǒng yuǎn...) Is this the same bill which was being talked about in the Beck thread?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 6:40 am
Maybe this is the turn of the rest of the world to influence American politics rather than vice versa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miza_Radioaktiv Vice Captain
|
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 8:12 am
Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv 我爱你。。。(Wǒ ài nǐ...)Speaking of which...
It looks like the bill is doing very well. It was voted in to begin the long debate over it. This is a good sign. I honestly wasn't expecting it to go this far since the Independents (before all this mess) were so against the bill, but in the end they voted for it to continue. Good show. 永远。。。(Yǒng yuǎn...) Is this the same bill which was being talked about in the Beck thread? Yes and no. It's been changed a bit and clarified since it's moved through Congress, but the backbone of it is still the same. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 2:53 pm
Did it make it through the Senate yet, or just the House?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 3:26 pm
Miza_Radioaktiv Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv 我爱你。。。(Wǒ ài nǐ...)Speaking of which...
It looks like the bill is doing very well. It was voted in to begin the long debate over it. This is a good sign. I honestly wasn't expecting it to go this far since the Independents (before all this mess) were so against the bill, but in the end they voted for it to continue. Good show. 永远。。。(Yǒng yuǎn...) Is this the same bill which was being talked about in the Beck thread? Yes and no. It's been changed a bit and clarified since it's moved through Congress, but the backbone of it is still the same. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...) So, the following (repost) still applies? In New York Times (18 aug), we find this said by liberal Bob Herbert: “Insurance companies are delighted with the way ‘reform’ is unfolding. Think of it: The government is planning to require most uninsured Americans to buy health coverage. Millions of young and healthy individuals will be herded into the industry’s welcoming arms. This is the population the insurers drool over.
“This additional business—a gold mine—will more than offset the cost of important new regulations that, among other things, will prevent insurers from denying coverage to applicants with pre-existing conditions or imposing lifetime limits on benefits. Poor people will either be funneled into Medicaid, which will have its eligibility ceiling raised, or will receive a government subsidy to help with the purchase of private insurance.
“If the oldest and sickest are on Medicare, and the poorest are on Medicaid, and the young and the healthy are required to purchase private insurance without the option of a competing government-run plan—well, that’s reform the insurance companies can believe in.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 6:12 pm
Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv 我爱你。。。(Wǒ ài nǐ...)Speaking of which...
It looks like the bill is doing very well. It was voted in to begin the long debate over it. This is a good sign. I honestly wasn't expecting it to go this far since the Independents (before all this mess) were so against the bill, but in the end they voted for it to continue. Good show. 永远。。。(Yǒng yuǎn...) Is this the same bill which was being talked about in the Beck thread? Yes and no. It's been changed a bit and clarified since it's moved through Congress, but the backbone of it is still the same. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...) So, the following (repost) still applies? In New York Times (18 aug), we find this said by liberal Bob Herbert: “Insurance companies are delighted with the way ‘reform’ is unfolding. Think of it: The government is planning to require most uninsured Americans to buy health coverage. Millions of young and healthy individuals will be herded into the industry’s welcoming arms. This is the population the insurers drool over.
“This additional business—a gold mine—will more than offset the cost of important new regulations that, among other things, will prevent insurers from denying coverage to applicants with pre-existing conditions or imposing lifetime limits on benefits. Poor people will either be funneled into Medicaid, which will have its eligibility ceiling raised, or will receive a government subsidy to help with the purchase of private insurance.
“If the oldest and sickest are on Medicare, and the poorest are on Medicaid, and the young and the healthy are required to purchase private insurance without the option of a competing government-run plan—well, that’s reform the insurance companies can believe in.”Not really. The "new" bill will force all current health insurance companies to take on those that apply regardless of pre-existing conditions and cannot deny coverage for those people. They will have to pay 100% of the medical care for those insured by them. This will cost health insurance companies s**t loads of money considering they used the "pre-existing" conditions as a way to save money. The less care they provided, the more money the company made. Now they are being forced to supply the greatest amount of care.
Now, the government will also have it's own cheap (extremely cheap) plan for those who still do not have the money to buy insurance from major health care insurers.
It's only really changed in that sense, well, and... Only tax payers can apply for the government health care insurance. That clipping is super old and the bill has changed a lot since then. It's not fantastic, but it's definitely a try on changing the horrible health care system in America.
@Lady Merewyn: It passed the House and the Senate wrote up some more on it and semi-passed it. It couldn't even be filibustered because of the awesome vote it got. The contents are to be debated now and it will need to be passed again before making it's way to the president. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miza_Radioaktiv Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:55 pm
Miza_Radioaktiv Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv 我爱你。。。(Wǒ ài nǐ...)Speaking of which...
It looks like the bill is doing very well. It was voted in to begin the long debate over it. This is a good sign. I honestly wasn't expecting it to go this far since the Independents (before all this mess) were so against the bill, but in the end they voted for it to continue. Good show. 永远。。。(Yǒng yuǎn...) Is this the same bill which was being talked about in the Beck thread? Yes and no. It's been changed a bit and clarified since it's moved through Congress, but the backbone of it is still the same. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...) So, the following (repost) still applies? In New York Times (18 aug), we find this said by liberal Bob Herbert: “Insurance companies are delighted with the way ‘reform’ is unfolding. Think of it: The government is planning to require most uninsured Americans to buy health coverage. Millions of young and healthy individuals will be herded into the industry’s welcoming arms. This is the population the insurers drool over.
“This additional business—a gold mine—will more than offset the cost of important new regulations that, among other things, will prevent insurers from denying coverage to applicants with pre-existing conditions or imposing lifetime limits on benefits. Poor people will either be funneled into Medicaid, which will have its eligibility ceiling raised, or will receive a government subsidy to help with the purchase of private insurance.
“If the oldest and sickest are on Medicare, and the poorest are on Medicaid, and the young and the healthy are required to purchase private insurance without the option of a competing government-run plan—well, that’s reform the insurance companies can believe in.”Not really. The "new" bill will force all current health insurance companies to take on those that apply regardless of pre-existing conditions and cannot deny coverage for those people. They will have to pay 100% of the medical care for those insured by them. This will cost health insurance companies s**t loads of money considering they used the "pre-existing" conditions as a way to save money. The less care they provided, the more money the company made. Now they are being forced to supply the greatest amount of care.
Now, the government will also have it's own cheap (extremely cheap) plan for those who still do not have the money to buy insurance from major health care insurers.
It's only really changed in that sense, well, and... Only tax payers can apply for the government health care insurance. That clipping is super old and the bill has changed a lot since then. It's not fantastic, but it's definitely a try on changing the horrible health care system in America.
@Lady Merewyn: It passed the House and the Senate wrote up some more on it and semi-passed it. It couldn't even be filibustered because of the awesome vote it got. The contents are to be debated now and it will need to be passed again before making it's way to the president. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...) That sounds exactly like what is mentioned in the quote: Poor people, elderly people, are being bumped to a government system, while the insurance companies have to take everyone... which includes healthy people who are forced to get insurance they don't want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:18 pm
Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv 我爱你。。。(Wǒ ài nǐ...)Speaking of which...
It looks like the bill is doing very well. It was voted in to begin the long debate over it. This is a good sign. I honestly wasn't expecting it to go this far since the Independents (before all this mess) were so against the bill, but in the end they voted for it to continue. Good show. 永远。。。(Yǒng yuǎn...) Is this the same bill which was being talked about in the Beck thread? Yes and no. It's been changed a bit and clarified since it's moved through Congress, but the backbone of it is still the same. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...) So, the following (repost) still applies? In New York Times (18 aug), we find this said by liberal Bob Herbert: “Insurance companies are delighted with the way ‘reform’ is unfolding. Think of it: The government is planning to require most uninsured Americans to buy health coverage. Millions of young and healthy individuals will be herded into the industry’s welcoming arms. This is the population the insurers drool over.
“This additional business—a gold mine—will more than offset the cost of important new regulations that, among other things, will prevent insurers from denying coverage to applicants with pre-existing conditions or imposing lifetime limits on benefits. Poor people will either be funneled into Medicaid, which will have its eligibility ceiling raised, or will receive a government subsidy to help with the purchase of private insurance.
“If the oldest and sickest are on Medicare, and the poorest are on Medicaid, and the young and the healthy are required to purchase private insurance without the option of a competing government-run plan—well, that’s reform the insurance companies can believe in.”Not really. The "new" bill will force all current health insurance companies to take on those that apply regardless of pre-existing conditions and cannot deny coverage for those people. They will have to pay 100% of the medical care for those insured by them. This will cost health insurance companies s**t loads of money considering they used the "pre-existing" conditions as a way to save money. The less care they provided, the more money the company made. Now they are being forced to supply the greatest amount of care.
Now, the government will also have it's own cheap (extremely cheap) plan for those who still do not have the money to buy insurance from major health care insurers.
It's only really changed in that sense, well, and... Only tax payers can apply for the government health care insurance. That clipping is super old and the bill has changed a lot since then. It's not fantastic, but it's definitely a try on changing the horrible health care system in America.
@Lady Merewyn: It passed the House and the Senate wrote up some more on it and semi-passed it. It couldn't even be filibustered because of the awesome vote it got. The contents are to be debated now and it will need to be passed again before making it's way to the president. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...) That sounds exactly like what is mentioned in the quote: Poor people, elderly people, are being bumped to a government system, while the insurance companies have to take everyone... which includes healthy people who are forced to get insurance they don't want. No. People aren't being forced to get health care if they don't want it. It's forcing the companies to accept anyone that wants to purchase a health care plan. It's basically stopping insurance companies from going, *looks over application* "Hm... It says here that you had a serious sinus infection when you were 12 which could cause some 'serious' health problems later. I'm sorry, but we can't insure you. That's a risk we won't take."
My friend's mom is a health insurance saleswoman. I hear all this s**t all the time. She has to deny people health care because of having tonsillitis/earaches/bug bites as a child. It's stupid. 永远。。。(Yǒng yuǎn...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miza_Radioaktiv Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:37 pm
I live in the U.S., I don't pay attention to the news much but I believe it already passed.
at least, i think it did.[/size]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:52 am
Miza_Radioaktiv Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv Gracchvs Robespierre Miza_Radioaktiv 我爱你。。。(Wǒ ài nǐ...)Yes and no. It's been changed a bit and clarified since it's moved through Congress, but the backbone of it is still the same. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...) So, the following (repost) still applies? In New York Times (18 aug), we find this said by liberal Bob Herbert: “Insurance companies are delighted with the way ‘reform’ is unfolding. Think of it: The government is planning to require most uninsured Americans to buy health coverage. Millions of young and healthy individuals will be herded into the industry’s welcoming arms. This is the population the insurers drool over.
“This additional business—a gold mine—will more than offset the cost of important new regulations that, among other things, will prevent insurers from denying coverage to applicants with pre-existing conditions or imposing lifetime limits on benefits. Poor people will either be funneled into Medicaid, which will have its eligibility ceiling raised, or will receive a government subsidy to help with the purchase of private insurance.
“If the oldest and sickest are on Medicare, and the poorest are on Medicaid, and the young and the healthy are required to purchase private insurance without the option of a competing government-run plan—well, that’s reform the insurance companies can believe in.”Not really. The "new" bill will force all current health insurance companies to take on those that apply regardless of pre-existing conditions and cannot deny coverage for those people. They will have to pay 100% of the medical care for those insured by them. This will cost health insurance companies s**t loads of money considering they used the "pre-existing" conditions as a way to save money. The less care they provided, the more money the company made. Now they are being forced to supply the greatest amount of care.
Now, the government will also have it's own cheap (extremely cheap) plan for those who still do not have the money to buy insurance from major health care insurers.
It's only really changed in that sense, well, and... Only tax payers can apply for the government health care insurance. That clipping is super old and the bill has changed a lot since then. It's not fantastic, but it's definitely a try on changing the horrible health care system in America.
@Lady Merewyn: It passed the House and the Senate wrote up some more on it and semi-passed it. It couldn't even be filibustered because of the awesome vote it got. The contents are to be debated now and it will need to be passed again before making it's way to the president. 永远。。。(Yǒngyuǎn...) That sounds exactly like what is mentioned in the quote: Poor people, elderly people, are being bumped to a government system, while the insurance companies have to take everyone... which includes healthy people who are forced to get insurance they don't want. No. People aren't being forced to get health care if they don't want it. It's forcing the companies to accept anyone that wants to purchase a health care plan. It's basically stopping insurance companies from going, *looks over application* "Hm... It says here that you had a serious sinus infection when you were 12 which could cause some 'serious' health problems later. I'm sorry, but we can't insure you. That's a risk we won't take."
My friend's mom is a health insurance saleswoman. I hear all this s**t all the time. She has to deny people health care because of having tonsillitis/earaches/bug bites as a child. It's stupid. 永远。。。(Yǒng yuǎn...) I'm fairly certain the bill is forcing all people to pay more money for plans they don't neccessarily want. Me, I'm not going to die today, tomorrow, or 20 years from now, I'm a healthy 22 year old man just out of active duty service. I have a great family metabolism and as long as I don't get cancer I'm living until my body rots from within. I will be forced to get medicare based on this bill. I've heard many more people tell me I have to get medical care now then people who told me what you're saying. As the media only likes to cover the good side of bad things and the bad side of good things, it's hard to tell whats what. But again, if it IS like what i think it is, they're gonna have to lock me up because I am not paying a single dime to insure my health because Obama said so. He illegalized my favorite cigarette already on the premise that "sugar filtered cigarettes are specifically marketed towards children" what a crock of s**t. And every pic I see of the guy he's smoking a cowboy. He is a hypocrite, a moron, and he's playing to the wealthy christian capitalist masses, just like every imperial bafoon before him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 4:41 pm
Norm of Okinawa wealthy christian capitalist masses, There are masses of wealthy now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:04 pm
Gracchvs Robespierre Norm of Okinawa wealthy christian capitalist masses, There are masses of wealthy now? Not for us, no. I meant the government as a hole. They are the above statement. Exploiting us via exorbant taxes and depressing inaction to use them properly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
