Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8789 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 09-22-2017 5:54 AM
360 online now:
Heathen, PaulK (2 members, 358 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Porkncheese
Post Volume:
Total: 819,267 Year: 23,873/21,208 Month: 1,838/2,468 Week: 347/822 Day: 7/66 Hour: 0/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1617
18
192021Next
Author Topic:   Fox news = false news
ringo
Member
Posts: 13636
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


(2)
Message 256 of 310 (723526)
04-03-2014 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 255 by Dr Adequate
04-03-2014 12:15 PM


Re: Add a little wine ...
Dr Adequate writes:

Whenever this President gets in trouble, he hides behind data.


in his Fortress of Amplitude.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-03-2014 12:15 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3428
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


(1)
Message 257 of 310 (723529)
04-03-2014 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by Theodoric
04-03-2014 9:23 AM


Re: Due When? Why?
not a feature of just ACA, it is part of all group health insurance.

Understood. I go through the same thing every year with my workplace insurance.

Primarily, people would wait until they got sick or needed an expensive procedure before they got sick.

Under the old business model I can see that, but this new model requires all people to have some minimum coverage as a matter of law, there are no more "pre-existing" clauses allowed, and the carriers are required by law to take on all comers, so this reason seems moot.

Also, there are underwriting and actuarial issues.

Yes. The same issues as with all other kinds of insurance which get along just fine without this enrollment restriction.

Without an open enrollment, people could jump around and in and out of plans all year long.

Which people won't do that often especially since the minimum requirements are the same company to company per ACA. There is no incentive to jump company to company except for price, and that is the marketplace and is a good thing.

the biggest reason for us was to make sure we got accurate and up to date demographic and other info from each person covered.

So how can the car/home/life insurance companies, which require and collect the same accurate demographic data for their actuaries, do their business very successfully without such an enrollment restriction?

I'm glad you have that connection to the business because under this new business model I see no economic justification for continuing a restrictive enrollment period. I'm missing something.

Edited by AZPaul3, : cuz


This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by Theodoric, posted 04-03-2014 9:23 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by PaulK, posted 04-03-2014 1:41 PM AZPaul3 has responded
 Message 260 by petrophysics1, posted 04-03-2014 1:53 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 13117
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 258 of 310 (723530)
04-03-2014 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by AZPaul3
04-03-2014 1:15 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
quote:

Under the old business model I can see that, but this new model requires all people to have some minimum coverage as a matter of law, there are no more "pre-existing" clauses allowed, and the carriers are required by law to take on all comers, so this reason seems moot

I think you mean "more important than ever for the insurers". With no restriction on pre-existing conditions, and guaranteed insurance there is less incentive for customers to sign up BEFORE needing treatment. The suppliers are in the insurance business, not charities doling out money for medical care.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2014 1:15 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2014 1:49 PM PaulK has responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3428
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


Message 259 of 310 (723531)
04-03-2014 1:49 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by PaulK
04-03-2014 1:41 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
But aren't all required to carry the insurance?

Except those willing to pay the fine. Which may be to their economic benefit until they get sick.

OK, I can see this.

Still, RAZD has the best idea.

Thanx, PaulK.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by PaulK, posted 04-03-2014 1:41 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by PaulK, posted 04-03-2014 1:54 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply
 Message 263 by petrophysics1, posted 04-03-2014 2:12 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 260 of 310 (723532)
04-03-2014 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by AZPaul3
04-03-2014 1:15 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
AZP3,

I can tell you were one of the "bright" ones that voted for Obama.

If you can afford health insurance but choose not to buy it, you must pay a fee known as the individual shared responsibility payment.

The fee in 2014 is 1% of your yearly income or $95 per person for the year, whichever is higher. The fee increases every year. In 2016 it's 2.5% of income or $695 per person, whichever is higher.

If you're paying under the $95 per person method, in 2014 the payment for uninsured children is $47.50 per child. The most a family would have to pay under this method in 2014 is $285.

You make the payment when you file your 2014 taxes, which are due in April 2015.

A note here if you are self employed you must pay the penalty on the quarterly returns you file in 2014, the employed morons won't realize they are going to be taxed till April 15, 2015.

Maybe you should ask yourself why the Obama sycophants on this board didn't tell you the true reason for the 3/31/2014 deadline and instead made up a bunch of crap you almost bought.

BTW I got the above quote from a government web site, if only everyone who was voting this November had to read it. Dems don't want you to know this even though it's true. The Republicans do for obvious reasons.

You can now return to your comatose state.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2014 1:15 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-03-2014 2:01 PM petrophysics1 has responded
 Message 266 by Theodoric, posted 04-03-2014 4:11 PM petrophysics1 has not yet responded
 Message 267 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2014 7:45 PM petrophysics1 has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 13117
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 261 of 310 (723533)
04-03-2014 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by AZPaul3
04-03-2014 1:49 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
quote:

But aren't all required to carry the insurance?

Then you should also consider the deadline on that. For the start of the system, and for people entering the system, after that.

And doesn't it make sense to tie that into the financial year ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2014 1:49 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15950
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.6


(4)
Message 262 of 310 (723535)
04-03-2014 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by petrophysics1
04-03-2014 1:53 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
A note here if you are self employed you must pay the penalty on the quarterly returns you file in 2014, the employed morons won't realize they are going to be taxed till April 15, 2015.

Maybe you should ask yourself why the Obama sycophants on this board didn't tell you the true reason for the 3/31/2014 deadline and instead made up a bunch of crap you almost bought.

BTW I got the above quote from a government web site, if only everyone who was voting this November had to read it. Dems don't want you to know this even though it's true. The Republicans do for obvious reasons.

You can now return to your comatose state.

All the words in that post are real words that are part of the English language.

But when we consider the way in which they were arranged into sentences, we find that although each of them were individually meaningful, they cease to be so when put into that particular order.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by petrophysics1, posted 04-03-2014 1:53 PM petrophysics1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by petrophysics1, posted 04-03-2014 2:28 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 263 of 310 (723538)
04-03-2014 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by AZPaul3
04-03-2014 1:49 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
Except those willing to pay the fine. Which may be to their economic benefit until they get sick

Would you buy collision insurance for your car if the law said you could buy it after you had an accident and they had to sell it to you. If this were true what do you think would happen to collision insurance rates?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2014 1:49 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 264 of 310 (723544)
04-03-2014 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by Dr Adequate
04-03-2014 2:01 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
But when we consider the way in which they were arranged into sentences, we find that although each of them were individually meaningful, they cease to be so when put into that particular order.

This from the person who posted a picture in his "Introduction to Geology" which he said was an example of wind blown deposition when it wasn't. You know I waited 6 months to see if anyone on this board would even ask a question about it, no one did. You didn't even look at it in an unbiased manner even after I told you it was wrong.

So much for careful unbiased observation and critical thinking which I see you carry on into the other areas of your life.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-03-2014 2:01 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-03-2014 3:27 PM petrophysics1 has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15950
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.6


(7)
Message 265 of 310 (723553)
04-03-2014 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by petrophysics1
04-03-2014 2:28 PM


Written In Sandstone
pertophysics1 writes:

This from the person who posted a picture in his "Introduction to Geology" which he said was an example of wind blown deposition when it wasn't. You know I waited 6 months to see if anyone on this board would even ask a question about it, no one did. You didn't even look at it in an unbiased manner even after I told you it was wrong.

So much for careful unbiased observation and critical thinking which I see you carry on into the other areas of your life.

Your version of events is interesting. Shall we look at what actually happened?

Dr Adequate, post #174 writes:

Oops, thank you. I bow before the master. How did you know?

Dr Adequate, post #175 writes:

* gets on all fours and grovels *

... what do you see there that tells you for certain that that isn't aeolian?

Dr Adequate, post #246 writes:

Those are good reasons, thank you.

I may have done something different in the world in your head, but in the real world not only did I politely, even obsequiously, ask you to set me right, not only did I then let you set me right, and correct the offending post, but also when you had set me right I thanked you for it. How often, in your experience, does that happen? How often is even the best-merited correction welcomed with warm thanks rather than grudging acceptance?

One more time. This is me:

Dr Adequate, post #174 writes:

Oops, thank you. I bow before the master.

Dr Adequate, post #246 writes:

Those are good reasons, thank you.

And this is your account of what happened:

petrophysics1 writes:

You didn't even look at it in an unbiased manner even after I told you it was wrong.

And this is your chosen example of how I can't look at things in an unbiased manner? Golly, I'm a monster of arrogance and prejudice, aren't I?

I now have some suggestions as to what you might go do to yourself. But you may not receive them in the same eager spirit which which I accepted your advice.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by petrophysics1, posted 04-03-2014 2:28 PM petrophysics1 has not yet responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5765
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005


(6)
Message 266 of 310 (723569)
04-03-2014 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by petrophysics1
04-03-2014 1:53 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
Your post is meaningless. What this has to do with anything I have no clue. It is a non-sequitur in relation to the thread and your sentences seem to not be related to each other.

the employed morons won't realize they are going to be taxed till April 15, 2015.

I see you have the typical disdain for the working class as most right wingers.

Now to take a deep breath and tell us what you want to say. I can see that you are one of the morons that voted against Obama. It amazes me how people continually vote against there own economic interests. Unless of course you are making over $250k per year, then I guess a lucky you is in hand.

If you can't be civil in your right wing nuttiness how about not contributing. People around here attempt to be civil, but you are being an ass and no one wants or needs your idiotic abuse.

Obama derangement syndrome much. You do realize that ACA is pretty much a revamped version of what the Heritage Foundation proposed. The individual mandate is a conservative principle. They spout personal responsibility until a Democrat suggest it then they do a 180. So conservatives were for the individual mandate before they were against it.

The right wing would do much better if they were at least rational and truthful. You fit right in with them.

Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by petrophysics1, posted 04-03-2014 1:53 PM petrophysics1 has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3428
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


(6)
Message 267 of 310 (723591)
04-03-2014 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by petrophysics1
04-03-2014 1:53 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
I can tell you were one of the "bright" ones that voted for Obama.

Yep. Twice. And I am so bright that the light often keeps me awake at night. One of those bothers I must suffer for being brilliant. Another such bother is having to deal with those who's critical thinking skills are a bit shallow.

This "shared responsibility payment" is no secret. If someone doesn't know about it by now then they are not paying attention to the universe around them and people like that are always getting into fixes, accidents and trouble and really need the insurance.

The fee is of no bother. What the law should have done was make that annual amount a monthly amount. Now that would get some attention.

As long as we're talking about what the law should have done, it should have made medical care available to everyone, citizen, visitor, green card or illegal and at no cost to the individual at the time of service.

We, the good ol' US of A, should declare before the entire world that access to effective medical care is not just a constitutional right but a Human Right required to be provided by collective humanity.

Oooo, that would be expensive. How do we pay for it?

Confiscatory taxes. Yes, that's right, confiscatory. If you don't know what that means look it up. If you do know what that means then commence cringing.

If you make over $500K a year every dollar over should be taxed at 50%. And we go up from there. At $10 mil you fork over 80%. Same for corporate taxes, different amounts, of course, but the same principle. And we can finally do what should have been done decades ago and end this heretical, blasphemous policy of not taxing churches.

I hope that completes my picture for you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by petrophysics1, posted 04-03-2014 1:53 PM petrophysics1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by RAZD, posted 04-04-2014 8:47 AM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply
 Message 270 by dronestar, posted 04-04-2014 1:10 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18966
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.7


(8)
Message 268 of 310 (723611)
04-04-2014 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 267 by AZPaul3
04-03-2014 7:45 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
If you make over $500K a year every dollar over should be taxed at 50%. And we go up from there. At $10 mil you fork over 80%. Same for corporate taxes, different amounts, of course, but the same principle. And we can finally do what should have been done decades ago and end this heretical, blasphemous policy of not taxing churches.

Those who benefit from the socio-economic environment that the US provides should pay to support it. Those that benefit the most should pay the most to ensure it keeps providing the socio-economic environment that they benefit from.

Simple.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2014 7:45 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Diomedes, posted 04-04-2014 9:30 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 661
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 4.4


(7)
Message 269 of 310 (723612)
04-04-2014 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by RAZD
04-04-2014 8:47 AM


Re: Due When? Why?
If you make over $500K a year every dollar over should be taxed at 50%. And we go up from there. At $10 mil you fork over 80%. Same for corporate taxes, different amounts, of course, but the same principle. And we can finally do what should have been done decades ago and end this heretical, blasphemous policy of not taxing churches.

Those who benefit from the socio-economic environment that the US provides should pay to support it. Those that benefit the most should pay the most to ensure it keeps providing the socio-economic environment that they benefit from.

What is ironic is that those were the type of effective tax rates we had in the 1950s. A time that was very prosperous for the United States. Also (ironically), a time that right wingers often cite as being the 'good times'. While conveniently forgetting that back then, we had much higher taxes and we subsidized education much more.

Oh the humanity!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by RAZD, posted 04-04-2014 8:47 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by Taq, posted 06-05-2014 6:04 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1362
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


(2)
Message 270 of 310 (723634)
04-04-2014 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by AZPaul3
04-03-2014 7:45 PM


Re: Due When? Why?
AZPaul3 writes:

As long as we're talking about what the law should have done, it should have made medical care available to everyone, citizen, visitor, green card or illegal and at no cost to the individual at the time of service.

America has been backing away from the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights ever since it was adopted by the the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948.

quote:
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Drafting Committee was chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt, who was known for her human rights advocacy. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948. On 10 December 1948, the Universal Declaration was adopted by the General Assembly by a vote of 48 in favor (including the USA).

quote:
Article 25.
• (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

http://en.wikipedia.org/...ersal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

Sadly, today america is more interested in taking away human right and liberties than promoting them . . .

quote:
http://news.yahoo.com/...s-154057442--abc-news-politics.html
[Jimmy Carter] denounced the Obama administration for "clearly violating" 10 of the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, writing in a New York Times op-ed on Monday that the "United States is abandoning its role as the global champion of human rights."

A former U.S. president is accusing [Obama] of sanctioning the "widespread abuse of human rights" by authorizing drone strikes to kill suspected terrorists.

In addition to the drone strikes, Carter criticized the current president for keeping the Guantanamo Bay detention center open, where prisoners "have been tortured by waterboarding more than 100 times or intimidated with semiautomatic weapons, power drills or threats to sexually assault their mothers."

The former president blasted the government for allowing "unprecedented violations of our rights to privacy through warrantless wiretapping and government mining of our electronic communications.


I wish advocates of the 2nd Amendment would be as enthusiastic about the 4th Amendment against search and seizure (NSA domestic spying); 5th Amendment guaranteeing due process; 8th Amendment barring cruel and unusual punishment (Manning Episode), 6th Amendment, assuring trial by jury (drone assassination program).

Edited by dronester, : clarity


This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2014 7:45 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
RewPrev1
...
1617
18
192021Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017