What's new
By:

Obamacare to increase premiums by 304 percent???

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 365
  • Start date Start date
I checked into the Nevada marketplace for insurance plans. We wanted to see if we could get supplemental insurance to help offset our high-deductible plan, considering my wife recently had a very serious medical issue and my son and daughter have ongoing needs. I found the very cheapest plan for a family our size was $985 per month, with a $4k deductible and 20% coinsurance after meeting the deductible, and that the deductible does not count toward the out of pocket maximum, which was set at $5k.

Interesting thing was, we were considering just such a plan last summer. We found one locally that was a co-pay plan, $1k deductible, out of pocket max was the same as the deductible which counted toward it (so you hit the deductible and would pay nothing more), and there were $20 and $40 copays for office visits. That plan was $750 and we thought it was way too expensive for the coverage. Wow how times have changed.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I checked into the Nevada marketplace for insurance plans. We wanted to see if we could get supplemental insurance to help offset our high-deductible plan, considering my wife recently had a very serious medical issue and my son and daughter have ongoing needs. I found the very cheapest plan for a family our size was $985 per month, with a $4k deductible and 20% coinsurance after meeting the deductible, and that the deductible does not count toward the out of pocket maximum, which was set at $5k.

Interesting thing was, we were considering just such a plan last summer. We found one locally that was a co-pay plan, $1k deductible, out of pocket max was the same as the deductible which counted toward it (so you hit the deductible and would pay nothing more), and there were $20 and $40 copays for office visits. That plan was $750 and we thought it was way too expensive for the coverage. Wow how times have changed.
Click to expand...

You're a stupid liar. That's impossible. I can't believe you would stoop to making up stories blah, blah, blah.

There I've saved everyone some time.
 
heyhey said:
I never said you didn't work hard. I said that some people have worked hard and earn enough not to qualify for subsidies. You seem to think that they are lying to you when they say their premiums have gone up dramatically. You should just admit that you don't give a **** about them and are for the law because it happens to benefit you. Don't get all bent out of shape when people are against it because it isn't good for them.
Click to expand...

I don't think he was getting bent out of shape. He was stating how the law has helped him. You seem defensive. I have heard both good and bad about Obamacare . My personal experience is good and so is my sister. We both live in different states. I always had a issue with some of the things I've read about it but I haven't been like some people who blame everything on Obamacare. Insurance costs were skyrocketing before Obamacare, employers were laying people before Obamacare and people were getting dropped from their insurance before Obamacare.

Opponents make it sound as though the world was just great before Obamacare. Of course the implementation has been a nightmare but instead of bashing it have your representatives change laws that make it better. If your exchanges are working then make your representatives actual work. You know find solutions to problems. I am for people having affordable insurance if Obama care doesn't do it then either fix it or come up with an working alternative. Something the complainers haven't done. Medical accounts do not address the cost of health insurance.
 
Beantown said:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/3540733/George-W-Bush-says-Iraq-intelligence-failure-is-his-biggest-regret.html


Most all your precious Democrats voted for the war you retard.
Click to expand...

As the father of our country, the Bush administration led the war machine. Instead of calming us down to allow cooler heads to prevail, and doing what he should have done that Obama did(collect intelligence, pinpoint his location, send a small team in to where the leader was and assassinate Bin Laden), he pulled a Pearl Harbor and let emotion lead. He used one terrorist attack from an organization to justify military presence(bordering on occupation) in countries that weren't even involved.

As the commander in chief of the US Armed Forces he had the ultimate power to use whatever he needed. He could have made it a quick, tactical strike. He did not. He opted for a long, costly (financially and in the lives of many of our soldiers, which can not easily be quantified) war, putting us WAY further in the hole than any other commander in chief ever had.

Don't you think that deserves an apology?
 
ElRoach0 said:
As the father of our country, the Bush administration led the war machine. Instead of calming us down to allow cooler heads to prevail, and doing what he should have done that Obama did(collect intelligence, pinpoint his location, send a small team in to where the leader was and assassinate Bin Laden), he pulled a Pearl Harbor and let emotion lead. He used one terrorist attack from an organization to justify military presence(bordering on occupation) in countries that weren't even involved.

As the commander in chief of the US Armed Forces he had the ultimate power to use whatever he needed. He could have made it a quick, tactical strike. He did not. He opted for a long, costly (financially and in the lives of many of our soldiers, which can not easily be quantified) war, putting us WAY further in the hole than any other commander in chief ever had.

Don't you think that deserves an apology?
Click to expand...

Obama didn't do that. Most of the intel that led to OBL going down came from the Bush administration years. Obama more or less signed the order. He personally did basically nothing that wasn't already long in the works. Everything the Bush admin did was based on intel. The same intel the dems saw that caused them to vote for the war, along with everyone else. It turned out to be bad intel largely, but that was what they had to operate under. It is easy to brush it all under the rug with catchy, but patently false, slogans like "Bush lied, people died", but it doesn't help anything or change the facts. This whole issue was hashed and rehashed ad nauseum on this board before I went on sabatical.



So back to the topic at hand, I couldn't believe that a family of 5 would have to pay $1000 per month for the most basic plan available in my state. I have always had a plan through my insurance at work, so I am not that familiar with the private insurance plan market, but from what we were looking at last summer that is very steep. Has it always been near that expensive? And how can people say that at $1000 that is better than either a bare-bones coverage or none at all for some families, when that would mean the difference between eating or not for some families. I guess I just didn't see enough of the "before" to understand how great the "after" now is.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Obama didn't do that. Most of the intel that led to OBL going down came from the Bush administration years. Obama more or less signed the order. He personally did basically nothing that wasn't already long in the works. Everything the Bush admin did was based on intel. The same intel the dems saw that caused them to vote for the war, along with everyone else. It turned out to be bad intel largely, but that was what they had to operate under. It is easy to brush it all under the rug with catchy, but patently false, slogans like "Bush lied, people died", but it doesn't help anything or change the facts. This whole issue was hashed and rehashed ad nauseum on this board before I went on sabatical.



So back to the topic at hand, I couldn't believe that a family of 5 would have to pay $1000 per month for the most basic plan available in my state. I have always had a plan through my insurance at work, so I am not that familiar with the private insurance plan market, but from what we were looking at last summer that is very steep. Has it always been near that expensive? And how can people say that at $1000 that is better than either a bare-bones coverage or none at all for some families, when that would mean the difference between eating or not for some families. I guess I just didn't see enough of the "before" to understand how great the "after" now is.
Click to expand...

Insurance has been painfully expensive for a whole now. Unless work provided it, most people simply can not afford it. I lucked out and got a 1k deductible policy for a family of three for $489/month. Then the aca came along and I can get a less expensive plan through the exchange. But in the meantime, my work has started reimbursing for coverage. Now I found out that if your work pays for coverage, you are I eligible for the aca exchanges.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Obama didn't do that. Most of the intel that led to OBL going down came from the Bush administration years. Obama more or less signed the order. He personally did basically nothing that wasn't already long in the works. Everything the Bush admin did was based on intel. The same intel the dems saw that caused them to vote for the war, along with everyone else. It turned out to be bad intel largely, but that was what they had to operate under. It is easy to brush it all under the rug with catchy, but patently false, slogans like "Bush lied, people died", but it doesn't help anything or change the facts. This whole issue was hashed and rehashed ad nauseum on this board before I went on sabatical.
Click to expand...

Well... there's this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/how-much-credit-does-obama-get-for-bin-ladens-reported-death/2011/05/02/AFzQ8jZF_blog.html

Which says this:

However, in a later background briefing for reporters, officials said that four years ago the identity was determined of the courier who ultimately led to bin Laden. That would place a key moment in the search back in the Bush administration. Officials also said that “about two years ago” U.S. intelligence discovered the areas in Pakistan where he operated. That sounds as if it happened during Obama’s presidency but the timing is vague enough that it could have overlapped with Bush’s. Other key events, such as the discovery of bin Laden’s compound and the decision to attack it, took place during Obama’s presidency.
Click to expand...

Since it's a combination, I'll give credit where credit's due: Not all of the information that was collected by the Bush administration was bad. A lot of the information they retrieved was under dubious circumstances(gitmo, "enhanced interrogation techiniques"), but it wasn't all bad.

But even though it's all they had to go on, it was wrong. As a leader, he still should have owned up and said "Ya know.. I was given some information. It wasn't correct. I'm sorry I took this as far as I did.". He didn't. He won't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top