As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Health Care Reform: Now With PR Gimmicks! We're Doomed.

1202123252663

Posts

  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    I'm at my dads, they watch Fox News here.
    He's pissed that his premiums are sure as shit going to go up. What's making him think this? Is it valid?

    Possibly up a little, but when it goes into full effect they can't dump him if he has a medical emergency.

    MKR on
  • The Crowing OneThe Crowing One Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    I'm at my dads, they watch Fox News here.
    He's pissed that his premiums are sure as shit going to go up. What's making him think this? Is it valid?

    Greed and obstruction of information.

    The Crowing One on
    3rddocbottom.jpg
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Apparently the cadillac plans that are getting taxed include my father in-law's.

    He works for the state you see, and the state employees union has good benefits for them.

    It's kind of sad to see this paid for by middle income state employees.

    Speaker on
  • ImprovoloneImprovolone Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    I'm at my dads, they watch Fox News here.
    He's pissed that his premiums are sure as shit going to go up. What's making him think this? Is it valid?

    Greed and obstruction of information.

    Well that explain nothing. Even if its total bullshit, what is the bullshit line he believes?

    Improvolone on
    Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
  • DeebaserDeebaser on my way to work in a suit and a tie Ahhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    I'm at my dads, they watch Fox News here.
    He's pissed that his premiums are sure as shit going to go up. What's making him think this? Is it valid?

    It's only valid if he ignores the fact that his premiums have been going up 7-15% annually EVERY YEAR for the PAST 15 YEARS.

    To give you an idea. Here is some completely shitty poo poo coverage:

    http://www.lifeandhealthinsurancequote.com/vytrasmarthealth1.htm

    That plan cost $192.08 five years ago. (Q1 2010) Same benefits, same underwriting, same network, almost DOUBLE the price.

    The industry has been a scam and no your father's insurance shouldn't go up any more than it has been. The non-exclusion for pre-existing conditions is not bundled with community ratings so insurers will just be able to price the sickies out if state regs allow it.

    Deebaser on
  • Saint MadnessSaint Madness Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Hah, the crazies are talking about Civil War now.

    Saint Madness on
  • thisisntwallythisisntwally Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    I'm at my dads, they watch Fox News here.
    He's pissed that his premiums are sure as shit going to go up. What's making him think this? Is it valid?

    Greed and obstruction of information.

    Well that explain nothing. Even if its total bullshit, what is the bullshit line he believes?

    some states have limits on the price differences between plans. california, ohio, new york and texas come to mind.

    these states are not going to see increases in insurance costs. states without those sorts of mandates, its pretty much open season, the insurance companies will raise rates to make up for whatever they're losing elsewhere. I live in ohio so i don't know what states those are, but i'd bet they're mostly red.

    thisisntwally on
    #someshit
  • GoslingGosling Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, Probably Watertown, WIRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Huh. Surprised it stayed at 60 votes here. I'd have bet anything that some of the Blue Dogs would have voted yes on cloture and no on passage. Particularly Lieberman, and PARTICULARLY Lincoln. They held the line, though.

    Gosling on
    I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
  • HachfaceHachface Not the Minister Farrakhan you're thinking of Dammit, Shepard!Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Gosling wrote: »
    Huh. Surprised it stayed at 60 votes here. I'd have bet anything that some of the Blue Dogs would have voted yes on cloture and no on passage. Particularly Lieberman, and PARTICULARLY Lincoln. They held the line, though.

    It's clear now that voting for cloture is voting for passage. Even the symbolic difference has eroded.

    Hachface on
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Gosling wrote: »
    Huh. Surprised it stayed at 60 votes here. I'd have bet anything that some of the Blue Dogs would have voted yes on cloture and no on passage. Particularly Lieberman, and PARTICULARLY Lincoln. They held the line, though.

    My stomach turns with dread about the votes on the bill that comes out of conference.

    But at the same time - it seems like we are probably in the clear.

    Speaker on
  • The Crowing OneThe Crowing One Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Speaker wrote: »
    Gosling wrote: »
    Huh. Surprised it stayed at 60 votes here. I'd have bet anything that some of the Blue Dogs would have voted yes on cloture and no on passage. Particularly Lieberman, and PARTICULARLY Lincoln. They held the line, though.

    My stomach turns with dread about the votes on the bill that comes out of conference.

    But at the same time - it seems like we are probably in the clear.

    Dear god knock on wood.

    The Crowing One on
    3rddocbottom.jpg
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Gosling wrote: »
    Huh. Surprised it stayed at 60 votes here. I'd have bet anything that some of the Blue Dogs would have voted yes on cloture and no on passage. Particularly Lieberman, and PARTICULARLY Lincoln. They held the line, though.

    More likely either Obama or Rahm held the line, but yeah, something like that.

    Fencingsax on
  • The Crowing OneThe Crowing One Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Gosling wrote: »
    Huh. Surprised it stayed at 60 votes here. I'd have bet anything that some of the Blue Dogs would have voted yes on cloture and no on passage. Particularly Lieberman, and PARTICULARLY Lincoln. They held the line, though.

    More likely either Obama or Rahm held the line, but yeah, something like that.

    Rahm needs to seriously slap more people more often. It's what he does.

    The Crowing One on
    3rddocbottom.jpg
  • DeebaserDeebaser on my way to work in a suit and a tie Ahhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    I'm at my dads, they watch Fox News here.
    He's pissed that his premiums are sure as shit going to go up. What's making him think this? Is it valid?

    Greed and obstruction of information.

    Well that explain nothing. Even if its total bullshit, what is the bullshit line he believes?

    some states have limits on the price differences between plans. california, ohio, new york and texas come to mind.

    these states are not going to see increases in insurance costs. states without those sorts of mandates, its pretty much open season, the insurance companies will raise rates to make up for whatever they're losing elsewhere. I live in ohio so i don't know what states those are, but i'd bet they're mostly red.

    Does CA really have a hard limit on paper? I've never heard of that, but seeing as they have individual medical underwriting the insurers over there don't cover the sickies anyway. Still, I thought they only had a renewal percentage increase cap of 20% but I could be thinking of another state.

    NY is a goddamn fucking nightmare and textbook case of why we need a strong mandate with the elimination of pre-existing conditions clauses.

    Deebaser on
  • thisisntwallythisisntwally Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Deebaser wrote: »
    I'm at my dads, they watch Fox News here.
    He's pissed that his premiums are sure as shit going to go up. What's making him think this? Is it valid?

    Greed and obstruction of information.

    Well that explain nothing. Even if its total bullshit, what is the bullshit line he believes?

    some states have limits on the price differences between plans. california, ohio, new york and texas come to mind.

    these states are not going to see increases in insurance costs. states without those sorts of mandates, its pretty much open season, the insurance companies will raise rates to make up for whatever they're losing elsewhere. I live in ohio so i don't know what states those are, but i'd bet they're mostly red.

    Does CA really have a hard limit on paper? I've never heard of that, but seeing as they have individual medical underwriting the insurers over there don't cover the sickies anyway. Still, I thought they only had a renewal percentage increase cap of 20% but I could be thinking of another state.

    NY is a goddamn fucking nightmare and textbook case of why we need a strong mandate with the elimination of pre-existing conditions clauses.

    you know, i was half listening to the conversation.

    I did not understand it to be a hard limit. it was a limit on the spread.

    thisisntwally on
    #someshit
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    This thing with Obama trying to say he was never for the public option during the campaign seems stupid.

    I'm pretty sure he was, but now he prefers the news stories that say "after all that work, Obama got pretty much what he wanted" to the stories that say "Obama makes the best of compromise".

    Speaker on
  • GoslingGosling Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, Probably Watertown, WIRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    If he wanted do do that for single-payer, it'd be one thing, but he did campaign on the public option. There's an entire website dedicated specifically to keeping track of every campaign promise he made. He's performing well enough on it (Kept 75, Compromised 20, Broken 9). He doesn't need to pull that.

    You campaigned on it, you didn't get it. It happens. Cop to it.

    Gosling on
    I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Depends on what you mean by "campaign on it." If you mean it was included in his campaign proposals, then he did. If you mean it was a point of focus or something he brought up in major speeches then he didn't "campaign on it." Usually when I say something like that I lean towards the second meaning. And he didn't mention it in any major speeches. But it is spin control because he did support it as a component in his overall healthcare policy, regardless of whether or not he got "95%" of what he wanted in this bill

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • Armored GorillaArmored Gorilla Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Speaker wrote: »
    This thing with Obama trying to say he was never for the public option during the campaign seems stupid.

    I'm pretty sure he was, but now he prefers the news stories that say "after all that work, Obama got pretty much what he wanted" to the stories that say "Obama makes the best of compromise".

    You're never going to see that headline.

    Armored Gorilla on
    "I'm a mad god. The Mad God, actually. It's a family title. Gets passed down from me to myself every few thousand years."
  • emnmnmeemnmnme Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Hah, the crazies are talking about Civil War now.

    A Civil War seems reasonable now that America is crumbling! We've already lost Florida and half of Georgia this morning and we're expecting territory all the way up to North Carolina will fall into the ocean by 3pm. This country is falling apart!

    emnmnme on
  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    emnmnme wrote: »
    Hah, the crazies are talking about Civil War now.

    A Civil War seems reasonable now that America is crumbling! We've already lost Florida and half of Georgia this morning and we're expecting territory all the way up to North Carolina will fall into the ocean by 3pm. This country is falling apart!

    Its a Christmas Miracle!

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    Depends on what you mean by "campaign on it." If you mean it was included in his campaign proposals, then he did. If you mean it was a point of focus or something he brought up in major speeches then he didn't "campaign on it." Usually when I say something like that I lean towards the second meaning. And he didn't mention it in any major speeches. But it is spin control because he did support it as a component in his overall healthcare policy, regardless of whether or not he got "95%" of what he wanted in this bill

    Of course, he did mention it in a major speech as President...

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Hm, Obama mildly decries the filibuster.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2009
    Hm, Obama mildly decries the filibuster.

    POST-GRACIOUS PRESIDENT!!!1!!

    Kastanj on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • lonelyahavalonelyahava Call me Ahava ~~She/Her~~ Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Bunning missed the vote?

    Why would a republican miss the vote?

    Also, I'm just as surprised as Gosling that it stayed at 60. I was really expecting more like 55/56 majority.

    But I'm happy with 60.

    Now, holiday recess, and conference.

    lonelyahava on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Hm, Obama mildly decries the filibuster.

    <3 Jim Lehrer so much.

    moniker on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Bunning missed the vote?

    Why would a republican miss the vote?

    Also, I'm just as surprised as Gosling that it stayed at 60. I was really expecting more like 55/56 majority.

    But I'm happy with 60.

    Now, holiday recess, and conference.

    It's the final sign that the cloture vote and final passage are now the same, further proving the Senate is dysfunctional.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Bunning missed the vote?

    Why would a republican miss the vote?

    Also, I'm just as surprised as Gosling that it stayed at 60. I was really expecting more like 55/56 majority.

    But I'm happy with 60.

    Now, holiday recess, and conference.

    It's the final sign that the cloture vote and final passage are now the same, further proving the Senate is dysfunctional.

    That or it gives cover to vote against the Conference bill because 'things changed!' and such.

    moniker on
  • SliderSlider Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    So, I get fined if I don't have health insurance and there is no opt-out option?

    Slider on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Slider wrote: »
    So, I get fined if I don't have health insurance and there is no opt-out option?
    Yes.

    $95.

    In 2014.

    If you make enough to put you more than 400% over the poverty line.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • emnmnmeemnmnme Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Slider wrote: »
    So, I get fined if I don't have health insurance and there is no opt-out option?

    Correct. But if you're poor, the government will give you money to buy some cheap insurance.

    emnmnme on
  • big lbig l Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Speaker wrote: »
    Apparently the cadillac plans that are getting taxed include my father in-law's.

    He works for the state you see, and the state employees union has good benefits for them.

    It's kind of sad to see this paid for by middle income state employees.

    This is too bad that unions are going to be hit pretty hard by the cadillac tax. But I think it's something that should be done. Unions negotiated those big HC benefit taxes because they were tax free and they wanted more stuff with less taxes. That's a bad incentive structure that should be fixed. And while unions and their workers take a hit now, it means in future negotiations this twisted incentive structure won't be in place, and unions and employers can negotiate out compensation that gives more money in wages and less in health care, putting more cash in pockets and reducing the incidence of overly expensive wasteful medical insurance plans. It's a painful solution for some, but it fixes a real incentive problem facing union negotiators. Eggs and omelets and all that.

    big l on
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2009
    I just read a quite bitter, partisan yet at the same time not completely dismissable attack on the democrat reform plan over at a blog that pretends to be moderately conservative. I want to raise the contentions brought up, but I naturally want to abide the strict anti-raid rules here.

    As I said, it's a piece lacking in good faith in some respects, but it might be useful to debunk and look through. Would it be OK if I pasted in a few of its paragraphs?

    I'll spoiler them. Like I said, I don't think he makes his case diplomatically, but he might raise something of value. I most definitely don't respect everything he has written or think it worthy of consideration, but here:
    "Remove doctors from the medical field and what are you left with? An empty shell, bereft of value to those who need its services. Democrats’ motives are in some respects admirable, but their thought process is lacking. Remove the advantages bestowed on members of the medical profession and you remove the motivation for the best and brightest among us to make the sacrifices needed to enter this important field."

    "Yes, others will certainly take their place in medical school and in practice, but the inevitable result will be a decline in the quality of care provided as a result of this mind shift. Yet the Democrats’ bill is focused, as it necessarily must be, on reducing costs and increasing systematic compliance, both of which have negative impacts on doctors and will inexorably lead, over time, to a brain drain in the medical field, a fact that Democrats doggedly ignore."

    "Liberals prefer instead to trumpet the need to provide medical insurance to people who cannot pay for it themselves, a goal that has some merit to it. What they conveniently ignore is history. Skyrocketing medical costs are a reality that effectively denies 5-10% of Americans access to medical services. But liberals fail to consider the key part in which their own past policies in creating this new, unfortunate situation."

    "Medicare, for instance, exists solely to shift the costs of late-in-life care away from those 60+ to current workers and their families. Providing medical care to the elderly is a noble goal; however, accomplishing it requires a massive transfer of wealth in order to reach it. Moreover, the inefficiency inherent in such government programs makes draconian cost-reduction measures a necessity on the provider side of the equation."

    "As is well-known, medical providers receive only 75-80% of the revenue from Medicare patients as they do from others. This has two effects: First, costs are increased for non-Medicare patients. This warps the health care market out of shape, the effect of which is effectively a hidden tax on working families; Second, some medical providers refuse to provide services to Medicare patients, thus reducing both convenience and quality of care to those the plan aims to help."

    "A second, more subtle problem with the Medicare entitlement is the mental attitudes that it fosters among both patients and physicians, namely that unlimited medical care is an essential right of every American and that equal outcomes, medically speaking, are both deserved and desirable for all Americans."

    "That neither is true has not stopped the creeping advance of the misguided notion that every conceivable medical treatment should be available to every American throughout every day of our lives, regardless of the cost and who must pay to provide marginally inefficient care. To put it simply, medical costs have increased in large part because Americans have come to believe the lie that they are entitled to use medical resources as if they had no cost, much like the air we breathe."

    Now Democrats in Congress are on the verge of taking this fundamental wrong and increasing its scope to the breadth and width of the American populace. In fact, it may already be too late to stop this from happening – the wheels have been greased in part thanks to the hundreds of millions of dollars in “political bribes” paid to Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. "

    "The vast majority of Americans have access to the finest health care that has ever been available. We demand that the profit motive that lies behind this system, the motive that is the sole reason for that system to exist, be respected. We demand that doctors be left free and unfettered to research and to provide care as they see fit. We demand that we be allowed to seek medical care according to our own desires to receive it and our ability to pay for it. We demand, in short, for government to restrict itself to its proper functions, none of which have anything to do with medicine."

    Kastanj on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    The guy is an idiot if he thinks that the best and brightest who are solely motivated by money are becoming doctors. They're becoming MBAs and doing their best to break our financial system. They get paid far more and don't go through the absolute hell that is our medical education system.

    I'd rather have a slightly less intelligent doctor who wants me to be healthy than a more intelligent doctor who wants his third Porche.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Seriously if you're all about money being a doctor is a shitty job

    you pay out the nose for education, get paid a pittance until you do your residency and then if you're lucky go into private practice in a highly competitive specialty

    nexuscrawler on
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    I just read a quite bitter, partisan yet at the same time not completely dismissable attack on the democrat reform plan over at a blog that pretends to be moderately conservative. I want to raise the contentions brought up, but I naturally want to abide the strict anti-raid rules here.

    As I said, it's a piece lacking in good faith in some respects, but it might be useful to debunk and look through. Would it be OK if I pasted in a few of its paragraphs?

    I'll spoiler them. Like I said, I don't think he makes his case diplomatically, but he might raise something of value. I most definitely don't respect everything he has written or think it worthy of consideration, but here:
    "Remove doctors from the medical field and what are you left with? An empty shell, bereft of value to those who need its services. Democrats’ motives are in some respects admirable, but their thought process is lacking. Remove the advantages bestowed on members of the medical profession and you remove the motivation for the best and brightest among us to make the sacrifices needed to enter this important field."

    "Yes, others will certainly take their place in medical school and in practice, but the inevitable result will be a decline in the quality of care provided as a result of this mind shift. Yet the Democrats’ bill is focused, as it necessarily must be, on reducing costs and increasing systematic compliance, both of which have negative impacts on doctors and will inexorably lead, over time, to a brain drain in the medical field, a fact that Democrats doggedly ignore."

    "Liberals prefer instead to trumpet the need to provide medical insurance to people who cannot pay for it themselves, a goal that has some merit to it. What they conveniently ignore is history. Skyrocketing medical costs are a reality that effectively denies 5-10% of Americans access to medical services. But liberals fail to consider the key part in which their own past policies in creating this new, unfortunate situation."

    "Medicare, for instance, exists solely to shift the costs of late-in-life care away from those 60+ to current workers and their families. Providing medical care to the elderly is a noble goal; however, accomplishing it requires a massive transfer of wealth in order to reach it. Moreover, the inefficiency inherent in such government programs makes draconian cost-reduction measures a necessity on the provider side of the equation."

    "As is well-known, medical providers receive only 75-80% of the revenue from Medicare patients as they do from others. This has two effects: First, costs are increased for non-Medicare patients. This warps the health care market out of shape, the effect of which is effectively a hidden tax on working families; Second, some medical providers refuse to provide services to Medicare patients, thus reducing both convenience and quality of care to those the plan aims to help."

    "A second, more subtle problem with the Medicare entitlement is the mental attitudes that it fosters among both patients and physicians, namely that unlimited medical care is an essential right of every American and that equal outcomes, medically speaking, are both deserved and desirable for all Americans."

    "That neither is true has not stopped the creeping advance of the misguided notion that every conceivable medical treatment should be available to every American throughout every day of our lives, regardless of the cost and who must pay to provide marginally inefficient care. To put it simply, medical costs have increased in large part because Americans have come to believe the lie that they are entitled to use medical resources as if they had no cost, much like the air we breathe."

    Now Democrats in Congress are on the verge of taking this fundamental wrong and increasing its scope to the breadth and width of the American populace. In fact, it may already be too late to stop this from happening – the wheels have been greased in part thanks to the hundreds of millions of dollars in “political bribes” paid to Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. "

    "The vast majority of Americans have access to the finest health care that has ever been available. We demand that the profit motive that lies behind this system, the motive that is the sole reason for that system to exist, be respected. We demand that doctors be left free and unfettered to research and to provide care as they see fit. We demand that we be allowed to seek medical care according to our own desires to receive it and our ability to pay for it. We demand, in short, for government to restrict itself to its proper functions, none of which have anything to do with medicine."

    Yeah, the problem isn't the government, but people like Dr. Chucklefuck above.

    Those skyrocketing costs? They're due to rent seeking by doctors. And the government is trying to rein in said doctors.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    The Village, still confused by why everyone hates Lieberman. Among other things:
    It is difficult to pinpoint when or why Lieberman has taken a hit: In the past two weeks, he not only crucial in helping remove the healthcare bill's public option and Medicare buy-in provisions, but also subsequently announced that he would join with Democrats to support the bill after those provisions were removed.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2009
    "It is difficult to pinpoint when or why Lieberman has taken a hit: In the past two weeks, he not only crucial in helping remove the healthcare bill's public option and Medicare buy-in provisions"

    That sentence is like some absolute zero shit when it comes to elementary thinking.

    Kastanj on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    "It is difficult to pinpoint when or why Lieberman has taken a hit: In the past two weeks, he not only crucial in helping remove the healthcare bill's public option and Medicare buy-in provisions"

    That sentence is like some absolute zero shit when it comes to elementary thinking.

    But he punched the hippies? Everyone loves punching hippies! And hippie punchers!

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    edited December 2009
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Slider wrote: »
    So, I get fined if I don't have health insurance and there is no opt-out option?
    Yes.

    $95.

    In 2014.

    If you make enough to put you more than 400% over the poverty line.

    $95/year? If so, time to get rid of my health insurance as soon as the "no preexisting conditions" rule goes into effect. Ka-ching!

    enc0re on
This discussion has been closed.