I hope all of the non-Liberal voted today.

TY PJ...I voted a couple of weeks ago.

The only observations I have to make are:

1. Obama only continued the bailouts started by GWB
2. The current unemployment problem was created by Obama's predecessor
3. The Repubs are spreading lies about the Congressionally passed healthcare plan. I recently got my plan which takes effect after the 1st of the year. Among the changes:

• I used to have a $2M lifetime limit; there is no limit now
• I used to have to stay in-network to get the greatest benefit; there is no limitation on who I can see now
• I used to have to pay 20% after deductible; now, after deductible, I pay -0-%
• I used to have to pay a portion of preventive care; now insurance pays 100%
• Nursing home care used to be very limited; now it's 100% covered after deductible;
• In-patient psychiatric/drug rehab care is at 100% after deductible.
• In most cases deductible is $500. Premiums did not change.
• Kids are covered to age 26.
• Pre-existing conditions are covered.
• Prescriptions are tiered, but still reasonable.

The fearmongering done by the Repubs is all lies. I have the proof in the changes in my insurance plan. Check your plans and see. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Ironically I got a similar letter in the mail from my insurer yesterday outlining a bunch of new benefits. Without trying to go line by line much of it is similar to the above. The kicker was there was even a line on there to the effect of "we are pleased to offer these additional benefits to you at no additional cost to you."

Bullshit! In December I expect to get a letter, as I do every year, with my new premium amount. I expect it will be 20-30% higher than last year. But it won't mention Obamacare or any legislation, it will simply say the increase is due to increasing costs to provide coverage.

The irony about removing a lifetime maximum, which was a change to my plan as well, is my current plan won't be around when I'm 65 or 70 and get some terminal disease that would approach my lifetime max...

Chuck and Geyser, please take a look at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HnkxIh62dQ Originally Posted by Survivor

My Dad used to say, "You can prove any point by quoting the Bible." The favorite two quotes: "And Judas went out and hanged himself; go and do thou likewise."

Really, supporting an argument with YouTube videos is much the same. Heck, you can find "experts" on all sides of this issue. The conservatives/libertarians on this board (you really can't tell them apart, so I don't understand their insistence on the distinction), have prejudged health care so that no matter what the animal looked like, they would hate it. Cold-hearted bastards. All I can say is if third world countries can offer their citizens health care, the greatest nation on earth should be able to also. So, fuk you cold-hearted bastards that wants health care to be the exclusive province of the rich, and the poor can die for all you care.

The irony about removing a lifetime maximum, which was a change to my plan as well, is my current plan won't be around when I'm 65 or 70 and get some terminal disease that would approach my lifetime max... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Same for me. But at least my kids will have the coverage, which is more than I could have said for me.

Same for me. But at least my kids will have the coverage, which is more than I could have said for me. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

How's that? That is, that your kids will have the coverage? What coverage do you think your kids will have? It isn't the nice plan you have now.

What I think you are missing is that anything that changes in current plans are just band aids

How's that? That is, that your kids will have the coverage? What coverage do you think your kids will have? It isn't the nice plan you have now.

What I think you are missing is that anything that changes in current plans are just band aids Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Ah, so you're siding with Bill Maher and Jon Stewart...that the health care plan didn't go far enough.

Even though it's just band aids, it is better than nothing.

TY PJ...I voted a couple of weeks ago.

The only observations I have to make are:

1. Obama only continued the bailouts started by GWB
2. The current unemployment problem was created by Obama's predecessor
3. The Repubs are spreading lies about the Congressionally passed healthcare plan. I recently got my plan which takes effect after the 1st of the year. Among the changes:

• I used to have a $2M lifetime limit; there is no limit now
• I used to have to stay in-network to get the greatest benefit; there is no limitation on who I can see now
• I used to have to pay 20% after deductible; now, after deductible, I pay -0-%
• I used to have to pay a portion of preventive care; now insurance pays 100%
• Nursing home care used to be very limited; now it's 100% covered after deductible;
• In-patient psychiatric/drug rehab care is at 100% after deductible.
• In most cases deductible is $500. Premiums did not change.
• Kids are covered to age 26.
• Pre-existing conditions are covered.
• Prescriptions are tiered, but still reasonable.

The fearmongering done by the Repubs is all lies. I have the proof in the changes in my insurance plan. Check your plans and see. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

C'mon Chucky...this ain't exactly brain surgery here.

If those changes are an increased value to you...there must be a decreased value to someone else. That someone else is either lower medical costs (doctors, hospitals, pharmacuticals), or insurance providers, or taxpayers. Or perhaps it will be a bait and switch as some of the other's have suggested here.

I know you can be a bit dense sometimes...but even you know the costs are not just going to sprout up out of the ground.

C'mon Chucky...this ain't exactly brain surgery here.

If those changes are an increased value to you...there must be a decreased value to someone else. That someone else is either lower medical costs (doctors, hospitals, pharmacuticals), or insurance providers, or taxpayers. Or perhaps it will be a bait and switch as some of the other's have suggested here.

I know you can be a bit dense sometimes...but even you know the costs are not just going to sprout up out of the ground. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

I predict lower medical costs, just as another poster pointed out. It's where the greatest disposable income is, and even for you, RK, it's a no-brainer.

I recently had emergency surgery. After my deductible, I'm paying 20%. If it had waited until after Jan. 1, all I would be out is my deductible of $500.

Ah, so you're siding with Bill Maher and Jon Stewart...that the health care plan didn't go far enough.

Even though it's just band aids, it is better than nothing. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Tudor logic: if you use the same word, even if it is in a different context, as someone else, you must agree with them

Coverage for kids is a nit -- about a 2 or 3% increase in costs. You have no idea the fucking shit-storm that is coming. health care is going to go from 14% of GDP to 17 or 18%. Their ain't enough "rich people" in the country to pay for that increased cost - so guess what dude, you'll get a bill for your free lunch.

Let me know when your employer cancels your health plan, pays a $4K penalty tax and throws your ass into a state exchange. I want to hear how much you love this POS then. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Back to PJ's point much earlier, which you clearly have missed, it doesn't matter what your insurer does this year or next...that plan won't exist very shortly...

I predict lower medical costs Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

So, are you saying doctors will recieve less?...or the hospitals?...or the nurses?...who? Again, the previous money went somewhere...so if you're not going to give it...then someone is going to get less.

C'mon...put on your thinking cap...Who is it going to be?

So, are you saying doctors will recieve less? Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Meet Dr. Patel, your new Primary Care Physician. He graduated in the top 80% of his class at the Online University of Bombay and is currently taking an English Course from Rosetta Stone.....

"TANSTAAFL"

If I have to explain that concept to you, you wouldn't understand it anyway.

Same for me. But at least my kids will have the coverage, which is more than I could have said for me. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

They don't need a lifetime maximum if they have death panels.

They don't need a lifetime maximum if they have death panels. Originally Posted by pjorourke

There you go RK, PJ answered your question.

Or maybe the PROFIT is what will go missing. Maybe instead of bonuses for a CEO because of a policy that denies coverage , ole Charles gets more insurance and the insurance company makes less money. Or PJ and Sara Palin are correct , the government is just going to have Death Panels to save that money so Charles has better insurance until he is just to old to be worth investing in. Tough choice, do the young folks pay for the older folks healthcare because they live longer than the old folks planned for back fifty years ago or do they make a a tough choice and insure younger more productive folks. Tough choice....to bad people don't lay it out in real terms.

There that may not be exactly correct but it at least attempts to answer your question

If those changes are an increased value to you...there must be a decreased value to someone else. That someone else is either lower medical costs (doctors, hospitals, pharmacuticals), or insurance providers, or taxpayers. . Originally Posted by Rudyard K

They don't need a lifetime maximum if they have death panels. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Correct. Death panels or cost adjusters will decide if you will recieve drug x or treatment x.The government will put a price on you and your medical condition.

Silly republican's always talking about principle. Fuck principle. It does not mean shit when you vote in different states. Nice try. Tell me this: Republican are the family value, by the bible, holier than thou, etc... How can you take part in this hobby but be republican/conservative? Not like the dems are trying to make prostitution legal but republicans are usually more outspoken about shit like this tearing up the traditional family.

Also, the only reason this healthcare stuff is going to cost more NOW is because the health care providers and issurance companies are going to try and get their big chunch of change before shit gets regulated for the people in 2014. Get rich while you can because in 2014 you wont be able to be out of control any longer. There actually is enough rich people in this country to pay for it. When everything ends up alright and this healthcare stuff works its way out, all these people talking shit about are going to never say they were wrong because conservatives and republicans never are wrong are they? Originally Posted by Geyser7

You can take part in this hobby and be conservative liberatarian.I don't believe the government has the right to tell a woman what she can or can't do with her body (+ mine).As far as "There actually is enough rich people in this country to pay for it." No thats not true as was once said "the problem with socialisim is you run out of other peoples money".