Poll: Majority happy w/ Obamacare

TEOTWAWKI wrote:Well dreams no one is effectively showing up at your house and robbing you with threats of imprisonment to give the money to your poor lazy neighbors....fact is you are the poor lazy neighbor to those that don't get a big subsidy and are forced to pay for you.

The key word here is FORCED...I hope the Supremes flush this toilet

Poor lazy neighbor? LOL! I am retired,Teo. I've worked almost 40 yrs. It's about time somebody paid for me. I could say the same thing about you getting your medicare. I paid for that so stuff it, Nazi man.

2seaoat wrote:I can see you using this logic with a IRA.  Oh the government forced me to keep my money in my account.  No, you can withdraw your money at any time, but if you are below a certain age you will pay a 10% penalty......you cannot fix stupid.......The government is forcing me to keep my money in my IRA........

So you are comparing ACA to and IRA...? One is a law which mandates compliance and payment in one form or another either a penalty or purchase of health insurance and the other a totally voluntary savings and investment plan ? Which actually has no coercion for you to contribute to it ? No doesn't work except in your Gruber mind.

Vikingwoman wrote:

TEOTWAWKI wrote:Well dreams no one is effectively showing up at your house and robbing you with threats of imprisonment to give the money to your poor lazy neighbors....fact is you are the poor lazy neighbor to those that don't get a big subsidy and are forced to pay for you.

The key word here is FORCED...I hope the Supremes flush this toilet

Poor lazy neighbor? LOL! I am retired,Teo. I've worked almost 40 yrs. It's about time somebody paid for me. I could say the same thing about you getting your medicare. I paid for that so stuff it, Nazi man.

Well I saved and am paying for myself...so should you have..You aren't paying for your medicare ?...I am...WTH ?

I'm not old enough for medicare.

Vikingwoman wrote:I'm not old enough for medicare.

Oh well be assured you will pay for it....


Medicare 2014 & 2015 costs at a glance
2014 & 2015 Costs at a Glance
Part B premium Most people pay $104.90 each month.(This amount won't change in 2015.)
Part B deductible $147 per year. (This amount won't change in 2015.)
Part A premium Most people don't pay a monthly premium for Part A. If you buy Part A, you'll pay up to $426 each month. (Reduced to $407 in 2015.)
Part A hospital inpatient deductible

You pay:

   $1,216 deductible for each benefit period ($1,260 in 2015)
   Days 1-60: $0 coinsurance for each benefit period ($0 in 2015)
   Days 61-90: $304 coinsurance per day of each benefit period ($315 in 2015)
   Days 91 and beyond: $608 coinsurance per each "lifetime reserve day" after day 90 for each benefit period (up to 60 days over your lifetime) ($630 in 2015)
   Beyond lifetime reserve days: all costs

Detailed Medicare cost information for 2014 & 2015
expand icon Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance)
expand icon Medicare Part B (Medical Insurance)
expand icon Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage)
expand icon Medicare Part D (Medicare prescription drug coverage)


http://www.medicare.gov/your-medicare-costs/costs-at-a-glance/costs-at-glance.html

I'm sure I will just as I'm paying for this Obamacare policy now.

I'd sure like to pay what you are paying for your great Obamacare policy now...

So you are comparing ACA to and IRA...? One is a law which mandates compliance and payment in one form or another either a penalty or purchase of health insurance and the other a totally voluntary savings and investment plan ? Which actually has no coercion for you to contribute to it ? No doesn't work except in your Gruber mind.


Well you got it partially right. They are both laws passed by the people's representatives in Congress and signed into law by a President. They both represent policy goals of Congress. One is to encourage people to save for retirement. One to encourage people to have health insurance. They both have penalties if the intent of the legislation is not followed. In both the citizens have a choice which if not in compliance with the law could face a penalty. To give you an idea how absurd your whining is the penalty for the non compliance under the ACA is 1% of your earnings for the year, yet it is 10% of the amount of YOUR money taken out of the account. Any person who wants to continue being a dead beat will pay a few dollars......

2seaoat wrote:So you are comparing ACA to and IRA...? One is a law which mandates compliance and payment in one form or another either a penalty or purchase of health insurance and the other a totally voluntary savings and investment plan ? Which actually has no coercion for you to contribute to it ? No doesn't work except in your Gruber mind.


Well you got it partially right.  They are both laws passed by the people's representatives in Congress and signed into law by a President.   They both represent policy goals of Congress.  One is to encourage people to save for retirement.  One to encourage people to have health insurance.  They both have penalties if the intent of the legislation is not followed.  In both the citizens have a choice which if not in compliance with the law could face a penalty.   To give you an idea how absurd your whining is the penalty for the non compliance under the ACA is 1% of your earnings for the year, yet it is 10% of the amount of YOUR money taken out of the account.  Any person who wants to continue being a dead beat will pay a few dollars......

First off you're comparing apples and oranges.

Second off no one is mandated to purchase IRA's.

So you are incorrect to utilize such as an analogy.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diOuUYcenW0

Lisa12 wrote:I'd sure like to pay what you are paying for your great Obamacare policy now...

Well, go on and retire and you can too.

First off you're comparing apples and oranges.

Second off no one is mandated to purchase IRA's.

So you are incorrect to utilize such as an analogy.

Not at all. Congress determined that deadbeats should have to pay for the costs covered by their medical care. They put in place the Heritage model of Romneycare and included penalties to collect a tax if people chose not to buy insurance. Congress determined that retirement funds were an important goal for Americans so that taxpayers would not be paying for folks in old age and gave tax advantages to those who chose to invest in retirement funds, and if folks who decided to early withdraw they penalized withdrawals. Both are legislation which set a societal goal to minimize taxpayer contributions for people who failed to save for retirement and those who failed to buy insurance......both liabilities to taxpayers. The penalty was an integral part of the legislation but nobody has to get the tax advantages of an IRA, or pay the penalty for early withdrawal, and nobody has to buy health insurance.

2seaoat wrote:First off you're comparing apples and oranges.

Second off no one is mandated to purchase IRA's.

So you are incorrect to utilize such as an analogy.

Not at all.  Congress determined that deadbeats should have to pay for the costs covered by their medical care.  They put in place the Heritage model of Romneycare and included penalties to collect a tax if people chose not to buy insurance.   Congress determined that retirement funds were an important goal for Americans so that taxpayers would not be paying for folks in old age and gave tax advantages to those who chose to invest in retirement funds, and if folks who decided to early withdraw they penalized withdrawals.  Both are legislation which set a societal goal to minimize taxpayer contributions for people who failed to save for retirement and those who failed to buy insurance......both liabilities to taxpayers.  The penalty was an integral part of the legislation but nobody has to get the tax advantages of an IRA, or pay the penalty for early withdrawal, and nobody has to buy health insurance.

Nope! If you want to compare them then the government would have had to mandate that all people had to purchase IRA's and told them there would be fines for those who didn't comply. Then your analogy might hold some relevance... And I would have had a problem with the government mandating such a thing also.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diOuUYcenW0

Vikingwoman wrote:

ppaca wrote:You asked what policy costs that much, I don't believe I ever said these people had individual plans, in fact it is their group retiree benefits that is going up to $2200 per month on Jan.

Even A Silver plan would be cost prohibitive for anyone just a bit over 400% FPL and age 61.

What does that have to do w/ Obamacare? There's a silver policy for $600 on the marketplace w/ no deductible.

For whom? And a link please.

2seaoat wrote:Dumb and dumber......nobody is forced to get insurance.  They have a choice.  Purchase insurance or pay a penalty.  The penalty for somebody making 50k is $400.........your choice......

Going up annually to punish more and more people.

Damaged Eagle wrote:

2seaoat wrote:And there we have it! The true attitude of the supposedly enlightened progressive liberal. Sit around drawing entitlements while someone else works their ass off for them. Just another lazy ass drug addled fat bitch waiting for her liposuction here. Nothing pretty to see.

All these opinions as you suck on the teat of government entitlement.

Are you suggesting that military should be privatized?

We could mandate that everyone has to buy military insurance and when the military wants a 5-10% pay raise every year they could just raise the premiums. I'm thinkin' for the first ten years we'll need at least 40% increases every year to bring the current pay in the military up to where it should be.

Then I suppose the military would decide what engagements they want to fight in instead of listening to some civic leader become CINC/WAR CRIMINAL.

Does that sound agreeable to you?

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5X_Dd_6Czk

I'm anxiously awaiting your answer on this since you seem convinced that military members are only sucking off the government teat.

It seems like the obvious solution is to privatize the military. Just remember that if the military is privatized they can unionize and demand similar pay to other companies that provide similar services.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diOuUYcenW0

Markle wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:

ppaca wrote:You asked what policy costs that much, I don't believe I ever said these people had individual plans, in fact it is their group retiree benefits that is going up to $2200 per month on Jan.

Even A Silver plan would be cost prohibitive for anyone just a bit over 400% FPL and age 61.

What does that have to do w/ Obamacare? There's a silver policy for $600 on the marketplace w/ no deductible.

For whom?  And a link please.

Everyone. Ppcca already listed it.