Post #381,899
10/9/13 7:08:07 PM
|
heh, the wonderful democratic plan called the
healthcare act is aimed a gutting the lesser middle class and forcing them to to enjoy the dubious ability to feed themselves as the truly poor while painting us as traitors because we are not going to enjoy getting fucked. The rich don't care, they can afford healthcare so the legislation doesn't affect them at all. It is the people on fixed incomes that watch their monthly premiums go from $338 to $1140. Now if that is the best plan that the American left has to "keep less of my money going to Larry Ellison" then fuck them.
Your only point seems to be "rich people! rich people!"
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,902
10/9/13 7:36:58 PM
|
REALLY?
You honestly believe that... oh my.
Those people are getting subsidies.
You are still a dolt!
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
|
Post #381,904
10/9/13 7:50:45 PM
|
no, they are not getting subsidies. Read the links
Oh wait, you don't have to because you have already projected the story line
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,906
10/9/13 8:23:40 PM
|
Go fsck yourself.
Welcome to 1/2 what I pay a month plus $HYARGE deductible.
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
|
Post #381,916
10/9/13 9:27:34 PM
|
can't its not long enough
and your point is that you want a lot of people to get fucked over because you are getting fucked over. Very rational of you. Leave it there.
I have sympathy for your dilemma, why don't you wait a month for the IT side to get better then see what they offer you and report back. It may help
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,917
10/9/13 9:28:52 PM
|
Nope wrong conclusion.
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
|
Post #381,933
10/10/13 6:32:04 AM
|
Then route it over your hip, not the shoulder like I do.
|
Post #381,913
10/9/13 9:18:14 PM
|
Which ones?
This one? http://news.yahoo.co...28-040209815.html
(Reuters) - Americans will pay an average premium of $328 monthly for a mid-tier health insurance plan when the Obamacare health exchanges open for enrollment next week, and most will qualify for government subsidies to lower that price, the federal government said on Wednesday.
The figure, based on data for approved insurance plans in 48 states, is the broadest national estimate for the cost of coverage when President Barack Obama's healthcare reform law takes full effect next year. The prices of the new plans are at the heart of a political debate over whether they will be affordable enough to attract millions of uninsured Americans when enrollment begins on October 1.
KFF calculator: http://www.npr.org/b...ry-our-calculator
US Average.
$50000 income
2 adults, each 30 years old, nonsmokers
2 children, under 21, nonsmokers
No employer-provided insurance
results
The information below is about subsidized exchange coverage. Note that subsidies are only available for people purchasing coverage on their own in the exchange (not through an employer). Depending on your state's eligibility criteria, you or some members of your family may qualify for Medicaid.
Household income in 2014:212% of poverty level
Unsubsidized annual health insurance premium in 2014:$8,975
Maximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:6.73%
Amount you pay for the premium:$3,365 per year
(which equals 6.73% of your household income and covers 38% of the overall premium)
You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$5,609
(which covers 62% of the overall premium)
BRONZE PLAN
The premium and subsidy amounts above are based on a Silver plan. You have the option to apply the subsidy toward the purchase of other levels of coverage, such as a Gold plan (which would be more comprehensive) or a Bronze plan (which would be less comprehensive).
For example, you could enroll in a Bronze plan for about $1,829 per year (which is 3.66% of your household income, after taking into account $5,609 in subsidies). For most people, the Bronze plan represents the minimum level of coverage required under health reform. Although you would pay less in premiums by enrolling in a Bronze plan, you will face higher out-of-pocket costs than if you enrolled in a Silver plan.
$280 a month for decent health insurance for that family doesn't sound too bad. Yes, it'll be a stretch for some, but so would almost any medical expense. (I think the Silver plan is better for most (if they can afford it) because it has more cost-sharing so per-event costs are lower.)
Rates are higher for smokers. (Another reason for you to quit, if you haven't already.)
You have some better links? Thanks.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #381,915
10/9/13 9:25:02 PM
|
try a different demographic
the folks that currently have a high deductible catastrophic plan earn 60k and are 55years old
anecdotal
I got notice that my blue cross was being canceled. The cheapest Obamacare replacement is $160 per month more and my total risk increases from $5000 to $12,500. The good news is that my menopausal wife and I now have maternity, pediatric dental and vision! Thanks a lot.
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,920
10/9/13 9:56:12 PM
|
facebook/healthcare.gov
Thanks for the quote that let me get to the linky.
Roger Filips seems to be an OD in Nebraska, 68739.
http://www.hartingto...right-future-here
Assuming he's 60 and she's 55 and they don't smoke, and they make $100k a year, his annual premium would be $12,534 for a silver plan, $10,388 for a bronze plan. No subsidy. (If they make $60k a year, then they'd get a $6,834 subsidy.)
He doesn't say why his BC was being cancelled. Presumably, being a health care provider, he recognizes the importance of having insurance. And normally would be happy to be able to get any insurance in that circumstance.
His snarkiness in his comment makes me suspect that there's much more to the story than he's posting (e.g. he used to have 2 offices for his practice and now seems to only have one.).
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #381,926
10/9/13 11:02:10 PM
|
And frankly ...
If the only example you can come up with of someone paying more is someone making >$100k/year then I don't see the problem.
--
Drew
|
Post #381,927
10/9/13 11:11:32 PM
|
And frankly, that is all...
Box needs to scream: SEE I TOLD YOU!
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
|
Post #381,937
10/10/13 8:20:58 AM
|
so the definition of rich is now 100k a year? good to know
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,945
10/10/13 9:46:19 AM
|
Median family income in the US is 50.5K
Which is to say that half of all families make less than that.
If you are getting 100K/year, you're in the top fifteen percent of all incomes in the US.
So yes, actually, it is, Box.
|
Post #381,946
10/10/13 10:32:58 AM
|
good to know
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,951
10/10/13 11:30:32 AM
|
So, another question...
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
|
Post #381,936
10/10/13 8:20:12 AM
|
60k a year $6,834 subsidy do you have a link?
seems to be a lot of anecdotal quotes that people making $8.25 do not qualify for a subsidy but a couple making $60k do?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,940
10/10/13 8:32:11 AM
|
That's what the KFF calculator says.
I assume them being 55 or older has something to do with it.
The only things that seem to matter are:
1) Age
2) State of residence
3) Smoker? y/n
4) Employer provided insurance available? y/n
5) Kids
6) Income
7) Is your state part of the Medicare expansion? y/n
8) What Metal do you want?
That's it.
http://kff.org/inter...bsidy-calculator/
I don't know if those numbers are accurate (I assume they are as the content of the law has been known a long time). If not, Healthcare.gov should have them (once the site is over its teething problems).
HTH.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #381,957
10/10/13 12:03:20 PM
|
huh, criteria is wierd, shows zero subsidy
60k 2 people non smoking
Results
The information below is about subsidized exchange coverage. Note that subsidies are only available for people purchasing coverage on their own in the exchange (not through an employer). Depending on your state's eligibility criteria, you or some members of your family may qualify for Medicaid.
Household income in 2014:
387% of poverty level
Unsubsidized annual health insurance premium in 2014:
$5,070
Maximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:
9.5%
Amount you pay for the premium:
$5,070 per year
(which equals 8.45% of your household income and covers 100% of the overall premium)
You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:
$0
(which covers 0% of the overall premium)
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,961
10/10/13 12:30:46 PM
|
Depends on your state.
Nebraska, 68739, Cedar, 2014 dollars, 60000, No, 2, 60 NS, 55 NS, No kids.
results
The information below is about subsidized exchange coverage. Note that subsidies are only available for people purchasing coverage on their own in the exchange (not through an employer). Depending on your state's eligibility criteria, you or some members of your family may qualify for Medicaid.
Household income in 2014:387% of poverty level
Unsubsidized annual health insurance premium in 2014:$10,553
Maximum % of income you have to pay for the non-tobacco premium, if eligible for a subsidy:9.5%
Amount you pay for the premium:$5,700 per year
(which equals 9.5% of your household income and covers 54% of the overall premium) You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$4,853
(which covers 46% of the overall premium)
The details matter, and maybe I mangled some things in trying different options. But the above is what it gave me starting fresh. The subsidy does drop for younger people.
HTH.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #381,964
10/10/13 12:49:01 PM
|
Depends on your state., Thats fair and balanced :-)
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,965
10/10/13 12:50:25 PM
|
States Rights!!!11 ;-)
|
Post #381,966
10/10/13 12:50:55 PM
|
I thought conservatives liked states' rights?
--
Drew
|
Post #381,968
10/10/13 1:04:32 PM
|
how is that state rights? its a federal subsidy
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,969
10/10/13 1:12:11 PM
|
A subsidy that depends on the state policies.
http://www.nytimes.c...remiums.html?_r=0
Why does the subsidy vary? Because the private insurance rates vary. The actual out-of-pocket costs are surprisingly uniform.
Those are for states with exchanges. For those that don't, the feds will be running an exchange. I don't know the details there yet. (Maybe you do. ;-)
HTH.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #381,970
10/10/13 1:21:39 PM
|
nope, I work for your neighbor :-)
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,974
10/10/13 1:49:04 PM
|
Snazzy. Dunno about the flying top border though ... ;-)
|
Post #381,977
10/10/13 1:58:06 PM
|
shoot, they changed the front end again?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,934
10/10/13 7:10:36 AM
|
Basically, yes. And what's wrong with that?
The BOx gibbers on: the wonderful democratic plan called the healthcare act is aimed a gutting the lesser middle class and forcing them to to enjoy the dubious ability to feed themselves as the truly poor while painting us as traitors because we are not going to enjoy getting fucked. Could you try re-writing that sentence into two or three, then maybe it would become parsable? (If it means what I *think* it might mean, it's laughably wrong; but why argue against that if it isn't perhaps even what you were trying to say.)
The rich don't care, they can afford healthcare so the legislation doesn't affect them at all. Duh, Sancta Simplicitas! This is wrong in at least two ways:
1) Then why are the financial backers behind the Republicans still pumping such a lot of dough into campaigns against it? They obviously have some reason, even if you don't know what that is.
2) Of course they care; until now that middle class you mention has got its health insurance from its employers, i.e, the upper class. If the middle class gets an alternative health insurance provider, the upper class won't have the middle class in as much of a grip on the balls as it has until now.
It is the people on fixed incomes that watch their monthly premiums go from $338 to $1140. Debunked by others already. (Not just in this thread, by the way, but in others last week, last month, the month before that, and I don't know how often before. Couldn't you try to acquire the decency not to repeat already-debunked "arguments" like a broken bloody record, please? Thank you.)
Now if that is the best plan that the American left has to "keep less of my money going to Larry Ellison" then fuck them. Sigh... Again, wrong; this time in at least three ways:
1) No, this is their plan to allow poor and sick people to get some health insurance. That's what this is all about, you know. (The name "Affordable Healthcare Act" might be a clue to anyone who isn't stoked up to the gills on right-wing propaganda.)
2) As per the other #2 above, the less of a grip Larry Ellison has on your balls, the more of a chance you'll have at keeping some of your hard-earned dosh out of his grubby little mitts.
3) Even if it helps absolutely zero in keeping your cash from Larry, at least it doesn't actively give him *more* of it, which is what any competing scheme he comes up with will inevitably aim for, so it's still better.
Ergo: No, (assuming your "them" means the Democrats), it's NOT a case of "fuck them" -- at least not as much as the Republicans.
Your only point seems to be "rich people! rich people!" In short, yes. And is there anything wrong with that? No!
There are basically two kinds of people in the world: Rich people and poor people (and people who can't count to three, like me). They have fundamentally opposed interests: Rich people are those who own money, real estate, and corporations. It is in their interest that ever more money go to those who already own money, real estate, or corporations. Poor people don't already have a lot of money. It is in their interest that some reasonable share of society's resources also go to those who do not already have a lot. (Yeah, somebody might have come up with this observation before me. That still doesn't make it wrong.)
ARE _Y_O_U_ "rich people!"? If not, then why are you so hell-bent on defending _their_ interests, to the clear and present detriment of _your own_ interests? Isn't that just... stupid?
--
Christian R. Conrad
Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi
(Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
|
Post #381,938
10/10/13 8:27:01 AM
|
gee, I have a coporation a few shekels in the bank
to pay next months bills and I own a house (if I can ever get the fucking bank to quit whining about missed payments) So by your definition I am rich? Good to know.
If my choices are to side with someone who is actively planning on financially harming me now with the worst scam in american legislative history shy of the teapot dome scandal of the Grant Administration, or siding with people who on their best day do not give a rats ass about me or mine, Sorry I side with the rich party on this one.
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,941
10/10/13 8:37:27 AM
|
Obamacare is worse than Bush's Iraq War. Good to know...
|
Post #381,947
10/10/13 10:33:46 AM
|
that was a legislative scam?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,949
10/10/13 10:40:05 AM
|
AUMF 2002? PL 107-243?
|
Post #381,942
10/10/13 8:39:42 AM
|
Wow. So how is the SEC such a deterrent of corruption?
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
|
Post #381,948
10/10/13 10:39:00 AM
|
Oh holy stupidity, please learn to read.
Da BOx shows that a remedial reading course wouldn't go amiss: So by your definition I am rich? Good to know. No, that was precisely my point: As far as I know, you are NOT one of the 1% richest, whose interests the Republican Party fights for.
And that's why it's so confusing to anyone who sees you arguing about politics, that you not only seem to have swallowed all their talking points hook, line and sinker, but also fight for them with such unbridled tenacity.
These are not your own interests you're fighting for, but someone else's; the interests you're fighting for are actually quite diametrically opposed to your own interests.
So why are you fighting so vehemently for them?
.
TL;DR: No, me NOT think you Larry Ellison. Me think Larry Ellison not your friend. So me wonder why you fight so hard for Larry?
--
Christian R. Conrad
Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi
(Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
|
Post #381,952
10/10/13 11:32:59 AM
|
Oh sheeit... thanks.
Now I have to clean this keyboard out.
Me think it funny in post.
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
|
Post #381,955
10/10/13 11:58:57 AM
|
According to Jake I am rich, so why should I side with dems?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,971
10/10/13 1:36:39 PM
|
Here's the thing Bill.
Your relative station in life and what you've been able to get going on has been the hallmark not of rich people, but of middle class people. Income disparity has gotten so out of whack in the last couple of decades that now those things are hallmarks of rich people, not middle class people. Furthermore, there's a different issue at hand; the rarefied air people: you know, the rentier class, of which you're definitely not a member.
You're rich, but you're not breathing the rarefied air. The fact that you're rich doesn't mean you should argue the interests of those breathing the rarefied air, and furthermore, the fact that since you've succeeded in hanging on to what you've got means that you're now rich rather than middle class is more a condemnation of how the rentiers have grabbed the air of the people who used to be around you (I'm sure there's one or two of your fellow citizens who've been on IWT that you can think of that fall into this category) to further rarefy their air. At this point, their air is so rarefied that they think they exist on a whole 'nother planet and have therefore become quite willing to feudify how they relate to the merely rich like yourself.
The fact that it takes being rich to afford this shit (when that wasn't the case thirty years ago) should tell you something is really fucking wrong here, and the "feedom! libreitbarty!" people are the ones that have been running this shit since the election of Reagan.
|
Post #381,975
10/10/13 1:57:30 PM
|
well I must be rich my cars are paid for 2 at 1985 1 at 1996
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #381,980
10/10/13 2:15:48 PM
|
3 Cars? OMG...
You are a Zillionaire.
I only have 3 cars... one is non-running Van. Ooops make that 4 cars... a 1969 in serious state of tear down. oops and 2 Motorcycles.
Gosh... and I just paid off my house. Woooo.
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
"No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
|
Post #381,997
10/10/13 6:33:44 PM
|
Naah, you're the increasingly rare middle class.
And you're attacking the party that created this class, the Democrats, on behalf of their opponents, the Republicans. It appears you do this in the mistaken belief that it's the Democrats who are destroying the middle class, while it is actually the rich people behind the Republicans who are doing it.
HTH!
--
Christian R. Conrad
Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi
(Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
|
Post #382,005
10/10/13 10:04:37 PM
|
the democrats did not create this class, the unions did
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
|
Post #382,009
10/11/13 1:34:35 AM
|
And as we all know, they're creatures of the Republicans...?
|
Post #382,015
10/11/13 8:07:33 AM
|
No, but since Clinton the Democrats have abandoned unions.
|