# So I went to the Government web page for obamacare



## Randy Rooster (Dec 14, 2004)

to see if I could apply for obama care. Guess what?

I couldnt get to the place to apply because apparently the website was overloaded. The government at work as usual - snafu.



> Please be patient while we're helping other people.


Why do I have the feeling this is just what I will hear if I ever need to go to a doctor and use obama care?

try yourself - good luck with it

https://www.healthcare.gov/marketplace/global/en_US/registration


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Wait until you find out it will take 3 months to have a appointment with your DR and 4 month to see a specialist. They are doing this in the VA now but it is coming to everybody.


----------



## Rakkasan (Sep 27, 2008)

Old Vet said:


> Wait until you find out it will take 3 months to have a appointment with your DR and 4 month to see a specialist. They are doing this in the VA now but it is coming to everybody.


I am sorry that you have having a long wait at your VA for an appointment. There are some areas that do not have a VA center very close to them. I have known people to have to go over 200 miles to receive their VA care that they need. Because I am close to my VA care center, I do not have to wait for care. 

However, if I could receive care at the closest medical facility regardless of distance, that would actually be closer to me.


----------



## Roadking (Oct 8, 2009)

If they can't run a website, how can they run health care...?

Matt


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Rakkasan said:


> I am sorry that you have having a long wait at your VA for an appointment. There are some areas that do not have a VA center very close to them. I have known people to have to go over 200 miles to receive their VA care that they need. Because I am close to my VA care center, I do not have to wait for care.
> 
> However, if I could receive care at the closest medical facility regardless of distance, that would actually be closer to me.


Now since I am over 65 and have try care I can go anywhere for medical treatment but it is the only way to get free drugs by going to the VA.There is a VA care center only 30 miles away but I can't go to that. If I do I must change from Little Rock (120 miles) to Fayteville (SP)(130 Miles) Hospital and loose all of my appointment in Little Rock and start over with the new DR. I go to the same DR that runes the VA facility 30 miles away but he can't wright a prescription for Little Rock. Where I live is on the verry edge of the Little Rock area.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

wow. I have been watching the news and the whining is just amazing. Every system has start up problems and only when you find out what they are can you fix them. And any site will crash or post delay messages when there is too much activity. Over 4 million people tried to access the site in the first day. I can't get onto THIS site sometimes. I guess people really want this healthcare lol!


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

Old Vet said:


> Now since I am over 65 and have try care I can go anywhere for medical treatment but it is the only way to get free drugs by going to the VA.There is a VA care center only 30 miles away but I can't go to that. If I do I must change from Little Rock (120 miles) to Fayteville (SP)(130 Miles) Hospital and loose all of my appointment in Little Rock and start over with the new DR. I go to the same DR that runes the VA facility 30 miles away but he can't wright a prescription for Little Rock. Where I live is on the verry edge of the Little Rock area.


And people wonder why the government considers vets to be terroristic threats.... I think I'd come unleased if I had to deal with that..


----------



## snowcap (Jul 1, 2011)

emdeengee said:


> wow. I have been watching the news and the whining is just amazing. Every system has start up problems and only when you find out what they are can you fix them. And any site will crash or post delay messages when there is too much activity. Over 4 million people tried to access the site in the first day. I can't get onto THIS site sometimes. I guess people really want this healthcare lol!


Thing is they should have tested the sites before this.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

snowcap said:


> Thing is they should have tested the sites before this.


They did. IPOD was a mess when it launched. Microsoft keeps making hot messes. HOTMAIL is constantly updating and tweaking. Google and Youtube are still always making you wait. Just because this is a government site does not mean it will be perfect - or that it will be a mess forever. Right now it is new.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

snowcap said:


> Thing is they should have tested the sites before this.


Not only that but making SURE they had the "Pipe Line" to handle such things as this. It is inexcusable.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> They did. IPOD was a mess when it launched. Microsoft keeps making hot messes. HOTMAIL is constantly updating and tweaking. Google and Youtube are still always making you wait. Just because this is a government site does not mean it will be perfect - or that it will be a mess forever. Right now it is new.


For the most part, all those you are pointing out work.. and work well.. and are the most used sites and companies in the world.. 

Our government has screwed up really bad with this... I don't get why you want to stick up for them.. .

If our government doesn't have the know how to make a few simple websites work, and give them enough bandwidth, then how would you expect me to believe they can keep our country safe as they keep claiming they are doing as they gather and store all of my personal data they collect on me?

Greatest nation in the world my butt.... Biggest running joke is pretty much what we've become... 

Thanks King O...


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

emdeengee said:


> They did. IPOD was a mess when it launched. Microsoft keeps making hot messes. HOTMAIL is constantly updating and tweaking. Google and Youtube are still always making you wait. Just because this is a government site does not mean it will be perfect - or that it will be a mess forever. Right now it is new.


And no one had to use any of them by mandate of 'law'.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

AngieM2 said:


> And no one had to use any of them by mandate of 'law'.


You live with thousands of mandated laws. You pay for all sorts of things that don't have direct benefit to you or that you even agree with. This whining about being legally obligated to pay for healthcare insurance is not reasonable. It is the law of the land and has withstood all the challenges including the supreme court and a second presidential election. If it does not work it can be amended but meanwhile it is really immature for those who don't like it to keep pouting and deliberately destroy a fragile economy.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

simi-steading said:


> For the most part, all those you are pointing out work.. and work well.. and are the most used sites and companies in the world..
> 
> Our government has screwed up really bad with this... I don't get why you want to stick up for them.. .
> 
> ...


The country (government) runs millions of programs everyday. Is there room for improvement - of course. It really is amazing how people focus on a few failures but completely disregard all the huge successes. I for one think the US is one of the greatest countries in the world but with some really awkward growing pains.

And as for the current state of affairs - reminds me of 1950. It is the McCar-Tea Party. Decent, hardworking Republican congressmen cannot vote their conscience because they are so terrified of being black-listed by this ridiculous gang.


----------



## Win07_351 (Dec 7, 2008)

emdeengee said:


> You live with thousands of mandated laws. You pay for all sorts of things that don't have direct benefit to you or that you even agree with. This whining about being legally obligated to pay for healthcare insurance is not reasonable. It is the law of the land and has withstood all the challenges including the supreme court and a second presidential election. If it does not work it can be amended but meanwhile it is really immature for those who don't like it to keep pouting and deliberately destroy a fragile economy.


I'm glad you weren't around in 1776


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

emdeengee said:


> hardworking Republican congressmen cannot vote their conscience because they are so terrified of being black-listed by this ridiculous gang.


You mean their constituents?


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Nate_in_IN said:


> You mean their constituents?


No, actually I do mean their conscience. They are elected by their constituents to represent them and to vote their conscience. This may be based on what their constituents want (and it is always just be some of the constituents) but it may also be based on their experience and the information they are privy to.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Win07_351 said:


> I'm glad you weren't around in 1776


Things would probably not be in such a mess if a few women had been around to discuss and create in 1776. And there were a lot of laws made in 1776. Different ones now but living in the past hinders the future.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

emdeengee said:


> No, actually I do mean their conscience. They are elected by their constituents to represent them and to vote their conscience. This may be based on what their constituents want (and it is always just be some of the constituents) but it may also be based on their experience and the information they are privy to.


So who are the "gangs" to which you were referring?


----------



## Jason72 (Jul 21, 2013)

No one likes to be mandated to pay for someone else who doesn't or will not pay for their own and I whole heartily back the tea party in blocking this disaster.


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

What do you expect from a laptop computer.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

One thing to remember is that less than 1 percent that went on line to apply for health care really did.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Nate_in_IN said:


> You mean their constituents?


Right over the head!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

I'm amazed. The State of Nevada paid Xerox $72 million to design & host the health exchange website, and they still don't have it off the ground.

http://www.informationweek.com/heal...-wins-contract-for-nevada-health-in/240007738

They also operate the telephone support center. What a disgrace!


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I'm amazed. The State of Nevada paid Xerox $72 million to design & host the health exchange website, and they still don't have it off the ground.
> 
> http://www.informationweek.com/heal...-wins-contract-for-nevada-health-in/240007738
> 
> They also operate the telephone support center. What a disgrace!


Did you really expect some different outcome? It IS the government after all!!


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

1*800 318-2596 is my reply


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

JeffreyD said:


> Did you really expect some different outcome? It IS the government after all!!


No, it's not the government. It's Xerox Corporation.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

emdeengee said:


> You live with thousands of mandated laws. You pay for all sorts of things that don't have direct benefit to you or that you even agree with. This whining about being legally obligated to pay for healthcare insurance is not reasonable. It is the law of the land and has withstood all the challenges including the supreme court and a second presidential election. If it does not work it can be amended but meanwhile it is really immature for those who don't like it to keep pouting and deliberately destroy a fragile economy.


Fragile Econ. Huh. It will get worse. If you really think that this Country is going to live under a Dictator and behave like Captialists ,inventing, working hard to be taxed and controlled ,You are so far mistaken,,,, I can't say on this site. Take a look at all of the Buisnesses that move out of the USA to get out from under the Jackboot of control(regulation and taxes) from this government and then tell me about Oceanfront property you have for sale in Arizona. I ain't Buying.

ps. Our Econ is also manipulated, the "crash" of 2008 was due to Dem.policys that were brought to a head by the Federal Reserve in Sept. 2008. Got Obama elected. Now our econ , stock market,goverment is being manipulated because we would not want to tarnish the "legacy" of our first kinda first but not really Black pResident.Obama can have his cronies pull the plug anytime he wants, and THAT is what is keeping our politians from speeking the truth about Obama and how far our Country is lost,doomed.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Nevada said:


> No, it's not the government. It's Xerox Corporation.


 OK so the government is so stupid it hired them. Google deals with how many hits per day?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

7thswan said:


> OK so the government is so stupid it hired them. Google deals with how many hits per day?


 How about the use of YouTube
More than 1 billion unique users visit YouTube each month
Over 6 billion hours of video are watched each month on YouTube&#8212;that's almost an hour for every person on Earth, and 50% more than last year
*100 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute*
Now if YT can handle THAT much traffic and as a Private held company so the heck should the government contracted for one that could do the job.
But again though this is what you get when government sends out bids and they take the Lowest Bider. LOL


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> How about the use of YouTube
> More than 1 billion unique users visit YouTube each month
> Over 6 billion hours of video are watched each month on YouTubeâthat's almost an hour for every person on Earth, and 50% more than last year
> *100 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute*
> ...


So why do you suppose Xerox can't do it?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Nevada said:


> So why do you suppose Xerox can't do it?


Click off a E Mail and ask them. LOL And don;t forget YT is Owned by Google too.
Just wait till Google gets the NFL SPorts Package away from Direct TV they ARE in talks with the NFL right now to do just that.
So maybe some day you will subscribe to a YT channel and Watch ALL those Football games that are on exclusively only Direct TV. LOL


----------



## Guest (Oct 4, 2013)

You mean it's not Bush's fault ?


----------



## Guest (Oct 4, 2013)

emdeengee said:


> wow. I have been watching the news and the whining is just amazing. Every system has start up problems and only when you find out what they are can you fix them. And any site will crash or post delay messages when there is too much activity. Over 4 million people tried to access the site in the first day. I can't get onto THIS site sometimes. I guess people really want this healthcare lol!


Sounds like something pelosi would say . You know , like
We've got to pass it to see what's in it .


----------



## Awnry Abe (Mar 21, 2012)

kasilofhome said:


> 1*800 318-2596 is my reply


Definitely. At least they came up with something catchy that you will N-E-V-E-R forget. Sigh.


----------



## Liberty'sGirl (Jul 7, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> Things would probably not be in such a mess if a few women had been around to discuss and create in 1776. And there were a lot of laws made in 1776. Different ones now but living in the past hinders the future.


What makes you think there weren't women around to discuss and create in 1776? You don't think the men discussed the creating of the new nation with their wives, mothers and sisters? Most of these men were raised by a mother/mother-figure.

"The hand that rocks the cradle is the hand that rules the world" is a truth.

The government wasn't ready, it will never be ready for good health care, this is about data mining.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Roadking said:


> If they can't run a website, how can they run health care...?
> 
> Matt


 It'll be ok, the IRS will handle it.
But don't let on that you're conservative OR religious...


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

emdeengee said:


> wow. I have been watching the news and the whining is just amazing. Every system has start up problems and only when you find out what they are can you fix them. And any site will crash or post delay messages when there is too much activity. Over 4 million people tried to access the site in the first day. I can't get onto THIS site sometimes. I guess people really want this healthcare lol!


 Where did you hear that? Our paper (Dallas Morn News) Said 1.6 mil tried to get in.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

simi-steading said:


> For the most part, all those you are pointing out work.. and work well.. and are the most used sites and companies in the world..
> 
> Our government has screwed up really bad with this... I don't get why you want to stick up for them.. .
> 
> ...


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

Twitter has over 200 million users..their system works well..maybe the gov. should have hired their developers to work on the system.

In today's world - 1.5 million or 4 million users is a piddly amount of people accessing..

BTW - in the teleco world, we PLAN for more users than that to use their smart phone each MINUTE..lol..and supply the bandwidth to do it. One thinks that if you want millions to access something you are selling, one would provide an easy way to do that.

Look at Amazon - a bazillion products, each with it's own "page" right down to mac and cheese..and they can ship same day..and rarely, if ever, screw up.

I would rather buy insurance from Amazon..at least I know it would be what I ordered, at the price I agreed to pay and would deliver what they promised or they would TAKE IT BACK..
lol..


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Liberty'sGirl said:


> What makes you think there weren't women around to discuss and create in 1776? You don't think the men discussed the creating of the new nation with their wives, mothers and sisters? Most of these men were raised by a mother/mother-figure.
> 
> "The hand that rocks the cradle is the hand that rules the world" is a truth.
> 
> The government wasn't ready, it will never be ready for good health care, this is about data mining.


 Pssst,those old white guys were Barbarians, ofcourse they didn't have women around.///sarc


----------



## Tommyice (Dec 5, 2010)

emdeengee said:


> They did. IPOD was a mess when it launched. Microsoft keeps making hot messes. HOTMAIL is constantly updating and tweaking. Google and Youtube are still always making you wait. Just because this is a government site does not mean it will be perfect - or that it will be a mess forever. Right now it is new.


But I'm not required by law to use Microsoft or Apple products.

People are whining because they were told they would see rainbows and unicorns and all they are seeing is mud and manure.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business,and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.

However, this is generally ok w/liberals. The ones I speak with eventually admit they're socialists if not communists.


----------



## Becka03 (Mar 29, 2009)

AngieM2 said:


> And no one had to use any of them by mandate of 'law'.


my son thinks his Ipad is mandated by law LOL


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

> We have a lot of visitors on the site right now.
> Please stay on this page.
> We're working to make the experience better, and we donât want you to lose your place in line. Weâll send you to the login page as soon as we can. Thanks for your patience!


Been getting this since they opened the site the other day.
I have insurance, but I just wanted to see how "Affordable" it would be.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

emdeengee said:


> wow. I have been watching the news and the whining is just amazing. Every system has start up problems and only when you find out what they are can you fix them. And any site will crash or post delay messages when there is too much activity. Over 4 million people tried to access the site in the first day. I can't get onto THIS site sometimes. I guess people really want this healthcare lol!


Obama and his health care scam are still running on excuses
Nobody wants his ridiculous plan except those dumb enough to think it's free, but unfortunately, Mr. Bribe and Blackmail mad it impossible not to buy his snake oil


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

mnn2501 said:


> ​Been getting this since they opened the site the other day.
> I have insurance, but I just wanted to see how "Affordable" it would be.


I checked on mine
My premiums would be about triple what I'm paying now, and the deductible would be almost 5 times higher
Great plan Obama you moron


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

I'm new, and this post is going to make you all hate me already. sigh.

1. most of the people posting in this topic have no clue what Obamacare really does, they are just reciting the misinformation heard on their favorite conservative news channel or radio station. I highly recommend you actually do your due-diligence and research this via non-partisan means.

2. The "insurance mandate" - you guys might want to research this specific topic. I bet you would be *shocked* to know this specific item, forcing every American to buy health insurance, is a *conservative* policy idea introduced by the Heritage Foundation in 1989, and was trumpeted as being a free-market approach to health care reform by Republicans. Go ahead, I will wait while you read up on it and be here to pick your jaw up off the floor when you return.

3. Obamacare is NOT nationalized health care. Conservatives shot that down (single-payer), and is why we are stuck with this mandate, that many attempt to "blame" on Obama and the democrats. All it does, is forces you to buy insurance, forces health insurance companies to cover YOU, regardless of your pre-existing conditions, and forces health insurance companies to also cover many preventative procedures, amongst other things.

4. I am curious, how many of you have direct experience with hosting and/or maintaining high-traffic web sites? I am a computer developer by day, working on a home care agency management solution (web based), and am tasked with maintaining the infrastructure to ensure we are always up and have enough capacity to service all of our customers. I also run a web hosting company on my off time, and have done so since 2003. The problem with Healthcare.gov is not unique to government sites, and in fact, they are handling the "problem" much more gracefully than any of the tech related websites mentioned so far in this post.

5. Twitter hits capacity very often. VERY often. They don't put you in a queue, they give you a big whale image, known as the "Fail Whale", that tells you to try again later. In fact, Twitter hits capacity so often, there is an entire website dedicated to this image and its evolution over the years:
http://www.whatisfailwhale.info/

There are legit reasons to hate Obamacare, the launch of healthcare.gov is not one of them.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

emdeengee said:


> You live with thousands of mandated laws. You pay for all sorts of things that don't have direct benefit to you or that you even agree with. This whining about being legally obligated to pay for healthcare insurance is not reasonable. It is the law of the land and has withstood all the challenges including the supreme court and a second presidential election. If it does not work it can be amended but meanwhile it is really immature for those who don't like it to keep pouting and deliberately destroy a fragile economy.


I might remind you of this in a couple of weeks when the feds run out of money.... afterall, "the law of the land", a bipartisan bill passed by both houses and signed by our president states clearly that they simply cannot borrow any more money. Its a mandate!


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I might remind you of this in a couple of weeks when the feds run out of money.... afterall, the law of the land, passed by both houses and signed by our president states clearly that they cannot borrow any more money. Its a mandate!


Ha! remember, congress always excepts themselves from the mandates


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

SeanInVa said:


> I'm new, and this post is going to make you all hate me already. sigh.
> 
> 1. most of the people posting in this topic have no clue what Obamacare really does, they are just reciting the misinformation heard on their favorite conservative news channel or radio station. I highly recommend you actually do your due-diligence and research this via non-partisan means.
> 
> ...


You are correct. The whole system was put out for bids and low one is the one that got the job of getting it off the ground not the best but the low one.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

SeanInVa said:


> Ha! remember, congress always excepts themselves from the mandates


Oh, I am sure they will find enough money left laying around in the treasury to pay their own salaries and cover their perks, but when there is no money left to cover the big expenses.... I really dont want to hear the whining from those who claim that Obamacare is the law of the land, therefor must be funded.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Old Vet said:


> You are correct. The whole system was put out for bids and low one is the one that got the job of getting it off the ground not the best but the low one.


Isn't that how all government contracts are awarded? Lowest bid? While I have contracted to the government via other companies, I have never worked through the proposal process myself.

I was working (contracting) to the Navy when the DON implemented NMCI (navy and marine corps intranet). I am sure that was low-bid - and it showed. What a steaming pile that was.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

SeanInVa said:


> I'm new, and this post is going to make you all hate me already. sigh.
> 
> 1. most of the people posting in this topic have no clue what Obamacare really does, they are just reciting the misinformation heard on their favorite conservative news channel or radio station. I highly recommend you actually do your due-diligence and research this via non-partisan means.
> 
> ...


1. Yes. Everyone should perform due diligence in educating themselves on issues before posting things considered a fact.

2. It really doesn't matter to me if republicans kicked around a mandate in the past. It does not justify it's implementation. The Federal Government requiring someone to purchase insurance, parts if which is never to be used, is a terrible decision. Then to hear over and over that it will lower healthcare costs is just insulting.

3. The ACA is in no ways healthcare reform. Instead it is placing heavy regulation on the health-insurance industry. It may be true that the Democratic Party would have preferred a single payer system, but it is pretty clear the current ACA legislation is supported along party lines. I hold every public official who votes for this legislation responsible for it's effects.

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Homesteading Today mobile app


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...e-whos-so-freakin-excited-but-theres-a-catch/

Another brilliant O lover:
Henderson likely could have received health insurance for as little as $44.72 on eHealthInsurance.com before Obamacare, according to Michael F. Cannon of the Cato Institute. And with Obamacare&#8217;s community-rating price controls that take effect in 2014, Henderson&#8217;s cheapest plan option on eHealthInsurance jumped up to $190.23.
&#8220;So it appears that Obamacare quadrupled Chad&#8217;s premiums, and Enroll America thinks this is a success story,&#8221; Cannon said.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

emdeengee said:


> wow. I have been watching the news and the whining is just amazing. Every system has start up problems and only when you find out what they are can you fix them. And any site will crash or post delay messages when there is too much activity. Over 4 million people tried to access the site in the first day. I can't get onto THIS site sometimes. I guess people really want this healthcare lol!


They've had 3 years to get things in place for opening day. THREE years!!

If they underestimated how many people might visit their website, what else have they underestimated/overlooked?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

SeanInVa said:


> Isn't that how all government contracts are awarded? Lowest bid? While I have contracted to the government via other companies, I have never worked through the proposal process myself.
> 
> I was working (contracting) to the Navy when the DON implemented NMCI (navy and marine corps intranet). I am sure that was low-bid - and it showed. What a steaming pile that was.


Used to be lowest bid but under this admin only "Ds" that are friends and/or related get the bids.

And just so ya know, your #1 statement on the post way above is prolly not correct...

Do you think my post-#43-is correct?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

7thswan said:


> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...e-whos-so-freakin-excited-but-theres-a-catch/
> 
> Another brilliant O lover:
> Henderson likely could have received health insurance for as little as $44.72 on eHealthInsurance.com before Obamacare, according to Michael F. Cannon of the Cato Institute. And with Obamacareâs community-rating price controls that take effect in 2014, Hendersonâs cheapest plan option on eHealthInsurance jumped up to $190.23.
> âSo it appears that Obamacare quadrupled Chadâs premiums, and Enroll America thinks this is a success story,â Cannon said.


There's something not right about that article. If he only makes $11,500 then he just a few hundred over the poverty level for a family of one. In that case, the second least expensive silver plan should cost him around $30/month.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Nevada said:


> There's something not right about that article. If he only makes $11,500 then he just a few hundred over the poverty level for a family of one. In that case, the second least expensive silver plan should cost him around $30/month.


W ho knows? Why isn't he on his Mommy's insurance?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> There's something not right about that article. If he only makes $11,500 then he just a few hundred over the poverty level for a family of one. In that case, the second least expensive silver plan should cost him around $30/month.


I am thinking you are talking Obamacare subsidized "rates" vs the real rates charged to those who do not opt into an Obamacare exchange. Not everyone wants to jump into Obamacare and will purchase their insurance on the open market. It is the open market rates that are making a jump.... so are the rates in the exchanges... the only difference is the government is picking up most of price for those who opt for the exchanges. You know the drill.... take from those who worked, saved and have, and give to those who want something for nothing.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I might remind you of this in a couple of weeks when the feds run out of money.... afterall, "the law of the land", a bipartisan bill passed by both houses and signed by our president states clearly that they simply cannot borrow any more money. Its a mandate!


Then I guess the end result will be that the US defaults on its debts and the economy collapses. Sounds like a heck of a plan Brownie.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Old Vet said:


> You are correct. The whole system was put out for bids and low one is the one that got the job of getting it off the ground not the best but the low one.


That is so true. Youtube gets 100 Hours of Uploads Every Minute, seems they know how to handle things as well as Google does. LOL
Get the lowest bidder and there you have it a Mess. And some want their Health run by such a mess as this. Unbelievable.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Tricky Grama said:


> Used to be lowest bid but under this admin only "Ds" that are friends and/or related get the bids.
> 
> And just so ya know, your #1 statement on the post way above is prolly not correct...
> 
> Do you think my post-#43-is correct?


Apparently, my #1 is spot-on. 



Tricky Grama said:


> The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved,


I think this is a bit of a misnomer. CARE isn't rationed, reimbursement, on the other hand, is. Specifically, reimbursement through Medicare, NOT a private plan. Isn't this basically already done in the Medicare world? I mean, we work with software that tells (home health) agencies how to manipulate the OASIS forms to maximize their profits, NOT maximize the care received. I am not quite sure what the difference is? 



> free health care for illegal immigrants,


False.
Illegal immigrants may not enroll in Medicaid, nor are they eligible to shop on the marketplace for health insurance. Permanent legal residents are eligible for health insurance subsidies on the marketplace, as are U.S. citizens. Current law says that hospital emergency rooms must stabilize illegal immigrants with medical emergencies, but that law predates Obamacare.



> free abortion services,


100% false. Read section 1303, which starts on page 118 of the text PDF

in fact, there are provisions for preventing public funds for being used to cover abortions at all (see page 120).

If the insurance provider chooses to provide "free" abortions, they may. Just as they may now. Obamacare does *not* mandate it. Again, this is NOT government-run healthcare. It's not even remotely close.



> and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.


Pure conjecture. Please cite where in the text this is stated.



> The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business,and put everyone into a government run system.


Again, 100% conjecture. Not to say it won't happen, but the sources saying this are extreme-partisan blogs.



> All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals.


Again, conjecture. It could happen, but at this point, this is purely your opinion.



> Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.


Source?



> However, this is generally ok w/liberals. The ones I speak with eventually admit they're socialists if not communists.


There is a big difference between wanting healthcare socialized, which the free market has failed time and time again, and full-fledged communism. Obamacare is NOT socialized healthcare.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big Obamacare fan by any means, but much of what you claimed is just recycled partisan rhetoric.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

SeanInVa said:


> I'm new, and this post is going to make you all hate me already. sigh.


Welcome aboard, and I seriously doubt that many here are going to hate you because of your beliefs. We all get along fairly well most of the time in spite of the fact that we have differing opinions. 



SeanInVa said:


> 1. most of the people posting in this topic have no clue what Obamacare really does, they are just reciting the misinformation heard on their favorite conservative news channel or radio station. I highly recommend you actually do your due-diligence and research this via non-partisan means.


Ok, I have to ask.... would it be better if we recited the mis-information we hear on the left leaning news channels?  For what its worth, a lot of us do our due diligence prior to posting here. 



SeanInVa said:


> 2. The "insurance mandate" - you guys might want to research this specific topic. I bet you would be *shocked* to know this specific item, forcing every American to buy health insurance, is a *conservative* policy idea introduced by the Heritage Foundation in 1989, and was trumpeted as being a free-market approach to health care reform by Republicans. Go ahead, I will wait while you read up on it and be here to pick your jaw up off the floor when you return.


That is not a shock, I for one, have been aware of this for a long time. Its not the source of origination that counts.... its the evil contained within its pages that worries me. 



SeanInVa said:


> 3. Obamacare is NOT nationalized health care. Conservatives shot that down (single-payer), and is why we are stuck with this mandate, that many attempt to "blame" on Obama and the democrats. All it does, is forces you to buy insurance, forces health insurance companies to cover YOU, regardless of your pre-existing conditions, and forces health insurance companies to also cover many preventative procedures, amongst other things.


Nope, its not, but it is the first step on the hiway to national health care which is the main goal. 




SeanInVa said:


> There are legit reasons to hate Obamacare, the launch of healthcare.gov is not one of them.


Yes there are.... Forcing the public to purchase any product or services... that in itself makes it distasteful to those who value their freedom. Forcing insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions... what a joke! Its like going into an insurance company after your house burns down and demanding they insure it for its full value before the fire. Who would ever bother to buy insurance if they knew they could do so after the catastrophe and collect on their claims? These things are bad, and get worse as you get further into it... but the very concept is what is evil to its core. Thats the loss of our basic freedom of choice, and the rights of nearly everyone is being infringed upon by our government. Not to mention its just one more way to rob the rich, and give to the poor, thus securing the poor mans vote come election day. The fact that their website doesnt function well is a very minor issue here.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Yes National Healthcare with a One payer System, and Obama has even said that. He said it may take 4 years it may take 10 years but Single Payer System is what i am after, first thew ACA then that will move into a one payer system. Government run Healthcare is not that far in the future. Thisnk Canada and the UK. And THAT is NOT what the uSA is about. Socialism at its finest. WORST that is.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Welcome aboard, and I seriously doubt that many here are going to hate you because of your beliefs. We all get along fairly well most of the time in spite of the fact that we have differing opinions.


I hope so! I like to debate, but realize I don't follow exactly the same beliefs as many "rural citizens" 



> Ok, I have to ask.... would it be better if we recited the mis-information we hear on the left leaning news channels?  For what its worth, a lot of us do our due diligence prior to posting here.


I am sure some do. I am sure some posters here have waded through all the pages of the monstrosity. Some, on the other hand, just simply recite what they heard on fox news/drudge/msnbc (for the libs)/huffpost, etc.

I would prefer people research this themselves and not rely on mass media (of which Fox *is* a part of) to inform their opinions. While there is usually some truthiness (is that a word?) to what each of them say, they are spun so bad as to push whatever agenda it is that particular outlet has on their plate. I highly recommend people at least stop by Christian Science Monitor to see what they have to say on topics - as they are one of the most non-partisan sources I have ever found.



> That is not a shock, I for one, have been aware of this for a long time. Its not the source of origination that counts.... its the evil contained within its pages that worries me.


My problem with this is the people who point to this mandate, and then expect "conservative" politicians to save them from this. it was the conservatives that dreamed the dang thing up in the first place! Many people use it as an excuse to attack the other side, when it's pretty ironic they do so.



> Nope, its not, but it is the first step on the hiway to national health care which is the main goal.


Maybe it is. Maybe it's the first step to more localized, community driven, insurance options as well. Either statement is an opinion.




> Yes there are.... Forcing the public to purchase any product or services... that in itself makes it distasteful to those who value their freedom.


Now this, I do agree with. I don't want to be forced to purchase anything. That said, I am stuck with the exact same dilemma when it comes to auto insurance. Either purchase, or pay a fine. I do freely admit this is not a apples to apples comparison, however - more like a apples to oranges comparison 




> Forcing insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions... what a joke! Its like going into an insurance company after your house burns down and demanding they insure it for its full value before the fire. Who would ever bother to buy insurance if they knew they could do so after the catastrophe and collect on their claims?


If you are forcing someone to buy insurance, you have to force the insurance companies to cover them, right? Not saying one or the other (or both) is good, but they seem to go hand-in-hand to me.



> These things are bad, and get worse as you get further into it... but the very concept is what is evil to its core. Thats the loss of our basic freedom of choice, and the rights of nearly everyone is being infringed upon by our government. Not to mention its just one more way to rob the rich, and give to the poor, thus securing the poor mans vote come election day. The fact that their website doesnt function well is a very minor issue here.


The mortgage interest tax deduction is essentially the same thing - giving you public money back that you didn't overpay. you don't happen to take advantage of that do you? For the record, I do - and it helps a lot (and I make over 400% of the poverty threshold, so I'm far from a "mooch").


----------



## Roadking (Oct 8, 2009)

Wonder when our credit rating will drop next...at or before the debt ceiling crossroads?

Matt


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

emdeengee said:


> Then I guess the end result will be that the US defaults on its debts and the economy collapses. Sounds like a heck of a plan Brownie.


Well, there are consequences in this world. Maybe thats what it will take for some folks to understand that they really should show some responsibility when they make bad bargains.... and spend way more money than they have available to them. I dont like the idea of an economic collapse either but I didnt make the rules. If you will notice I have sorta argued against the constant overspending policies in DC for a long time. What kind of "plan" would you suggest? Continue to spend like there is no tomorrow? Or trim expenses as necessary to be able to meet our obligations? Me? I say we cut back on the spending and learn to not over-obligate ourselves in the future. We have the money available to pay our bills.... but it may bite a bit having to cut back on non essentials.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

No it isn't a opinion about a Single Payer system, Obama has Said THAT is what he wants at the end of all of this. And THAT IS NAtional run Healthcare something the American people will not stand for.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

arabian knight said:


> No it isn't a opinion about a Single Payer system, Obama has Said THAT is what he wants at the end of all of this. And THAT IS NAtional run Healthcare something the American people will not stand for.


To be fair, we've had socialized healthcare for years. It was enacted as soon as hospitals were required to see patients regardless of the ability to pay. We all pay for it, in terms of ridiculous hospital costs. $100 bags of saline. $50 tylenol pills, etc.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Then you agree with what Obama said he wants a Single Payer System National Run Healthcare like Canada and the UK.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

SeanInVa said:


> Maybe it is. Maybe it's the first step to more localized, community driven, insurance options as well. Either statement is an opinion.


Oh, Well I was just basing that on what I had heard on the various media when the whole thing was being debated by the left, the right and all the inbetweens prior to this "compromise" being rammed down the throats of the American public. A great many were screaming for "socialized medicine" at that time, another rather large group wanted "single payer", (I did notice that no one was volunteering to be that single payer though, it was always to be paid for with someone elses money.  ) After all the dealing was done, the back room deals, locked doors sessions, and Obamacare came out as the result I just presumed it was as close as they could come to their openly stated desires. I am also fairly certain that it was a deal concocted by the more liberal groups, since the more conservative side of the equation were not allowed in many of the meetings, and none of them voted for it. 



SeanInVa said:


> Now this, I do agree with. I don't want to be forced to purchase anything. That said, I am stuck with the exact same dilemma when it comes to auto insurance. Either purchase, or pay a fine. I do freely admit this is not a apples to apples comparison, however - more like a apples to oranges comparison


I know of no state that mandates you purchase auto insurance. Millions of Americans dont even own automobiles! Now, that being said... if you CHOOSE to purchase an automobile, still no mandate for insurance! If you choose to operate it on hiways where others drive on a regular basis... then and only then do we expect you to be responsible and protect the rest of us from a potential mistake that you might make.... yeah.. it happens! 



SeanInVa said:


> The mortgage interest tax deduction is essentially the same thing - giving you public money back that you didn't overpay. you don't happen to take advantage of that do you? For the record, I do - and it helps a lot (and I make over 400% of the poverty threshold, so I'm far from a "mooch").


The mortgage interest tax deduction is not even close to the same thing! It is one deduction allowed in a very complex tax law. It does not take money from anyone.... it merely allows some folks to keep some of their own money that they worked and earned.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

arabian knight said:


> Then you agree with what Obama said he wants a Single Payer System National Run Healthcare like Canada and the UK.


Yes, I believe that was his goal. This current plan, however, is a LONG ways from that.



Yvonne's hubby said:


> Oh, Well I was just basing that on what I had heard on the various media when the whole thing was being debated by the left, the right and all the inbetweens prior to this "compromise" being rammed down the throats of the American public. A great many were screaming for "socialized medicine" at that time, another rather large group wanted "single payer", (I did notice that no one was volunteering to be that single payer though, it was always to be paid for with someone elses money.  ) After all the dealing was done, the back room deals, locked doors sessions, and Obamacare came out as the result I just presumed it was as close as they could come to their openly stated desires. I am also fairly certain that it was a deal concocted by the more liberal groups, since the more conservative side of the equation were not allowed in many of the meetings, and none of them voted for it.


I was one of the ones in favor of single-payer. I prefer the free market to most problems like this, but the free market has failed us on healthcare over and over and over. It's time to try something different.



> I know of no state that mandates you purchase auto insurance. Millions of Americans dont even own automobiles! Now, that being said... if you CHOOSE to purchase an automobile, still no mandate for insurance! If you choose to operate it on hiways where others drive on a regular basis... then and only then do we expect you to be responsible and protect the rest of us from a potential mistake that you might make.... yeah.. it happens!


This is true. But I don't have the CHOICE to save money to pay for that mistake I may or may not ever make. Instead, I MUST (or pay a fine) carry insurance that I may never use.



> The mortgage interest tax deduction is not even close to the same thing! It is one deduction allowed in a very complex tax law. It does not take money from anyone.... it merely allows some folks to keep some of their own money that they worked and earned.


That is a fair point.

Wow so this topic has really segued from a discussion over the website to one of the law itself. Apologies for that! Hopefully this thing will get fixed soon, because I do want to at least compare what I have now to what I could get on the marketplace. I don't qualify for ANY subsidies at all, so right now, based on the estimate calculators, I am looking at almost doubling what I currently pay, for less, if I were to leave my current plan (not gunna happen at those prices!)


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Welcome aboard, and I seriously doubt that many here are going to hate you because of your beliefs. We all get along fairly well most of the time in spite of the fact that we have differing opinions.
> 
> Ok, I have to ask.... would it be better if we recited the mis-information we hear on the left leaning news channels?  For what its worth, a lot of us do our due diligence prior to posting here.
> 
> ...


 
This isn't about you Yvonne's hubby.
Welcome Sean in VA 
Here is the simple truth. 
WE DONT WANT IT. WEATHER IT IS GOOD OR BAD. IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

SeanInVa said:


> I was one of the ones in favor of single-payer. I prefer the free market to most problems like this, but the free market has failed us on healthcare over and over and over. It's time to try something different.


The free market has been working fine.... even in spite of the government interference. In what way do you see it has failed us... ever.... much less over and over? 



SeanInVa said:


> This is true. But I don't have the CHOICE to save money to pay for that mistake I may or may not ever make. Instead, I MUST (or pay a fine) carry insurance that I may never use.


Well, maybe you should take that up with your state legislature. In my state I am still free to decide whether or not to purchase auto insurance. Even if I opt to have an auto and drive it on our hiways... I can still post a bond in lieu of purchasing insurance that I may never need. I dont do it that way, but I could if I so desired. I just carry liability in case I were to have an accident and cause injury to some other good citizen. This seems reasonable as well as responsible to me.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

davel745 said:


> This isn't about you Yvonne's hubby.
> Welcome Sean in VA
> Here is the simple truth.
> WE DONT WANT IT. WEATHER IT IS GOOD OR BAD. IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.


Ah yes... there is that!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

SeanInVa said:


> Wow so this topic has really segued from a discussion over the website to one of the law itself. Apologies for that! Hopefully this thing will get fixed soon, because I do want to at least compare what I have now to what I could get on the marketplace. I don't qualify for ANY subsidies at all, so right now, based on the estimate calculators, I am looking at almost doubling what I currently pay, for less, if I were to leave my current plan (not gunna happen at those prices!)


:hysterical: Its what we call thread drift.... happens everytime around this place. Give it another few posts and someone will be blaming it on Bush.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

SeanInVa said:


> Yes,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What law are you taking about? The one passed by congress or the one that Obama changed?


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> The free market has been working fine.... even in spite of the government interference. In what way do you see it has failed us... ever.... much less over and over?


My opinion is that when the free market is applied to healthcare, and all that comes with that - medical devices, drugs, etc - ultimately your life saving operation or drug is being held for ransom because we allow profit-motivated entities to have a stranglehold on these items. This is fine for goods like chairs, automobiles and services like catering or auto repair. But we are talking about life or death, in many cases - not whether you get to watch the game on a brand new big screen or not.

So what we end up with is, doctors who prescribe name-brand drugs that cost hundreds or thousands of $$ per refill because they were paid off in some fashion by the drug companies. We end up with doctors who won't perform a life saving surgery because the patient can't afford $100,000 out of pocket. We have drug companies that don't want to cure anything, instead they R&D drugs to "maintain" patients so they get a nice hefty residual every month when the patient has to purchase their meds. We end up with providers who perform only what is absolutely required for a patient, instead of actually everything they need to recover properly - unless you pay!

And you don't really get much of a choice for many healthcare related items. How many hospitals have sales on bypass surgeries? Stents? MRIs? How many choices do you *really* have there?

Health care costs only go up, they NEVER go down (that I have seen, please do correct me if I'm wrong on that). Insurance goes up. Doctors costs go up. Facility costs go up. Device costs go up. Drug prices go up. I mean, we allow a private entity to have a monopoly (via a patent) on a life-saving procedure. Oh, did you hear, I developed a cure for cancer? That will be $500,000 please. "But it only costs $10 to make the pills?!" you might say. "Yes, yes it does. But I've got a patent, so I'm the only place you can get it. $500,000 please. Cash or charge?" would be the reply.

You can grow or raise your own food. You can build your own furniture. You can provide your own electricty. You can fix your own car. You can even build items that are patented, you just can't sell them. What you can't do, is provide your own health care.

While many people are appalled at a government beaurocrat deciding if they receive that life saving operation or not, that is already being decided by your insurance company, doctor, facility or your wallet.

I guess I just think that, in what you and I would like to call the greatest nation this planet has ever seen, where we can send millions and millions of dollars to feed and clothe other countries - on the taxpayers' dime, why is it such a bad thing to instead use that money to take care of our own people? I get the point about something for nothing and how people abuse it. I am of the opinion that we should socialize healthcare and totally eliminate medicare, medicaid and other social welfare programs.

Sorry, that's not exactly how I wanted to present that but it's about time for me to head out here, so that's what you get


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

davel745 said:


> WE DONT WANT IT. WEATHER IT IS GOOD OR BAD. IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.


Aside from the fact that the Supreme Court says it is constitutional, I recall conservatives playing fast & loose with constitutionality during the Bush administration. Justification like waterboarding not meeting their definition of torture, and having a letter from his lawyer or the DOJ saying a variety of things were constitutional top the list. Then there was authorization from congress to ignore the constitution, which congress has no authority to do in the first place.

Your suggestion that Obamacare is unconstitutional is nothing more than a political rallying cry from the right. It has no basis in fact or in law. All we've got is your plain English interpretation, which is at odds with constitutional scholars across the country.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

SeanInVa said:


> And you don't really get much of a choice for many healthcare related items. How many hospitals have sales on bypass surgeries? Stents? MRIs? How many choices do you *really* have there?


You can't bargain with medical providers as an individual because they hold the key bargaining component; they know what's wrong with you and how badly you need it. That's all the bargaining leverage they need to get whatever they want.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

Nevada said:


> You can't bargain with medical providers as an individual because they hold the key bargaining component; they know what's wrong with you and how badly you need it. That's all the bargaining leverage they need to get whatever they want.


Or as the good doctor I ice fish with says, or how bad your child needs it. This was his explantion to why medical is sky high when the rest of us were complaining about the high insurance prices.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

So I've been trying since the 1st to sign up. I don't mind the queue. I just check that browser tab every few minutes. But every time I have tried, the security questions get me. First there were no options/questions in the dropdowns. Then it was and continues to be that my security answers are not in the right format. say what? you can't process letters and numbers?

Capacity problems, I can totally understand and I sympathize with. Obvious lack of QA, I cannot.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

SeanInVa said:


> So I've been trying since the 1st to sign up. I don't mind the queue. I just check that browser tab every few minutes. But every time I have tried, the security questions get me. First there were no options/questions in the dropdowns. Then it was and continues to be that my security answers are not in the right format. say what? you can't process letters and numbers?
> 
> Capacity problems, I can totally understand and I sympathize with. Obvious lack of QA, I cannot.


My state has its own exchange. It's been having problems too but I finally got in today. The news is very good. My subsidy is $497/month. There is one bronze plan that I can have for free, but the deductibles & copays are unaffordable. I'll be going with an HMO plan that costs me $53/month. Copays are manageable with that HMO.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Nevada said:


> My state has its own exchange. It's been having problems too but I finally got in today. The news is very good. My subsidy is $497/month. There is one bronze plan that I can have for free, but the deductibles & copays are unaffordable. I'll be going with an HMO plan that costs me $53/month. Copays are manageable with that HMO.


So you feel that I owe you that much of a subsidy. After all I will have to pay a part of it.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Old Vet said:


> So you feel that I owe you that much of a subsidy. After all I will have to pay a part of it.


Maybe not. You might qualify for a subsidy yourself.

But in any case, I didn't ask for it. Like everyone else I'm just complying with federal law by doing what I'm told. You can't really blame me because it happens to be a good thing.


----------



## 95bravo (Mar 22, 2010)

I knew this was going to be a disaster from the get go. Go take a stroll in your local Veterans hospital. Go in the waiting rooms and talk to some vets. Ask them how they like gov run health care. They have hoop after hoop to jump, But hay they will give you mind trippy drugs by the handful. Is that the kind of healthcare and society y'all want to live in?:smack


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

95bravo said:


> I knew this was going to be a disaster from the get go. Go take a stroll in your local Veterans hospital. Go in the waiting rooms and talk to some vets. Ask them how they like gov run health care. They have hoop after hoop to jump, But hay they will give you mind trippy drugs by the handful. Is that the kind of healthcare and society y'all want to live in?:smack


I agree with you. Wait until it will take 3 month before you can get a appointment to see a Primary care nurse practitioner and 4 month to see a specialist. Then come back and tell me how much you love the Obama care. Oh by the way you cant go to the VA while the government is shut down unless it is life or death. Then you will be transferred to another hospital when you are stable.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Your suggestion that Obamacare is unconstitutional is nothing more than a political rallying cry from the right. It has no basis in fact or in law. All we've got is your plain English interpretation, which is at odds with constitutional scholars across the country.


Do you think SCOTUS' ruling re: Citizens United was correct/constitutional?


----------



## 95bravo (Mar 22, 2010)

Old Vet said:


> I agree with you. Wait until it will take 3 month before you can get a appointment to see a Primary care nurse practitioner and 4 month to see a specialist. Then come back and tell me how much you love the Obama care. Oh by the way you cant go to the VA while the government is shut down unless it is life or death. Then you will be transferred to another hospital when you are stable.


What will happen the next time the gov shut's down when all hospitals are run by the gov?


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Nevada said:


> Maybe not. You might qualify for a subsidy yourself.
> 
> But in any case, I didn't ask for it. Like everyone else I'm just complying with federal law by doing what I'm told. You can't really blame me because it happens to be a good thing.


You most certainly did ask for it, campaign for it and vote for candidates that did support it. Don't try to play innocent when someone calls you on the fact that you repeatedly brag about someone else paying your way. 

And if we all qualify for subsidies, who the heck will pay the bill?:smack


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

95bravo said:


> What will happen the next time the gov shut's down when all hospitals are run by the gov?


They will be open but only in life threaten accidents or sickness. Other way you will be sent home and tole come back after the shut down is over.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

95bravo said:


> What will happen the next time the gov shut's down when all hospitals are run by the gov?


Obamacare only subsidizes insurance premiums. It doesn't provide medical care.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Obamacare only subsidizes insurance premiums. It doesn't provide medical care.


That is true so if you get mecial care is another question. But it is hard to do one with out the other of course you can have insurance and not have medical care but not the other way on expensive things.
To answer the question if the government owns all the hospital and it shuts down then what will you do for the minor things like a broke leg or a stroke.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

SeanInVa said:


> My opinion is that when the free market is applied to healthcare, and all that comes with that - medical devices, drugs, etc - ultimately your life saving operation or drug is being held for ransom because we allow profit-motivated entities to have a stranglehold on these items. This is fine for goods like chairs, automobiles and services like catering or auto repair. But we are talking about life or death, in many cases - not whether you get to watch the game on a brand new big screen or not.
> 
> So what we end up with is, doctors who prescribe name-brand drugs that cost hundreds or thousands of $$ per refill because they were paid off in some fashion by the drug companies. We end up with doctors who won't perform a life saving surgery because the patient can't afford $100,000 out of pocket. We have drug companies that don't want to cure anything, instead they R&D drugs to "maintain" patients so they get a nice hefty residual every month when the patient has to purchase their meds. We end up with providers who perform only what is absolutely required for a patient, instead of actually everything they need to recover properly - unless you pay!
> 
> ...


Hmmm... some of this is erroneous. And not just semantics, like what you think is wrong in my post.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Tricky Grama said:


> Hmmm... some of this is erroneous. And not just semantics, like what you think is wrong in my post.


It helps the discussion along when you can expand on your claim, and not just toss out random pot shots.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Here'a another random pot shot, but most of us already knew this Idiotincharge didn't read the bill or know what's in it.

"If he understood his own law, Obama would realize that suspending the mandate has nothing to do with uninsured Americans having access to health insurance."
http://rare.us/story/how-obamas-ignorance-of-health-care-caused-the-shutdown/

PS-Sean- docs are not paid to Rx. However they are taught in med school to Rx and certain meds are routinely promoted as drugs of choice.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Tricky Grama said:


> Here'a another random pot shot, but most of us already kknew this Idiotincharge didn't read the bill or know what's in it.
> 
> http://rare.us/story/how-obamas-ignorance-of-health-care-caused-the-shutdown/


Wait, I post the actual bill text, and prove you wrong with specific citations. and then you post a link to an extremely partisan website that has nothing to with the claims you made?

Come on, really?


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Tricky Grama said:


> Here'a another random pot shot, but most of us already knew this Idiotincharge didn't read the bill or know what's in it.
> 
> "If he understood his own law, Obama would realize that suspending the mandate has nothing to do with uninsured Americans having access to health insurance."
> http://rare.us/story/how-obamas-ignorance-of-health-care-caused-the-shutdown/
> ...


Actually they ARE paid. Please actually research the claims you make, as right now, all you are doing is exactly what I claimed you were doing. Recycling extremely partisan rhetoric.

http://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/doctors-prescription-drugs--207652001.html


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Yeah, really.

I don't believe you posted any more 'actual bill' than I did in post #43. My quote was from a constitutional judge who actually read the bill. 

And if you disagree w/any partisan site you should counter w/the truth if that quote is inacurate. 

No one here accused you of left partisan-ness. But gettin' close...


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Tricky Grama said:


> Yeah, really.
> 
> I don't believe you posted any more 'actual bill' than I did in post #43. My quote was from a constitutional judge who actually read the bill.
> 
> ...


I posted a link to the PDF of the complete bill, and then told you exactly which pages proved you wrong. Yet you continually ignore that. And your link and quote have nothing to do with the claims you made, they instead talk about the insurance mandate. You made pretty wild claims about how obamacare provides free abortions, forces medical professionals into having abortions, will result in bankrupt insurance companies (which those companies seem to think otherwise)... with no backing. no proof. just wild claims.

Stop recycling wild claims without any proof whatsoever, and I will stop with calling your claims partisan.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

95bravo said:


> I knew this was going to be a disaster from the get go. Go take a stroll in your local Veterans hospital. Go in the waiting rooms and talk to some vets. Ask them how they like gov run health care. They have hoop after hoop to jump, But hay they will give you mind trippy drugs by the handful. Is that the kind of healthcare and society y'all want to live in?:smack


I see this here all the time, I'm glad it's not true for MN. We have a great VA health system. If I was single I wouldn't even consider having health insurance as a vet living in MN.:thumb:


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

LOL! A NBC site?!?!? WhooHoo! Lets all get on the POTUS's network bandwagon.
That network has lied manytimes as well as NOT told the news.

My info comes from 20 yrs working for durg companies as well as knowing the Pharma laws.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Tricky Grama said:


> LOL! A NBC site?!?!? WhooHoo! Lets all get on the POTUS's network bandwagon.
> That network has lied manytimes as well as NOT told the news.
> 
> My info comes fron 20 yrs working for durg companies as well as knowing the Pharma laws.


oh come on, it's a local affiliate.

Here's a fox source for you.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/industri...ccusing-novartis-paying-kickbacks-to-doctors/

another
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...ments-from-pharmaceutical-company-to-promote/


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

SeanInVa said:


> I posted a link to the PDF of the complete bill, and then told you exactly which pages proved you wrong. Yet you continually ignore that. And your link and quote have nothing to do with the claims you made, they instead talk about the insurance mandate. You made pretty wild claims about how obamacare provides free abortions, forces medical professionals into having abortions, will result in bankrupt insurance companies (which those companies seem to think otherwise)... with no backing. no proof. just wild claims.
> 
> Stop recycling wild claims without any proof whatsoever, and I will stop with calling your claims partisan.


 I believe my quote said we MAY be in for docs to be forced to perform abortions. (we beat this to death last yr) Its been in the news that abortions will be funded, those who were bribed to go along w/law were lied to about that in order to vote for the bill.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

SeanInVa said:


> oh come on, it's a local affiliate.
> 
> Here's a fox source for you.
> http://www.foxbusiness.com/industri...ccusing-novartis-paying-kickbacks-to-doctors/
> ...


I'm not going to LOL on this b/c I realize most do not know about docs honorariums for giving lectures, etc. This has been scrutinized to death & there's a fine line.
Docs agree to present data on ...say a new diabetes med (I think that's Novartis's specailty). (of course it SHOULD be a doc who treats) They need to fly to where the lecture is held. They need to have a hotel, meals, fee for speaking. 
So, you think they should do this on their own dime?


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

your post:


> The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
> 
> The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business,and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.


You did say "probably" as applied to forcing the medical professionals into abortions, but no maybe in front of the others. Maybe that's what you intended, but it's not what is there.

The law states, as I clarified earlier, that abortions are not forced to be covered, and public funds are not to be used for them if the insurance provider does cover them.

And the news can say whatever they want, it doesn't mean it's true. The BILL says otherwise:



> SEC. 1303. SPECIAL RULES.
> 11 (a) SPECIAL RULES RELATING TO COVERAGE OF
> 12 ABORTION SERVICES.&#8212;
> 13 (1) VOLUNTARY CHOICE OF COVERAGE OF ABOR-
> ...


Right there. it specifically says abortions are not required to be covered. it is 100% voluntary and up to the insurance plan provider to cover or not cover.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Tricky Grama said:


> I'm not going to LOL on this b/c I realize most do not know about docs honorariums for giving lectures, etc. This has been scrutinized to death & there's a fine line.
> Docs agree to present data on ...say a new diabetes med (I think that's Novartis's specailty). (of course it SHOULD be a doc who treats) They need to fly to where the lecture is held. They need to have a hotel, meals, fee for speaking.
> So, you think they should do this on their own dime?


No, however it's the very definition of a conflict of interest.


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

SeaninVa Do you currently work in goverment ?


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Grumpy old man said:


> SeaninVa Do you currently work in goverment ?


No I do not, I develop software for the health care industry - home health care, specifically.

That said, I spent 10 years developing software for the US Navy.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Maybe not. You might qualify for a subsidy yourself.
> 
> But in any case, I didn't ask for it. Like everyone else I'm just complying with federal law by doing what I'm told. You can't really blame me because it happens to be a good thing.


It seems to me we are currently looking at a budget crisis looming on the horizon..... something about defaulting on our current debts due to a lack of funds coming into the treasury, and yet you seem to think adding another trillion bucks worth of expense (most of which will have to be borrowed) is a "good thing"?


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

That's all I need to know , Thanks for your input . My personal opinion on the entire debate is that aca will one day be known as the 1st major hit to Americans freedom and the beginning of a life changing times we will never be able to recover from .The government has no business forcing anyone to buy health insurance .


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

POTDA, Grumpy Old Man!!













So, I guess the website shut down already?
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/US..._mail_job=1540407_10052013&promo_code=15178-1


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Grumpy old man said:


> My personal opinion on the entire debate is that aca will one day be known as the 1st major hit to Americans freedom and the beginning of a life changing times we will never be able to recover from .


Reagan said the same thing about enacting Medicare. It seems that America's freedom survived Medicare just fine.


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Reagan said the same thing about enacting Medicare. It seems that America's freedom survived Medicare just fine.


:umno: Americans didn't have to sign up /provide personal information and be forced to stay compliant with the govs rules or be fined ,BIG DIFFERENCE !


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

davel745 said:


> WEATHER IT IS GOOD OR BAD. IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.


It was passed by congress, signed by the president, then declared constitutional by the Supreme Court. What more do you want?


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

Now I wonder what this is really for ???


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

Nevada said:


> It was passed by congress, signed by the president, then declared constitutional by the Supreme Court. What more do you want?


I can't tell you how much I hate Obamacare and how shocked I am to say this, but.... I actually agree with Nevada on this statement.

It shouldn't be something that is holding up the budget compromise, nor should it be a point of such division and near war among Americans. The fact is, that it is what it is, and it isn't going away any time soon. 

If it does turn out to be as bad as we suspect it will, it will collapse under it's own weight. Yes, we will all suffer because of it, but it's way past the timeframe where we can do anything about it now. It's time to move forward into whatever our destiny is with this thing, let history play out whatever is going happen, and wait _diligently and patiently _for the *best *opportunity to get rid of it instead of using every stupid remote opportunity to just make it all worst and get it dug in even further.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Grumpy old man said:


> Now I wonder what this is really for ???


Allegedly to store all the data the NSA is pouring over to spy on us. Given the size, and the other "amenities" on the property - I have a nasty feeling it's for even more nefarious purposes - as if the original allegations aren't nefarious enough...

I will be so happy when America finally wakes up and takes the government back from these above-the-law idiots.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Karen said:


> I can't tell you how much I hate Obamacare and how shocked I am to say this, but.... I actually agree with Nevada on this statement.
> 
> It shouldn't be something that is holding up the budget compromise, nor should it be a point of such division and near war among Americans. The fact is, that it is what it is, and it isn't going away any time soon.
> 
> If it does turn out to be as bad as we suspect it will, it will collapse under it's own weight. Yes, we will all suffer because of it, but it's way past the timeframe where we can do anything about it now. It's time to move forward into whatever our destiny is with this thing, let history play out whatever is going happen, and wait _diligently and patiently _for the *best *opportunity to get rid of it instead of using every stupid remote opportunity to just make it all worst and get it dug in even further.


So what you are suggesting is we just wait and see how it works? Lets look at another law... the law of gravity... that one doesnt need congressional approval, nor a Supreme Court ruling. Would you "wait and see" what happens if you were in a boat floating downstream towards Niagra falls? Or would you kinda figure that gravity just might kick in when you went over the edge? Are you aware what kind of catastrophic events will take place when our nations economy collapses under the added weight of this boondoggle? Would it not be better to at least try to paddle to shore before allowing the boat to go over the falls? To me, any effort made to prevent this thing is better than no effort at all.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

And I wonder how many have looked at all those data centers put by companies Like MS, Google Apple and this one for the NSA is HUGE Look how much data processing power and Data Storage they have inside these buildings and it will scare the living day lights out of you, and there is more then one for each of these companies as well as the NSA, collect away and store everyones information that is what ACA is all about. Yottabytes of storage. and that is a HUGE NUMBER. LOL


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

Yeah let's just go with the flow, don't worry about the waivers and special terms for the chosen ones.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> To me, any effort made to prevent this thing is better than no effort at all.


But the thing is that the government shutdown isn't about the ACA any longer. In fact I'm not really sure what republicans want now. I'm not sure they know either.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Karen said:


> I can't tell you how much I hate Obamacare and how shocked I am to say this, but.... I actually agree with Nevada on this statement.
> 
> It shouldn't be something that is holding up the budget compromise, nor should it be a point of such division and near war among Americans. The fact is, that it is what it is, and it isn't going away any time soon.
> 
> If it does turn out to be as bad as we suspect it will, it will collapse under it's own weight. Yes, we will all suffer because of it, but it's way past the timeframe where we can do anything about it now. It's time to move forward into whatever our destiny is with this thing, let history play out whatever is going happen, and wait _diligently and patiently _for the *best *opportunity to get rid of it instead of using every stupid remote opportunity to just make it all worst and get it dug in even further.


I hate to disagree with you on this but The House of Representative has the right to not put any money on a law if they don't want to. That is their job.Now if you listen to the media and the democrats the whole world is about to end because they want to do this but it is their job and the Senate and the President can not change that. Now that the shut down has happened It is the Republicans the closed all the parks and lakes and the other places that are now closed and are trying to make it as hard as possible for the everyday people or that is what the President wants you to think. The House has sent a lot of bills to the Senate to keep from having a shut down and are send more even now but the Senate and the President will not accept them. They have sent them all the funding measures for every thing but Obama care but the president is of the opinion that you do it my way or hit the highway.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Old Vet said:


> I hate to disagree with you on this but The House of Representative has the right to not put any money on a law if they don't want to.


They might have the legal right to do it, but I can't recall a previous CR ever being held up over funding an existing law. Do you recall a case where this was done before?


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Karen said:


> I can't tell you how much I hate Obamacare and how shocked I am to say this, but.... I actually agree with Nevada on this statement.
> 
> It shouldn't be something that is holding up the budget compromise, nor should it be a point of such division and near war among Americans. The fact is, that it is what it is, and it isn't going away any time soon.
> 
> If it does turn out to be as bad as we suspect it will, it will collapse under it's own weight. Yes, we will all suffer because of it, but it's way past the timeframe where we can do anything about it now. It's time to move forward into whatever our destiny is with this thing, let history play out whatever is going happen, and wait _diligently and patiently _for the *best *opportunity to get rid of it instead of using every stupid remote opportunity to just make it all worst and get it dug in even further.


 My understanding at this point the Republicans just want all those exempt from this disaster to have to comply with the laws just like the serf do .In short all congressmen get to go on Ocare like the poor common man .:hobbyhors
Sounds fair to me :happy2:


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

Do we own the government or does it own us ?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Old Vet said:


> I hate to disagree with you on this but The House of Representative has the right to not put any money on a law if they don't want to. That is their job.Now if you listen to the media and the democrats the whole world is about to end because they want to do this but it is their job and the Senate and the President can not change that. Now that the shut down has happened It is the Republicans the closed all the parks and lakes and the other places that are now closed and are trying to make it as hard as possible for the everyday people or that is what the President wants you to think. The House has sent a lot of bills to the Senate to keep from having a shut down and are send more even now but the Senate and the President will not accept them. They have sent them all the funding measures for every thing but Obama care but the president is of the opinion that you do it my way or hit the highway.


Yes many times in the past mandatory spending has been Stopped. This is not a new thing at all. And they have Congress has that is already stopped certain items that are in ACA from being funded. and there are two good examples of this being done recently: one, the Hyde Amendment bans federal funding for abortion by amending the Medicaid entitlement program and has been attached to appropriation bills since 1976; second, Congress already defunded the co-op health insurance program which was part of ObamaCare in section 1857 of the Continuing Resolution passed in April 2011. 
And some even before that have been stopped that is said to be mandatory spending.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> Yes many times in the past mandatory spending has been Stopped. This is not a new thing at all. And they have Congress has that is already stopped certain items that are in ACA from being funded. and there are two good examples of this being done recently: one, the Hyde Amendment bans federal funding for abortion by amending the Medicaid entitlement program and has been attached to appropriation bills since 1976; second, Congress already defunded the co-op health insurance program which was part of ObamaCare in section 1857 of the Continuing Resolution passed in April 2011.
> And some even before that have been stopped that is said to be mandatory spending.


What if democrats in the senate refused to fund the government unless we repealed the Bush tax cuts?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> What if democrats in the senate refused to fund the government unless we repealed the Bush tax cuts?


What's the answer? They refuse to sign a budget for 6 years. Why haven't we had one since Obama took office? So we won't know exactly how much the liberals are spending on entitlement programs and not paying for infrastucture maintainence or improvements.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Nevada said:


> What if democrats in the senate refused to fund the government unless we repealed the Bush tax cuts?


OK since the Bush tax cuts have already expired then go ahead.


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

Karen said:


> I can't tell you how much I hate Obamacare and how shocked I am to say this, but.... I actually agree with Nevada on this statement.
> 
> It shouldn't be something that is holding up the budget compromise, nor should it be a point of such division and near war among Americans. The fact is, that it is what it is, and it isn't going away any time soon.
> 
> If it does turn out to be as bad as we suspect it will, it will collapse under it's own weight. Yes, we will all suffer because of it, but it's way past the timeframe where we can do anything about it now. It's time to move forward into whatever our destiny is with this thing, let history play out whatever is going happen, and wait _diligently and patiently _for the *best *opportunity to get rid of it instead of using every stupid remote opportunity to just make it all worst and get it dug in even further.


It doesn't matter what these people say they are part of the corruption of this country. It is un constructional to force an American to buy health insurance. 
and it is a big fraud on the people of this country.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

SeanInVa said:


> your post:
> 
> 
> You did say "probably" as applied to forcing the medical professionals into abortions, but no maybe in front of the others. Maybe that's what you intended, but it's not what is there.
> ...


I have two questions.
1- is it currently illegal to use Federal Funds to provide abortions?
2- are there any Federal Govt subsidized Obamacare policies available on the exchanges that provide abortions?


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

nchobbyfarm said:


> I have two questions.
> 1- is it currently illegal to use Federal Funds to provide abortions?
> 2- are there any Federal Govt subsidized Obamacare policies available on the exchanges that provide abortions?


Yes I think it is illegal. I do not know the answer to the other question and I honestly never looked at that part this way. You make a very good point here.

Sent from my M470BSA using Tapatalk 4


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

maybe we'll all get lucky and the gov will stay closed .


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Reagan said the same thing about enacting Medicare. It seems that America's freedom survived Medicare just fine.


Do you honestly believe this?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> But the thing is that the government shutdown isn't about the ACA any longer. In fact I'm not really sure what republicans want now.


Can you say "repeal"? How about "freedom"? Or "economic stability"?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> So what you are suggesting is we just wait and see how it works? Lets look at another law... the law of gravity... that one doesnt need congressional approval, nor a Supreme Court ruling. Would you "wait and see" what happens if you were in a boat floating downstream towards Niagra falls? Or would you kinda figure that gravity just might kick in when you went over the edge? Are you aware what kind of catastrophic events will take place when our nations economy collapses under the added weight of this boondoggle? Would it not be better to at least try to paddle to shore before allowing the boat to go over the falls? To me, any effort made to prevent this thing is better than no effort at all.












However, I agree w/Karen too. This admin got re-elected. Mostly by folks who like the POTUS & have NO clue of what the policies are. Like why is there about 2/3rds against the UNhealthcare law but many of those must've voted this admin back in??? 
Y'all remember the precincts that went 110% for Obama...


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> They might have the legal right to do it, but I can't recall a previous CR ever being held up over funding an existing law. Do you recall a case where this was done before?


I don't recall a case where a law was passed w/only the minimum majority, that would take over about 10% of the economy that the POTUS has excepted his cronies, himself, congress & their workers from either.

FYI, all the "Rs" want is compromise on this...make congress be held to the same laws as us, as well as give us the same year waiver from the bill.
NV, tell us why that's not fair??

Edited to add-sorry, Sawmill Jim, you said it, should've read all b/4 posting vut guess it doesn't hurt to say it again!


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

So those that think this law is constitutional because it's a Tax, are You willing to let the Government do Anything to You ,aslong as it's"called" a Tax?


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Obamacare sticker shock, Huge premium increases, Higher deductibles, Young Obama supporters hit hard, Low information Americans continue to be deceived, Obamacare Facebook page angry comments
&#8220;The study says 27-year-old men in Nebraska will see a whopping 279 percent increase in premiums and 27-year-old women in Nebraska will get an also-shocking 227 percent increase in rates.&#8221;*&#8230;Watchdog.org*
&#8220;Rising medical costs, &#8220;combined with the costs associated with the Affordable Care Act, have made it increasingly difficult to continue providing the same level of health care benefits to our employees at an affordable cost,&#8221;&#8221;*&#8230;UPS memo *
&#8220;Can we stop calling ObamaCare the Affordable Care Act now?&#8221;&#8230;*Guilford College student*


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

Tricky Grama said:


> However, I agree w/Karen too. This admin got re-elected. Mostly by folks who like the POTUS & have NO clue of what the policies are. Like why is there about 2/3rds against the UNhealthcare law but many of those must've voted this admin back in???
> Y'all remember the precincts that went 110% for Obama...


 
So 110% isn't proof of voter fraud (Not picking on you tricky just asking a question.) And if I remember there were quite a few that voted 100% for Obama and No votes for Romney, What's up with that. there will always be a few who vote for the other guy. And then George Soros owns the voter machine company. Soros has caused other country's to collapse.


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

If i lied to as many people as this administration has I would be in jail for fraud !, How are the young entitled O supporters dealing with the thought that they may have been flat out lied to and at the very least mislead ? Presidents have been impeached for less !


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Grumpy old man said:


> If i lied to as many people as this administration has I would be in jail for fraud !, How are the young entitled O supporters dealing with the thought that they may have been flat out lied to and at the very least mislead ? Presidents have been impeached for less !


----------



## Peepsqueak (Apr 6, 2005)

I hope they get this together soon. The website is a mess. Since I am self employed I do not want to have an employer to get reasonable healthcare. I will sign my family up for this but I am already disappointed on the lack of organization involved. Red tape at its finest.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Peepsqueak said:


> I hope they get this together soon. The website is a mess. Since I am self employed I do not want to have an employer to get reasonable healthcare. I will sign my family up for this but I am already disappointed on the lack of organization involved. Red tape at its finest.


You really shouldnt need to worry about getting into the exchanges with this... Obama promised that everyone could keep right on with their current policies just like they had before this went into effect. I am pretty sure he also promised those rates would be quite a bit less than last year.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Yeah, YH, the idiotincharge promised our rates would go down "300%".


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

Tricky Grama said:


> I don't recall a case where a law was passed w/only the minimum majority, that would take over about 10% of the economy that the POTUS has excepted his cronies, himself, congress & their workers from either.
> 
> FYI, all the "Rs" want is compromise on this...make congress be held to the same laws as us, as well as give us the same year waiver from the bill.
> NV, tell us why that's not fair??
> ...


This should get potd!

Also if our rates dropped 300% they would be paying us for being insured. That makes as much sense as the current law. Ie: none.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Nevada said:


> They might have the legal right to do it, but I can't recall a previous CR ever being held up over funding an existing law. Do you recall a case where this was done before?


sorry but: so what? its their constitutional duty to open or close the purse strings.
Had past Houses done their job we might not be in this situation.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

MJsLady said:


> This should get potd!
> 
> Also if our rates dropped 300% they would be paying us for being insured. That makes as much sense as the current law. Ie: none.


 Tnx, Lady. My post was wrong-typo-he actually said 3000%! 
Idiot.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Well, it looked like the system was going to work today. But, noooo. 'Account Could Not Be Created. System Is Unavailable'.

This, after having THREE years to prepare. I dread to see what our healthcare looks like.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

It looks pretty bad. EVERYONE will have to have every kind of coverage. You're 75 y/o female? HAVE to have maternity coverage. (I wonder if you'll need prostate med coverage too?)
DH just got his notificaton from BC/BS that his plan will end 12/31. $430/mo, has a couple bad pre-existing conditons, new policy? Prolly 3 times that am't. Can't afford it, will have to go w/o & see if they can collect their fine.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> It looks pretty bad. EVERYONE will have to have every kind of coverage. You're 75 y/o female? HAVE to have maternity coverage. (I wonder if you'll need prostate med coverage too?)


A 75 year-old female will undoubtedly be on Medicare, not Obamacare. 



Tricky Grama said:


> DH just got his notificaton from BC/BS that his plan will end 12/31. $430/mo, has a couple bad pre-existing conditons, new policy? Prolly 3 times that am't. Can't afford it, will have to go w/o & see if they can collect their fine.


You need to look at your health care exchange for plans.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

it's a bit hard to look at the exchange for plans when you can't even create an account :-/


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

SeanInVa said:


> it's a bit hard to look at the exchange for plans when you can't even create an account :-/


I just finished at the Nevada exchange this morning. The only thing I couldn't do is upload income & citizenship verification documentation, but I've printed it and will get in in the mail today.

I joined an HMO plan for only $53/month. I'm a happy camper. :dance:


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

I'm in VA, so using the federal exchange. I can't even create an account. I've been trying since the 1st.


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

Obama has come to the aid of the American citizen. Through his keen manipulation the computers don't work. Thank you Barry you have a 100% track record , every thing you touch turns to poo.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

davel745 said:


> Thank you Barry you have a 100% track record , every thing you touch turns to poo.


 If you don't mind-UNDERSTATMENT of the Year!:bow:


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

Now is seems you have to be signed up by mid February instead of the end of March.. Interesting with all the problems they are having..


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

Why bother ?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Grumpy old man said:


> Why bother ?


I had a very good reason for bothering. I got a $497/month subsidy to help pay for my health care insurance. I used that subsidy to join an HMO that only costs me $53/month. Not bad for a 63 year-old man.


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I had a very good reason for bothering. I got a $497/month subsidy to help pay for my health care insurance. I used that subsidy to join an HMO that only costs me $53/month. Not bad for a 63 year-old man.


Well ... that cooment wasn't directed to you but this whole boondoggle will be gone before long and I refuse to post anything like the information they want when so many gov offices have access . sounds like a recipe for disaster and the few who have signed 51,000 as this am I would bet most have no ins now or a long list of prexisting conditions and want to jump in before they can't find coverage at all . No thanks !


----------



## Guest (Oct 11, 2013)

I wouldn't put much faith in an administration running a health-care system for millions of people when they can't even create a working web site in 3 & 1/2 years , especially when the rules keep changing . They can't even assure people that the prices they are being quoted is the actual price they will be paying .
They have finally had to admit they were lying in the beginning when they were saying the number of hits was causing all the problems & that was a great success because everyone wanted to sign up .
How can you be that incompetent when the very survivability of the health plan depends on millions falling for it ? I do know that I don't want anyone too stupid to create a working website in charge of my health care .


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

to be fair, Obama and the dems didn't design nor code the website - CGI Federal did.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

SeanInVa said:


> to be fair, Obama and the dems didn't design nor code the website - CGI Federal did.


Of course it's not the government's fault why would anyone expect due diligence from them? Hey, it's not their money, they can always get more :icecream:.


----------



## SeanInVa (Oct 3, 2013)

Ambereyes said:


> Of course it's not the government's fault why would anyone expect due diligence from them? Hey, it's not their money, they can always get more :icecream:.


That's not what I meant but feel free to keep putting words in my mouth.

Of course the government is at fault fir not overseeing this properly. But cgi should be getting heat for developing a pile of crap for 93 million dollars. It should absolutely affect their chances at future contracts

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> I had a very good reason for bothering. I got a $497/month subsidy to help pay for my health care insurance. I used that subsidy to join an HMO that only costs me $53/month. Not bad for a 63 year-old man.


Ok, I am curious here. Since there seems to be a shortage of funds, and there is a "partial" gov shutdown.... VA benefits shut off etc... where is this subsidy funding coming from?


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

SeanInVa said:


> to be fair, Obama and the dems didn't design nor code the website - CGI Federal did.


Still, the website has cost 5 times what was promised and still doesn't work. NOTHING government does works as promised or comes in at or under budget. Why would anyone think Obamacare will be different?


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

SeanInVa said:


> That's not what I meant but feel free to keep putting words in my mouth.
> 
> Of course the government is at fault fir not overseeing this properly. But cgi should be getting heat for developing a pile of crap for 93 million dollars. It should absolutely affect their chances at future contracts
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4


Yes, they should lose this contract,but I have a feeling they will just get more money to try and fix this mess. Tax money has been spent again for failure. Who is in charge of this contract? Who is the oversight?


----------



## Becka03 (Mar 29, 2009)

Nevada said:


> I had a very good reason for bothering. I got a $497/month subsidy to help pay for my health care insurance. I used that subsidy to join an HMO that only costs me $53/month. Not bad for a 63 year-old man.



you are welcome- I am glad as a tax payer I was able to help pay for your health insurance, I am sure none of my costs will rise as a result of my full cooperation with helping you- 
right?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Becka03 said:


> you are welcome- I am glad as a tax payer I was able to help pay for your health insurance, I am sure none of my costs will rise as a result of my full cooperation with helping you-
> right?


Have you checked at your exchange yet?


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I had a very good reason for bothering. I got a $497/month subsidy to help pay for my health care insurance. I used that subsidy to join an HMO that only costs me $53/month. Not bad for a 63 year-old man.


Boy I am glad you found this I was afraid that my tax dollars were going to something unimportant like defense or other causes but they are sending to your health. Good to know because I get no subsidy at all and but pay for the heath care on my own like the laws said.


----------



## Becka03 (Mar 29, 2009)

Nevada said:


> Have you checked at your exchange yet?


not in this lifetime- I work at a job that provides healthcare - so I don't need to- of course it is going up- my premiums - and my copays and my meds- 
so that I can make sure you have subsidies


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Nevada said:


> I had a very good reason for bothering. I got a $497/month subsidy to help pay for my health care insurance. I used that subsidy to join an HMO that only costs me $53/month. Not bad for a 63 year-old man.


My horse even knows better than to bite the hand that feeds him. Gloating and rubbing the noses of those providing your beloved subsidy is not only rude but also ill advised. Those providing for themselves, their families and the leaches might decide to quit if they are forced to watch the spoils of the ravaging to often.


----------



## Becka03 (Mar 29, 2009)

nchobbyfarm said:


> My horse even knows better than to bite the hand that feeds him. Gloating and rubbing the noses of those providing your beloved subsidy is not only rude but also ill advised. Those providing for themselves, their families and the leaches might decide to quit if they are forced to watch the spoils of the ravaging to often.


honestly- it is like- oh Thank you- you can not help your own family since I tax you so much -but hey this random person is getting a kidney and Lord forbid they thank you- 
WHT


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Becka03 said:


> honestly- it is like- oh Thank you- you can not help your own family since I tax you so much -but hey this random person is getting a kidney and Lord forbid they thank you-
> WHT


I've raised a family and I've paid taxes. I'm not ashamed to be mostly retired now. This hamster is off the treadmill.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

Nevada said:


> I've raised a family and I've paid taxes. I'm not ashamed to be mostly retired now. This hamster is off the treadmill.


And enjoy the days ahead Nevada. Lifes to short to sweat the details. Let the next guy worry and fuss about the trifles. That's my motto!


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> A 75 year-old female will undoubtedly be on Medicare, not Obamacare.
> 
> 
> 
> You need to look at your health care exchange for plans.


OK, I was making a point...so a 64 y/o woman will be required to have full coverae, maternity car, B.C. etc.
AND while someone IS trying to fix it, presently there's NO verification of income. You can make a mil but say you're destitute & get subsidized coverage.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

davel745 said:


> Obama has come to the aid of the American citizen. Through his keen manipulation the computers don't work. Thank you Barry you have a 100% track record , every thing you touch turns to poo.


----------



## SpaceCadet12364 (Apr 27, 2003)

davel745 said:


> So 110% isn't proof of voter fraud



Ok, please enlighten me and explain how it is not fraudulent for someone to receive 110% of the vote? 

:hrm:


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

Tricky Grama said:


> OK, I was making a point...so a 64 y/o woman will be required to have full coverage, maternity car, B.C. etc.
> AND while someone IS trying to fix it, presently there's NO verification of income. You can make a mil but say you're destitute & get subsidized coverage.


TG, even though i am not yet 50 and only God could give me a baby via miracle, I would have to pay those things too. I figure if he wants to do that he will pay for it not the government. 
Nev, you raised a family? Good for you. So what? So have I. I don't want you paying for my care. That job belongs to MY kids not you or yours. It is not right of me to burden you with my needs nor is it right of you to expect me to pony up for yours.


----------



## SpaceCadet12364 (Apr 27, 2003)

Tricky Grama said:


> Can't afford it, will have to go w/o & see if they can collect their fine.


If you get any form of government payment, they'll collect their fine from you.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

SpaceCadet12364 said:


> Ok, please enlighten me and explain how it is not fraudulent for someone to receive 110% of the vote?
> 
> :hrm:


If you are talking about the incident in Florida, each voter is handed multiple different ballots. So nobody was accused of voting for any one candidate more than once, they only voted on multiple ballots like they were supposed to.

The claim of 110% voter turn out was a complete fraud in itslef.


----------



## Jenn (Nov 9, 2004)

nchobbyfarm said:


> I have two questions.
> 1- is it currently illegal to use Federal Funds to provide abortions?
> 2- are there any Federal Govt subsidized Obamacare policies available on the exchanges that provide abortions?


1- yes. Even soldiers overseas where no local hospital does abortions- have to pay to go home to have one or pay the Army hospital which otherwise gives them free care for the procedure.
2- "Obamacare" leads us to private policies. If they cover abortions, they are not allowed to pay for them with money from federal subsidies. So if a company has all 100% subsidized clients and offers abortion coverage, it will have to charge extra for this or get some outside funding for it.


----------



## snowcap (Jul 1, 2011)

It seems "Ocare' is doing an effective job of being an extension of O's class warfare.
Potatoes and grain if you know what I mean.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

snowcap said:


> It seems "Ocare' is doing an effective job of being an extension of O's class warfare.


Obamacare restored what the poor & middle class always had; access to medical care. Growing up in the 50's & 60's this wasn't that much of an issue because everyone could afford to see a doctor and buy prescriptions.

When average Americans can't afford to see a doctor for simple illnesses, we've got a crisis on our hands.


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

When the average Americans get $500.00 a month subsidies, we will soon be broke! 

OH yes , we already are! Who will pay the subsidies when we can't borrow any more money?


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

I believe that over 100% of people in a bunch of districts in Ohio and Florida voted for Obama.. Some districts said that there were 0 votes for Romney. I find this hard to believe given the diversity I see here on HT, someone would vote for Romney. It isn't to much of a stretch to say that fraud was committed given the lies Obama has told.


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

well...


----------



## Becka03 (Mar 29, 2009)

Nevada said:


> I've raised a family and I've paid taxes. I'm not ashamed to be mostly retired now. This hamster is off the treadmill.



this is the exact thinking that has our Country in a mess- the huge percentage of people in the country looking for a handout-just cause they think they are owed it- cause they worked- what if the half who are providing your subsidies all took the same attitude? I tell you what would happen- exactly what Obummer wants an entire Country that is defendant on the gov'

this thinking is why I have almost no contact with half of my deadbeat the gov't owes me family and the rich ones who are liberal koolaid drinkers... of course my aunt who thinks I am nuts for being a Christian and Conservative who LOVES the great leader and his thinking -and owns her own business- it now looking to unload it and sell it as fast as she can and has made all her employees part time since this Ocare thing......


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

Where would the US economy be if we hadn't supported rebuilding war torn countries and had not wasted billions of dollars on obama's welfare plans , The way I was raised was if you took any type of a handout from the government you were considered a WELFARE recipient . Period . I prefer not to become reliant on government for anything .


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

SpaceCadet12364 said:


> Ok, please enlighten me and explain how it is not fraudulent for someone to receive 110% of the vote?
> 
> :hrm:


 What I read was the #s were based on last election so there were more voters registered than were originally counted...yeah, sounds acceptable, huh.
Not.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

SpaceCadet12364 said:


> If you get any form of government payment, they'll collect their fine from you.


 I'm thinking they'll take it from our SS?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

davel745 said:


> I believe that over 100% of people in a bunch of districts in Ohio and Florida voted for Obama.. Some districts said that there were 0 votes for Romney. I find this hard to believe given the diversity I see here on HT, someone would vote for Romney. It isn't to much of a stretch to say that fraud was committed given the lies Obama has told.


 Yup, I couldn't remember the other states but I do remember the Philadelphia counts.


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

This is all just one more reason to go off the financial and services grid completely .


----------



## Randy Rooster (Dec 14, 2004)

I swear to God that website is worse than a trip to the DMV.

I checked with my current insurance company which is blue cross- according to blue cross I can stay in current plan which will go way up in price or I can apply at the government market place web site to see what else is avaialable incluuding a possible subsidy to help pay for the huge price spikes in medical coverage that obama care has brought about- so they pass this ---- obama care and now my premium on my current policy is going through the roof and if I need assistance paying for it I have to go through this horrible application process they have set in place. Un friggin believable.

Just unreal.


----------



## Randy Rooster (Dec 14, 2004)

and I wanted to add this - which appears at the bottom of the pages there



> A federal government website managed by the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

I am afraid to go and even look I believe once you have gone there they have you and can make sure you sign up. I say just stay away.


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

davel745 said:


> I am afraid to go and even look I believe once you have gone there they have you and can make sure you sign up. I say just stay away.


Me too! 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Homesteading Today mobile app


----------



## Randy Rooster (Dec 14, 2004)

davel745 said:


> I am afraid to go and even look I believe once you have gone there they have you and can make sure you sign up. I say just stay away.


 
No - just no

Some of the responses here are pure tin foil platted.


----------



## Guest (Oct 13, 2013)

The reason I'm so passionately against the unaffordable care act is because I already had good insurance at a reasonable price . Because of o care my insurance has doubled in price & I won't be surprised if they raise it again , cut benefits or both . What I'm paying now is an absurd amount . If at all possible I plan to run to the doctor often enough to use all I pay for . I'd rather my doctor who I know & like get the money than for it to be used to subsidize some deadbeat nere do well .


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Becka03 said:


> this is the exact thinking that has our Country in a mess- the huge percentage of people in the country looking for a handout-just cause they think they are owed it- cause they worked- what if the half who are providing your subsidies all took the same attitude?


That's just it, I spent 40 years being one of the half that paid for others' subsidies. But more to the point, I contributed 15% of my pay to FICA all those years. Yes, I know that the employer paid half, but I consider that part of my pay because my employer could have given it to me if there was no FICA.

I try not to take statements like that personally, but I resent being called some kind of a freeloader because I accept retirement benefits. I'm only in the position I'm in today because I did what I was supposed to do; go to college, work a career, and contribute to FICA & my corporate retirement fund. I don't consider myself a freeloader in any sense of the word.

And while I don't begrudge poor people their food stamps and relief checks, there IS a difference. I'm collecting benefits from programs that I contributed to while they aren't.

Besides, I'll only be on Obamacare for 20 months before I'll turn 65 and be forced to go on Medicare.


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

Randy Rooster said:


> No - just no
> 
> Some of the responses here are pure tin foil platted.


 
You go Randy and leave your traceable IP address and see if they don't add you to there list. I am willing to bet it is the only thing working on the Obama care website.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

I read a comment from someone who got partially through the Ocare site, he said that Experian (the credit reporting people) were the ones verifying ID. What is up with that?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Ambereyes said:


> I read a comment from someone who got partially through the Ocare site, he said that Experian (the credit reporting people) were the ones verifying ID. What is up with that?


That was me. At the time the Experion database was all they had working at the Navada site. They verified if they have a name & address match in their records. Since I haven't applied for credit for a long time Experion had no record of me. I kind of like that.

During the following week they got other databases working, so my name & address was verified. Despite flying under Experion's detection I'm not completely off the radar, since I file income tax returns, have a bank account, and receive Social Security payments each month.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

I would be in the same pickle, have not applied for any type of credit in 30+ years. Actually I read it on DU. Missed your post. Ooops


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Ambereyes said:


> I would be in the same pickle, have not applied for any type of credit in 30+ years. Actually I read it on DU. Missed your post. Ooops


It was posted in a thread at the HT Countryside Family forum about Obamacare.

Yes, I own my home without a mortgage, paid cash for my car, and haven't applied for credit for at least 8 years. Evidently the credit reporting agencies think I died or something. That's fine with me.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

Nevada said:


> It was posted in a thread at the HT Countryside Family forum about Obamacare.
> 
> Yes, I own my home without a mortgage, paid cash for my car, and haven't applied for credit for at least 8 years. Evidently the credit reporting agencies think I died or something. That's fine with me.


Same here, I would hate to see what they would say about me. Nice feeling though, being somewhat out of the system.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Nevada said:


> That's just it, I spent 40 years being one of the half that paid for others' subsidies. But more to the point, I contributed 15% of my pay to FICA all those years. Yes, I know that the employer paid half, but I consider that part of my pay because my employer could have given it to me if there was no FICA.
> 
> I try not to take statements like that personally, but I resent being called some kind of a freeloader because I accept retirement benefits. I'm only in the position I'm in today because I did what I was supposed to do; go to college, work a career, and contribute to FICA & my corporate retirement fund. I don't consider myself a freeloader in any sense of the word.
> 
> ...


FICA contributions have absolutely NOTHING to do with Ocare. You think your FICA contributions fund Ocare subsidies? Really? No wonder you don't feel bad using the govt guns to provide for your needs. You don't know how it even works.

ETA- you did everything you were supposed to? Does that include retiring to early before providing for you needs?


----------



## SpaceCadet12364 (Apr 27, 2003)

Tricky Grama said:


> I'm thinking they'll take it from our SS?


Um, yep. Being the goobermint is one of the few entities that can take money away from SS payments...if you owe them money, they will take it.


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

Well... let them come find me , using a proxy server should slow them down I'll not be downloading anything online for anyone .


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

nchobbyfarm said:


> FICA contributions have absolutely NOTHING to do with Ocare. You think your FICA contributions fund Ocare subsidies? Really? No wonder you don't feel bad using the govt guns to provide for your needs. You don't know how it even works.
> 
> ETA- you did everything you were supposed to? Does that include retiring to early before providing for you needs?


 Just wanted to say that (yeah, b/c I like Nevada & b/c I have a feel for how he provides for himself AND many others) NV for sure would have provided for his needs. He might be a lib but he's responsible.


----------



## Randy Rooster (Dec 14, 2004)

I served in the US military and because of that I am not only known to exist by them but ( gasp) they have my finger prints !


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Grumpy old man said:


> Well... let them come find me , using a proxy server should slow them down I'll not be downloading anything online for anyone .


Yep slow em down about ten seconds eep:


----------



## Grumpy old man (Aug 6, 2013)

Sawmill Jim said:


> Yep slow em down about ten seconds eep:


they couldn't find bin laden for years and they had 1,000's of people looking for him ,i think my chances of staying out of the lime light are pretty good .:bouncy:


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Grumpy old man said:


> they couldn't find bin laden for years and they had 1,000's of people looking for him ,i think my chances of staying out of the lime light are pretty good .:bouncy:


Don't kid yourself they knew where Bin was I bet he checked in regularly:bash:
At present you are like a lot of us ,not wort their effort .eep: Yet .


----------



## davel745 (Feb 2, 2009)

Ben laden went into witness protection program.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Tricky Grama said:


> Just wanted to say that (yeah, b/c I like Nevada & b/c I have a feel for how he provides for himself AND many others) NV for sure would have provided for his needs. He might be a lib but he's responsible.


You still sure about that?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Yup. I think so.


----------

