Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fine me, government. I won't pay insurance companies for your shithole plan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:39 PM
Original message
Fine me, government. I won't pay insurance companies for your shithole plan
The Dems better stand up to, um, the Dems, or they are going to create something that enrages the American public.

Baucus' plan, or anything that compels, by threat of fines, citizens to BUY insurance from private health companies, is going to create a new, serious, wide-spread anti-government movement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DesertFlower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. what if you could buy into the public option?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. What if I couldn't?
My wife and I have good insurance.
But what if we didn't have our jobs? (Not an entirely unlikely situation with a local unemployment rate near 18 percent). What if we both got jobs that allowed us to make our mortage payments, but that didn't allow us to afford insurance?

THe government is going to FINE us?
Are you fucking kidding me?

The Democratic Party is FUCKED if it thinks people are going to support this whorporate give away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DesertFlower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. IMO if you can't afford it, it should be free
or subsidized.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skier_ Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. Agreed, everyone deserves to be healthy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shirlden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #10
27. Free or subsidized??
And that money comes from a tree??? Or does it come out of the taxpayer pocket?? Just asking..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #27
55. We are already paying for 2x universal coverage
$8,000 per person per year vs. $2,750 in Sweden.
Plus they cover everyone from cradle to grave and they live longer.

If the doctor charges $2,000 for an MRI and the public plan pays $200, we've saved $1,800 on one test.
And $200 would still be double the Tokyo price.

Of course under a sane system, the CEO of United Health would have to live on less than $125 million a year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. You have good insurance, yet refuse to "pay insurance companies for your shithole plan"?
What?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. If your income dropped that much
you would not be fined, but given the money to participate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virgogal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. Massachusetts has penalties if you don't buy health insurance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DesertFlower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. how much does it cost? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virgogal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
22. Don't know,sorry. It is a penalty added to your state taxes. I have
insurance so don't know the figures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DesertFlower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. i meant how much does the insurance cost?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virgogal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Don't know that either,sorry. Maybe this link will help.
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 06:21 PM by virgogal
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Indeed. And I have heard some people moved to New Hampshire to get away from it.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. And the MA plan is a failure
EOM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. I like the cut of your jib
I'll be keepin my insurance and paying for my girlfriends.
It will continue to be hard to afford.
I won't be able to afford all the care I need.
But the corporations will be on good ground.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. How do you buy it if you don't have a job?
I don't understand this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. if you don;t have a job - subsidies kick in
it's the folks making $65K with a family of 4 - screwed to the wall by the plan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #9
56. The Baucus plan is DOA
Not one Republican vote and 3 or 4 Democrats against.
It will never get out of committee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #56
57. that is true - but I do not think the mandate concept is dead
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. My guess is that the unemployed
May be taken care of by previously mentioned subsidies.
My concern is for the working poor. Or the lower middle class.
Even the middle class.
Employers are going to drop plans left, right and center, if they can. And that's going to leave people fending for themselves, paying out of pocket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. "Businesses will be required to offer their workers healthcare"
And that's why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance -- just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. (Applause.) Likewise -- likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers. There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still can't afford coverage, and 95 percent of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements. (Applause.) But we can't have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees. Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-t... /
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
30. Don't you just love this guessing game we are forced to play?
When these tea baggers w/health care ins, not wanting to pay for anyone else, experience their employers suddenly dropping employer health care ins, they'll be pissed! Big Time! :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. From what I understand Obama plans 1) subsidies or 2) free basic coverage for those that can't
Baucus bill probably doesn't have that, but they are not going to pass the Baucus bill "as is."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillowTree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #13
52. I wish someone would define "basic coverage".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #5
19. Subsidies, why it is prorated by income as well
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
15. Yep. If compulsory insurance doesn't come with SIGNIFICANT improvements
to the current situation, like, "Holy shit, this is WAY BETTER than the way things were!", then Dems will have buttfucked themselves into a generation in the wilderness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #15
29. Okay, whoah-back, wait
From a post above:



"Businesses will be required to offer their workers healthcare"

And that's why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance -- just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. (Applause.) Likewise -- likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers.


Which do you think they'd choose to do, given the choice?

There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still can't afford coverage,


Based on what? I hope it's not gross income, but I bet it is...

and 95 percent of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements. (Applause.) But we can't have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees.


Ah. So it is going to be based on gross income.

Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.


So someone like me- making about $54K/year, not poor but definitely feeling the pinch already- will end up having to pay at least a portion of the health care benefits previously wholly provided through his employer. Hey, if the USPS- my own employer- is able to merely pay a legal minimum amount to my health benefits instead of providing it in full, they're going to do it because they badly need the money right now. That savings, however, will not not not find its way into my paycheck to help pay for the new legal requirement I must abide by, and yet I'm dead certain I'll be making too much (we're probably talking gross income here, not even net before I pay the bills and buy the food, and that's just not fair because I don't see all of that amount) to qualify for any sort of public option provided in the final bill.

In other words, I'll end up having to either quit my job to get on the public option, not pay at all and face a (comparatively steep) fine that I simply cannot pay, or somehow come up with however big the bill is every month before I pay for anything else, including rent and food. I can't see anything but bad things for me under those conditions, and I understand why the former PR director of CIGNA is saying it's a giveaway, a long, wet kiss, to the insurance companies.

That monthly insurance bill better be small. Vanishingly so. Otherwise, I and a whole lot of other middle-class workers are in one hell of a lot of trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #29
44. I know
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 07:05 PM by charlie
It's like they're approaching it ass-backwards -- It can't be universal unless everyone's onboard, so we'll just make it mandatory aaaaand.... done! Universal coverage, yay! Now, how should we make this plan work? What goes in it?

And don't look now, but Wall Street's back into the old "creative" shenanigans that blew up the financial system -- they're buying up life insurance policies, packaging them together, and selling them as bonds. Kind of like CDO's, but with insurance companies on the hook, instead of mortgage holders. And one thing insurance companies count on is that a certain percentage of life policies will lapse. When these "securitized" policies increase the number that live until the big payout, it'll cost all of us in increased premiums.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoUsername Donating Member (265 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #29
49. But would there be a legal minimum your employer would be required to pay
or, for that matter, a price cap on what insurance companies could charge? So far, the only thing I have heard is that people would be required to either buy insurance or pony up for the fine. Will the bill require standardized fees and premiums as in: for a private insurance company to be able to to LEGALLY offer insurance, they will be required to pay x% on doctor visits, x% on prescriptions, x% on lab fees, etc. and the MAXIMUM they will be able to charge the 'victims' is $$$ per month for a single person, $$$per month for a family of 4, etc.

Without some sort of price requirements, all I can see is that 'mandated insurance' will give insurance companies free reign to raise prices to astronomical levels (as if they aren't there already) AND blame the government for the price increases in the process. IOW, it's a HUGE handout to the insurance companies. No surprise there. They're taking a page out of the Wall Street Bailout book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #29
62. Yep-Employers are going to find a way to weasel out if they can-no doubt about it.
Edited on Mon Sep-21-09 05:00 PM by earth mom
That's why Obama's "reform" just ain't gonna work.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. Ok I have a question... and I do not necessarily like this mechanism ok
there are others that are as good.

How do expect to get universal participation? They are using the German model, not the Canadian model.

That is for starters.

There is more, not that I like it... this is ONE of many potential bills, read this again, ONE of many potential bills.

And of course, if you are under a certain income you will get help to buy that insurance.

But how do you expect to get universal care (this is one way) without forcing universal participation? By the way the Canadian model uses taxes. So what happens if you are poor and cannot pay taxes? You are still covered.

:banghead:

People want to pay things with funny money I believe at this point.

And yes, I am following the whole circus, and all four bills so far. None has been voted OUT of either the House or Senate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. I support a Canadian modell
Pay taxes all your life. Benefit when you need it. Have coverage in the rough periods between jobs.

It's simple.
It's humane.
It's smart.

And I am willing to pay higher taxes for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JBoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #21
31. It varies from province to province, but in BC I'm "required" to purchase coverage
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 06:34 PM by JBoy
Most employers pick up the costs of our Medical Services Plan and offer some kind of supplemental plan as well to cover non-basic items.

For anyone self-employed (or unemployed for that matter), you are required to pay yourself for coverage. It's a relatively nominal rate:

Monthly
$54 for one person
$96 for a family of two
$108 for a family of three or more.

If you are low income, you can get premium assistance on a sliding scale. Coverage is not cancelled if your account goes into arrears.

But all in all, it is still simple, humane and smart. And it's subsidized by taxes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. You are paying more than I pay for Tricare Prime
and to me Tricare would be the perfect model. Oh shoot, even wiht the exchange rate you are.

And it is tested too.

Just that most Americans do not realize the differences. My brother was a resident at Toronto Gen... internal Medicine... so I have had exposure to three medical systems.

The Mexican system as a paramedic... it has its good points... I never did a walletcoscopy for example... and its bad points... (some of the graft at the clinics, for the social security system come to mind)...

The American health care system (the military version) And I am impressed by it.

The American civilian system...

And of course the Ontario version of Health Canada...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #21
33. I support that too, but the votes are not there
and unfortunately in the US for many cultural reasons the best we can do is the German momdel, admitedly the German model (and the US model will get there) has a highly regulated insurance sector, cadillac care is highly taxed and in reality most citizens get the subsidies.

They have also been developing this for over 100 years.

Been readying the bills as they come out... early on it looked like the Mexican system, and they heard from me... but I recognize this as the German system. It is effective and the effect is the same.

Realize also that Medicare was lousy in 1965 and SS stunk in 1936. The first is not over when the President signs it, it is just begun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #16
38. They are fucking well NOT using the German model!
The German model tightly regulates private insurance, which is all non-profit, and offers highly competitive government-paid plans as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. We will get there... this is the skeleton of that
And pray tell me, where exactly did the German model start? With a highly regulated private sector?

no
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 04:16 AM
Response to Reply #41
53. Yes--it started with a highly regulated private sector
The initiative was from government, and top down, by Otto von Bismarck. We will never get there by forcing people to subsidize outrageous insurance industry profits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #16
48. ridiculous. German model, as every single, socialized medicine model, is funded through taxes.

it's irrelevant if it's single-payer (like Canada) or multi-payer, all these models are still funded by taxes.

i don't understand why you keep cheerleading for this sad, cruel joke of an insurance reform(/bailout) designed to work through what essentially is a back-door ULTRA-regressive tax on the struggling middle class.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
20. Baucus "Plan" will not be passed as is. Rockefeller etc will throw much of it out
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 05:59 PM by emulatorloo
Rockefeller Meets Privately with Obama on Health Care
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

White House thinks Baucus bill will change
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
county worker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
24. I agree with the idea that if all we get is insurance reform with a mandate
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 06:16 PM by county worker
it isn't going to go down easy with most of us.

Insurance companies should not even be in the mix in my opinion. If there is a mandate then there must be a public option so that those who do not want to contribute to the insurance company's welfare can still have medical care. We all need to pay for our health care costs but if there is Medicare available to all it would be a much better world.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cabluedem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
26. We will not pay any fines at all. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
28. I've been saying the same thing for weeks now.
Very few people seem capable of hearing this argument.

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #28
47. Instead of paying attention to ISSUES. We're looking at Freeptards with racist signs
And moronic t-shirts.
We're demanding meaningless apologies from Republicans who aren;t going to help us anyhow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #47
50. i wish it was US marching in a million people march on Washington demanding Universal Health Care

for all Americans, as a human right, funded by progressive taxation, NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
32. Exactly. The public, Dems and Idiots will all reject manditory insurance.
That will give Congress the excuse "we tried". We need to clean house in Congress starting with GOP's-buttkiss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
34. We may not be able to primary all of the asshole Democrats but we should at least
concentrate on a few like Corp-butt-kiss. There must be another Democrat we can support in his state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madville Donating Member (743 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
35. What co-pays and deductibles are mandated under this plan?
It doesn't matter if they subsidize the plan if it has $30 co-pays, a $2000 annual deductible and covers 80% after the deductible is met like many plans you see today. The poor still won't be able to afford it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #35
42. It's a lot worse than that.. Premiums eat up 12% or your income
The bare bones plan only covers 70% of expenses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EmeraldCityGrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:47 PM
Response to Original message
37. Baucus played right into their hands
...the more the plan sucks, the more anti-Obama sentiment grows. Disrupting the presidency for the next four years is there goal
regardless the issue. Obama needs to make it clear quickly this plan is unacceptable. Peoples tolerance for BS is minimal at this point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #37
45. Baucus didn't play into their hands. HE IS ONE OF THEM
And in the DP, he is not alone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
39. This "plan" is just another...
... clusterfuck that will not help many people, will enrich the wrong people and will piss off the general public.

Any plan without a public option is POINTLESS. And truth be known nothing short of SINGLE PAYER will get costs in line because in the health care business most of the players NAME THEIR PRICE and the consumer has NO RECOURSE.

It's enough to make one sick :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
40. You are forced to buy car insurance in I beleive all 50 states...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Balbus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #40
43. If you drive a car.
Well, I guess if we die we can get out of buying health insurance. You're right. good point. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TorchTheWitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #43
51. No, only if you OWN a car
You can drive someone else's car all damn day long and not have to pay insurance. And it's liability insurance which does not cover you, your passengers or your car.

This totally false comparison to mandated liability auto insurance pisses me off and it especially pisses me off that Obama himself used that false comparison.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #40
46. Driving/Living are two different things
Stop being an insurance company lackey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #46
54. How could you possibly come to that conclusion from one statment....
A statement of fact is not an admission of like or dislike.

There was no subtle meaning behind that statement, no innuendo that I can see in fact nothing even remotely telling about a hidden agenda in support of the insurance industry let alone the state of said lackeyness.

The only thing I can discern, however, from your statement is a propensity to jump to conclusions.

Perhaps you should think a bit before you leap...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fading Captain Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #54
59. Of course there is
By saying we all have driver's insurance (which is a fucking scam, if you ask me), you are suggesting that is OK if we all are forced to have health insurance, by law.

If you are not suggesting this, why else would you be saying it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneTenthofOnePercent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #40
61. Only if you drive on PUBLIC roads.
A car owner does not have to buy insurance, or even title/register a car that is not to be used on public roads. Heck, you don;t even need a license. Ranches, farms, construction companies, large corporate installations... most do not have insurance or registration on the work vehicles because those vehicles never see a public road. There are exceptions, but they are reasonable.

If you want to drive on a public highway, you need to be liable for damages you may cause.

I think, like car insurance, if you want any coverage/service at all in a public facility or from a facility that receive any other public funding then you must buy the mandated insurance policies. If you do not pay the mandated insurance policies, then you're going to have to pay for any healthcare 100% out of pocket from a 100% private healthcare provider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
58. The FINE is designed to stop people from using Emergency Rooms
At least that's my belief. They can't seriously believe that the fine is going to really raise revenues or cause enforcement. I believe it's designed to discourage people who now go to the ER from showing up there because they fear repercussions of not getting their mandated insurance.

BTW, I hate the approach of mandatory insurance. It's not health care reform. It's government becoming a collection agent for big insurance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-21-09 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
60. ..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 31st 2014, 03:03 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC