I see no reason to keep people that do not want health insurance alive. If they find a way to insure themselves, great! If on the other hand, they show up at the ER or they decide to have kids or they end up with cancer, they get turned away from any hospital for not having coverage. That seems fair to me. It would certainly cull the heard quick enough. Would you Right-wing idiots take this deal? Really? Why not?
So how about manning up & let us know if you believe whether or not private gun ownership should be banned in the US?
Mr Balls has a meddling ego. After the sex act is over, no one's balls either literal or figurative are relevant at all. It doesn't matter what I think or what Mr. Balls thinks. The decision-maker from that point on can only be the woman and those others, if any, to whom she choses to go for counsel.
How radical! Actually giving the person that has to carry the pregnancy to term a choice. But wait.... How can you control women that can make their own decisions?
Can you not discuss the health care you want in this thread? This seems like a simple topic. You should be able to follow it. I see no reason to keep people that do not want health insurance alive. If they find a way to insure themselves, great! If on the other hand, they show up at the ER or they decide to have kids or they end up with cancer, they get turned away from any hospital for not having coverage. That seems fair to me. It would certainly cull the heard quick enough. Would you Right-wing idiots take this deal? Really? Why not?
Why stop there? If the woman has the right to choose whether or not the baby gets to live why not make that privilege open-ended? Abortion advocates believe it's okay to kill a baby based on it's sex, eye color, etc why not extend the "right" if the woman doesn't like the way the child matures?
Joe Nation: I don't think I;m a right winger but I would be willing to opt out on the condition that I could negotiate my own insurance coverage without it having to conform to government standards. Our research over the last month on how to make sure our employees have insurance has shown me that the ACA has caused more harm than good
Love it! Ask ol' moron joe a question for which he's not been prepped and you get one of those "it does not compute" answers. Bless your heart...it's gotta be tough functioning as a shill for the far left fringe.
You can negotiate your own insurance now. That hasn't changed. You can't buy junk insurance that won't cover anything anymore, but how is that a bad thing? The government sets minimum standards for countless industries in this country. Why should something as important as health care be any different?
Yes, that is just what I said, you are not allowed to buy junk policies since they do nothing to prevent you from going broke if you have a major medical issue. You do know that you have to obey speed limits too? The government mandates the speed at which you can travel in your car. Those evil bastards! Why would they do that? Must be some sinister Kenyan Socialist Muslim plan to take over the country.
And still you refuse to say whether you should be able to opt out of insurance as long as you don't use the medical system in this country. Hum? Personal responsibility and all goes out the window the second reality smacks you in the face.
More typical Right-wing lies... Talk about calling journalists out. Deborah Cavallaro was all over the news on Wednesday as an example of someone who lost her existing health insurance thanks to Obamacare. Except one problem—the plan she qualifies for is better. Under her current plan, she is limited to two doctor visits a year, pays $293 a month with a yearly deductible of $5,000. Cavallaro says she was told by her insurance broker she would be paying $478 a month—but she didn’t check the website herself. There, she would have found a better plan, with only a $2,000 deductible and all doctor visits covered by a copay—for only $40 more a month. http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheets/2013/10/31/cheat-sheet.html#3
Like the ones that do not cover eye exams for those with perfect vision? Like the ones that do not cover pediatric dentistry for 60 year olds. Or maternity coverage for the 60 year old males? BTW, do you believe private gun ownership should be banned in the US?
This is a lie. They do prevent you from going broke in the event of a major medical issue. That is their purpose. That is why these insurance products were created. They are not junk. These policies do what they were designed to do. These so called junk policies - as you call them - require the consumer of medical services to pay more of the front end medical expenses - with higher deductibles and higher front end ceilings out of pocket. Once these ceilings are met your back end is protected 100% from financial ruin just like any other policy. This worries me. The President has known about this situation for 3 years. With all this time to plan and strategize - trying to convince the American Public their cancelled policies were actually nothing but junk - is the best they could come up with. Give me a break.
Sorry farmy, you simply are speaking from misinformation. Here is an example of some of the conditions covered by these "mini-meds". But in July 2011 she was diagnosed with breast cancer, at which point the policy’s annual limits of $1,000 a year for outpatient treatment and $2,000 for hospitalization became a huge problem. Facing a $30,000 hospital bill, she delayed treatment. “Finally my surgeon said, ‘Judy, you can’t wait anymore.’ While I was waiting my tumor became larger. It was 3 centimeters when they found it and 9 centimeters when they took it out.” After a double mastectomy, radiation treatments, and reconstructive surgery, Goss is taking the drug tamoxifen to prevent recurrence. So how was this woman covered 100%? This is a typical mini-med health insurance plans. I think you misunderstand how they really work. The new ACA law was design to take these types of plans off of the market.