We Only Use 100% NATURAL Logarithms

[josephkk]

I don't find anything at this link...

Just tried the one in your reply, it works for me. Just the same the text
of the like gives you the lookup hook, H.R.3590. Give that to your
favorite search engine.

?-)

 

[[email protected]]

I'm glad to oblige in part, but since you're the one trying to take my
medical options and dictate what I must do, I'd think the main burden
of proof should be yours.

He must be happy with your supporting info.

I'll support my claim, and I'll look forward to your basis for saying
people can keep their plans.

Evidence, by definition, doesn't exist for something that hasn't
happened yet; anything I point you to will be opinion, estimation, and
analysis. Also, many of the issues are complex--this is 20% of the
American economy we're talking about. So, strap on your thinking cap!

PRIVATE EMPLOYEES
This analysis relates to the House plan. That didn't thankfully pass--
it was worse--but many of the same considerations apply:
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/07/20...e-your-current-insurance-period-end-of-story/

They estimated 83 million people would lose their private insurance
options (out of roughly 130 million employed, or about 2/3rds)

MEDICARE ADVANTAGE
Medicare Advantage (covers a tremendous number of seniors' plans),
hurt by recently published rules:
http://insureblog.blogspot.com/2013/02/medicare-advantage-plans-lose-under.html

MEDICAID
Currently only about 60% of the people who qualify for Medicaid are on
it (in many cases because they're otherwise covered, such as through
employment, or a spouse). Obamacare pushes that to 100% (which is why
states are resisting Obamacaid, the expanded program under Obamacare.)

Under my reading of section 1311 of the law, if you go to a state
exchange to check out private insurance, the state's computerized
system--by law--examines the medical, family, employment, benefit, and
IRS tax records of everyone in your household. If it determines you
qualify for Medicaid, by law, you will be automatically enrolled in
Obamacaid. (1311(d)(4)(F))

So, you said "it has no (or very little) impact on everyone who
already has insurance." Above are three major groups in America, with
insurance, whose coverage is affected, both regarding cost and
coverage.


It was a promise he made, widely disseminated and repeated in his
speeches--he said Obamacare would save families $2,500 a year.

This is a pay link, but the free preview says it all...
http://news.investors.com/092412-626848-health-premiums-up-3065-obama-vowed-2500-cut.aspx?p=full


Why invent reasons and purposes for things? Why not just look them
up?

Of course a tax is an overhead expense for Americans. Fees too--I
don't understand what you're talking about here.

But, I misspoke on the 3%--I was conflating it with the (separate) tax
on insurance itself.

The 3% is a fee on insurance sold thru the health insurance
"exchanges," to cover the cost of operating this new middle-man /
bureaucracy. That's not in, but is authorized in O/C, and has been
promulgated in the HHS Secretary's recent regulations for exchanges.

So, besides requiring coverages, lower deductibles, no caps, and
funding coverage for 10% of America with its premiums too, as the
first step in making insurance "cheaper"--in addition to all of those
added expenses--we have a 3% "fee" for the exchange, an additional tax
on the insurance itself, plus a tax on all the medical devices you buy
and / or drugs you might need.

As I keep saying, all of those cost more.

I'll address more later...I gotta run.

I think you already stole his tongue.

 

[[email protected]]

He must be happy with your supporting info.

Or just not interested. It's a lot easier and happier to listen to
the propaganda--and I do mean propaganda. The lunch is free. No one
has to pay. Adding more government departments between you and your
doctor increases your choice and decreases the cost.

Most of the supporters aren't using their critical reasoning, and/or
don't have enough information to know; they take Obama on faith.

I think you already stole his tongue.

I spent part of this morning reading HHS' old press releases. It's
truly breathtaking to see such dissembling--the very scale of such
misinformation, calculated to deceive--from a government agency. I'm
not talking about subjective judgements here either. There are plenty
of those, but I mean outright, systematic, deliberate misstatement of
known objective facts.

It would be one thing to ask the American people, "Should we hike
premiums 20% to cover poor people, and increase future rate growth" or
whatever, and have us agree to it. But, to pass it without letting
even our congressmen see it, to insist it costs less when it costs
more, that you can keep your plan when it's meticulously calculated to
make sure you can't--that's scary.

Obamacare is remarkable not just for what it does, but what it makes
it possible for any government to do in the future--track you in real
time, and force you to buy any good or service they desire.

 

[rickman]

Or just not interested. It's a lot easier and happier to listen to
the propaganda--and I do mean propaganda. The lunch is free. No one
has to pay. Adding more government departments between you and your
doctor increases your choice and decreases the cost.

Most of the supporters aren't using their critical reasoning, and/or
don't have enough information to know; they take Obama on faith.

Who is John Galt?

I spent part of this morning reading HHS' old press releases. It's
truly breathtaking to see such dissembling--the very scale of such
misinformation, calculated to deceive--from a government agency. I'm
not talking about subjective judgements here either. There are plenty
of those, but I mean outright, systematic, deliberate misstatement of
known objective facts.

It would be one thing to ask the American people, "Should we hike
premiums 20% to cover poor people, and increase future rate growth" or
whatever, and have us agree to it. But, to pass it without letting
even our congressmen see it, to insist it costs less when it costs
more, that you can keep your plan when it's meticulously calculated to
make sure you can't--that's scary.

Obamacare is remarkable not just for what it does, but what it makes
it possible for any government to do in the future--track you in real
time, and force you to buy any good or service they desire.

Can't they do that already? Don't you have insurance on your car?

Track you in real time??? You got me on that one... How does that
happen? Are they giving us ID cards with trackers built in, or are you
talking about the GPS tracking built into the free cell phones everyone
has to have with them at all times?

What the heck are you talking about???

 

[[email protected]]

Who is John Galt?

Americans spend about $7,500 per capita annually on medical care.
Upthread, you thought it was reasonable to count anyone who spent
$5,000 over two years as a "medical bankruptcy."

That's not thinking critically.

Can't they do that already?  Don't you have insurance on your car?

They can't make you buy a car. They can't make you buy food
"insurance." Oh, wait--actually, now they can. They can make you buy
both--Obamacare says.

Track you in real time???  You got me on that one... How does that
happen?  Are they giving us ID cards with trackers built in, or are you
talking about the GPS tracking built into the free cell phones everyone
has to have with them at all times?

What the heck are you talking about???

The exchanges. They collect, aggregate, and share your personal
medical, employment, financial, tax, and other information, the same
on everyone in your household, and share it. Your IRS records--
previously strictly protected by law--are now freely shared between
agencies, and internet-accessible (with the right password, one
assumes).

Makes you want to call me a lunatic, right? I don't blame you. Go
ahead and do it--I'll cite you straight from the f***ing law.

They do it because they need that info to compute your benefits,
subsidies, premiums. Subsidies are determined by /household/ income,
so they have to know the situation of everyone living in your house,
related or not. The IRS has to track who has insurance, assess
penalties, track compliance on a monthly basis, who has employer-care,
whose plan is grandfathered, and so forth.

Dictators have traditionally killed for this sort of information, and
got a lot less.

 

[[email protected]]

Americans spend about $7,500 per capita annually on medical care.
Upthread, you thought it was reasonable to count anyone who spent
$5,000 over two years as a "medical bankruptcy."

That's not thinking critically.











They can't make you buy a car.   They can't make you buy food
"insurance."  Oh, wait--actually, now they can.  They can make you buy
both--Obamacare says.



The exchanges.  They collect, aggregate, and share your personal
medical, employment, financial, tax, and other information, the same
on everyone in your household, and share it.  Your IRS records--
previously strictly protected by law--are now freely shared between
agencies, and internet-accessible (with the right password, one
assumes).

Makes you want to call me a lunatic, right?  I don't blame you.  Go
ahead and do it--I'll cite you straight from the f***ing law.

Okay, I admit, the law's horrendously boring, and you're probably not
interested. (They count on that.) The provisions are spread
throughout it, making it even boring-er.

So here's a little understandable snippet from some guys who, frankly,
really don't quite get the magnitude of the data dump, but have
understood at least a piece of it:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...otential-obamacare-privacy-nightmare/1752211/
"ObamaCare's federal exchange, however, will be very different from
these earlier efforts or emerging private exchanges such as
eHealthInsurance.com. In order to determine eligibilty for health
insurance subsidies, the new exchange has to bring together
information about you and your family from the Treasury Department and
IRS, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice,
as well as your Social Security number — all coordinated by the
Department of Health and Human Services."

 

[[email protected]]

Just tried the one in your reply, it works for me. Just the same the text
of the like gives you the lookup hook, H.R.3590. Give that to your
favorite search engine.

?-)

Here's the consolidated version (incorporates the amendments):

http://housedocs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf

 

[[email protected]]

No one you'd understand.

Americans spend about $7,500 per capita annually on medical care.
Upthread, you thought it was reasonable to count anyone who spent
$5,000 over two years as a "medical bankruptcy."

That's not thinking critically.

What he means is that a one-time expense of $5,000, out of pocket,
will bankrupt but $7,500 (or $20,000) every year, laundered through
the federal government, is not only quite affordable but downright
patriotic.

 

[[email protected]]

Or just not interested. It's a lot easier and happier to listen to
the propaganda--and I do mean propaganda. The lunch is free. No one
has to pay. Adding more government departments between you and your
doctor increases your choice and decreases the cost.

Most of the supporters aren't using their critical reasoning, and/or
don't have enough information to know; they take Obama on faith.

Oh, "Rickman" has been given the information, alright. Reasoning?
Well...

I spent part of this morning reading HHS' old press releases. It's
truly breathtaking to see such dissembling--the very scale of such
misinformation, calculated to deceive--from a government agency. I'm
not talking about subjective judgements here either. There are plenty
of those, but I mean outright, systematic, deliberate misstatement of
known objective facts.

It was known then. No one cared. It was deemed "good". The fact is
that it was designed to fail and leave us in an even worse mess. The
only solution to a mess the size government can make is another
government mess, right?

It would be one thing to ask the American people, "Should we hike
premiums 20% to cover poor people, and increase future rate growth" or
whatever, and have us agree to it. But, to pass it without letting
even our congressmen see it, to insist it costs less when it costs
more, that you can keep your plan when it's meticulously calculated to
make sure you can't--that's scary.

The truth is often scary.

Obamacare is remarkable not just for what it does, but what it makes
it possible for any government to do in the future--track you in real
time, and force you to buy any good or service they desire.

Sure, but it's been happening for some time. Apparently the
government now has the right to "infringe on your freedom". After
all, it's in your own interest. Truly amazing.

 

[[email protected]]

No one you'd understand.



What he means is that a one-time expense of $5,000, out of pocket,
will bankrupt but $7,500 (or $20,000) every year, laundered through
the federal government, is not only quite affordable but downright
patriotic.

The implied assumption was a little worse than that. The "study" he
cited showing lots of medical bankruptcies categorized anyone who
spent $5,000 over two years as a medical bankruptcy.

Well, the national average would be $7,500 x 2 = $15,000 over those
two years.

So, they (Elizabeth "Fauxchahontas" Warren, law professor, now
Democrat senator from MA) included anyone who spent 1/3rd of the
national annual average or more.

 

[[email protected]]

Where did you get this number?  I expect this is an *average* which is
very different from saying that most or even *many* people spend this
much.  Do you understand statistics?

Of course I do. Do they? Is that study author--former socialist law
professor "You didn't build that" Elizabeth Warren--expert in
statistics and health care? Why would she be authoring such a study
to begin with?

I have to pay unemployment insurance.  Does that count?  Or do I have
the choice of not working?

First, that's a state program, a bastardized offspring of the horrible
stuff FDR did. I don't like it, but states are allowed to do that.
Each can do what its citizens want, which creates a useful diversity
of experiments.

I don't pay it, but I have a good idea--let's make unemployment
insurance 40% of your pay. That way you'll always be secure. And I
want you to buy jeans made from sustainable, organic, non-GMO fibers,
at least two pair a year.

In *real time*???  The instant I skin my knee the feds are on it!

No, monthly for most data if I'm not mistaken. That's close enough.

Your employer has to report you. If you leave their employment, if
you change your plan, they tell the IRS.

Your doctor has to provide your medical records to HHS. Not "if they
ask," or "when you submit a claim," the HHS Secreatry has decided
your doctor has to share your medical records with the federal
government, period.
http://www.aapsonline.org/index.php...te_your_property_and_your_private_medical_rec

Okay, listen up--that thing about your doctor having to surrender your
medical records? It's *not* in the law. HHS Secretary Kathleen
Sebelius just decided that would be good. Your representatives didn't
vote on it. You've got no choice. The IRS will enforce it (they
penalize non-compliance.)

I don't understand why you think this is okay.

No, I don't call people names.  but the IRS is not Obamacare...

The IRS, oddly, is a /great deal/ of Obamacare. Obamacare you see,
has almost nothing to do with care, and almost everything to do with
enforcement, on level after level.

 If you
are worried about real time tracking you should be worried about the
real bad guys, Google and the cell phone companies!  Don't think for a
moment they are benevolent.

I don't use cellphones, and I don't use Google. Mostly. (google
groups excepted)

I'm not afraid of the government tracking me or spying on me; it's not
modesty that makes me object to being x-rayed naked by idiots; these
simply offend me. It's none of their damn business. They work for
me. I'm not an object for their amusement, to be tracked and scanned
and manipulated (by morons).

Nor do I need them telling me what to do, planning my life, taking my
retirement to give to someone else, and promising to do the same for
me later. Then, they squander it.

I lived in Germany before the fall of the Iron Curtain. I went to
Dachau and saw the gate, where it says "Arbeit macht frei." I
listened to the East German radio stations promising the same things
we're hearing today, the same promises. I think maybe that's why I'm
more sensitive to governments that propagandize and lie--I've seen it.

Don't think for a moment Barack Obama is benevolent. He's off on a
lavish spring break, celebrating the sequester no doubt. He doesn't
care about you. Neither does Sebelius, for that matter.