Just when anti healthcare reform-ers were happy they were winning

[sportage]

NEWSWEEK:
"Employment-based health insurance is in big trouble, but don't blame Obama"

NewsWeek

Americans who have health insurance, we are told, are largely satisfied with it and terrified of losing it. Many of them assume that employment-based insurance?for all its flaws?is preferable to any other system. President Obama has gone out of his way to tell people who get their insurance from employers that they had nothing to fear:

If you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: Nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.

That's true. But powerful trends in the broader economy will. Even without reform, lots of people with employer-provided insurance are losing it. And those who still have it may find they'll be less satisfied with it in the future.

The latest report from the Census Bureau on income, poverty, and health insurance is full of interesting data. (For example, median household family income in 2008, at $50,303, was below where it was in 1998. Heckuva job, Bushie, Greenie, and the whole economic team!) Perhaps the most surprising census data are the significant evidence that, even absent a reform bill, the United States is slowly nationalizing health care. In 2008, enrollment in Medicare and Medicaid rose from a combined 81 million to a combined 85.6 million. Add in military health care, and some 87.4 million Americans in 2008 got health insurance directly from a government source?about 29 percent of the total. Meanwhile, health insurance became less tethered to work. The percentage of people covered by employment-based health insurance fell from 59.3 percent in 2007 to 58.5 percent 2008, and the percentage of those working full-time and part-time who lacked health insurance rose in 2008. The ranks of those getting insurance from employers include a substantial number of public employees?teachers, state workers, etc. (In August, government accounted for about 17 percent of payroll jobs.) Add those folks to the people receiving coverage from Medicare, Medicaid, and the military, and, as Jon Bon Jovi once put it, "we're half way there." Most of the Americans who have insurance may already be getting it through the government, one way or another.

No... I will not say I told you so. Woops. Guess I just did.

 

[sportage]

PS. This should have been in BOLD too.

Even without reform, lots of people with employer-provided insurance are losing it.

 

[Patranus]

Wait, so Medicare enrollment is increasing while the population is getting (on average) older?

I am confused as to why that might be happening.....

(THIS IS A TROLL THREAD PER ITS TITLE - IT IS INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING AND/OR INFLAMMATORY)

 

[spidey07]

You don't have to get your insurance from your employer.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Patranus
(THIS IS A TROLL THREAD PER ITS TITLE - IT IS INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING AND/OR INFLAMMATORY)

You are shameless, Chairman Fuhrer Patranus Manson-bin Laden the Troll, posting this as there's yet another of your locked troll threads on the front page today.

And your attack about a misleading title - let's quote the moderator from your lock today:

Thread locked due to misleading thread title.

The title doesn't even say anything to be misleading, beyond a claim that anti-UHC people thought things were going their way. You're acting like a spanked child.

 

[Patranus]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Patranus
(THIS IS A TROLL THREAD PER ITS TITLE - IT IS INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING AND/OR INFLAMMATORY)

You are shameless, Chairman Fuhrer Patranus Manson-bin Laden the Troll, posting this as there's yet another of your locked troll threads on the front page today.

And your attack about a misleading title - let's quote the moderator from your lock today:

Thread locked due to misleading thread title.

The title doesn't even say anything to be misleading, beyond a claim that anti-UHC people thought things were going their way. You're acting like a spanked child.

Sure the title is misleading. The linked article has nothing to do with health care reform, rather the fact that the elderly are on medicare. What else is new?

Now, who are against this "reform" by a significant margin? THE ELDERLY.

 

[MovingTarget]

Interesting article. This confirms what a lot of my colleagues have been seeing in the job market over the years. Employer-based insurance is going to go the way of the dodo....

 

[woodie1]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Interesting article. This confirms what a lot of my colleagues have been seeing in the job market over the years. Employer-based insurance is going to go the way of the dodo....

Yep, it'll be cheaper to buy it from Uncle Sam.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: woodie1

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Interesting article. This confirms what a lot of my colleagues have been seeing in the job market over the years. Employer-based insurance is going to go the way of the dodo....

Yep, it'll be cheaper to buy it from Uncle Sam.

I take it from your tone that you are not a public-option supporter. I just want to know where the article makes a claim that it would be cheaper. Even if you don't support a public option, you could easily make a case that a system based on the individual would be preferable overall to that of an employer-based one.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

My guess is $100-150 is going to get you a pretty shitty plan (I.e. high deductible, spotty coverage etc)

I know mine is somewhere around $1,300 a month, but it's above average on coverage.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

I paid more than twice that for completely craptastic coverage, and so does almost everyone I know. Only the lucky FEW have good insurance for reasonable cost. For most of America, it's a raping.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

Hell, I don't know why I even bother with you. But if decent insurance was $150 then this whole debate wouldn't be happening.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Interesting article. This confirms what a lot of my colleagues have been seeing in the job market over the years. Employer-based insurance is going to go the way of the dodo....

That can't possibly be. Forum posters are never wrong.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

Hell, I don't know why I even bother with you. But if decent insurance was $150 then this whole debate wouldn't be happening.

This * 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

 

[miketheidiot]

hey look spidey spewing shit in a healthcare thread.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Patranus

Sure the title is misleading. The linked article has nothing to do with health care reform, rather the fact that the elderly are on medicare. What else is new?

Now, who are against this "reform" by a significant margin? THE ELDERLY.

Yeah, he should have compared Obama to Mao.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Interesting article. This confirms what a lot of my colleagues have been seeing in the job market over the years. Employer-based insurance is going to go the way of the dodo....

The United States, as a nation that was able to offer the majority of its citizens a high quality of life, is also going the way of the Roman dodo.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

Hell, I don't know why I even bother with you. But if decent insurance was $150 then this whole debate wouldn't be happening.

Your idea of "decent insurance" and my idea of taking care of oneself, financially, are a great divide that we can never agree upon.

It's like listening to a teenager bitch about why he's paying for such high auto insurance premiums. It's like hearing an adult bitch about the cost of living, the cost of energy, the cost of anything. And yet the child (no matter what age) will gladly pay 150 bucks a month for cable, mobile phone, etc.

Cheap fuckers who don't want to take personal responsibility to insure what they cannot insure themselves. With great freedom comes much responsibility.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

Hell, I don't know why I even bother with you. But if decent insurance was $150 then this whole debate wouldn't be happening.

Your idea of "decent insurance" and my idea of taking care of oneself, financially, are a great divide that we can never agree upon.

It's like listening to a teenager bitch about why he's paying for such high auto insurance premiums. It's like hearing an adult bitch about the cost of living, the cost of energy, the cost of anything. And yet the child (no matter what age) will gladly pay 150 bucks a month for cable, mobile phone, etc.

Cheap fuckers who don't want to take personal responsibility to insure what they cannot insure themselves. With great freedom comes much responsibility.

In other words, there are no decent $100-$150 family policies and you're blowing smoke because you think that the UHC might be passed. You will not find plans like current employer plans for anywhere near what we are paying now without some sort of subsidie (like our employers currently do), period.

 

[Sclamoz]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

Hell, I don't know why I even bother with you. But if decent insurance was $150 then this whole debate wouldn't be happening.

Your idea of "decent insurance" and my idea of taking care of oneself, financially, are a great divide that we can never agree upon.

It's like listening to a teenager bitch about why he's paying for such high auto insurance premiums. It's like hearing an adult bitch about the cost of living, the cost of energy, the cost of anything. And yet the child (no matter what age) will gladly pay 150 bucks a month for cable, mobile phone, etc.

Cheap fuckers who don't want to take personal responsibility to insure what they cannot insure themselves. With great freedom comes much responsibility.

Can you find a real world example of a good $150 or less insurance plan?

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: Sclamoz

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

Hell, I don't know why I even bother with you. But if decent insurance was $150 then this whole debate wouldn't be happening.

Your idea of "decent insurance" and my idea of taking care of oneself, financially, are a great divide that we can never agree upon.

It's like listening to a teenager bitch about why he's paying for such high auto insurance premiums. It's like hearing an adult bitch about the cost of living, the cost of energy, the cost of anything. And yet the child (no matter what age) will gladly pay 150 bucks a month for cable, mobile phone, etc.

Cheap fuckers who don't want to take personal responsibility to insure what they cannot insure themselves. With great freedom comes much responsibility.

Can you find a real world example of a good $150 or less insurance plan?

No he cannot. In other threads it's been proven false.

Spidey is the biggest damn liar in the whole debate.

 

[brandonbull]

I think the morons miss the point about no one in their right mind is against health care reform. What people are against is government run health care. Big difference my liberal/lefty/righty/conservative/retard friend. Instead of telling people the details of reform and applying that to the current system, we are being forced to "sign a blank check" for a new system and being told to trust our current politicians.

This "health care reform" crap has been twisted just like the opposition to illegal immigrants was. No one is against immigration just like no one is against true health care reform. People want illegals running around about as much as they want the government running health care but certain groups throw around labels with the hope of shaming people into agreement.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: Sclamoz

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
It's good that employer-based health insurance is going away. People buying their own will realize just how much it's costing them and their health/life won't be dependent on keeping one particular job. Informed consumer and more job mobility FTW. The only down side here is the current state of non-employer based health insurance. Bend over.

100-150 bucks a month is too much for you to pay for your own insurance? Individual plans are even less than that.

Hell, I don't know why I even bother with you. But if decent insurance was $150 then this whole debate wouldn't be happening.

Your idea of "decent insurance" and my idea of taking care of oneself, financially, are a great divide that we can never agree upon.

It's like listening to a teenager bitch about why he's paying for such high auto insurance premiums. It's like hearing an adult bitch about the cost of living, the cost of energy, the cost of anything. And yet the child (no matter what age) will gladly pay 150 bucks a month for cable, mobile phone, etc.

Cheap fuckers who don't want to take personal responsibility to insure what they cannot insure themselves. With great freedom comes much responsibility.

Can you find a real world example of a good $150 or less insurance plan?

No he cannot. In other threads it's been proven false.

Spidey is the biggest damn liar in the whole debate.

No surprise coming from people that worship the Joe Wilson's in the country