You won't find THIS on FAUX!

http://www.keystonepolitics.com/2013/09/pa-obamacare-premiums-will-be-cheaper-than-expected/

Pennsylvania's source for liberal political news and commentary

In Pennsylvania, a 27-year-old choosing a mid-level silver plan, which would cover about 70 percent of medical costs, would pay $187 a month. If that person earned $25,000 annually, he or she would be eligible for tax breaks and the monthly cost would drop to $145 for the same plan.
Click to expand...

So the 57 year-old with a pre-existing condition getting a $70 a month policy knocked down to $1.11 a month is sounding more and more like BS.
 
Annie said:
Herein lies the problem, assuming this story is credible which considering the two sources now covering it may be doubtful, one would expect if this is a significant type of case, there would be more. There are literally thousands of cases where premiums have gone up 80% or more, that are being called anecdotal by the left.

I seriously doubt that anyone doesn't want real healthcare reform, most just aren't willing to acknowledge the fact that Obamacare isn't reform and is likely to not only decrease the quality of care for all but the very wealthy, but also make all but the very wealthy and very poor pay much more.

The numbers originally put out on 'insuring the uninsured' are not going to hold either. While some will be picked up by medicaid, most will remain uninsured, for the bronze plan even with subsidies is unaffordable in premiums and deductibles.
Click to expand...


There are also literally thousands of cases where premiums have gone down significantly (Ms. Roach being a case in point) that are being called anecdotal by the right.

How are dueling anecdotes going to prove anything? I said all along the govt. should collect information for a year and then release a report.
 
Taft2016 said:
As usual, the salient question of the discussion gets ignored here.

If she was paying $500 a month previously, why can't she pay this wonderful rate of $70 a month?

Why do we have to pick that up?

This wasn't billed as another welfare program.
Click to expand...

She could be on Medicaid, too. Don't blame the stranger just because you're not smart enough to search the system for your most favorable rate.
 
Taft2016 said:
Let's see. A guy on a forum who posts something and says only "I saw this on Facebook"...

... compared with a professional news organization, on an FCC licensed broadcast channel...

Yeah, practically the same thing.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Why don't you do a little research and prove her wrong instead of whining about it? Get your name on WTAE for exposing fraud, if that's what you think is going on.
 
christiefan915 said:
She's not on Medicaid, Offissa. Those grapes you're chewing on are mighty sour.
Click to expand...

What is this gibberish now? Who said anything about Medicaid?

She said she found a policy for $70 a month. It's a perfectly rational question to ask why everybody else, particularly those without a pre-existing condition, can not find the same deal.
 
christiefan915 said:
Why don't you do a little research and prove her wrong instead of whining about it? Get your name on WTAE for exposing fraud, if that's what you think is going on.
Click to expand...

Whining? Like you did about the Facebook story which I made no assertions about as to its accuracy? I just said, "I saw this on Facebook."

WTAE just reported what she told them. Showing us a receipt, or an invoice, or telling us the name of the company would have been nice.

Instead, they served up transparent BS.
 
christiefan915 said:
There are also literally thousands of cases where premiums have gone down significantly (Ms. Roach being a case in point) .
Click to expand...

Ms. Roach's case being transparent BS.

I posted from a liberal site that said in Pennsylvania a 27 year-old making $25K a year could expect to pay $145 a month. A 57 year-old with a pre-existing condition getting a policy for $70 a month?

Transparent BS.
 
Taft2016 said:
What is this gibberish now? Who said anything about Medicaid?

She said she found a policy for $70 a month. It's a perfectly rational question to ask why everybody else, particularly those without a pre-existing condition, can not find the same deal.
Click to expand...

I said something about Medicaid. Namely, that with her health problems and finances she could go on Medicaid and be responsible for some small co-pays but instead she shopped for insurance and found a favorable rate.

Furthermore, you don't know who did or didn't find the same or similar deal because everyone's deal isn't making the news.
 
Taft2016 said:
Ms. Roach's case being transparent BS.

I posted from a liberal site that said in Pennsylvania a 27 year-old making $25K a year could expect to pay $145 a month. A 57 year-old with a pre-existing condition getting a policy for $70 a month?

Transparent BS.
Click to expand...

A 57-year old with a pre-existing condition and no job. You think she'd get a $70/mo. policy if she were working? Please. :rolleyes:
 
christiefan915 said:
A 57-year old with a pre-existing condition and no job. You think she'd get a $70/mo. policy if she were working? Please. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Oh lawd, are you dumb.

She got the $70 a month policy *BEFORE* the government subsidies knocked it down to $1.11.

You can't follow the simplest line of thought, can you?

I believe the $1.11 part, because we're a putrid welfare state. I just don't believe the $70 part. If that were true, more people would be getting the same, or better deal.
 
christiefan915 said:
Furthermore, you don't know who did or didn't find the same or similar deal because everyone's deal isn't making the news.
Click to expand...

No, but this one person who allegedly got the $70 a month deal is all over the friggin' internet now.

A younger person in good health should theoretically be able to get an even better price than $70. But we're not hearing that, are we? Anywhere. One story like that at least? Somewhere? Just one?
 
Taft2016 said:
Oh lawd, are you dumb.

She got the $70 a month policy *BEFORE* the government subsidies knocked it down to $1.11.

You can't follow the simplest line of thought, can you?

I believe the $1.11 part, because we're a putrid welfare state. I just don't believe the $70 part. If that were true, more people would be getting the same, or better deal.
Click to expand...

Believe me that I can follow any line of thought you could lay out, and then some.

Perhaps you should have phrased this particular sentence... "A 57 year-old with a pre-existing condition getting a policy for $70 a month?"... to include everything you wanted to say, instead of adding the $1.11 bit later just so you could get in a snide remark.

And you never answered the question of whether she'd get a policy with so many subsidies if she were working, like the 25-year old in your example.
 
Taft2016 said:
No, but this one person who allegedly got the $70 a month deal is all over the friggin' internet now.

A younger person in good health should theoretically be able to get an even better price than $70. But we're not hearing that, are we? Anywhere. One story like that at least? Somewhere? Just one?
Click to expand...

:Googler: Have at it.
 
christiefan915 said:
There are also literally thousands of cases where premiums have gone down significantly (Ms. Roach being a case in point) that are being called anecdotal by the right.

How are dueling anecdotes going to prove anything? I said all along the govt. should collect information for a year and then release a report.
Click to expand...

Considering that 'health care reform' has been a serious topic for over 20 years, wouldn't you have expected they'd been doing this for at least 20? I would. I know they have the data, it's what government does, yet we see none of it in reports made public or in news articles? Why do you think that is?
 
Taft2016 said:
What is this gibberish now? Who said anything about Medicaid?

She said she found a policy for $70 a month. It's a perfectly rational question to ask why everybody else, particularly those without a pre-existing condition, can not find the same deal.
Click to expand...


prove they cant
 
Annie said:
Considering that 'health care reform' has been a serious topic for over 20 years, wouldn't you have expected they'd been doing this for at least 20? I would. I know they have the data, it's what government does, yet we see none of it in reports made public or in news articles? Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...


pretending this is not working when it is will just make you more of a fool
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top