Koch Brothers Lie

The monthly premium you pay looks like it will more affordable than what you have now

I do not need the Koch brothers to tell me I may be fucked.
We don't pay a premium now, so anything they force us to pay will be more than what we pay. Why don't we pay a premium? Because. we. are. fucking. broke. Taking more money from us will not help us. We're doing all we can to live within our means now, what the fuck more am I supposed to give up? I would love for president Obama to call me personally an explain to me what part of my oh so extravagant lifestyle I'm supposed to give up to pay this shit? What, the fact that I actually have shoes bothers someone? Or perhaps it's that I got to eat today? Please do tell.
The kids have Medicaid, and right now the way it looks since our state won't expand the medicaid program (which does fuck all anyway) it may very well be less expensive and more affordable and doable for us to simply pay the fine once a year than try to afford this shit month to month. Obama fucked us. If he couldn't get universal healthcare (which I don't believe by the way hell we had the presidency, the house and the senate at one point) he should have shut up and let someone else try- not do this half ass shit.

And that first bit about doc choice is soooo disingenuous. "All you gotta do is make sure your doc is in the plan you want" says the clearly privileged Huff post employee! Oh joy! No, dumbass, what that means is that you have to call around and somehow make sure every doc you use takes the plan you can afford (not the one you choose) and when something changes you are likely locked in- just as you are now for at least a period of time. If one doc takes the plan and one doesn't what then? Where's your choice then? Where the Koch shits are actually wrong is that this is not much different than the current system- but where the democrats are wrong is this is not actual choice. Picking from what you can wrangle and afford is different from just picking what you want.

Well I won't run down all of the misinformation Mississippi has fed you but rest assured it's not as bad as you've been told.

NoCoPilot wrote:

Well I won't run down all of the misinformation Mississippi has fed you but rest assured it's not as bad as you've been told.

I haven't taken in any information other than certain states have opted out. Because basically, what anyone says doesn't mean jack shit until it all happens. But the printout on my taxes estimates our fine to be 498 dollars. Just the fact that someone would fine a family under poverty level tells me just what kind of fuckers I'm dealing with. Cuz you have to be a fucker to take money from the already poor.

http://101.communitycatalyst.org/aca_provisions/subsidies

Oregon still wants you, Jenni

NoCoPilot wrote:

http://101.communitycatalyst.org/aca_provisions/subsidies

The smallest number there is 489 a year. That's approx 40 a month. Again, I do not understand what the privileged don't get about 40 dollars is 40 dollars. Where is it supposed to come from? We live in the hole now, as it is. And can't get out of it because we have no resources to do so. So instead of lending a little help, maybe paying for some of my kid's therapy or for me to go back to class, oh no, instead they want 40 bucks more. And again, if they want this month to month we are simply going to be better off paying the fine once a year when we have the extra money. If they will take the premiums once a year great but if not- again, I'd love to see Obama go over my budget and realistically tell me where this 40 is supposed to come from. 10 dollars per week. Tell, me, which child do I skip feeding that day? Because ten dollars a day is about what I have to fix meals on. For all of us, not just one of us, and that's all three meals. Ben gets a little more because he works and bossman pays half his lunch costs.

Also tax credit may or may not mean jack shit to us. We pay no federal income taxes. So unless they are gonna either treat it like the EIC and give it in cash in that case or take it off some of our local taxes like sales or the employment taxes we won't see that.

This entire thing is a result of people not understanding what it is like to function as a poor person in this society. The people that write this shit just have no clue. The idea of people having a finite amount of income, no credit cards to put it on and no cars to trade in for lower payments, no Starbucks to give up for the cost, the sort of life someone at poverty level lives is just beyond the comprehension of these people. And this entire wad of shit is built on our backs. We poor people who are so adaptive and hard working hold up this entire society, every last WalMart and lazy ass politician is on us. We deserve real universal healthcare, not this half assed bullshit that will put off the real deal for many more years.

Jenni wrote:

maybe paying for some of my kid's therapy

Why is your kid in therapy?

NoCoPilot wrote:

Oregon still wants you, Jenni

And we are hoping to go this next year. At least it will be easier to be where we are up there. But no one wants me. No one wants poor people. That's all I am. My IQ and abilities don't matter, all people see is poverty. That's what I thought I could escape with a computer. The internet hides reality. I thought I could at least feel normal for a while, pretend to be middle class. (Hey I have a computer so there's evidence I had money at least once!) But the gap is too wide. I don't even comprehend some of the shit I see my friends talking about. My world doesn't extend high enough for me to have an opinion on if a Hyundai or a Kia is better or what color duvet you should get to go with that chair, or where you are going on vacation.

Look, if this Obamacare thing goes well, I will shout from the rooftops I was wrong. And I'll be happy to do it.
But in all honesty, I have no more hope. I'm out of positivity. I'm out of the ability to look on the bright side and none of my clouds have silver linings.

Sounds like kiddo isn't th only one who is clinically depressed. Seriously.

NoCoPilot wrote:

Jenni wrote:

maybe paying for some of my kid's therapy  

Why is your kid in therapy?

I don't know if you recall but Storm has issues. Asperger's with major depressive disorder and dyslexia. (We knew about the dyslexia years ago though.) Medicaid will pay for about 3 different therapists here. One is an Indian guy who won't spend more than ten minutes in the room with her and writes a script for Prozac. Prozac makes her worse. The other two are christian therapists who don't want to hear about her being gay and think that jesus is the answer to all her problems. If I want a real therapist, someone who actually will do what a therapist should do we have to pay them. It's about 60 a visit and we do what we can afford, one to three sessions a week. Most days are good now. Or at least not too bad. She's come a long way. But there are still days where my one job as a parent is to be sure my daughter lives through the day. It's tiring and it eats away at your ability to cope with all of it.

NoCoPilot wrote:

Sounds like kiddo isn't th only one who is clinically depressed.  Seriously.

Probably right. But there's not much to be done about it. All I can do is put my head down and keep slogging.
And be (very) thankful for the few of you I have who don't ignore me and let me vent a little without repercussions.

Edit: And I'll add this: it does indeed make me feel better that there is some limit to what they will charge us.

Clinical depression is very much a bootstraps vortex -- the least little negative sends you into a tailspin of increasing negativity that feeds on itself.  But by the same token the least little positive can break the cycle and cause the vortex to begin to spin the other way, making things better and better until you wonder what all the fuss was about.

Oregon is beautiful in the Spring.

Well, the name of this thread is dead-on accurate: the Koch brothers are dishonest, despicable characters. They epitomize the modern American capitalist.

But Jenni is right about some of the problems with the Affordable Health Care Act. No one in her economic situation should be required to buy health insurance or be fined for not being able to buy it. The only moral resolution to the health care problems in this country is to expand Medicare to cover everyone. Of course, this presents its own problems; the current 1.45% Medicare tax working people pay would no doubt have to be increased, or else the Medicare expenses should just come out of the general fund.

And it's not only those with low incomes who suffer from the predations of the American health care industry. More than half of bankruptcy filings are the result of medical expenses incurred by working- and middle-class families who have private medical insurance. Number of bankruptcies caused by medical bills in Canada: zero.

I was surprised when I heard one of the authors of a book about the American medical industry when she addressed the problem of emergency room usage. It had been widely assumed - and reported - that the great increase in the use of emergency rooms was due primarily to the influx of immigrants. However, based on a thirty-year study. it showed that 100% of the increase in emergency room usage was created by working people with health insurance.

News this morning brought two new nightmare scenarios:

1 wrote:

“The unintended consequences of the ACA are severe,” they continue. “Perverse incentives are causing nightmare scenarios. First, the law creates an incentive for employers to keep employees’ work hours below 30 hours a week. Numerous employers have begun to cut workers’ hours to avoid this obligation, and many of them are doing so openly. The impact is two-fold: fewer hours means less pay while also losing our current health benefits.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/07/15/labor-leaders-obamacare-will-shatter-their-health-benefits-cause-nightmare-scenarios/

2 wrote:

The fact that people are working solely to get health insurance signals a failure of the private health insurance market. That’s one of the reasons why the Affordable Care Act was created.”

However, with Medicaid rapidly expanding under the Affordable Care Act, the researchers foresee such a progression could happen in reverse, stating the option of public health insurance may lead some Americans to retire or to leave their jobs in large numbers.

http://www.inquisitr.com/849343/affordable-care-act-could-cause-people-to-leave-their-jobs-study-says/

I'm not sure I would characterize anything written by Forbes as "News."

I found this the other day: http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21581749-obamacare-hits-trouble-states-mississippi-spurning
It does not make me hopeful.

First, it required states to offer Medicaid to all those with incomes of up to 138% of the federal poverty level, or $15,856 for an individual.
That would cover us (we aren't quite at 100% poverty level) except that MS is not expanding Medicaid.

By default, Mississippi will have a “federally facilitated exchange”, managed by the health secretary’s deputies. So far only two insurers have made bids to sell health plans on it. Residents of 42 counties will have a choice of only one subsidised plan; 36 counties will have none. And many poor Mississippians will be ineligible for Medicaid.

Now it does say that those at 100% to 400% of the poverty level will get subsidies, but what about those just under 100% like us? Reason I ask is the article admits how little Medicaid pays, few docs take it. But my kids have Medicaid not the more accepted CHIP because we do not make enough to qualify for CHIP. In other words, the state has no compunction about denying the poor what they can if they can. We could use CHIP way more than some of the better off people who do get it, their kids get what they need paid for. The further down they can push you, they will. If the rules don't make them subsidize us, they won't. Also 2 insurers doesn't make for much competition and I'll bet it wont make for too many docs who take it.

One night on the news they said our subsidy would be "up to 100$ per family". I have to admit that scared the everliving shit out of me. There's no way 100 bucks will cover us. Like I say the kids have Medicaid but for Ben and I...100$? I don't think so, no insurance I've ever seen has premiums that low. And it's ever so lovely that the feds look to fine us when it's the state who has the power to opt out. Yeah, thanks a lot. It also will bother me a lot if we are forced to pay money we really do not have for insurance that's the equivalent of Medicaid where no one wants to take it.

I don't think any of this is fair at all. I think this is mandating we buy something and it only helps those who run those businesses and if he gave a damn about universal healthcare this crap would never have been accepted.

I also think Howard's idea of expanding Medicare could be implemented easily if we just asked the rich to pay the same amount of tax on that that we do. We pay that 1.45%. But if you are rich in this country you do not. Your percentage could be many times smaller because you are only taxed on part of your income - not all of it like we are. I think it's time that changed.

You're right that the ability of the states to opt out of the program just makes it tougher on a lot of people. And, of course, the states are only doing it for political purposes. As long as people continue to elect the types of officials they do now, this kind of shit will continue.

For this program, I think that very-generous means testing should be used - nation wide - to provide free insurance equivalent to what Congress gets.

Jenni wrote:

I also think Howard's idea of expanding Medicare could be implemented easily if we just asked the rich to pay the same amount of tax on that that we do. We pay that 1.45%. But if you are rich in this country you do not. Your percentage could be many times smaller because you are only taxed on part of your income - not all of it like we are. I think it's time that changed.  

You got this one point wrong; there is no wage limit on Medicare tax. It is paid on 100% of your income - as long as that income is salary or wages. If you make all your money from investments, as nearly all rich people do, you won't pay any Medicare tax at all. And you won't pay any Social Security tax. And your income tax rate will be very low. Taxes have become very regressive.

_Howard wrote:

You got this one point wrong; there is no wage limit on Medicare tax. It is paid on 100% of your income - as long as that income is salary or wages. If you make all your money from investments, as nearly all rich people do, you won't pay any Medicare tax at all. And you won't pay any Social Security tax. And your income tax rate will be very low. Taxes have become very regressive.

Ah that's right, my bad. There is one for SS but not Medicare. Still, I sort of think that applying it to all income would certainly get the same desired effect.

Yes, all income - including investment income - should be taxed the same. But it will take a hell of a lot of changes to rectify the problems created by the medical industry in this country.

The biggest problem is the incredible cost of medical care in the USA (even though we have the highest infant mortality rate of all developed countries). We have lousy outcomes for much medical treatment and a large percentage of lousy doctors (I remember Bill Maher once saying, "Somewhere is the world's worst doctor. And someone has an appointment with him tomorrow."). The insurance companies add about twenty percent to the cost of heath care. Just removing that nonproductive cost would help a lot.

There is no excuse for this country to continue to drain so much wealth from the population for the sole purpose of enriching a few. But that is, after all, The American Way.