In the early 00’s things were different for me. I had gotten out of college a few years earlier, and taken a job as a software developer doing contract work for steel mills and other industry. While it was a good way to make money, my heart was still into art and design, so I set forth finding a way to combine art and technology into a new career. Enter the Internet. I started a web and print design company on the side as I worked my full time job. I had steady income, and my employer was paying my health insurance premiums. I wasn’t on the company plan because I knew someday I’d want to leave that job and work on my business full time, and having my own policy would make that transition seamless. My employer took out the premiums from my paycheck pre-tax and sent in the premiums for me. So far so good.
Then things went downhill fast. My employer was accused of not depositing 401(k) contributions from employees. He was also involved in a discrimination lawsuit by an employee he fired. And finally, I was notified by my insurance company that the employer hadn’t paid my insurance premiums even though he’d taken the money out of my paycheck. This was the third time he’d done that, so my insurance company dropped my policy. I attempted to re-apply, but because I have a preexisting condition (I was born with spina bifida), I was rejected by my insurance company and all the others to which I applied. One agent told me that there was an unofficial “black list”, and once one insurance agency rejects your application, your information goes into a database where other insurance companies can see the rejection, and they will also reject you.
I promptly quit my job and called a few lawyers. Because my employer had given me a check to cover the money he took out of my paychecks, I wasn’t technically “out” anything tangible as far as the law was concerned. There was nothing they could do. I was self-employed, and my wife, one of my three kids, and I were uninsured. (Two of my kids were adopted through foster care so they were still on Medicaid). I was no longer living the dream, I was pretty much screwed.
I continued on with the business, making a decent living but still under the constant threat of losing everything in the event of a medical emergency. I had hoped to grow the business so that I could create an insurance group, but that never happened. After five years, I shut down the business and took a full time job as a software developer, which is where I sit today as I write this. My dream of working for myself had come to an end.
The Great Red Hope
In those five uninsured years, I was not without hope. I had joined the NFIB (National Federation of Independent Business Owners) when I started my business. This was during the first years of George W. Bush, when the Republicans controlled everything much like they do today. NFIB was pushing some changes to insurance laws that would have benefited me greatly. With the Republicans in office, they felt they had a chance. They proposed:
1. Allowing insurance companies to sell policies across state lines.
2. Allowing trade groups and clubs, such as NFIB, to create insurance groups that members could be insured through instead of having to get insurance through an employer.
Either of those options could have solved my insurance problem. I could look for a policy in another state with fewer limits on preexisting conditions, or that allowed policies that only covered catastrophic events. Or, I could have just gotten insurance through NFIB. I contributed cash, wrote letters, and filled out petitions. In the end, the Republicans did… nothing. The next election they lost seats the Democrats, and their monopoly on power was over. I became bitter and angry, vowing never to vote Republican again. A few Ron Paul articles later, I turned to the dark side of the political spectrum. I was officially a libertarian.
Enter Obamacare
When Obamacare was being debated, I was livid. You’d think that I’d love it, considering that I have a preexisting condition and the law was supposed to make sure everyone could get insurance. But everything proposed by the Democrats was the complete opposite of what I knew would work for me and others like me. They would make insurance more expensive, more complicated, and more of a bureaucratic nightmare.
My ideal solution would be the above two items, to which I would have added a third:
3. Provide another way for people with preexisting conditions, who were working but could not get insurance elsewhere, to get a policy through Medicare or some other program.
That’s it. Almost everyone would then have access to health insurance, and the extra competition between states would bring down prices. Of course, this wouldn’t require a huge government program, so the Democrats wouldn’t even consider it. When Obamacare became law, I saw that my initial thoughts were right. If I were still self-employed, there is no way I would be able to afford those premiums.
The Repeal
So here we are today, waiting for the Republicans to repeal Obamacare and set things straight, which isn’t happening. While I’m disappointed, I’m not surprised. The Republicans have been here before. They’ve had a chance to use their power to make things better for many people. Whether it’s lack of intelligence, spinelessness, or something else, who knows? But every day I see more proof that neither of the major parties has any intention of doing what’s right or helpful. Democrats just want to create bigger government programs that cement their power, and Republicans want to do pretty much nothing, for fear of pissing someone off and not getting elected next cycle.
As for me, I’m still sitting behind a desk working for someone else, and I think I’ll be here for a while. The cost of insurance, and the amount of time, effort, and money required to follow regulations required to run a business are more than I’d like to deal with.
This is a pretty raw deal. I’m sure you handled it with much more grace and aplomb than I would have, personally.
I guess the tax you now had to pay on that income isn’t considered tangible.
Good point, although at the time insurance premiums were a lot lower than they are now. I want to say less than $250 per month, and he missed two or three payments. So the lawyer would have cost more.
I tend to just sit there like a slug when I’m in a hopeless situation. My wife’s reaction is usually, let’s say, more strong. Every once in a while we cross paths with that old employer, and my wife just walks away to prevent herself from becoming violent. We both hate that guy, and express it in our own unique ways.
My $.02
Let her get violent.
I mean, if there’s no disincentive, that employer will forever be 100% a dick.
Wife in jail seems a disincentive.
I’m not advocating for property damage 😉 Maybe just a good telling-off, peppered with a few four-letter words.
That would work.
I wasn’t technically “out” anything tangible as far as the law was concerned.
I’m not so sure. He broke a contract, and is liable for the damages you incurred, whether direct, incidental or consequential (TW: many technicalities involved). Its not written in stone that a refund is sufficient remedy (unless the contract said it was). Your damages exceed the amount that was refunded, so its likely that he could have been liable for those excess damages.
I would add price transparency to that list. As I recall, the AMA has a strict no advertised prices rule (or used to, anyway).
People like our little friend Tony always default to the “You can’t comparison shop when you’re having a heart attack!” argument, but the vast majority of health issues are not literally a matter of impending death.
*There are billboards around Indianapolis advertising laser eye surgery for $whatever, so maybe the rule has changed. But I have never seen one for stents, or knee replacements.
Keeping prices transparent should be a no-brainer for even the hardest-core leftist, considering how transparent prices for other things, like their favorite indie donut shops, keeps the quality high and the prices low.
It also has the added preventative benefit too. If you think a bypass is going to be too expensive you might jump on a treadmill every once in a while.
You can’t comparison shop when you’re having a heart attack!
A statement which is both beside the point and misleading.
1. You can “comparison shop” beforehand and make legal arrangements that ensure your choices are respected (or you could anyway, if the law allowed for it and protected such arrangements).
2. The government is most assuredly not going to “comparison shop” on your behalf. The old saying is “good, fast, cheap–pick at most two” and the government is only interested in “cheap”.
I’m not even sure they’re interested in “cheap”, considering the old $300 toilet seat joke. The people who make up government seem mostly interested in power, immunity from consequences, or a cushy place to park themselves while getting paid to do nothing.
The government is a prime example of being penny wise and pound foolish. They’ll fight tooth and nail over trivial bullshit while wasting millions on feel-good nonsense. You’re right that they’re not good at cheap, on the whole. It’s just that what they do spend lots of money on has little if any relationship to the goals at hand.
The $300 toilet seat canard is a little misleading. When you hear it, it sounds like a clear cut case of greedy contractors bilking the taxpayer. I read up on the story a few years ago. It turns out the feds had a contract for a fairly specific toilet seat. When ordered en masse, the price was vastly below $300. The problem came up when the government decided, after the fact, to put on an additional order for something like 20 or 30 seats. For the manufacturer, that meant doing a complete retooling and new production run. For 20-30 seats. The $300 figure is with the cost of setting up for the new run baked into the price.
There’s a pediatric urgent care center that I’ve taken my daughter to a couple of times that has prices prominently displayed in the waiting room. Was kind of shocked to see it the first time.
What’s the going rate for an ear infection?
To give you one or cure it, big man?
I thought ear infections in Florida were free for anyone swimming on the Gulf Coast.
Sure, if you want to get it the boring “traditional” way.
Aural sex?
There was an after hours pediatric urgent care around the corner from us that not only posted their prices, but refunded my money when they examined my infant son (who was running a fever) and declined to treat him because he was two weeks old and they recommended the ER. (Poor kid had a UTI, but the lab fucked up the culture twice — not the urgent care, his pediatrician and the hospital).
I actually got refunded too.
Kid needed stitches. They made us wait 2 hours. The doctor finally came in, looked, and said she couldn’t do it. Off to the ER.
That sounds severe.
I cut my finger pretty badly a few years ago, and at the ER realized that I could easily do what the doctor did, but at home without the wait or deductible (or having to sit next to someone who get scolded for not bringing their extremely infectious disease in earlier) by just having first aid supplies that are slightly more advanced than band aids or neosporin.
And we’ve had use for it too – it worked fine without a doctor applying their magic knowledge to the wound. YMMV.
I’ve gotten better care at places like MinuteClinic and PatientFirst, which is a full-service retail-style doctor’s office type of thing. Plus, the pricing’s upfront and they tend to keep costs low since they’ve got a significant number of people paying out of pocket.
Minute Clinic and similar places are a great idea. I think they will play an important role in dealing with the upcoming doctor shortage.
There are lots of things that doctors do that shouldn’t require 7 years of expensive medical training.
Being a gatekeeper to antibiotics is one of them.
NP & PA’s are, in my experience, outstanding for routine and minor patient care. I’m not sure I’d ever go back to an MD for a primary care provider.
Reasonably certain that Ophthalmologists are not covered by the AMA but a different group entirely
It’s not just the money. You thought you were insured, but you weren’t.
What if you got hit by a car? Had a heart attack while you were in the shower? You would have been completely financially ruined.
Refunding the money that he stole from you doesn’t even begin to make this whole again. What a fucking scumbag.
What if you got hit by a car?
Can you get pregnant by a car, or only a bus?
I’m sure Jerome Bettis can, Derrick Carr I’m not so sure.
/sportsball joke
The worst STD of all: pregnancy.
he really is.
I think that healthcare is where you really see the young and old conservative divide in politics. Even the new guys that I don’t like very much (like Cotton, for example) actually want to repeal Obamacare and are on the record as wanting conservative stuff passed. The opposition is almost all from the old wing of the party, who still thinks that they’re the minority and need to work with Democrats.
I keep saying this. The House would have repealed Obamacare on like February 1st, and would have pushed through a ton of other fiscal conservative stuff.
Well, Stockholm Syndrome is appropriate, given the dem’s obsession with Scandinavia.
Also- on prices.
The Tonys of the world will say, “Do you really want the low bidder doing X?” That depends. Can you get an honest dependable assessment of the quality of the work they do?
*not from the AMA
That reminds me of an old joke I hear from time to time: What do you call the guy that finished dead last in his medical school’s graduating class?
Doctor.
Hi everybody!
Hi Dr. Playa!
That doesn’t square with almost all government contract work, which is low bid.
Low bid .. but 7x over budget by the end of it.
I mean, you get a 1 year contract for a million dollars, and you can probably make a life long career out of it by pushing the budget and time constraints.
Thank you editors for the nice formatting and images.
We do what we can
Ha! That reminds me of my pooches.
In all honesty we need to get insurance completely out of the picture and allow prices to drop to affordable levels. I promise you if no one had insurance you would suddenly see very reasonable prices on everything.
I think you are right.
Not that long ago, I was looking at a very minor procedure, debating whether or not to do it. So, I called up the practice and asked them how much it costs with my insurance, which they have on file. I could not get a straight answer, so I called up my insurance provider to ask them. Same thing. They both gave me the same sort of answer but from opposite sides of the coin.
Practice: Well, how much we charge depends on how much your insurance will cover, which we don’t know until we bill them.
Insurance Provider: Well, how much we’ll cover depends on how much they charge, which we don’t know until we get the bill.
And then they apparently negotiate. Dafuq.
So you’re saying healthcare is run by Arab traders? …I knew it.
I have a newsletter if you’re interested. 😛
My dad is in the medical field. He said his cash rate is much much higher than what he is actually paid, because the insurance takes the cash rate and offers some set percentage off of it. He has to set his cash rate abnormally high because if he sets it at market value the insurance jews him.
It’s called a chargemaster.
Did you just drop a “hard J”?
if you’re referring to the jews comment, my father is jewish so I thought it would be funny to talk about a jew getting jewed.
Sephardim/Mizrahim don’t know the proper term for Jew on Jew violence is “schnorr-ed”.
Is this like a Gypsy getting Gypped?
I think it’s even funnier than that. Not as funny as taking back something you gave to an indian, though.
Or going down on a lady with gonorrhea in The Maldives.
I got chewed out in front of a classroom of my peers for saying gypped once. Good times.
Until then, I’d never even realized it had anything to do with Gypsies.
Your teacher didn’t let you off Scot free?
“Until then, I’d never even realized it had anything to do with Gypsies.”
I thought it was spelled ‘jipped’ before I learned about the Gypsy connection. One of those words you’ve never seen in print before kinda thing.
Scot Free is great. They have three possible verdicts: Guilty, Not Guilty, Not Proven. The last one indicating that the evidence doesn’t prove guilt but they weren’t exactly exonerated.
the insurance takes the cash rate and offers some set percentage off of it.
You don’t see many of those contracts any more. Its mostly percentages (premium or discount) off of Medicare rates.
I’ve dealt with this too: “How much will the procedure cost?” “Have the procedure done and then we’ll tell you.” At the same time these same insurance companies promote high deductibles and co-insurance as a way of incentivizing their customers to be price conscious.
Such a cluster. Like, I’m trying to be a responsible consumer here. Help me help you, insurance companies and health care providers.
They are looking for meatbags that pay their insurance premiums and copays…how much or how needed is beside the point.
I’m beginning to think there is no solution for health care. We are so deep in the mud any attempt to get out will make things worse.
The solution to healthcare is to start winning the cultural argument. That sentiment trickles down into politics, not the other way around. You have to make it cool to rebel against healthcare. It starts at the individual, not Washington.
Yes. And we’re in this situation partly because of bureaucratic inertia, and partly because it’s intentional.
One of these things makes me sad. The other one makes me very angry.
It’s gotten to the point where I’d be okay with single payer, only if it’s coupled with a massive deregulation of the private sector. That way the progs stop whining and ruining the private sector with things like Obamacare, and health care costs fall back to earth at the exchange of an increased tax burden. I think we’d even come out ahead.
Even though it would be politically feasible, it’s never gonna happen because there aren’t enough opportunities for cronyism and graft.
Deregulation of the medical sector is not going to happen, ever.
That regulatory system was captured a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away.
Single payer means no private sector. Everything is priced by the state, paid by the state and regulated by the state, including how much you’ll be allowed to bill in a year, and no, you can’t get payment from elsewhere.
Nothing gets the progs more irate than the idea of “two tier system”, where teh poorz must get their health care in underfunded public system that’s full of heroes who can do nothing, as they literally have one aspirin and half a stethoscope, while The Rich live it up with top-tier care, sexy nurses and blackjack.
You’re right, I used the wrong term. I mean an independent government run system like the VA.
But isn’t the two-tier system already the way it is in places like Britain? I don’t know how well that’s received.
But yeah, the genuine communists would prefer if everyone was subjected to equal destitution. If you quoted Thatcher about how they want to make the poor poorer so that the rich have less proportionally, I’m sure they would think that’s a great idea. More people dying in the streets would be an acceptable price to pay for satisfying their emotional repulsion to people making profits. Luckily, they’re in the minority.
It’s received quite badly. The private service has been expanded in the last … decade and a bit? Help, UK readers! to provide more leeway to private service, and has been under relentless attack from the left.
In Canada, it’s on province-by-province basis, but most places, if you want to take government money, you can only take govt. money. They tend to have some flexibility – I think in BC right now MRI technicians are allowed to work elsewhere when they are not scheduled in govt system, but GPs are not. It is currently not a huge deal, as most people go through govt system for basic care. Dental, optometrist and such, however, are basically private insurance or cash-on-hand, as govt. stays out.
A real two-tier system is a reality in most of Continental Europe. In many places, like France, you can buy supplementary insurance to top up what is supplied by the government if you wish. Hilariously, this is never mentioned by the progs.
If I opt out of taking government money will they give me a good chunk of my taxes back?
By “taking money” I meant, doctors who charge the govt. And no, you don’t get any taxes back if you take yourself out of public system.
Well, no, you CAN get some money back, if your health expenses are above a certain treshold, but my supplementary insurance (got it when I was a contractor, kept it) never came even close to it. I suppose if I had considerable co-pays for some reason I could have claimed some of them on tax return.
independent government run system like the VA
The VA is fully socialized medicine. All the facilities are owned by the state, and all the workers are state employees. Its about the only model worse than single payer.
” half a stethoscope”
Stick a finger in the other ear, it’ll still work fine.
In a single payer system that allows for privatized health care, you have to add the price of care you want to pay for out of pocket, to the care you’re forced to pay for through taxes. We’re not talking about a few bucks out of your paycheck for a single payer system that works, we’re talking double digit percentages. The result is that even upper middle class people can’t afford to pay twice to go to a private clinic.
I have personal experience with this. There is no way that single payer doesn’t become the default kind of health care for everyone except the well connected.
In all honesty we need to get insurance completely out of the picture and allow prices to drop to affordable levels. I promise you if no one had insurance you would suddenly see very reasonable prices on everything.
It used to be that you could get a discount from your doctor for paying in cash. Now, you’re the poster child for cost shifting if you don’t have an insuror to negotiate pricing on your behalf.
Re: paying in cash. It leads to some bizarre practices. I had to get an imaging test done a couple of years back. They gave me the option of paying in cash or running it through insurance. If I paid in cash, the catch was that it wouldn’t count against my deductible. so, if the test revealed I needed further treatment, and I paid in cash, I would be more out of pocket. The weird thing was that I had to make the decision at the time of the test even though it was going to take 24 hours for the results to be known. They wouldn’t even let me provide a credit card in case I walked without paying the bill. There was no incentive for them to do this since any further treatment would have been done somewhere else.
When I got my wisdom teeth removed, they made me pay half up front before they would do the surgery. It makes sense, I guess, because I was never going to set foot in that building again.
There were 8 or 9 employees in that practice including the doctor and the nurse, and probably 6 of them worked on billing.
I get that but they could have asked for a cc imprint and told me if they didn’t hear from me in 48 hours they were going to bill to it. That way, I could have paid them direct or run it through insurance.
This place wouldn’t take a CC either. And I don’t think it’s because they lose a percentage to the the CC company.
They had an actual check franking device at the billing counter. I wrote the check, they ran it through the machine, and the money was debited from my account in real time.
They got their money, and there was no way I was getting it back even if they botched the surgery.
Wow! That does not inspire confidence.
They had an actual check franking device at the billing counter. I wrote the check, they ran it through the machine, and the money was debited from my account in real time.
Wow, what’s this now? The fastest method I am aware of with regard to generic checking transactions is the Check21 apparatus.
i.e.the transaction happens prior to the beginning of the next banking day
It might have been a hold. The money was not available to me from that point on.
I have no idea when it actually cleared; just that they had first dibs on my money.
An instantaneous checking funds hold is pretty incredible to me, I’ve never heard of that before. If some day in the future you happen to track down the nomenclature/mechanism that was employed, I would appreciate if you’d relay the info to me.
The fact that you’re surprised over something that you’re obviously very knowledgeable about is making me second guess my memory of the event.
Especially since the event involved nitrous and Vicodin.
Just the same, if that technology is real, let me know. Most people aren’t aware of security reserve accounts imposed by risk departments, but yet here you are.
When I had my wisdom teeth extracted, I was put under with an IV general anaesthetic. When I woke up afterward, I was utterly convinced somebody might steal my envelope of tooth fragments, so I got the idea that haphazardly writing my own given name on the envelope with my own blood wad an amazing idea.
I’ve seen them since… 2007. I’m not sure who does it, although the name VeriCheck comes to mind, but Walmart has had it since 2007, it converts the check into a debit transaction and runs it through their debit system. No signature required, no filling out the check– it’s fed into the check reader/printer, the check is filled out, endorsed, and voided, and the check is handed back for the customer’s records.
By the same token, I don’t know why the provider didn’t have PIN-enabled debit. NSF returns are much less costly, the discount rate is lower, and chargebacks are very difficult.
Thanks for the tip compgrokker.
Huh. I guess I did learn something useful at Haas other than identifying a salad fork.
They don’t take CC because there are a lot of scumbags that feel the Card Association dispute rules allow them to force a refund they aren’t entitled.
Yep. And the processing bank would also require them to keep some amount of money in reserve in case of chargebacks.
See this AMEX? It means I can do WHATEVER I WANT
“I’m not even gonna ask for a refund. I’ve got my CapOne Visa.”
“I’m just going to leave this rental car in a handicapped spot at the airport. Nope, nope, I don’t want to hear it. Talk to AMEX.”
Nice write-up, Kevin.
This has and still does baffle the hell out of me. Who is against this and why? Or is it just that no one is trying to push it? This is such a no-brainer. People like us always bring this up, but I can’t recall any
sleazebagscongressmen ever bringing it up.Also; has this ever been challenged in court? If so, I assume they twisted the Commerce Clause somehow?
I’m not sure, but I think it has to do with every state having their own laws on healthcare. 50 laboratories and all that.
How will the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation employ 40,000 (I actually have no idea if it is 40 or 40,000) Floridians without it, Florida Man?
20,000 dig holes, the other 20,000 fill them in. It would be a net improvement to the economy.
The tasteless jokes write themselves.
I think that’s basically it. Since regulation of insurance is done by the states, if a company issued a policy in Illinois and you wanted to buy it in Indiana, it wouldn’t necessarily comply with Indiana regs.
That’s the point, though. If Indiana mandates that a preexisting condition is covered, and Indiana insurance companies use that as an excuse to reject me, but Colorado does not have those restrictions, why shouldn’t I be able to get insurance from a company in Colorado? Disclaimer: I haven’t required any treatment for my preexisting condition for about 30 years.
I think for the same reason you can’t sell 30 round mags in California even though they’re legal in Florida. The rules are where the sale is completed not originated.
*not a defense of the policy
But a Californian isn’t breaking any laws by buying a 30 round magazine in Florida. It’s only illegal for him to bring it into California, and it’s not prohibited by Federal law.
Even if a Colorado insurance company want to sell their insurance to Kevin, and Indiana didn’t have a problem with it, I still think they’re legally barred from doing so by Federal law.
Thank you. I also don’t get the state line thing. I suspect it might have to do with insurance providers being regional, so if they agree with each other not to spread into other states they’re able to limit competition.
Except the big players are all national. They just have 50 different main offices.
Many conservatives in Congress, especially in the House, have been on the record saying that they’re in favor of selling policies across state lines. The shitstains really are in the Senate and their lifers.
See this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarran%E2%80%93Ferguson_Act
Completely OT: not sure if you saw the rugby anecdote I posted in yesterday’s afternoon links. It’s numbered post 16.
Fu$%ing French…
Midwest championships…1992 or so? Guy has two ribs broken, kind of bulging there around his side. Ref tells captain – send him off. Guy takes swing at ref, ’cause he wants to finish the match.
Thanks Swiss. From the article:
406-19 is a pretty amazing level of bipartisanship. Could that much have changed in 7 years? (rhetorical question)
From Pelosi’s own blog:
Someone needs to reintroduce this bill and see if Nancy still means those words. Hell, I’d include that quote in the bill.
Someone should suggest that to Massie. I bet he’d put it up.
Makes little sense. What would happen if, say, Colorado tried to block a resident from buying mutual funds from Vanguard in Pennsylvania? Vanguard, Fidelity, etc.,
would be in federal court in a half second. If me growing a cotton plant in my back yard somehow affects “interstate commerce” then the feds can surely step in and
allow interstate insurance policies to be sold.
Yes. Oddly enough, the Commerce Clause is used to insert Fedgov into nearly every aspect of commerce, but when states start erecting barriers to entry suddenly they have no use for it.
So glad this guy hasn’t disappeared.
It’s going to take more than his real life straightman getting fired to keep this troll down.
But, but… I’ve had no less than 5 friends on Facederp (I don’t know why I don’t just quit it) share this Andy Borowitz article!
I still don’t know how people can find him funny.
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/white-house-accuses-french-woman-of-spreading-pro-immigration-propaganda
I had to read it three times to figure out what the fuck he was on about and when I finally figured out he was talking about the statue I remembered I probably make less than him and my vision blurred and turned red.
And wouldn’t it actually be “Egyptian woman”?
I was going to point out that she was actually arab but I figured it was already such a stupid article it wasn’t worth my time.
Now I want to look up some videos of hot North African chicks with French accents.
You and your fetishes.
^^ I’ll have what he’s having
Look upon my liberties, ye miserable curs, and despair.
Only in Trumpistan is having a petulant hissy-fit for being caught with one’s pants down is ‘kickin’ someone’s ass’.
To be fair, Acosta was legitimately retarded or disingenious enough to claim that those backwards furriners can’t learn English good unless they’re in Britain or Australia.
No, he didn’t. That’s Trump spin. And the most hilarious thing about it is that Miller chose to call Acosta a “cosmopolitan”. Wouldn’t being cosmopolitan, by definition, mean Acosta would have more experience about the world outside our borders than less?
No, it’s not.
Quote: “This whole notion … that they have to learn English before they get to the United States, are we just going to bring in people from Great Britain and Australia?”
That’s is not ‘Trump spin’, that is a direct quote from a liar or a retard who doesn’t understand that teaching English abroad is a billion dollar industry.
And native speakers of a language don’t have an advantage in measures of language proficiency over second language learners?
That having been said, there’s a little bit more to it, but I don’t want to spoil my pending article.
Sure, and if Acosta said that he’d have a point. But he didn’t, instead he created a disingenuous statement that serves to redirect the conversation to idiocy that benefits himself.
People like him are poisonous to public discourse.
INDIA!!!!
Ethnic groups:
Indo-Aryan 72%, Dravidian 25%, Mongoloid and other 3% (2000)
Languages:
Hindi 41%, Bengali 8.1%, Telugu 7.2%, Marathi 7%, Tamil 5.9%, Urdu 5%, Gujarati 4.5%, Kannada 3.7%, Malayalam 3.2%, Oriya 3.2%, Punjabi 2.8%, Assamese 1.3%, Maithili 1.2%, other 5.9%
note: English enjoys the status of subsidiary official language but is the most important language for national, political, and commercial communication; Hindi is the most widely spoken language and primary tongue of 41% of the people; there are 14 other official languages: Bengali, Telugu, Marathi, Tamil, Urdu, Gujarati, Malayalam, Kannada, Oriya, Punjabi, Assamese, Kashmiri, Sindhi, and Sanskrit; Hindustani is a popular variant of Hindi/Urdu spoken widely throughout northern India but is not an official language (2001 census)
You should see all the English and Australians pouring into my country because of our English language immigration requirements, we haven’t seen a darkie or a Chinaman in ages!
…Oh wait, that’s not reflective of reality at all.
If you read the actual text of the RAISE Act bill, and understand the implications of how they propose to measure English language proficiency, Acosta’s observation is much more accurate than Miller’s deflection. I plan to fully explicate why in my article.
I’m certain Acosta read the content of the bill and made his statement based on an even-handed and careful analysis of it. That’s why it’s so shallow and moronic.
I don’t deny that it’s probably a case of broken clocks. Still, I don’t want to give any more spoilers than I already have. I fear that if I do, in proving why Steve Bannon is an enemy of us all, even peppering the article with pics like this:
won’t be enough to get folks to read it.
Correct. Way too many clothes
If you read the actual text of the RAISE Act bill, and understand the implications of how they propose to measure English language proficiency, Acosta’s observation is much more accurate than Miller’s deflection. I plan to fully explicate why in my article.
Hmm…on first pass, this looks very similar to what my family went through when we applied to immigrate to Canada. It’d be fun to see how much of this is cribbed from Canada’s system.
It’d be fun to see how much of this is cribbed from Canada’s system.
I’m sure Dalmia will inform us in a fitful rage over the horrific influence of the dastardly snowbacks.
Dastardly Snowbacks
Didn’t they play Day 2 at Lollapalooza last year?
I meant actual research, where you go through both bills, find the similar areas and see how the points shake out. Maybe even apply the points to the author and see how the score under each system.
Fuck, if only I had an iota of legal training, this would be a good article to submit. Eh, fuck it, maybe I’ll use my rules lawyer skills from RPGs and fake it!
I don’t think Trump is proposing that only native English speakers need apply.
Would they have an advantage over people who learned it later? In many cases, yes.
So? I still think speaking English is a good filter for “Who do we let in?” How good their English needs to be is more a function of the second question: “How many?”
The bill says:
Its a third(?) level tie breaker. A quick look at 220(a) didn’t reveal anything too disturbing.
I suppose the alternatives are
(a) Don’t count being able to speak English at all. Personally, I don’t like this one.
(b) Set a floor, and if you meet that it goes away. You could argue this one either way.
I’m not sure what this is all about.
Can someone explain in 140 characters or less?
“Racist!”
“I know you are, but what am I?”
WH Presser.
CNN reporter makes observation that Cotton plan would favor immigrants from the Anglosphere, Trump aide has meltdown at podium.
I’ve actually just finished an outline on the whole sordid affair that I hope to publish here on the weekend.
You’re completely wrong about Miller having a meltdown. I’ve watched the video. Put extra effort into your piece, whatever you announced so far doesn’t sound well-thought-out.
Really? Are you in the habit of apologizing after delivering a dispassionate explanation of policy?
I hope you haven’t missed Harsanyi’s take on it.
Though I didn’t like Miller’s use of the word “cosmopolitan.” Acosta is not cosmopolitan, he is an idiot regurgitating talking points.
Gettin’ nitpicky here, but “Trump aide has meltdown at podium” is not “a dispassionate explanation of policy”.
/pedant OFF
I really am looking forward to your take on the bill. I think immigration is a very tough issue, and don’t trust anybody in the DemOp or Alt-Nut media to give me any good info on the bill.
A prog thinks an inscription on a statue TRUMPS immigration law or any proposed changes to it. Then shits pants on the twitters.
129 characters (with spaces)
Wait, that’s something else. I shouldn’t be multitasking on this site.
It’s ok, I often confuse browser tabs when I’m typing one-handed as well. The format of this site and ahego.com is too similar to tell at first glance.
Let me fire up my super-secure virtual machine incognito browser on my disposable laptop and check out this ahego.com
You should probably go to public wifi too, just in case.
And wear your Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses.
No. I literally mean that I shouldn’t be reading the comments here and working at the same time. Once I caught myself hyperlinking a THICC Thursday page into a consult management report….
And this was a problem how exactly?
Probably would have gotten a raise and promotion.
Good question. It’s not like they can fire me.
The dividends will by magnificent and the yield curves voluptuous…much like these Instagram hoes!
Great article Kevin. My wife and I found ourselves in a similar position when we both changed jobs and were in between employer provided insurance. A cheap Obamacare plan with a $12k out of pocket and uselessly high deductible would have been roughly 3 times our monthly mortgage payment. It’s insane. I put her and the kids on short term catastrophic for fifty bucks a month, with a 10k out of pocket.
Something else I’ve found people don’t realize is that hospital affiliated doctors are now charging a separate facility fee that comes out of your deductible. So the visit to your PCP that used to run a $40 copay is now the $40 copay plus a $250 facility fee. This happens even if it’s a tiny satellite office building and it’s every single visit. I’ve since cut ties with any doctor not practicing as independent. I realize that not all of them might be doing this but all of the ones around me are.
When one changes jobs, doesn’t ERISA law require the current insurance provider to cover you for 18 months as long as you pay the premium? That usually gives one time to find another, better carrier.
COBRA can break ya. People don’t realize how much of the premium employers pick up.
The rules around COBRA are also (or at least used to be) bizarre. When I changed jobs in 2006, I was unemployed-and without insurance-for 3 months. The HR person at the job I was leaving got me signed up for COBRA but told me to not pay anything unless I had a major claim. At that point I could then pay the premium and the insurance would kick in. I kind of looked at him sideways and he said, don’t worry, it’s actually supposed to work that way. To this day, I still don’t know if he was right, deluded, or if I didn’t understand.
I think, just to be safe, I bought a catastrophic policy on a month-to-month basis.
And, you’re right about COBRA: I think the premium was more than double what I’d been paying.
Yes – you can claim your COBRA retroactively for a certain period of time, although I won’t do it with children. They stay insured at all times no matter what.
Also if you/your spouse is medicare eligible but you’re still on an employer plan, you need to stay insured so you don’t have a break in insurance and be forced to pay the Medicare enrollment penalty.
Yep. I briefly went COBRA a few years ago, and it was $1800 a month. This was BEFORE Obamacare.
I wish GI JOE would just finish those guys!
THANK YOU! I was wondering if anyone would hit that lazy, down the middle pitch…
Costs under COBRA can be 102-150% of the total premium as well.
COBRA, not ERISA, but yes.
It does but the premium was about the same. Our company plan was largely indistinguishable in price or features. So we were paying an absurd amount out of our paychecks while working but it couldn’t be helped.
Finances aside, it becomes harder to justify paying an absurd premium when there’s not a paycheck offsetting it. Which is probably the point of why this is run through the employers and states like CA are trying to start mandatory retirement accounts through the employers.
It’s run thru employers as an artifact of tax law dating to the 1950’s. In a logical world, your health insurance would not be dependent on your employer and people would choose jobs based on skills and pay and not the particulars of a insurance program.
That’s right, I should I have said that’s probably why there’s been no serious effort to change doing so since then.
Y’all yokels probably didn’t think you’re raging antisemites, but Politico is here to set you straight.
Hilarious hashtag hot take coming as a response to Acosta’s insistence that Miller is a white supremacist because of an obscure, slender historical connection he invented on the spot.
WHAT?! I CAN’T HEAR YOU OVER ALL THE DOG WHISTLES!!
When discussing what to name this website, I campaigned for “Rootless Cosmotarians”. Swiss loved it, but Sloopy, (or was it OMWC?) vetoed.
I’m still upset that the url for this place isn’t fuckoffslaver.com.
It’s still available last time I checked.
How could we use that and keep our “Family Friendly” accreditation?!?!?!?!?!
wouldyoukindlyfuckoffslaver.com?
fornicateoffkeepersofinvoluntaryservitudeworkers.com
Andrew Ryan hardest hit.
+1 golf club
Anyone could buy it and set a re-direct.
Y’all didn’t open the discussion up to the rest of us?
Talk about some animals being more equal than others, Napoleon.
*adjusts monocle*
Indeed.
Oy vey. The original “citizens of the world” were the Stoics of Rome. Well before Stalin rose to power there were people claiming “Cosmopolitan” and using it as a slur especially between the world wars. The fact that these people are essentially the American nomenklatura and trying to declare what is nekulturny by diktat is totally lost on them because they don’t have any depth to their knowledge.
Yeah!
*has no idea what you’re talking about*
Exactly. I think the first cosmopolitan was Diogenes, the Greek philosopher, a rather eccentric fellow. The word and idea is ancient, and derided well before Stalin came on the scene.
It’s nice that Soviet Jew-hate is getting some exposure, at least!
I was informed by some intelligent people on the internet that communism is totes the fault of the Joos. Because Trotsky and Lenin’s mother was originally Jewish or something.
My impression is that the majority of antisemitism was directed at the Bolsheviks. I couldn’t quite figure out why. White army recruitment posters would refer to them as “Jews and Communists” as if they were the same thing.
My best guess is that pretty much everyone was an antisemite and it was just another way to smear your opponent. Or something something Hitler. I need to read more history.
For some odd reason, after decades of sporadic mass murder of Jews by Tsarist authorities, some Jews joined anti-Imperialist parties, and, being literate and passionate, assumed some of leadership positions. Including Bolsheviks.
All the White armies were fiercely Russian nationalist (more or less depending on which one, because God forbid they have a united command, or strategy, or anything, really) so blaming The Jew came naturally. Remember where Protocols of Elders of Zion come from.
Not to bag on Russians, historically they were bad, but so were French, Spanish and assorted German states when it came to (((conspiracies))). Europe was (is?) just a shitty place to be a Jew.
And their support of anti-imperialist parties didn’t go so well in the end.
Pan covered most of it, but there was also an element of religious fervour directed at the communists that threw in antisemitism with it. Orthodox Russian and Catholic Polish propaganda rolled with this a fair bit.
Also Marx and…er… Rosa Luxemburg?
I can recommend a short story collection dealing with Stalinism and Jews in pre-WW2 Europe.
OT, but Jeff Deist gave a pretty good speech last week.
Futbol news: Neymar is moving from Barcelona to Paris Saint-Germain for 222 million euros.
Now, clubs in Europe have to operate under something called financial fair play, whereby they can’t have operating losses over a certain amount.
PSG could not pay for this transfer and comply with financial fair play.
But PSG is owned by the nation of Qatar (technically Qatar Sports Investments)
And Qatar bought the 2022 World Cup.
So Qatar is paying Neymar 222 million euros to act as ambassador for the 2022 World Cup. Neymar is then paying the amount himself (release clause, Barcelona has to accept under Spanish law), and is moving to Paris as a free agent.
I think we need a Foreign Footy column just to explain this…and I thought the MLB and NBA “luxury tax” was odd.
*head explodes*
I’m putting something together that will include this for the next foreign footy column. Just breaking news and all.
Excellent!
Don’t forget to update us on the riveting action of the Europa League, third qualifying round.
Also, interesting take here on why Neymar decided to leave:
http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40804584
And Neymar’s salary is going to work out to about $1.026 million per week.
Reasonably certain that Ophthalmologists are not covered by the AMA but a different group entirely
Thx- makes sense
I skimmed the AMA’s code of ethics and there was nothing explicitly banning advertising prices that I could see.
States usually regulate professional licensing…I know Lawyer advertising is strangled, er…regulated by the States.
Hmmm…
Sec. 26. Advertising.
(1) Any person licensed under this Act may advertise the availability of professional services in the public media or on the premises where such professional services are rendered. Such advertising shall be limited to the following information:
(a) Publication of the person’s name, title, office
hours, address and telephone number;
(b) Information pertaining to the person’s areas of
specialization, including appropriate board certification or limitation of professional practice;
(c) Information on usual and customary fees for
routine professional services offered, which information shall include, notification that fees may be adjusted due to complications or unforeseen circumstances;
(d) Announcement of the opening of, change of,
absence from, or return to business;
(e) Announcement of additions to or deletions from
professional licensed staff;
(f) The issuance of business or appointment cards.
(2) It is unlawful for any person licensed under this Act to use claims of superior quality of care to entice the public. It shall be unlawful to advertise fee comparisons of available services with those of other persons licensed under this Act.
(3) This Act does not authorize the advertising of professional services which the offeror of such services is not licensed to render. Nor shall the advertiser use statements which contain false, fraudulent, deceptive or misleading material or guarantees of success, statements which play upon the vanity or fears of the public, or statements which promote or produce unfair competition.
(4) A licensee shall include in every advertisement for services regulated under this Act his or her title as it appears on the license or the initials authorized under this Act.
(Source: P.A. 97-622, eff. 11-23-11.)
Thanks – totally missed that.
Apparently the whole tangle of laws is being revamped the end of this year. I am sure they made it much better!!!!!!
/IL
There’s plenty of advertising for procedures that aren’t typically covered by insurance.
I hear plastic surgery ads on the radio all the time. Same with LASIK.
Yeah, the LASIK ads here mostly include prices.
A tummy tuck here is 3 grand.
Just sayin’.
Is there a Wartyization package?
Based on this morning’s bodyfat scan, I might need to sign up for that.
Is that like a colon tuck?
I’m starting to think about just copying this and pasting it as obligatory in every health care article:
The overwhelming majority of doctors do not belong to the AMA.
I’d put it in all caps and bold face if I thought it would make any difference.
What the AMA says has literally nothing to do with how I practice medicine. They are not a regulatory body nor are their edicts binding on anyone except their members (many of whom ignore them anyway).
Doctors do not advertise prices for several reasons, the biggest of which is that there is no public demand since the bill for the vast majority of the patients is paid by third parties. For most people, the only number they’re concerned with is their copay. If a large number of people started demanding price transparency, you would start getting it. Barring extreme levels of reform of the current system, though, that won’t happen.
I was going to read (and maybe respond) to your comment, but then I noticed your avatar has an appalling lack of appropriate headgear.
And as was pointed out the last time you said this, the number of doctors in the AMA is irrelevant since to the power and effects of the AMA’s lobbying. It’s not the doctor-AMA relationship that matters, it’s the legislator-AMA relationship.
That having been said, the AMA seems to be against certificate of need and in favor of increasing medical school enrollment. So, it’s not all bad.
Hmm, it seems the AMA is now against certificates of need and in favor of increasing medical school enrollment, but they spent decades in the past arguing the opposite, i.e. that without CON and limited enrollment, there would be an “oversupply” of medical professionals.
“you mean our efforts to inflate prices could backfire when we all become slaves? ok, may need to re-evaluate our approach…”
The AMA’s lobbying power is very overrated on this board. While it is one of the largest single lobbying spenders in health care, pharmaceutical companies, who tend to group up for their lobbying efforts, spend much more on a yearly basis. The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, an industry lobbying group, by itself has outspent the AMA so far in 2017 (14.2 million to 12.4 million). Add in the pharmaceutical companies themselves, each of whom spends quite a bit on individual lobbying (Blue Cross/Blue Shield alone has spent 12.3 million so far this year), and it’s pretty apparent who has the most pull in health care.
Same thing with insurance companies. Same thing with trial lawyer organizations. The pull of the AMA with legislators compared to these groups is small. My point is that we spend so much time on this board railing about the AMA when it’s a minor player in the health care game.
Moreover, I’ve never seen any evidence that the AMA has advocated or lobbied against price transparency. On the contrary, the organization has advocated increased price transparency between doctors and patients.
http://www.ama-assn.org/content/american-medical-association-adopts-policies-improve-data-and-price-transparency
(Sorry guys, I suck at html and don’t want to chance Sugarfreeing my link)
In any event, the original comment was concerning the AMA code of ethics, which has nothing whatsoever to do with their relationship with legislators.
Shit, just realized in my attempt to condense the post to make it more legible, I accidentally listed Blue Cross/Blue Shield as a pharmaceutical company. It isn’t, it’s an insurance company. I initially listed Pfizer there, which has spent 5.6 million dollars in 2017 on lobbying. I had another paragraph about insurance companies, of which BC/BS is the largest spender I could find.
I don’t work for any of those organizations, so I’m not trying to deflect blame from any of them. Each plays a role in the current state of affairs, albeit in different ways. And I have said before that the AMA has had as much of a mitigating effect on the stupidity of legislators as it has had a deleterious effect on the shape of policy. But the AMA is, or at least was for a long time, an important player in restricting the supply side of medicine. This is not exactly defamatory nor particularly unique to the AMA, as it is generally the stated or unstated goal of all trade organizations to drive up the prices paid to their members (Adam Smith observed this behavior long before the AMA even existed). Nor is it atypical in the modern age for a trade organization to have only a fraction of the profession among its membership. But that still leaves it as the single largest voice representing doctors as a whole (with other organizations representing doctors by specialty, sometimes affiliated with the AMA, sometimes not).
The AMA is not the supervillian solely responsible for the status quo, but that doesn’t mean it is without villainy.
I’m about half way through the book Catastrophic Care by David Goldhill (it was recommended by a couple fine people here) and this is a huge part of his emphasis on why we are where we’re at now. I’m thoroughly impressed with the book and recommend it.
I’ve heard of the book but haven’t picked it up. I’ll have to add it to my reading list (although frankly reading stuff about medicine when I’m off work can be damned depressing).
I’m absolutely certain that the third party payer system is exactly why things have come to where we are. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve had to explain why they can’t “just get an MRI” out of the emergency room at 11pm for back pain they’ve had for years rather than the x-ray I’ve ordered or why I plan to transport via a ground unit rather than by helicopter. In many cases, there is a much less costly way that will produce the same result, but it literally makes no difference whatsoever since the person receiving the benefit isn’t the one who has to pay. It’s the worst system imaginable for controlling costs, in my opinion.
I’m getting fired up! Go Bucks!
http://nbc4i.com/2017/08/03/ohio-state-buckeyes-ranked-no-2-in-preseason-coaches-poll/
I’ll take USC at 4.
Louisville surprised me where they landed, but who knows?
I agree with you OK about handling pre-existing conditions through medicare. I was preaching that same thing when it was being discussed. You could charge based on ability to pay. You could also have penalties for people who just wait until they have a problem to apply. Could do something similar for people whose insurance ran out due to extraordinary circumstances. That made a hell of a lot more since than screwing over everyone.
If I’ve learned nothing else from the TEAM BLUE partisans in my office, screwing over everyone is the only way to be truly fair.
Oh for fuck’s sake.
Saw that coming a mile away. Trump talked a big game about a lot of things, dealing with debt wasn’t one of them.
Since when has Trump ever shied away from debt? The man is a walking talking debt machine.
I didn’t pack enough whiskey in my lunch bag today.
That’s understandable. The real time to have the fight is during budgeting, not when spending what has already been budgeted. But it does make the debt ceiling a worthless piece of charade.
OT — Hundreds of low-paid Georgia cops are on food stamps, report says
http://www.ajc.com/news/local/hundreds-low-paid-georgia-cops-are-food-stamps-report-says/S3gc7EDkiUjT73gKU7xFJP/
on topic, at least they have health insurance?
Self awareness fail of the day at the bottom of that post:
Yes, because the cops are the only armed and unhappy people in Georgia.
more frightened of raising taxes than they are of facing a group of armed and unhappy people.
I would have said they are afraid of raising taxes because they don’t want to face a group of armed and unhappy people.
Does Georgia have any kind of legislation prohibiting officers working off-duty jobs? If not, that whole article is bullshit.
Either that, or the officers are too stupid* to find gigs that so many other cops have no trouble finding.
Eh, could be both, I guess
Heads we win, tails you lose
Although it is reasonable to assume Scaramucci had good intentions, his comments provide an example of how a well-meaning man can unintentionally undermine a female colleague with comments that miss the mark. Unfortunately, the problem is not uncommon. Psychologists Peter Glick and Susan Fiske refer to it as benevolent sexism — a chivalrous attitude that suggests women are weak and need men’s protection, in contrast to hostile sexism (an antagonistic attitude toward women and a desire to control or dominate them).
While benevolent sexism might not sound that bad, Glick and Fiske describe how this kind of paternalism suggests that women need to be taken care of by men, and men who endorse this form of benevolent sexism are more likely to accept the mistreatment and harassment of women at work (though I’m not suggesting Scaramucci would do so). Moreover, research has also found that benevolent sexism makes it less likely that women will get candid feedback and challenging assignments, and more likely that they’ll get confidence-eroding offers of unsolicited assistance. All of this undercuts women’s perceived competence and makes it harder for them to advance.
Harvard Business Review goes SJW.
What’s their take on benevolent racism?
+ burden, white man, 1 each
Thanks for the article, I’m sorry to hear of your insurancw troubles. My best guess for why Republicans continue to not remove government from healthcare (and rollback welfare) is that many of their constituents and voters are on those programs. They certainly love hearing their reps saying we need to roll back and repeal but I think the politicians realize that their constituents wouldn’t actually like it in the end. The whole “keep your government hands off my medicare” type of deal.
JUSTICE!
Ned Friend has high hopes for what Seattle’s new income tax could mean for his city.
The measure, passed by the city council in July, would impose a 2.25 percent tax on high-income – those who make above $250,000 a year, or twice that for couples.
Mr. Friend, a software engineer whose annual income is above the threshold, sees the new cash source as a way to help ease the affordability crisis that is the dark side to Seattle’s booming tech industry. He says he’s happy to pay a little extra each year if it means more revenue for the city to address homelessness and fund public education, make taxes more fair, and defend liberal Seattle against strikes from a conservative federal government.
Lots of sweeping generalities about eliminating “systemic inequalities”. Liberal hucksters and think tank flim-flam artists, FTW!
Say it with me: CAPITAL FLIGHT!
No matter how gradually you tighten the vice grip, sooner or later Seattle will be the next Detroit.
Once again, did Friend send a check to the city prior to being forced to do so?
Or even volunteer in soup kitchens, homeless shelters, or make gifts to same?
I attempted to re-apply, but because I have a preexisting condition (I was born with spina bifida), I was rejected by my insurance company
Not that it does you any good, but that may have been a violation of HIPAA, which believe it or not was only incidentally about privacy. The first three letters stand for “Health Insurance Portability”. There’s some technicalities, but the big one is “were you seen for the pre-existing condition within the last six months”. If so, it could be excluded from your new policy. I’m not sure when/if was legal to completely bar someone who had a year’s worth of insurance from a policy altogether, or whether you were only allowed to exclude the pre-existing condition from the new policy.
This is all from memory, and most of this has been overridden by ObamaCare.
When I first got the policy, the policy did exclude pre-existing conditions from coverage. The law changed during the time I had the policy, so my policy was grandfathered in. I’m not sure if it was state or federal law, but the change to the law stated that pre-existing conditions had to be covered by every policy, So, the insurance companies just rejected me outright.
I think that only works if you have a certificate of continuing coverage or whatever it’s called.
If your coverage lapses for more that a certain period of time, you have to start from scratch and they can deny you.
Yep, that was it.
The last time I read the HIPAA stuff (right after Rand was throwing out his ideas on reform) I want to say I read that if you had a lapse of longer than 32 days or something, the insurance companies could deny you for one year, but then had to issue.
I may be totally wrong about that though.
HIPAA, which believe it or not was only incidentally about privacy.
I thought it was about making certain you had no privacy from the State.
Let me sing you the song of my people…
Seriously good article Kevin. I’m in a similar boat as I’ve worked for the same small engineering firm for 15 years, but the prices for insurance, even before Obamacare, were astronomically high. My wife took a part time job at 24 hour fitness because they offered it to every employee, as long as you made enough to cover the premiums. We worked our entire schedule out to make sure she could do that and were doing great. Even after our first daughter was born, the premium only went up like $50.
Cut to two years later and it’s all “We’re sorry, but the plans that we currently offer are not Obamacare compliant. Therefore we will sadly have to drop coverage for our part-time employee’s. Oh, and good luck making enough hours to qualify as full time.” Ok, I guess we’re getting private insurance.
Cut to this year and for the first time in our adult lives we have no insurance (kept the girls covered for almost as much as we were paying back in 2012) because even with a subsidy the premiums were more than our rent (don’t even get me started on the asinine “subsidy”). So now instead of embarking on my own and starting my own design firm, I’m going to be looking for anything that offers decent compensation and health insurance. But of course, none of our liberal friends really care about us because they just assume we’re okay with taking one for the team so that their shitty artist friends can get insurance for $25 a month.
And I get to pay the penaltax because that asshole John McCain wouldn’t just repeal this piece of shit abortion.
/end rant
So now instead of embarking on my own and starting my own design firm, I’m going to be looking for anything that offers decent compensation and health insurance.
And another incentive for big businesses not to support reform/repeal.
I recall lots of DemOp types claiming that OCare would actually help people start their own businesses, etc. because of the robust and affordable health insurance marketplace policies.
Again, the eternal dilemma – “stupid, or malicious”. Because I and many others predicted the exact opposite, and what we predicted has come to pass.
Foreseeable consequences are not unintended.
I remember the Obama(don’t)Care supporters summarily dismissing any predictions that it would cause people to lose their jobs. Then, when job loss actually occurred, some of them actually made the argument that it’s a good thing because those people can now get on Medicaid or subsidized insurance and pursue their dreams of being artists or novelists or whatever.
We almost lost our insurance at my current job about a year ago. At that time, I also looked into Obamacare plans. According to the law, you and I are rich and don’t need subsidies. Yet another reason to be pissed.
I fully admit that I probably should have left a couple years ago, with no real pay raises but added responsibilities. But my boss has been awesome with working with our schedule and pays me to do freelance work for his second company. Of course all of that extra money was eaten up the last two years thanks to premium increases.
The other awesome thing is that my wife’s income counts against us now, since it’s not going to pretax premiums. So the IRS says “Look, you made an extra 7k last year compared to the year previous, so bend over cause we’re gonna fuck you good.”
Damn.
And this is exactly what Pelosi wanted.
I hate that bitch
I’m on temporary insurance because the cheapest plan I could get was $400 a fucking month for just me. I refuse to spend that much.
The Republicans have been here before. They’ve had a chance to use their power to make things better for many people. Whether it’s lack of intelligence, spinelessness, or something else, who knows?
I would say its a combination of stupidity (not realizing what a bubble they live in), cowardice (not wanting to be out of step with others in the bubble), and corruption (Big Gov butters their toast).
I don’t want people to think I’m ignoring this thread, but I don’t think anybody wants me to rehash old threads either. I do have a couple of things to add.
I have a preexisting condition, too, and the best thing for that is a free market–consumer choice on qualitative considerations. Counter to what most people think, single payer sucks for preexisting conditions.
When we’re talking about rationing in single payer, we’re often talking about something called “medical necessity”.
There’s a database for coders that decides which procedure codes, etc. are alright depending on the diagnostic code. For instance, if I have my right hand amputated, they can’t also bill Medicaid for amputating three fingers on my right hand. Having my right hand smashed in a car accident, likewise, probably doesn’t justify taking CT scans of my left hand.
This turns into rationing when they start making decisions about what’s cosmetic, what’s the least expensive option, what’s really necessary, etc. Is a penile implant for a man over the age of 65 medically necessary after prostate surgery? What about a man at the age of 25, 35, 45, 55? What about breast reconstruction surgery after a mastectomy? Is that medically necessary or just cosmetic? Wouldn’t you rather make these qualitative choices for yourself in a market based on price and your income rather than have them made for you by an unelected bureaucrat? What about mobility? Hip replacement surgery and rehabilitation are expensive–especially compared to a wheel chair. If a wheel chair will get you around the house and to the store–is the ability to walk medically necessary?
What if there are more voters who care about giving women free breast reconstruction but don’t give a damn about whether 65 year old men can walk again?
If you have other certain preexisting conditions, say ulcerative colitis, is it medically necessary to keep your large intestine in place when a colostomy bag would do just as well? The medications for keeping ulercative colitis under control are expensive–it’s a lifetime of maintenance. Plus, you need to go in for a colonoscopy once a year or every other year to verify that you haven’t developed colon cancer. That’s expensive. Much cheaper to just take our your large intestine and give you a colostomy bag! You can’t get colon cancer if you don’t have a colon.
Of course, some selfish people don’t want to go through life with a colostomy bag, and those subjective qualitative considerations are so irrational! The don’t even show up on a bureaucrat’s spreadsheet anywhere. That’s the great thing about central planning–it’s only in markets where people get to make choices for themselves about how much they’re willing to pay vis a vis qualitative considerations. Someday, St. Bernie willing, we’ll get rid of this ridiculous market system where stupid redneck Christians get to make qualitative choices for themselves and rob favored groups of the popular procedures they deserve to get “for free” at tax payers’ expense!
If and when we get to single payer–which means everyone is on Medicaid–be aware that these are the kinds of qualitative choices bureaucrats will necessarily need to make on our behalf. Who gets which procedures becomes a zero sum game–and being a minority in a democracy sucks, especially if you have a preexisting condition that most people don’t know or care about. When people hear that I have a preexisting condition, they assume I must favor nationalization and single payer, I guess, because they assume that when the government is giving out free healthcare, they imagine that their own favorite condition is the one that will get the funding.
The problem with socialized medicine is that they always run out of other people’s diagnoses.
The other reason I tell people with preexisting conditions that they should favor markets for insurance is that buying coverage for a preexisting condition isn’t really insurance. I mean, you’re looking for insurance in case you’re struck with something unrelated to your preexisting condition, but you’re also looking for coverage of what you already have. You don’t necessarily want to buy insurance and coverage for something you already have from the same insurance company. The insurance company isn’t specialized because to cover anything unforeseen, they have to cover everything. You can go to renal facilities that are specifically set up for people with kidney diseases. There are huge cost advantages in doing it that way–they don’t have to open a maternity ward or an ER to deal with broken bones. If you have colitis, you want to be able to go to a center that specializes in GI care because that means their quality in those areas are better and their cost basis will be lower. Nothing encourages specialization like a market.
Link for the quote on Medical Necessity:
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/getting-approval-medicaid-services-medical-necessity.html
On a recent family trip, I got into an argument with my sister, who is also a physician, about health care reform.
Her position was that we must require every American to have health insurance because, if we don’t, the cost of providing their care is borne by everyone else. My response was to ask how that was different than everyone having health insurance, since everyone else would be paying premiums that would pay for the cost of their care. I was told that it was different, though I’m still not sure how.
I’m pretty sure all the “single payer, yay!” people think this way. Sure, we’ll still all end up paying for everybody’s health care, but we’ll make it up in volume, or something.
Sure, we’ll still all end up paying for everybody’s health care, but we’ll make it up in volume, or something.
I like that.
Honestly, when I’ve gotten people to really admit what this is all about, it turns out to be about control. It’s better that the government punish fat people, or smokers, or whatever other health violators for their sins, than that evil insurance companies simply charge them more. If you repent, then you can be saved; but if you buy indulgences, then you’re cheating.
“Indecent assault”
Pussy grab?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40819816
Someone rebuffed Luke Duke? FAKE NEWS!
Pre-season top 25
New rule of you lose to KU in the previous season you are banned from the top 25 for the next season… I’m looking at you Texas.