Re: Senate Finance Committee Votes "NO" on Public OptionGo to Top
Originally Posted by CHUMPS FROM OXFORD
A good first step but not out of the woods yet.
Bloodbath this Saturday? I sure hope not.
The odds makers now have it a 29.5 pt spread, the third highest spread of the day for all NCAA games. It would be a good chance for Kelly to pad those Heisman-esque stats for T. Pike, but I think he is too much of a gentleman to do so. I would take the pts if I had a gun to my head... but honestly I know nothing about the Redskins football team.
Maybe they could sneak Big Ben back in for the weekend... speaking of which, I was a pretty happy boy last Sun. We have to celebrate those rare moments when they come. I'm sure you were on the other side of that one...
Re: Senate Finance Committee Votes "NO" on Public OptionGo to Top
Last week Zach Dysert (RS Fresh) made his debut at QB. He threw for over 330 and rushed for more than 100. 6-4 1/2 and a strong arm. Reminds people of Ben since he was the top-rated QB in Ohio.
He might make things interesting. But we're still two years away from a 7-9 win season.
Re: Senate Finance Committee Votes "NO" on Public OptionGo to Top
Possible interesting trivia here Chumps... Z. Dysert from a Div VI school, and T. Pike from a Div IV school, opposing starters for Div I college programs; both from very small high schools. I suppose it has happened before, but seems unusual to me.
Re: Senate Finance Committee Votes "NO" on Public OptionGo to Top
What's being sold to the public is this huge influx if young healthy people will be in the market which will keep the rates low.
These are the healthy uninsured prospects we speak to every day when we quote incredible rates come back with "can I have around....4 months to think about it?"
Last edited by healthagent : 09-30-2009 at 10:51 AM.
Re: Senate Finance Committee Votes "NO" on Public OptionGo to Top
Originally Posted by healthagent
What's being sold to the public is this huge influx if young health people will be in the market which will keep the rates low.
There is more truth in what is not being said though....
Most of these individuals will qualify for the subsidy, meaning they don't help keep rates low (but it comes from another pocket...). The other thing they are not saying is if they don't qualify for a subsidy, they refuse to tell this group that they will have to actually PAY for insurance, to help offset the cost of a 55 year olds heart attack.
Re: Senate Finance Committee Votes "NO" on Public OptionGo to Top
Originally Posted by healthagent
We can go back to the Mass. model to see that it's a short-term patch. Did Mass. succeed in getting a lot of people insured? Yes.
However, they have not addressed long term costs, rate increases, access to primary care, etc...and the whole program is currently in the red.
All Congress want to do is take the Mass. model and multiply it by 49.
Your forgeting another thing learned from the Mass model waiting times to be seen by a doctor and routine procedures are now among the highest in the nation.
Let me tell you who's gonna take it right up the a** with health care reform - the middle class. Those who are earning just more than 300% of FLP and currently don't have coverage because they live check to check.
Re: Senate Finance Committee Votes "NO" on Public OptionGo to Top
Originally Posted by healthagent
Let me tell you who's gonna take it right up the a** with health care reform - the middle class. Those who are earning just more than 300% of FLP and currently don't have coverage because they live check to check.
You mean they are not taking it in the shorts now?
The greed of you people is totally unparalleled to anything or anyone I've ever seen in my life.
You folks are actually happy that you will be able to make a six-figure income in a system that screws people over. Talk about being self-centered. It's your entire generation.
I'm glad you all despise me so much. It's a badge of honor.
I think a public option that would compete with the private sector is/was the only way to bring about cost containment.
But you neo-cons have won the day and you and I both know that the "industry" will "rule" the regulators.
Greed, greed, greed, greed, greed. You people disgust me.
Re: Senate Finance Committee Votes "NO" on Public OptionGo to Top
I thought this was relevant. I called the IRS today to see if I could negotiate a late FEE they charged me. My corporate taxes were sent in three months late simply out of laziness. They charged me a $445 late fee. If you think credit cards are bad, try the IRS.
Okay, no big deal. The part that got me was when I called and finally got through the maze of phone call run around, a recording came on and said "your wait time could exceed 15 minutes." WTF!!! That blew me away because it's the first time I've ever heard your wait time could exceed 15 minutes. That's like 10 times the normal wait. Granted, the entire U.S. population is their customer or at least a large portion of it is. The track record is just not there to have enough confidence in the government to run health care.
So much for efficiency. I was ready to pay them that crazy fee but instead I hung up.
Re: Senate Finance Committee Votes "NO" on Public OptionGo to Top
Originally Posted by CHUMPS FROM OXFORD
I am still worried about the "Exchange" which probably will go through. it forces all of the policies to be issued through this program...almost GI.
Commish, if still paid, will be reduced.
An amendment was tacked onto the plan to allow brokers to sell it. Not sure what the commish would be (of course, no plan out there has any numbers attached), but it would still allow for us to remain in business.