PsyOps
Pixelated
I'm waiting for the ball to drop on this, where we (military retirees) are forced into the single payer system.
Affordable Health Insurance
- Thread starter Gilligan
- Start date
I'm waiting for the ball to drop on this, where we (military retirees) are forced into the single payer system.
PsyOps
Pixelated
So much for the pre-existing conditions crap!
what does the Chrio have to do with it :shrug:
for me, Cigna would rather UI take a pill than getting a adj once a month
luckily I have it in with my chrio [I do all of their computer work] so this matters not ... they will see me, and take whatever the insurance will payout
Tilted
..
The pre-existing conditions requirement (i.e. that plans can't deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions) hasn't gone into effect yet. If she were to try to get coverage through an exchange this time next year, they wouldn't be able to deny her because she'd seen a chiropractor recently.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Perhaps insurance companies should start practicing now to get used to it
I just can't keep up with this bill, what happens when... Quite honestly I'm fed up with our government making things so complicated for the express purpose of keeping us in the dark. We don't know what is going to hit us when. Quite honestly this is like being in a war zone with bullets flying and not knowing when one is going to hit you.
Tilted
..
Perhaps insurance companies should start practicing now to get used to it
I just can't keep up with this bill, what happens when... Quite honestly I'm fed up with our government making things so complicated for the express purpose of keeping us in the dark. We don't know what is going to hit us when. Quite honestly this is like being in a war zone with bullets flying and not knowing when one is going to hit you.
Some of them I suspect are, but they don't have to - not quite yet.
And I get you regarding the bill (and much of U.S. Code, for that matter) being complicated. That was part of my point in the post I made earlier citing a number of sections of U.S. Code.
But I don't think the express purpose of the various interacting parts of the legislation being complicated is to keep people in the dark. They've actually created some decent resources to help people understand some of the important stuff. The reason it's so complicated is because they've taken so much on - they're trying to do so many things, appease so many interests. As lengthy and confusing as the law may be, that's mostly a function of how much it endeavors to accomplish. Given a list of every single detail that they (collectively) wanted to implement, I'm not sure I - or anyone - could have made the bill significantly shorter and less cluttered.
And there's also the issue that the Democrats, because of the election of Scott Brown in the middle of the process, got stuck having to go with a version of the bill that they weren't able to refine to their satisfaction (e.g. fix drafting errors or omissions) as would otherwise have been the case. And by stuck I mean that they either had to go with what they had already or, likely, give up the effort to substantially reform health care at that time.
That's the part that leaves me shaking my head. I fail to see very much "reform" in the ACA, if the word is still intended to have an entirely positive connotation and implies "making everything better than it was before".
I see increased bureaucracy. I see changes..but "change" is not automatically equal to "reform".
Tilted
..
Meh... One politician's reform is another citizen's #### in the ass.
I can simply look at the mind-boggling costs that are being built in and permanently incurred with the massive new bureaucracy and recognize that nothing good could possibly come of that.