RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny
"93 million"?? Are you nuts? From which right-wing extremist liars did you get this bit of ridiculous misinformation? Come on, Mike, let's see some attribution here. Mike wrote: > Oh come on dude. If you like your insurance , you can keep it, period. Just > because the administration > knew in '10 that 93 million would probably lose it, well that's just a > *glitch*.
Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny
Better start watching something other than MSNBC Judy. Fox is reporting that as early as '10 the administration knew that a very high percentage of people, offered insurance in the work place ,could possibly lose theirs as well. Some 63% of small businesses as well as 45% of large businesses could be sending out cancellation letters. Possibly as high as 93 million. Possibly? Probably? Who cares, it's meant to be, to force people on to Obamacare. From: "authfri...@yahoo.com" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 1, 2013 8:20 AM Subject: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny "93 million"?? Are you nuts? From which right-wing extremist liars did you get this bit of ridiculous misinformation? Come on, Mike, let's see some attribution here. Mike wrote: > Oh come on dude. If you like your insurance , you can keep it, period. Just > because the administration > knew in '10 that 93 million would probably lose it, well that's just a > *glitch*.
Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny
BTW is it just a coincidence that the employer mandate has delayed till next year? Those letters wouldn't be going out till after the elections From: Mike Dixon To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" Sent: Friday, November 1, 2013 9:03 AM Subject: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny Better start watching something other than MSNBC Judy. Fox is reporting that as early as '10 the administration knew that a very high percentage of people, offered insurance in the work place ,could possibly lose theirs as well. Some 63% of small businesses as well as 45% of large businesses could be sending out cancellation letters. Possibly as high as 93 million. Possibly? Probably? Who cares, it's meant to be, to force people on to Obamacare. From: "authfri...@yahoo.com" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 1, 2013 8:20 AM Subject: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny "93 million"?? Are you nuts? From which right-wing extremist liars did you get this bit of ridiculous misinformation? Come on, Mike, let's see some attribution here. Mike wrote: > Oh come on dude. If you like your insurance , you can keep it, period. Just > because the administration > knew in '10 that 93 million would probably lose it, well that's just a > *glitch*.
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: Your lie detector must be on the blink, Judy. Bottom line is, Obama baldly lied repeatedly, beyond doubt, and he should be impeached because of it. You are usually on top of people telling lies, but you seem to have really dropped the ball on this one. The question is, did the entire administration know it was a lie and why did they do it? Go figure. 'Joe Scarborough Finally Admits Obama Lied About ObamaCare' Newsbusters: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/joe-scarborough-finally-admits-obama-lied-about-obamacare http://newsbusters.org/blogs/paul-bremmer/2013/10/30/joe-scarborough-finally-admits-obama-lied-about-obamacare On 11/1/2013 11:32 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: It's nowhere near that, doc. It's only people who have individual plans who are subject to it, and they're a very small percentage of the market. Plus which, some of it is indeed "bad actors," insurance companies that try to make these people believe their only option is a much more expensive one than the one that was canceled, when actually the companies have cheaper plans that meet the ACA standards and that are not that much more expensive although they provide a lot better coverage than the plan that was canceled (which will very likely save them money.in the longer run). I can't speak to your particular situation, but if you are genuinely getting stuck with much higher premiums but not much better coverage, you're among a very small group. We'd all be better off with single-payer, but the bottom line is that with ACA, most people will benefit. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: OK - let's say it is just half of that - 45 million, which sounds closer, anyway. It is a rigged game. Any policies that don't carry all the coverages that are now federally mandated, must be cancelled, as mine was, and reissued. It is not 'bad actors', as the prez is saying - It is federal law, which he signed into place. It gets better. Then, when the policy is reissued, surprise, now, more than double. Subsidies are only available on the more expensive plans, anyway. My "choice", subsidized, or not, is basic insurance, with a $5000 annual deductible, for $560/mo. I'd have to spend almost $12,000, per year, before getting a dollar reimbursed. No thanks. Gee, I feel so grateful for 'health reform'. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: "93 million"?? Are you nuts? From which right-wing extremist liars did you get this bit of ridiculous misinformation? Come on, Mike, let's see some attribution here. Mike wrote: > Oh come on dude. If you like your insurance , you can keep it, period. Just > because the administration > knew in '10 that 93 million would probably lose it, well that's just a > *glitch*.
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny
OK - let's say it is just half of that - 45 million, which sounds closer, anyway. It is a rigged game. Any policies that don't carry all the coverages that are now federally mandated, must be cancelled, as mine was, and reissued. It is not 'bad actors', as the prez is saying - It is federal law, which he signed into place. It gets better. Then, when the policy is reissued, surprise, now, more than double. Subsidies are only available on the more expensive plans, anyway. My "choice", subsidized, or not, is basic insurance, with a $5000 annual deductible, for $560/mo. I'd have to spend almost $12,000, per year, before getting a dollar reimbursed. No thanks. Gee, I feel so grateful for 'health reform'. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: "93 million"?? Are you nuts? From which right-wing extremist liars did you get this bit of ridiculous misinformation? Come on, Mike, let's see some attribution here. Mike wrote: > Oh come on dude. If you like your insurance , you can keep it, period. Just > because the administration > knew in '10 that 93 million would probably lose it, well that's just a > *glitch*.
RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny
Well, to start with, even if that estimate weren't ridiculously high, it's not of the entire population, as you suggested at first, but only of those who have insurance through their employers. Now, Mike, despite what Fox News tells you, the government has no control over what private employers decide to do about insurance. I would imagine there would be a huge outcry from your Tea Party types if the government told these companies they couldn't drop their employee insurance plans. The government doesn't care if people get insurance through their employers, as long as it's up to ACA standards. The government has no incentive to "force people onto" ACA if they already have good insurance, so that claim is obviously false. ACA is for people who don't have decent, affordable insurance. The onus is on the companies who have no compunctions about leaving their employees high and dry. The fact is, though, that these people (however many of them there will be) will be able to get affordable policies through the exchanges because of ACA (without having to worry about preexisting conditions, of course, or losing their coverage if they lose their job or quit and move away or decide to start their own business and become a job creator). ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Better start watching something other than MSNBC Judy. Fox is reporting that as early as '10 the administration knew that a very high percentage of people, offered insurance in the work place ,could possibly lose theirs as well. Some 63% of small businesses as well as 45% of large businesses could be sending out cancellation letters. Possibly as high as 93 million. Possibly? Probably? Who cares, it's meant to be, to force people on to Obamacare. From: "authfriend@..." To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 1, 2013 8:20 AM Subject: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny "93 million"?? Are you nuts? From which right-wing extremist liars did you get this bit of ridiculous misinformation? Come on, Mike, let's see some attribution here. Mike wrote: > Oh come on dude. If you like your insurance , you can keep it, period. Just > because the administration > knew in '10 that 93 million would probably lose it, well that's just a > *glitch*.
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny
It's nowhere near that, doc. It's only people who have individual plans who are subject to it, and they're a very small percentage of the market. Plus which, some of it is indeed "bad actors," insurance companies that try to make these people believe their only option is a much more expensive one than the one that was canceled, when actually the companies have cheaper plans that meet the ACA standards and that are not that much more expensive although they provide a lot better coverage than the plan that was canceled (which will very likely save them money.in the longer run). I can't speak to your particular situation, but if you are genuinely getting stuck with much higher premiums but not much better coverage, you're among a very small group. We'd all be better off with single-payer, but the bottom line is that with ACA, most people will benefit. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: OK - let's say it is just half of that - 45 million, which sounds closer, anyway. It is a rigged game. Any policies that don't carry all the coverages that are now federally mandated, must be cancelled, as mine was, and reissued. It is not 'bad actors', as the prez is saying - It is federal law, which he signed into place. It gets better. Then, when the policy is reissued, surprise, now, more than double. Subsidies are only available on the more expensive plans, anyway. My "choice", subsidized, or not, is basic insurance, with a $5000 annual deductible, for $560/mo. I'd have to spend almost $12,000, per year, before getting a dollar reimbursed. No thanks. Gee, I feel so grateful for 'health reform'. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: "93 million"?? Are you nuts? From which right-wing extremist liars did you get this bit of ridiculous misinformation? Come on, Mike, let's see some attribution here. Mike wrote: > Oh come on dude. If you like your insurance , you can keep it, period. Just > because the administration > knew in '10 that 93 million would probably lose it, well that's just a > *glitch*.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny
Well then, I am abstractly pleased, for them. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: It's nowhere near that, doc. It's only people who have individual plans who are subject to it, and they're a very small percentage of the market. Plus which, some of it is indeed "bad actors," insurance companies that try to make these people believe their only option is a much more expensive one than the one that was canceled, when actually the companies have cheaper plans that meet the ACA standards and that are not that much more expensive although they provide a lot better coverage than the plan that was canceled (which will very likely save them money.in the longer run). I can't speak to your particular situation, but if you are genuinely getting stuck with much higher premiums but not much better coverage, you're among a very small group. We'd all be better off with single-payer, but the bottom line is that with ACA, most people will benefit. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: OK - let's say it is just half of that - 45 million, which sounds closer, anyway. It is a rigged game. Any policies that don't carry all the coverages that are now federally mandated, must be cancelled, as mine was, and reissued. It is not 'bad actors', as the prez is saying - It is federal law, which he signed into place. It gets better. Then, when the policy is reissued, surprise, now, more than double. Subsidies are only available on the more expensive plans, anyway. My "choice", subsidized, or not, is basic insurance, with a $5000 annual deductible, for $560/mo. I'd have to spend almost $12,000, per year, before getting a dollar reimbursed. No thanks. Gee, I feel so grateful for 'health reform'. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: "93 million"?? Are you nuts? From which right-wing extremist liars did you get this bit of ridiculous misinformation? Come on, Mike, let's see some attribution here. Mike wrote: > Oh come on dude. If you like your insurance , you can keep it, period. Just > because the administration > knew in '10 that 93 million would probably lose it, well that's just a > *glitch*.
