Europe is baffled by the US Supreme Court - Page 6

Florida Sportsman

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 62
  1. #51
    Senior Member Ol Mucky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    4,532
    Quote Originally Posted by heathen View Post
    but at what cost?

    "May the justices please meet my sister-in-law. On Feb. 8, she was a healthy 32-year-old, who was seven and a half months pregnant with her first baby. On Feb. 9, she was a quadriplegic, paralyzed from the chest down by a car accident that damaged her spine. Miraculously, the baby, born by emergency C-section, is healthy.

    Were the Obama health care reforms already in place, my brother and sister-in-law’s situation — insurance-wise and financially — would be far less dire. My brother’s small employer — he is the manager of a metal-fabrication shop — does not offer health insurance, which was too expensive for them to buy on their own. Fortunately, my sister-in-law had enrolled in the Access for Infants and Mothers program, California’s insurance plan for middle-income pregnant women. AIM coverage extends 60 days postpartum and paid for her stay in intensive care and early rehabilitation.

    But when the 60 days is up next week, the family will fall through the welfare medicine rabbit hole. As a scholar of social policy at M.I.T., I teach students how the system works. Now I am learning, in real time.

    For health coverage, the baby fares best. He is insured through Healthy Families, California’s version of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, the federal-state plan for lower-income children ineligible for Medicaid whose families cannot afford private insurance. California is relatively generous, with eligibility extending up to 250 percent of the federal poverty level of $19,090 for a family of three; 27 states have lower limits.

    When the AIM coverage expires, my sister-in-law will be covered by Medi-Cal, California’s version of Medicaid, because she is disabled and has limited income. But because my brother works, they are subject to cost-sharing: they pay the first $1,100 of her health costs each month. Paying $1,100 leaves them with a monthly income of just 133 percent of the federal poverty level. If my brother makes more money, their share of the cost increases.

    They must also meet the Medi-Cal asset test: beyond their house and one vehicle, they can hold $3,150 in total assets, a limit last adjusted in 1989. They cannot save for retirement (retirement plans are not exempt from the asset test in California, as they are in some states). They cannot save for college (California is not among the states that have exempted 529 college savings plans from their asset tests). They cannot establish an emergency fund. Family members like me cannot give them financial help, at least not officially. If either of them receives an inheritance, it will go to Medi-Cal. Medi-Cal services that my sister-in-law uses after age 55 will be added to a tab that she will rack up over the rest of her life. When she and my brother die, the state will put a lien on their estate; their child may inherit nothing...."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/05/op...me&ref=general
    So................they don't want to share any personal burden? Not be held accountable for any financial responsibility?

    Great health plan. Even greater mindset :frown


    As for the "richest" nation in the world? H is throwing us into a financial tailspin, borrowing 1 TRILLION a year is it?? And the lib's just want to pass the buck again for what....... more votes?? More debt? More taking care of their pals?


    Not the party i'm gonna ever support.
    "The Chief Executive is acting as an Imperial President, without regard to his citizens, only caring about his agenda."

  2. #52
    Senior Member heathen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,673
    so a medical problem impoverishes a family pretty much forever and you don't see a problem with that?

    aren't you one of the ones whining about half the country not paying taxes?

    you seem to support another family sinking into that group. good job. i'll never support the republican point of view. or at least not in the GOP current incarnation.

    perhaps after they tear themselves apart this year they'll act like humans but as long as your type is what the GOP consists of, i and a enough of a majority won't vote republican.

    you're gonna love 4 more years of O.

  3. #53
    Senior Member Ol Mucky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    4,532
    Quote Originally Posted by heathen View Post
    so a medical problem impoverishes a family pretty much forever and you don't see a problem with that?

    n
    Never said that.

    I said a typical lib wants nothing to do with personal responsibility (gathered from what I read on this forum) or accountability. Not even the slightest apparently based on your comments.


    Once again, blame the rep for not caring, being cold-hearted, greedy bastiches.

    I will promise you this, I/we donate more time, money and effort to helping those in need than all the libs I know.

    "The Chief Executive is acting as an Imperial President, without regard to his citizens, only caring about his agenda."

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,364
    Quote Originally Posted by heathen View Post
    but at what cost?

    "May the justices please meet my sister-in-law. On Feb. 8, she was a healthy 32-year-old, who was seven and a half months pregnant with her first baby. On Feb. 9, she was a quadriplegic, paralyzed from the chest down by a car accident that damaged her spine. Miraculously, the baby, born by emergency C-section, is healthy.

    Were the Obama health care reforms already in place, my brother and sister-in-law’s situation — insurance-wise and financially — would be far less dire. My brother’s small employer — he is the manager of a metal-fabrication shop — does not offer health insurance, which was too expensive for them to buy on their own. Fortunately, my sister-in-law had enrolled in the Access for Infants and Mothers program, California’s insurance plan for middle-income pregnant women. AIM coverage extends 60 days postpartum and paid for her stay in intensive care and early rehabilitation.

    But when the 60 days is up next week, the family will fall through the welfare medicine rabbit hole. As a scholar of social policy at M.I.T., I teach students how the system works. Now I am learning, in real time.

    For health coverage, the baby fares best. He is insured through Healthy Families, California’s version of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, the federal-state plan for lower-income children ineligible for Medicaid whose families cannot afford private insurance. California is relatively generous, with eligibility extending up to 250 percent of the federal poverty level of $19,090 for a family of three; 27 states have lower limits.

    When the AIM coverage expires, my sister-in-law will be covered by Medi-Cal, California’s version of Medicaid, because she is disabled and has limited income. But because my brother works, they are subject to cost-sharing: they pay the first $1,100 of her health costs each month. Paying $1,100 leaves them with a monthly income of just 133 percent of the federal poverty level. If my brother makes more money, their share of the cost increases.

    They must also meet the Medi-Cal asset test: beyond their house and one vehicle, they can hold $3,150 in total assets, a limit last adjusted in 1989. They cannot save for retirement (retirement plans are not exempt from the asset test in California, as they are in some states). They cannot save for college (California is not among the states that have exempted 529 college savings plans from their asset tests). They cannot establish an emergency fund. Family members like me cannot give them financial help, at least not officially. If either of them receives an inheritance, it will go to Medi-Cal. Medi-Cal services that my sister-in-law uses after age 55 will be added to a tab that she will rack up over the rest of her life. When she and my brother die, the state will put a lien on their estate; their child may inherit nothing...."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/05/op...me&ref=general
    Your sister in law had an incredibly tough break and my heart goes out her and her family.

    They couldn't afford health insurance for 2 but decided to have a kid and gamble with the possibility of a health care catastrophe and no insurance?

    The issue before the court isn't whether some would benefit from Obamacare, at the expense of others, but rather is there a limit to the government's ability to control our lives.

  5. #55
    Senior Member heathen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,673
    Quote Originally Posted by m9000 View Post
    Your sister in law had an incredibly tough break and my heart goes out her and her family.

    They couldn't afford health insurance for 2 but decided to have a kid and gamble with the possibility of a health care catastrophe and no insurance?

    The issue before the court isn't whether some would benefit from Obamacare, at the expense of others, but rather is there a limit to the government's ability to control our lives.
    i'd rather pay for everyone's health care than start another war over lies. apparantly mucked up's and your views differ.

    note that the reason they don't have insurance is because they can't afford it without a group policy.
    as to contraceptives, a republican candidate for president wants to outlaw them.
    you also might wanna note that no contraceptive is 100%.

    and it was an article, which you might have discovered if you'd actually clicked on the link.

  6. #56
    Senior Member heathen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,673
    Quote Originally Posted by Ol Mucky View Post
    Never said that.

    I said a typical lib wants nothing to do with personal responsibility (gathered from what I read on this forum) or accountability. Not even the slightest apparently based on your comments.


    Once again, blame the rep for not caring, being cold-hearted, greedy bastiches.

    I will promise you this, I/we donate more time, money and effort to helping those in need than all the libs I know.
    yup, heartless, greedy bastage is exactly how you republicans come across.
    you might wanna check on how expensive health insurance is if you don't have a group policy.
    but you do have access (or else you would be whining about it or in the same boat as that family) and you don't care that other hard working americans don't have access to those discounts.

    and i don't believe you donate anything to anybody.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ol Mucky View Post
    cold-hearted, greedy bastiches.
    yup. that's you.

    no one said that family was trying to skate on obligations. the issue is that now there is no chance that they can get out of poverty.

    great job, repubs, great job.

  7. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    377
    Butt hurt cause McD's insurance sucks?
    Note: the above statement is not directed at anyone in particular and therefore is not a personal attack

  8. #58
    Senior Member fins4me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Eastern Tennessee
    Posts
    7,519
    Quote Originally Posted by heathen View Post
    yup, heartless, greedy bastage is exactly how you republicans come across.
    you might wanna check on how expensive health insurance is if you don't have a group policy.
    but you do have access (or else you would be whining about it or in the same boat as that family
    ) and you don't care that other hard working americans don't have access to those discounts.

    and i don't believe you donate anything to anybody.



    yup. that's you.

    no one said that family was trying to skate on obligations. the issue is that now there is no chance that they can get out of poverty.

    great job, repubs, great job.
    so for those of us who buy our ins. without the benefit of a group policy rate have the right to say what we want,,,, right????
    ALLISON XB 21,, MERCURY 300 Opti Max Pro Series (Slightly Modified) You can't catch me!!!
    "Today is MINE"

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,364
    Quote Originally Posted by heathen View Post
    i'd rather pay for everyone's health care than start another war over lies. apparantly mucked up's and your views differ.

    note that the reason they don't have insurance is because they can't afford it without a group policy.
    as to contraceptives, a republican candidate for president wants to outlaw them.
    you also might wanna note that no contraceptive is 100%.

    and it was an article, which you might have discovered if you'd actually clicked on the link.

    Nobody is trying to outlaw contraception.
    Religous organizations that disagree with contraception should not be forced to violate their beliefs. If a woman doesn't like their beliefs she doesn't have to work for them and is free to seek employment from whomever.

    The war diversion attempt is weak- you could take all the money spent on the wars and it wouldn't cover the health bill for very long.

    Step away from the Obama kool-aid.
    Last edited by m9000; 04-06-2012 at 10:40 PM.

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,364
    So people who want to keep more of the money they EARN are "greedy", but others who desire subsidized housing, food, healthcare, cell phones, etc aren't greedy-

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •