Health Insurance
Lancaster, PA · Member since 2008 · 28 posts · 2 votes
For those of you who have transitioned into fulltime investors....
What are you using for personal and family health insurance?
What kind of prgrams are available/recommended?
What is the range of monthly cost you are experiencing?
I'm aware this will vary state-by-state, but overall averages should be similar.
Thanks,
Josh
While I don't know that the goal is to divide people, it feels like it's gotten to the point where it's more important to adhere to an ideology than to focus on making this a better country.
And I'll blame the Democrats for starting it 8 years ago with the Iraq war (actually, I think the "religious right" started this before then, but the Democrats did more damage, more quickly). When we invaded Iraq, I have to believe that most of the politicians who supported the war did so because they believed it was in the best interest of our country. And most of the politicians who didn't support the war honestly felt like it wasn't in our best interest to attack Iraq at that point in time. It wasn't a political issue...it was about HOW BEST DO WE PROTECT OURSELVES.
I wasn't a supporter of the war, but back then, I certainly didn't see it as a partisan issue. I knew plenty of liberals who thought invading Iraq was a good thing. And I knew plenty of conservatives who thought invading Iraq wasn't the right course of action. I was all for invasion in the middle east, but it wasn't Iraq I thought we should invade.
Then, over the course of just a few months, it became a pure "us versus them" mentality among the parties.
Suddenly, there was nothing about the "war on terror" that liberals supported and there was nothing about the war on terror that the conservatives would stand up and say, "that's just not right!" It was pretty crazy that on an issue so important to the future safety of the citizens of this country that our politicians thought it was more important to toe the party line than to do what they really thought was right.
Ever since then, it seems like EVERY issue is now Democrat vs Republican. Doesn't matter what the issue is, you either side with one party or the other, and you're either fully for it or fully against it.
And it's only fueled by the media. Look at these idiot talk show hosts... I've previously mentioned my disdain for Beck, O'Reilly and Limbaugh, but trust me, I feel the same way about Keith Olbermann, Alan Colmes, and Bill Maher (though Maher gets credit for at least being funny). Every one of them has a "you're either on this side or that side" mentality, and if you think you can straddle the line on some issues (or fall on different sides of the line on different issues), you're made to feel like an idiot.
It's even worse when those with the microphone can so completely corrupt an issue that it can't even be discussed. A good example is Sarah Palin with the whole "death panels" thing. She took an issue that could be debated on its merits, and corrupted it to the point where it couldn't even be discussed, all with that one ridiculous phrase.
Harry Reid does this same thing every chance he gets -- he takes issues from a point where they can be logically debated, and turns them into sound bites that essentially remove all rationale. Politicians are happy to make up lies if it will advance their agenda.
To make things worse, these days, people aren't expected to have opinions. They're only expected to be "liberal" or "conservative." Democrat or Republican. Us or Them.
For example, everyone here thinks I'm a radical liberal. On social issues I certainly am (and I'm proud of it). But, on most fiscal and Constitutional issues, I'm a Libertarian (and I'm equally proud of that). I've stated many of my conservative beliefs over the past year (for example, I've been very outspoken about how stupid TARP was), but people here can't seem to grasp the fact that I can have opinions on both extremes, as if there's something wrong with that. People can't seem to grasp that I can have opinions on both extremes...though I fail to see why that's so weird...
Ten years ago it was pretty common to be a moderate, or to have beliefs on both sides of the spectrum; today you're "flip flopper" or a "fake ".
It's about time people are once again allowed to debate issues on their merits, without having talk show hosts, politicians, or anyone else try to boil issues down to catch-phrases, sound bites, or us-vs-them battle-lines. And it's about time people should be allowed to believe whatever they want to believe without being made to feel like they are "supporting the enemy."
I don't know if any of that made sense, but in short, I agree with you Tim...
You are correct that the CBO is NOT non partisial and the proof is from their own main page.
To see how the health care bill effects things who do they turn to? An excerpt from their how home page
Consisting of acknowledged experts in health care, CBO's panel of health advisers meets periodically to examine research in health policy and to advise the agency on its analyses of health care issues. The panel thus helps to further the reliability, professional quality, and transparency of the agency's work.
Yeah, right! In order to keep an eye on health care lets only talk to health care people! That is about as partisian as you can get!!!
However from the fiscal side. The CBO says that the health care legislation will INCREASE the deficits. That is correct INCREASE the deficits!!!!
My oh my! let us make it look like we are saving money and reducing the deficit because we are able to put money into the HI trust fund. Nevermind that that money is comming from other areas of the total budget which would increase, deficit wise!
Also dont think that the bill is law, yet!
It does not go into effect until when?
And since it so drastically affects the budget it also must go through a reconciliation process. What happens if the house and senate can not reconcile the bill to the budget?
Does the budget then have to be changed, or does the bill get changed?
Or maybe it just gets repealled.
There is still workings going on in the back room, so to speak.
Perhaps you should look up the word "partisan"...
Hint: It has nothing to do with health care.
Now that Health Care is moving forward, I think it's time to overhaul this nation's educational system...it stinks...
This needs to go back to topic of what to do now, not what should or shouldn't be. Personally I'm researching private co-ops, which are exempt from this legislation. Lawmakers always leave loopholes for informed friends and I think this may be the one to take advantage of.
Sorry J, you have to do better than that. Partisian is one sided, not caring for what the other side says or thinks.
That can be Health Care, or any other issue, where there is more than one side.
The CBO "approves" a budget of a bill that requires 4 years of taxation before implementation of anything in the bill in order to make it appear the bill is deficit neutral. You don't need any more quantitative data than that combined with the hand picked current director being ideologically bent towards this bill to know it's a partisan entity.
This is no more deficit neutral than a tech company announcing another round of successful VC funding is evidence of profit.
Just the fact that they only go to a Health Care panel consisting of experts from the health care field to
"advise on analyses of health care issues. The panel thus helps to further the reliability, professional quality, and transparency of the agency's work."
When you admit to only getting information from one side of an issue, that is tantamount to admitting to being partisan.
I am not calling them partisan, they are calling themselves partisan, by defination. They are proud of it and do not hide it.
Yo . . . have any of you guys (those of you debating the CBO) looked at the first post on the thread? This discussion was intended to help investors determine how best to get health coverage, and has gone way off . . .
Moving topic to politics forum.
The earlier statement from Tim and Jawsette both seemed to place the CBO as partisan, not non-partisan.
Given the fact that everyone in the know seems to disagree with Tim, this seems like a reasonable request...
Wow, sorry...didn't realize this wasn't in the Politics forum! Would certainly have steered clear of the politics had I realized...
You know Jason this got me to thinking. This didn't used to be a political issue... and that could be the problem. Is it me or is DC systematically politicizing the apolitical elements of our lives to divide people ideologically?
While I don't know that the goal is to divide people, it feels like it's gotten to the point where it's more important to adhere to an ideology than to focus on making this a better country.
And I'll blame the Democrats for starting it 8 years ago with the Iraq war (actually, I think the "religious right" started this before then, but the Democrats did more damage, more quickly). When we invaded Iraq, I have to believe that most of the politicians who supported the war did so because they believed it was in the best interest of our country. And most of the politicians who didn't support the war honestly felt like it wasn't in our best interest to attack Iraq at that point in time. It wasn't a political issue...it was about HOW BEST DO WE PROTECT OURSELVES.
I wasn't a supporter of the war, but back then, I certainly didn't see it as a partisan issue. I knew plenty of liberals who thought invading Iraq was a good thing. And I knew plenty of conservatives who thought invading Iraq wasn't the right course of action. I was all for invasion in the middle east, but it wasn't Iraq I thought we should invade.
Then, over the course of just a few months, it became a pure "us versus them" mentality among the parties.
Suddenly, there was nothing about the "war on terror" that liberals supported and there was nothing about the war on terror that the conservatives would stand up and say, "that's just not right!" It was pretty crazy that on an issue so important to the future safety of the citizens of this country that our politicians thought it was more important to toe the party line than to do what they really thought was right.
Ever since then, it seems like EVERY issue is now Democrat vs Republican. Doesn't matter what the issue is, you either side with one party or the other, and you're either fully for it or fully against it.
And it's only fueled by the media. Look at these idiot talk show hosts... I've previously mentioned my disdain for Beck, O'Reilly and Limbaugh, but trust me, I feel the same way about Keith Olbermann, Alan Colmes, and Bill Maher (though Maher gets credit for at least being funny). Every one of them has a "you're either on this side or that side" mentality, and if you think you can straddle the line on some issues (or fall on different sides of the line on different issues), you're made to feel like an idiot.
It's even worse when those with the microphone can so completely corrupt an issue that it can't even be discussed. A good example is Sarah Palin with the whole "death panels" thing. She took an issue that could be debated on its merits, and corrupted it to the point where it couldn't even be discussed, all with that one ridiculous phrase.
Harry Reid does this same thing every chance he gets -- he takes issues from a point where they can be logically debated, and turns them into sound bites that essentially remove all rationale. Politicians are happy to make up lies if it will advance their agenda.
To make things worse, these days, people aren't expected to have opinions. They're only expected to be "liberal" or "conservative." Democrat or Republican. Us or Them.
For example, everyone here thinks I'm a radical liberal. On social issues I certainly am (and I'm proud of it). But, on most fiscal and Constitutional issues, I'm a Libertarian (and I'm equally proud of that). I've stated many of my conservative beliefs over the past year (for example, I've been very outspoken about how stupid TARP was), but people here can't seem to grasp the fact that I can have opinions on both extremes, as if there's something wrong with that. People can't seem to grasp that I can have opinions on both extremes...though I fail to see why that's so weird...
Ten years ago it was pretty common to be a moderate, or to have beliefs on both sides of the spectrum; today you're "flip flopper" or a "fake ".
It's about time people are once again allowed to debate issues on their merits, without having talk show hosts, politicians, or anyone else try to boil issues down to catch-phrases, sound bites, or us-vs-them battle-lines. And it's about time people should be allowed to believe whatever they want to believe without being made to feel like they are "supporting the enemy."
I don't know if any of that made sense, but in short, I agree with you Tim...
I'll take it a little further J. Since people themselves are beginning to be outspoken (especially on constitutional issues), it is this divide and conquer attitude that they both (dems and repubs) must possess so that we do not realize just how much in jepordy the society is due to government officials believing that they are above the constitution, or at least do not have to abide by it because they make the rules (laws).
Holy crap I just voted up one of Jason's posts.... Really nothing to add except more examples on each side.