What's new
By:

Republican controlled house says.."DEFUND Obamacare, or we're SHUTTING the GOVT. DOWN "

southwind said:
Thought by now, you understood, like everyone else, Dog can't comprehend more than one sentence at a time.............get with the F#K!@ program man !
Click to expand...
Comprehension lies with the reader. Most of the time you can't even figure out a one sentence post.
 
Ms Tree said:
That's because there is something called the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). This act limits the ability of a company insurance plan to deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions. This act does not apply to self employed or to those seeking private insurance.

I'm surprised you did not know this.

My brother in law had to have two heart valves replaced. There were complications which resulted in a second surgery to replace them a second time a few months later. My sister said she stopped adding up the bills when she passed $1,000,000.

My wifes sister in laws sister had triplets. One had sever medical problems and did not end up surviving. The cost for hospital care for all three in NICU also blew well past $1,000,000.

Please explain how someone is supposed to save for such circumstances.

My Hernia was billed at close to $20k. I got food poisoning a few years back and had to go to ER and then was admitted for 3 days. That bill was over $40k.

HSA accounts have their place but they are pretty limited and pretty useless. It's pre-tax income so the savings is not all that substantial. My wife needs some dental work next year so I am going to put $1,500 in a HSA and pay for it that way. I might be able to got to Olive Garden with my wife with the money we save.... wooooo hooooo.
Click to expand...
Where did I state that I was hired after 1996? That's right, you have to falsely assume certain things for your fabricated stories to fit your agenda. I have a long list of medical stories with large bills (all paid for) as well, but they are none of your business. I put money into an FSA account every year to cover things like deductibles, co-pays and the like . . all tax exempt. Up until a few years ago I could buy OTC drugs with the card but that stupid POS you put in office took that away.

It's strange that you think an HSA is limited and useless when in fact, the tax exempt account balance can be rolled over year after year. Let's face it, you're pretty thick between the ears.
 
Knotbuyinit said:
Where did I state that I was hired after 1996? That's right, you have to falsely assume certain things for your fabricated stories to fit your agenda. I have a long list of medical stories with large bills (all paid for) as well, but they are none of your business. I put money into an FSA account every year to cover things like deductibles, co-pays and the like . . all tax exempt. Up until a few years ago I could buy OTC drugs with the card but that stupid POS you put in office took that away.

It's strange that you think an HSA is limited and useless when in fact, the tax exempt account balance can be rolled over year after year. Let's face it, you're pretty thick between the ears.
Click to expand...

Then you were quite lucky because companies could deny coverage due to pre-existing. I know someone who was.

For folks who have basic or no coverage the HSA/FSA are pretty useless. Even for those with basic coverage that have high deductbles and low caps the ballance in thE account can be wiped out in the blink of an eye. The accounts are good for the things you mention but if you do not have coverage or you have basic coverage they are of little use.
 
southwind said:
Don't fret. BaRack will send 'em a voucher !
Click to expand...

Are you Tea partiers worried that the poor in your your party will like the ACA and switch over to be Democrats leading to the demise of the Tea party and Republicans?
 
traderjake said:
US employers slashing worker hours to avoid Obamacare insurance mandate

Trend sparks fears among low-paid workers that they will be hit twice: by having earnings cut and paying more for healthcare

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/30/us-employers-slash-hours-avoid-obamacare
Click to expand...

Effective Jan 2014, these companies that have indicated that they reduced hours of employees in order to not pay benefits. They will be in potential violation of the ERISA act.
The court case will be interesting to follow. Those with the boisterousness of naming the reason for work hour reduction "Obamacare", and there were several, will be squirming the most.

I cant wait to watch...!! LMFAO
 
P. REZ said:
Are you Tea partiers worried that the poor in your your party will like the ACA and switch over to be Democrats leading to the demise of the Tea party and Republicans?
Click to expand...

Republicans need no help from the Party to fly it into the ground.

Hate to tell you this but many dems are Tea Party faithful, among others.....

(Even some blacks)
 
im back..!! said:
Effective Jan 2014, these companies that have indicated that they reduced hours of employees in order to not pay benefits. They will be in potential violation of the ERISA act.
The court case will be interesting to follow. Those with the boisterousness of naming the reason for work hour reduction "Obamacare", and there were several, will be squirming the most.

I cant wait to watch...!! LMFAO
Click to expand...
Wrong, what the liberals want to do is rewrite ERISA in order to save Obamacare. It's going to be funny alright! Watching the democrats try to pass legislation that would strip the youth in this country from having REAL affordable healthcare . . LMFAO. Did you go to the same law school as Ms Tree, Ms Tree?

"The Affordable Care Act is supposed to be a paradise for the middle class, but now that Americans are starting to eat from the tree of knowledge, the liberal deities are trying to force them to stay inside the garden. Witness their crackdown on the booming ObamaCare alternative known as self-insurance.

Under this model, businesses and many unions bypass commercial health plans and instead pay directly for the medical claims of their workers. Self-insured plans enjoy lower costs and more flexibility because they are insulated from state regulations and mandates under a 1974 federal law known by the acronym Erisa.

Today a record 61% of covered workers are in a self-insured plan, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation's 2013 survey, up from 49% in 2000. Self-insurance used to be concentrated among national companies that could spread risk over large pools of employees.

But self-insurance is now filtering down to businesses with 199 workers or fewer, as a hedge against ObamaCare's federal mandates and the danger that costs on its small-business exchanges will soar. Some insurers are now selling popular products that allow groups as small as 25 to self-insure. In a 2012 study, the Urban Institute found ObamaCare's incentives will cause as many as 60% of small firms to convert without regulatory changes.

So the White House, liberal pressure groups and state and federal regulators are trying to close what they call the self-insurance "loophole" before more escape. Their political and actuarial fear is that if enough businesses don't join, the exchanges could fail because too few younger and healthier people will subsidize everybody else.

In a June alarm titled "The Threat of Self-Insured Plans Among Small Businesses," the liberal Center for American Progress warns that "the result of this shift could cause an insurance premium death spiral." Note how businesses that pay for their workers' health care are suddenly a "threat." Wasn't coverage the point of ObamaCare?

Big business loves Erisa's freedoms, so the left's political target is so-called stop-loss insurance that is essential to the little guys. Unlike corporate America, small employers are more exposed to the risk of a single high-cost case of serious illness, so they buy this form of catastrophic coverage as a self-insurance backup.

Liberals are pushing state legislatures to outlaw stop-loss policies for small and mid-sized business. Another poison pill is fixing the dollar levels where stop-loss policies are allowed to start paying—aka "attachment levels" akin to deductibles—so high that they are too risky for small businesses to buy. The standard can be as low as expenses exceeding $10,000 per enrollee, but liberals want to triple or quadruple that, or more.

Democrats in California have been leading this effort as usual, though more than a dozen states including Colorado and Rhode Island have either passed or are moving such destructive bills. Insurance commissioners also love this because it gives them more regulatory power.

Speaking of which, another danger is that the Obama Administration may try to unilaterally rewrite Erisa. In May 2012 the Labor Department joined Treasury and Health and Human Services on a regulatory "information request" about stop-loss that is a prelude to a new rule-making.

That document muses that "It has been suggested that some employers with healthier employees may self-insure and purchase stop loss insurance policies with relatively low attachment points to avoid being subject to [ObamaCare's] requirements while exposing themselves to little risk." That sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

One threat is for the Labor Department to use regulation to define stop-loss as a "health insurance issuer," rather than financial reinsurance that all industries use to manage risk. The trouble is that stop-loss doesn't pay providers or medical claims or cover individuals—and in any case three of five self-funded plans use some form of stop-loss, not merely the new small business wave.

The double trouble is that most companies that self-insure use an add-on company such as a brand-name insurer for processing payments, building networks, etc. Once Labor starts controlling "issuers" in the name of rescuing ObamaCare's exchanges, all Erisa benefits become subject to political tampering.

That's a specialty of new Labor Secretary Thomas Perez, who has more than a few businesses worried. Mr. Perez made his name stretching the law at the Justice Department, but he cut his political teeth at HHS in the Clinton years and as special counsel to the late Ted Kennedy.

One irony in all this is that the collateral damage will include union health plans covered by collective bargaining in industries like construction and services. Thousands of small Taft-Hartley union trusts rely on stop-loss and may lose that option, along with millions of other people who don't work for the Fortune 500. President Obama famously promised that if you like your health plan you can keep it, but this Erisa gambit will also scramble the plans of the businesses that already self-insure as a safe harbor.

In 2009 we ran a series of editorials called "Repealing Erisa" that exposed new Labor Department oversight of self-insurance in the House ObamaCare bill. The controversy and business criticism forced Democrats to strip that provision out, but this latest assault shows that the threat is back. Liberals hate Erisa's pluralism in favor of total government control, and small business is merely the appetizer."

http://online.wsj.co...2138004388.html
 
Knotbuyinit said:
Wrong, what the liberals want to do is rewrite ERISA in order to save Obamacare. It's going to be funny alright! Watching the democrats try to pass legislation that would strip the youth in this country from having REAL affordable healthcare . . LMFAO. Did you go to the same law school as Ms Tree, Ms Tree?

"The Affordable Care Act is supposed to be a paradise for the middle class, but now that Americans are starting to eat from the tree of knowledge, the liberal deities are trying to force them to stay inside the garden. Witness their crackdown on the booming ObamaCare alternative known as self-insurance.

Under this model, businesses and many unions bypass commercial health plans and instead pay directly for the medical claims of their workers. Self-insured plans enjoy lower costs and more flexibility because they are insulated from state regulations and mandates under a 1974 federal law known by the acronym Erisa.

Today a record 61% of covered workers are in a self-insured plan, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation's 2013 survey, up from 49% in 2000. Self-insurance used to be concentrated among national companies that could spread risk over large pools of employees.

But self-insurance is now filtering down to businesses with 199 workers or fewer, as a hedge against ObamaCare's federal mandates and the danger that costs on its small-business exchanges will soar. Some insurers are now selling popular products that allow groups as small as 25 to self-insure. In a 2012 study, the Urban Institute found ObamaCare's incentives will cause as many as 60% of small firms to convert without regulatory changes.

So the White House, liberal pressure groups and state and federal regulators are trying to close what they call the self-insurance "loophole" before more escape. Their political and actuarial fear is that if enough businesses don't join, the exchanges could fail because too few younger and healthier people will subsidize everybody else.

In a June alarm titled "The Threat of Self-Insured Plans Among Small Businesses," the liberal Center for American Progress warns that "the result of this shift could cause an insurance premium death spiral." Note how businesses that pay for their workers' health care are suddenly a "threat." Wasn't coverage the point of ObamaCare?

Big business loves Erisa's freedoms, so the left's political target is so-called stop-loss insurance that is essential to the little guys. Unlike corporate America, small employers are more exposed to the risk of a single high-cost case of serious illness, so they buy this form of catastrophic coverage as a self-insurance backup.

Liberals are pushing state legislatures to outlaw stop-loss policies for small and mid-sized business. Another poison pill is fixing the dollar levels where stop-loss policies are allowed to start paying—aka "attachment levels" akin to deductibles—so high that they are too risky for small businesses to buy. The standard can be as low as expenses exceeding $10,000 per enrollee, but liberals want to triple or quadruple that, or more.

Democrats in California have been leading this effort as usual, though more than a dozen states including Colorado and Rhode Island have either passed or are moving such destructive bills. Insurance commissioners also love this because it gives them more regulatory power.

Speaking of which, another danger is that the Obama Administration may try to unilaterally rewrite Erisa. In May 2012 the Labor Department joined Treasury and Health and Human Services on a regulatory "information request" about stop-loss that is a prelude to a new rule-making.

That document muses that "It has been suggested that some employers with healthier employees may self-insure and purchase stop loss insurance policies with relatively low attachment points to avoid being subject to [ObamaCare's] requirements while exposing themselves to little risk." That sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

One threat is for the Labor Department to use regulation to define stop-loss as a "health insurance issuer," rather than financial reinsurance that all industries use to manage risk. The trouble is that stop-loss doesn't pay providers or medical claims or cover individuals—and in any case three of five self-funded plans use some form of stop-loss, not merely the new small business wave.

The double trouble is that most companies that self-insure use an add-on company such as a brand-name insurer for processing payments, building networks, etc. Once Labor starts controlling "issuers" in the name of rescuing ObamaCare's exchanges, all Erisa benefits become subject to political tampering.

That's a specialty of new Labor Secretary Thomas Perez, who has more than a few businesses worried. Mr. Perez made his name stretching the law at the Justice Department, but he cut his political teeth at HHS in the Clinton years and as special counsel to the late Ted Kennedy.

One irony in all this is that the collateral damage will include union health plans covered by collective bargaining in industries like construction and services. Thousands of small Taft-Hartley union trusts rely on stop-loss and may lose that option, along with millions of other people who don't work for the Fortune 500. President Obama famously promised that if you like your health plan you can keep it, but this Erisa gambit will also scramble the plans of the businesses that already self-insure as a safe harbor.

In 2009 we ran a series of editorials called "Repealing Erisa" that exposed new Labor Department oversight of self-insurance in the House ObamaCare bill. The controversy and business criticism forced Democrats to strip that provision out, but this latest assault shows that the threat is back. Liberals hate Erisa's pluralism in favor of total government control, and small business is merely the appetizer."

http://online.wsj.co...2138004388.html
Click to expand...

Here's a reference to the "Possible" violation, we shall see. If I was a bussiness I certainly wouldn't be flaunting it. Like some of these raging employee beaters...

http://www.mwbavl.com/employmentblog/?p=122
 
And again I'll state BaRack is a liar. He doesn't want you to keep "YOUR" insurance ! He wants "Everyone" on the single-payer system ! If not, why the low fines for companys's not covering employees ?
Just like Hoffa Jr. stated recently, their union and members are concerned with companys dropping coverage on their employees and instead, paying the fine, which is significantly lower !
Too bad all these union peeps drank the koolaid and were duped....Might not have a community organizer running the most powerful country in the world, into the dirt, right now !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Criminality of the GOP - put up or shut up
Replies
5
Views
2K
tech2101
tech2101
S
State of the airline webcast 2Quarter2007
Replies
3
Views
1K
Prince of PAWOBs
Prince of PAWOBs

Latest posts

Back
Top