Where does the money go

I never liked my nose, so around 1987 I had the bit indicating the Jewish ancestry part, surgically removed. Cost $3k. No pain, no eye bruises.

Kevin Aylward

I never had a problem with being ugly... I call it "character" >:-} ...Jim Thompson

No major issues here, I've had a few skin tags removed just for comfort. They like to hit me with the liquid nitrogen here and there. I was in a while back and I ask "is there something I can put on this dark spot on my face to lighten it?" The Dermatologist grabs the Nitrogen bottle ad sprays it. When I got the bill, I complained about charging $100 to spray it and it didn't change it a bit. They removed the $100. Years ago the did this to another spot, when it got darker they did a biopsy and told me the area had been froze. Other than that not a problem with that area. At each checkup I try to get the doc to check all my moles, so far nothing bad. My mother had a facial lesion removed, the doc did a lousy reconstruction, she was always self conscious about it. I do have bags under my eyes, they're plastic, I'd prefer paper! Mikek

Speaking of recent TV Shows...

Can't watch that series, it's like propaganda for 'good' dmeocrats. When they cover past presidents, well you guessed it, only democrats.

Even the show 10 things you didn't know, which usually is 'amateuristic' in its production had a show about 'secrets of the white house' told a small bit about the well-known tunnels in and around the white house. Even contained little jibes at Republicans,like the comment about how the First family pays for ALL personal food, dinners, snacks, and how the present occupants pay happily without qualms, but Nancy Reagan got her bill and commented about how much it cost! Well, duh?! That just shows fiducial responsibility to me. BUT, in addition, that was THE most polished production I've seen in a long time, professional voice overs etc and continually showcasing with news-bytes the 'powerful' man there now, showed the 'effectiveness' of his actions, etc etc. Turned it off.

Maybe it's just me, but it looks like a broad sweep of presentations, remember the Forbes articles about 'voting democrat'? ALL set up to herald Hillary into office, without the voting people questioning whether the votes were real, or not.

At least "13 Hours at Benghazi" has made it into production in time. Ex Blackwater employees. I never felt bad for merceneries until I saw that show.

Mike, O-care heaped lots of new services and requirements on, which

Insurers are now required to sell bigger policies and the taxpayer makes good their losses, so they're doing well (for the next two years of bail-outs, at least).

You're also paying for Medicaid expansion, because doctors have to charge the general public more, for each Medicaid patient they see (to make up the losses).

There are scores of other redistribution mechanisms in it. The simplest answer to "where does the money go" is "it's being used incredibly inefficiently to buy other people's over-priced insurance."

Cheers, James Arthur

No, that's false. If that were true on average, insurance doesn't work.

The average person under Obamacare can expect to pay significantly more (because O/C costs more) and get less (because your payments go toward buying other people's insurance).

Obamacare hurts the average person.

Cheers, James Arthur

If your rates are lower under the ACA, it's because someone else is paying more. Congratulations, you're on welfare.

It sounds like Mike solved his problem the Obamacare way--with taxpayer money.

I really enjoyed this Obamacare "success" story: a late 20-something pajama boy broke his leg skateboarding with his friends, and his Obamacare policy paid $55,000 to get it fixed. He only paid $750. His mom was very pleased.

But he could have gotten it fixed for $6,250 at the Surgery Center of Oklahoma:

Hooray! Obamacare made it possible for a late-20's skateboarder to pay the hospital about 8x what he should have, of other people's money, and he's pleased as punch.

That's not a success, THAT was the whole problem to start with.

Yeah, nice work Barack, that'll make health care cheaper.

Not.

Cheers, James Arthur

I'm not sure that even makes sense the way you say it. But the insurance companies are paying for anyone's premiums and raising your rates to cover it. What a load of BS.

??? Bigger poliicies? I think paper is the same size it used to be. Oh, you mean the higher deductibles... Yes, I can see how a larger deductible would raise your premiums.

Your insurance has *nothing* to do with medicare. All money in the world is not a zero sum game.

That certainly is "simple".

Insurance is a free market with competition. The rates reflect the expenses and profits. The insurance companies don't pay for anyone's insurance and they sell policies that are not hugely different than what they sold before.

This is a very tiresome rant. Get over it, will you?

Yes I'm well aware, I'm have had a 72% increase since May of 2012 when Obamacare regulations started. So now I pay for my yearly physical, colonoscopy, mammograms and gyno care in my premium not when I get them. I'm paying at least $2,000 a year for that privilege. $7,700 - $4300 + normal inflation increases = about $2,000

I'll would save about $1,400 this year, because of the generous $7,452 subsidy my friendly hard working taxpayers are offering me. The scary part is, if I take the Obamacare, I think that subsidy will go away and I'll be stuck paying $13,700 + inflation every year.

Is there a class I can take to learn how to live on the government tit. I wasn't raised with that cultural heritage. ;-\

Mikek

Yes, not hugely different, the silver plan deductible is $12,500 vs my $10,000. The silver plan has some additional cost per procedure but not hugely different than what I have. The silver plan has unlimited lifetime benefits where mine is limited to $5,000,000. That's a Obamacare benefit, huge, I don't know.

The hugely different part is $13,700 vs $7,700. Oh, and the hardworking taxpayers get reamed for $7,452 for my subsidy.

I don't plan to get over it until I'm sure it won't get changed or I move to the darkside and take the subsidized savings.

Note if you are on medicare, have a company policy, a government worker, or a union member, Obamacare hasn't come after you, yet. I purchase an individual policy, my group doesn't have a lot of political power, they came after my group first.

All this to cover 7 million people, oh note, 73% of those already had insurance.

Mikek

Here's the next gotcha...

...Jim Thompson

Simple solution. Obama will just unilaterally forgive any back taxes owed. Means tested, of course (all will qualify).

I think the cap issue is big for those who it *is* an issue for and not much for those who don't, just like everything else in an insurance plan. If you never use insurance it doesn't matter what policy you have.

I don't know about these numbers. I believe you got them from an agent and not from the exchanges, right? I will find out for myself in November.

Won't get changed???? Of course it will change. Nearly half of Congress wants to toss it out the window! How likely is it that nothing about it will change?

"Kaiser Family Foundation, said many people who qualify for these tax credits aren't working 9-to-5 jobs with regular salaries." Yes, many are self employed, and must buy individual policies. Their incomes can vary 20% from year to year. 30% if you have a BP oil spill. Mikek

How is this a "gotcha"? You get a tax credit when you pay for your insurance. When you file your taxes they *don't* give it to you again. If you got more tax credit than you are entitled to you have to pay that portion back. It's a free loan at worst.

Isn't that what he's doing with student loans, unilaterally forgiving? Or is that just for government workers? I just want to know whether to feel stupid for paying and keeping my kids from taking out student loans. Mikek

A tidbit I picked up in the AP article, " Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., said in an interview that he disagrees with making people pay back part of their premium subsidy. That would happen if someone made more money during the year and failed to report it to HealthCare.gov. "Why should individuals be punished if they got a bump in salary?" said Pascrell. "To me, this was not the ACA I voted on." What kind of idiot is he? I'm playing straight man here! Mikek

I wasn't being facetious. No, it's all, at least for those who get useless degrees (or no degree) and are chronically unemployable.

That's between you and your conscience.

The people who think they got something for nothing are going to find out differently. They aren't likely the same people with 2K or 5K in their bank account that they can fork over. ...or not.