|
Cancer Patients are losing their health insurance because of Obamacare
|
|
Topic Started: Dec 12 2013, 01:04 AM (4,062 Views)
|
|
Marcus
|
Jan 23 2014, 02:52 PM
Post #21
|
|
- Posts:
- 15,302
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #64
- Joined:
- Nov 26, 2009
|
If you notice the Democrats are not talking about this.
|
|
|
| |
|
Plus 1
|
Jan 25 2014, 12:08 PM
Post #22
|
|
- Posts:
- 1,125
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #2,164
- Joined:
- Dec 6, 2013
|
Several years ago my friend's son had cancer. It did go into remission. Now, they find out it's returned and he's getting treated, thankfully, because president Obama signed a law saying he can't be denied from a previous condition.
I'm very thankful to Obama, for this.
|
|
|
| |
|
Snidely Whiplash
|
Jan 26 2014, 04:57 AM
Post #23
|
|
- Posts:
- 15,286
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,630
- Joined:
- Jul 23, 2012
|
- Plus 1
- Jan 25 2014, 12:08 PM
Several years ago my friend's son had cancer. It did go into remission. Now, they find out it's returned and he's getting treated, thankfully, because president Obama signed a law saying he can't be denied from a previous condition.
I'm very thankful to Obama, for this. That's not a certainty.
|
|
|
| |
|
Plus 1
|
Jan 28 2014, 01:10 PM
Post #24
|
|
- Posts:
- 1,125
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #2,164
- Joined:
- Dec 6, 2013
|
- Snidely Whiplash
- Jan 26 2014, 04:57 AM
- Plus 1
- Jan 25 2014, 12:08 PM
Several years ago my friend's son had cancer. It did go into remission. Now, they find out it's returned and he's getting treated, thankfully, because president Obama signed a law saying he can't be denied from a previous condition.
I'm very thankful to Obama, for this.
That's not a certainty. My friend starts treatment, February 12th.
|
|
|
| |
|
kennyinbmore
|
Jan 28 2014, 01:43 PM
Post #25
|
|
- Posts:
- 18,350
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #452
- Joined:
- Mar 30, 2010
|
As usual I had to go find the real unslanted story
- Quote:
-
She explains that her insurance company has paid $1.2 million for her treatment and has never doubted her doctors, but now it is pulling out of the individual California market
For those who don't know what that means it means the company pulled out of the market because they felt like they couldn't compete
- Quote:
-
"One of the factors I believe contributed to this decision, even if the two companies are disinclined to acknowledge it, is the special tax break that California law gives to Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, which has allowed and continues to allow those two companies to avoid paying $100 million in state taxes a year," added Commissioner Jones. "Aetna and United Healthcare don't get the special tax break provided to Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, and so they faced a major competitive disadvantage in California."http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/2013/release053-13.cfm
Nothing to do with Obamacare
|
|
|
| |
|
negroplease
|
Jan 28 2014, 01:49 PM
Post #26
|
|
- Posts:
- 31,973
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #578
- Joined:
- Jul 14, 2010
|
- kennyinbmore
- Jan 28 2014, 01:43 PM
As usual I had to go find the real unslanted story - Quote:
-
She explains that her insurance company has paid $1.2 million for her treatment and has never doubted her doctors, but now it is pulling out of the individual California market
For those who don't know what that means it means the company pulled out of the market because they felt like they couldn't compete - Quote:
-
"One of the factors I believe contributed to this decision, even if the two companies are disinclined to acknowledge it, is the special tax break that California law gives to Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, which has allowed and continues to allow those two companies to avoid paying $100 million in state taxes a year," added Commissioner Jones. "Aetna and United Healthcare don't get the special tax break provided to Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, and so they faced a major competitive disadvantage in California."http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/2013/release053-13.cfm
Nothing to do with Obamacare LOL.
|
|
|
| |
|
Snidely Whiplash
|
Jan 29 2014, 12:34 AM
Post #27
|
|
- Posts:
- 15,286
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,630
- Joined:
- Jul 23, 2012
|
- kennyinbmore
- Jan 28 2014, 01:43 PM
As usual I had to go find the real unslanted story - Quote:
-
She explains that her insurance company has paid $1.2 million for her treatment and has never doubted her doctors, but now it is pulling out of the individual California market
For those who don't know what that means it means the company pulled out of the market because they felt like they couldn't compete - Quote:
-
"One of the factors I believe contributed to this decision, even if the two companies are disinclined to acknowledge it, is the special tax break that California law gives to Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, which has allowed and continues to allow those two companies to avoid paying $100 million in state taxes a year," added Commissioner Jones. "Aetna and United Healthcare don't get the special tax break provided to Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, and so they faced a major competitive disadvantage in California."http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/2013/release053-13.cfm
Nothing to do with Obamacare Who's cancer story in this thread are you referring to?
|
|
|
| |
|
kennyinbmore
|
Jan 29 2014, 07:43 AM
Post #28
|
|
- Posts:
- 18,350
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #452
- Joined:
- Mar 30, 2010
|
Last link of the first post in the thread. a cancer patient from Califormia
|
|
|
| |
|
Snidely Whiplash
|
Jan 29 2014, 12:46 PM
Post #29
|
|
- Posts:
- 15,286
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,630
- Joined:
- Jul 23, 2012
|
- kennyinbmore
- Jan 29 2014, 07:43 AM
Last link of the first post in the thread. a cancer patient from Califormia Ah ok. With so many links I wasn't sure.
In any event, as your article mentioned the subsidy maybe "one of the factors". Bottom line is under obamacare they can't charge more for pretexting conditions and they do little business in Cali in the individual market. It therefore wasn't cost effective.
2 things. The subsidy was there before obamacare and those insurers were able to still do business. Obamacare changed the dynamics. Second, and it's a misconception I held, HIPAA which prevents insurers from not covering pretexting conditions existed before obamacare. It was signed in during the Clinton era. It was poorly enforced but it existed. So basically we were lied to about pretexting conditions by Obama and the dems.
The bottom line, the more we know the less we see how little we gained with this clusterfuck, obamacrap. Just mandates on the masses and a bailout for various players in the health insurance sector.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=53211
|
|
|
| |
|
DeShawn
|
Feb 3 2014, 03:13 AM
Post #30
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,408
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,203
- Joined:
- Dec 11, 2011
|
- Marcus
- Jan 23 2014, 02:52 PM
If you notice the Democrats are not talking about this. It's because they are hypocrites.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|