Obama wants my help.

[amdx]

On 10/25/2013 7:20 PM, Bob F wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Too bad your governor, who didn't believe the ACA would come to pass,
didn't prepare your state for it, eh?

Wrong again, dumbshit. His governor (and mine) didn't drink the
KoolAid, as yours obviously did.

I just heard on the news that 36 states are having real problems with the
federal site. Funny, but that's exactly how many states bagged out of their
chance to do it themselves. There go those silly Republicans again, creating a
problem, and then blaming it on anyone but themselves.

Hi Bob,
I'm asking again for more info.
Thanks, Mikek

Bob, I would like to compare your old with the new.
Would you fill in the missing info below.
Maybe some people really are saving money with Obamacare,
but I need the numbers to crunch.
Thanks, Mikek


I'm really curious if you're comparing apples to apples, regarding
your old and new policies.

How do the deductibles compare?
How do the copays compare?
How does the out of pocket compare?
Did you already have the things included in your premium that Obamacare
has forced on the the rest of us?
Such as, free yearly physical, free mammograms, free gynecological
exam, free colonoscopy and some others I can't quickly find.
The point, these aren't really free, the company has to charge a
higher premium to give these at no charge. That's why I wonder if you
had a high cost policy already.
Would you give me more details.
Thanks, Mikek

 

[amdx]

On 10/25/2013 7:20 PM, Bob F wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Too bad your governor, who didn't believe the ACA would come to pass,
didn't prepare your state for it, eh?

Wrong again, dumbshit. His governor (and mine) didn't drink the
KoolAid, as yours obviously did.

I just heard on the news that 36 states are having real problems with the
federal site. Funny, but that's exactly how many states bagged out of their
chance to do it themselves. There go those silly Republicans again, creating a
problem, and then blaming it on anyone but themselves.

It's not the states having problems, it's the people in those states
relying on the Federal government site.

 

[amdx]

On 10/25/2013 7:47 PM, hamilton wrote:

On 10/25/2013 4:36 PM, amdx wrote:
How does the out of pocket compare?

Can someone explain what the <!!> this means ?

The premium, copay, and deductibles are all out of MY pocket.

So what is this suppose to mean ?

hamilton


The more complete phrase is "Maximum Out-of-Pocket".

From Quicken Health.

Out-Of-Pocket Maximum

An Out-of-Pocket maximum is the most that you should have to pay for
your healthcare during a plan period (usually one year). Before reaching
the out-of-pocket maximum, you pay for part of your medical care, such
as copays and coinsurance. Once you have paid the amount set by the
out-of-pocket maximum, your insurance will pay 100% of the allowed
amount for your covered healthcare expenses, up to a preset benefit
maximum. Note that ineligible expenses -- such as elective plastic
surgery -- aren't counted against your out-of-pocket maximum.

Mikek

 

[Leif Neland]

amdx sendte dette med sin computer:

I saw Obama on TV, he has ask that we tell others what Obamacare has meant
me.

I do not think this is a fault with the TV, so the post is off-topic in
sci.electronics.repair

--
Husk křrelys bagpĺ, hvis din bilfabrikant har taget den idiotiske
beslutning at undlade det.

 

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 19:01:46 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:15:26 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Bring it on, fuckwad. We won't be using pikes on you.


Oh, please. Save your projectile vomiting for your teabaggin'
buddies.

Your (zero) IQ is showing.

Pot calling the kettle black again.

You lefties would call people racist for saying the same that, lefty.

LOL! Too bad you can't think.

You're the lefty, Lefty. It's amazing how you deny your own beliefs.
Idiots do that.

 

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:17:26 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
How exactly is employer mandated insurance any different than
government mandated insurance. And what is wrong with the Republican
concept of a mandate. It worked for Romney. The Repubs pushed it for
years before the Democrats decided they could do it if the Repubs
like it so.

The keyword is "mandated", moron. If it's mandated, it's a tax. If
you're forcing one person to pay for another, it's theft.

Why didn't you stop this Republican idea before the Democrats devided to go
along with it?

You're lying, again, Lefty. We can always tell; you're typing.

 

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 20:47:49 -0500, amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote:

On 10/25/2013 7:20 PM, Bob F wrote:
krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Too bad your governor, who didn't believe the ACA would come to pass,
didn't prepare your state for it, eh?

Wrong again, dumbshit. His governor (and mine) didn't drink the
KoolAid, as yours obviously did.

I just heard on the news that 36 states are having real problems with the
federal site. Funny, but that's exactly how many states bagged out of their
chance to do it themselves. There go those silly Republicans again, creating a
problem, and then blaming it on anyone but themselves.


It's not the states having problems, it's the people in those states
relying on the Federal government site.

The point being missed here is that apparently the states are capable
of such a thing and the federal government isn't. The economies of
scale should be working exactly the opposite way. Of course the
federal site was a no-bid contract given to one of Moochell's buddies.

 

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 20:52:51 -0500, amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote:

On 10/25/2013 7:20 PM, Bob F wrote:
krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Too bad your governor, who didn't believe the ACA would come to pass,
didn't prepare your state for it, eh?

Wrong again, dumbshit. His governor (and mine) didn't drink the
KoolAid, as yours obviously did.

I just heard on the news that 36 states are having real problems with the
federal site. Funny, but that's exactly how many states bagged out of their
chance to do it themselves. There go those silly Republicans again, creating a
problem, and then blaming it on anyone but themselves.



Hi Bob,
I'm asking again for more info.
Thanks, Mikek

<crickets>

He's lying. Like all true believers, he has to lie to justify his
worldview. ...to himself, even when everyone else can clearly see
through the BS.

 

[Mho]

"Kris K. Kaputo" wrote in message news:bd0gb7Ffaj3U1@mid.individual.net...

On 10/25/13, 8:20 PM, Bob F wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Too bad your governor, who didn't believe the ACA would come to pass,
didn't prepare your state for it, eh?

Wrong again, dumbshit. His governor (and mine) didn't drink the
KoolAid, as yours obviously did.

I just heard on the news that 36 states are having real problems with the
federal site. Funny, but that's exactly how many states bagged out of
their
chance to do it themselves. There go those silly Republicans again,
creating a
problem, and then blaming it on anyone but themselves.

What a coincidence!

 

[Mho]

Don't feed the trolls. The troll that attacks you is none other than Chris
Caputo the worst Usenet troll ever to destroy a newsgroup.

He will continue forever if you allow it.

---
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message news:bcqin1F7lsfU1@mid.individual.net...
Doubtful your May 2012 or May 2013 increases had much to do with the
ACA. I pay under $1000 a month with a $200 annual deductible for health
insurance, and I have a $10 co-pay for doctors' office visits and my
hospital bills are paid in full. I pay $5 for generic prescriptions and
20% for non-generics. Recently had cataract surgery on one eye, and my
total out of pocket charges were under $100. Same for a colonoscopy.

I'm in a group plan and am paying the full amount for an individual. If
I added a family member, it would be another $225 a month.

You are doing something wrong. Are you in a Republican state where the
governor decided not to set up a state exchange?

 

[Mho]

Don't feed the troll. Chris Caputo is the worst Usenet troll and has ruined
more newsgroups than any other shithead.

Look him up.

--

wrote in message news:dnvl699vjd81sckn0hgod0d83o16vvevqd@4ax.com...

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 18:12:19 -0400, "F.O.A.D." <noway@jose.com> wrote:

On 10/25/13, 6:07 PM, tm wrote:

"Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:l4epi6$acp$1@dont-email.me...
krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 11:11:33 -0700, Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 13:59:57 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

Charlie E. wrote:
Bob,
Just out of curiousity, is that before or after the subsidy?


After.


Ok, so your actual premium probably went up big time, but the
government is 'making up' for the difference - i.e. stealing from the
taxpayer to make you feel like you got a bargain. What was the
difference in the pre-subsidy premium!

BobF is a socialist. He's all in favor of stealing. As long as he's
the recipient, take it all (the government can keep some for their
trouble - doesn't matter to him).

As usual, know-it-all krw knows nothing, and makes up right wing
fantasies about everyone that doesn't "think" like him.

We should just outlaw insurance? Then the righties would be happy.
Just let everyone pay their responsibility if they get sick or
injured. What exactly is insurance - ever think about that?

How exactly is employer mandated insurance any different than
government mandated insurance. And what is wrong with the Republican
concept of a mandate. It worked for Romney. The Repubs pushed it for
years before the Democrats decided they could do it if the Repubs like
it so.


I'm glad krw wants to live in a world where he's rich and everyone
else is dog poor. I'm sure the coming Republican ideal America will be
a wonderful place for him. It just sounds like such a wonderful place
when they've eliminated the middle class. Krw - have you hired your
armed bodyguards yet?




Damn, can you be any more confused? No wonder oboma won, all the
terminally ignorant libtards voted for the free ride. The only good part
is they will suffer the most. Too bad.




Ahh, another hate-fill Teabagger...just what rec.boats needs.

Ahh, another dumbshit lefty...just what SED neds.

 

[Bob F]

krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 19:01:46 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:15:26 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Bring it on, fuckwad. We won't be using pikes on you.


Oh, please. Save your projectile vomiting for your teabaggin'
buddies.

Your (zero) IQ is showing.

Pot calling the kettle black again.

You lefties would call people racist for saying the same that,
lefty.

LOL! Too bad you can't think.

You're the lefty, Lefty. It's amazing how you deny your own beliefs.
Idiots do that.

And only right wingers behave like you. What do the koch brothers pay you for
this?

 

[Bob F]

krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:17:26 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
How exactly is employer mandated insurance any different than
government mandated insurance. And what is wrong with the
Republican concept of a mandate. It worked for Romney. The Repubs
pushed it for years before the Democrats decided they could do it
if the Repubs like it so.

The keyword is "mandated", moron. If it's mandated, it's a tax. If
you're forcing one person to pay for another, it's theft.

Why didn't you stop this Republican idea before the Democrats
devided to go along with it?

You're lying, again, Lefty. We can always tell; you're typing.

Really? As always, you're nothing but lying obnoxious bluster!

Read up folks!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/27/1078152/-Republicans-Supported-an-Individual-Mandate-Until-Obama-Did#

When George H.W. Bush was president, he came up with this crazy idea on how to
improve our health care system.

H.W. Bush had this radical plan to propose an individual health care mandate to
bring down health care costs by forcing every American citizen to purchase
insurance because the uninsured raise the cost for everyone else. This would
also end pre-existing conditions.

The Heritage Foundation supported and even helped write H.W. Bush's bill with an
individual mandate. Today they are one of many conservative groups fighting the
current mandate.

Republicans eventually tabled this plan because they didn't think they could get
enough Democratic support in congress to pass it. (My, how times have changed)

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/did-a-conservative-think-tank-really-invent-the-individual-mandate/247124/

In the course of defending the health care bill he passed in Massachusetts, Mitt
Romney told Newt Gingrich that he got the idea for the individual mandate -- a
rule dictating that everyone must buy health insurance or pay a penalty -- from
the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington, D.C. think tank. Is it
really responsible for creating the policy that is now so anathema to
conservatives?

James Taranto, an opinion editor at The Wall Street Journal, has some relevant
history to share. Before going any farther you should know that he writes his
column in the first person plural. "Heritage did put forward the idea of an
individual mandate, though it predated HillaryCare by several years,"

 

[John Devereux]

"Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com> writes:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 19:01:46 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:15:26 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Bring it on, fuckwad. We won't be using pikes on you.


Oh, please. Save your projectile vomiting for your teabaggin'
buddies.

Your (zero) IQ is showing.

Pot calling the kettle black again.

You lefties would call people racist for saying the same that,
lefty.

LOL! Too bad you can't think.

You're the lefty, Lefty. It's amazing how you deny your own beliefs.
Idiots do that.

And only right wingers behave like you. What do the koch brothers pay you for
this?

They should ask for their money back.

--

John Devereux

 

[amdx]

On 10/26/2013 8:07 AM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 20:52:51 -0500, amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote:

On 10/25/2013 7:20 PM, Bob F wrote:
krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Too bad your governor, who didn't believe the ACA would come to pass,
didn't prepare your state for it, eh?

Wrong again, dumbshit. His governor (and mine) didn't drink the
KoolAid, as yours obviously did.

I just heard on the news that 36 states are having real problems with the
federal site. Funny, but that's exactly how many states bagged out of their
chance to do it themselves. There go those silly Republicans again, creating a
problem, and then blaming it on anyone but themselves.



Hi Bob,
I'm asking again for more info.
Thanks, Mikek

crickets

He's lying. Like all true believers, he has to lie to justify his
worldview. ...to himself, even when everyone else can clearly see
through the BS.

I don't know if he's lying, there are situations where he could have
that situation. If he has a health condition, his previous insurance
premium could be high to cover that. The new Obamacare premium could be
lower because Obamacare doesn't charge more for preexisting conditions.
Or, he might have had a Cadillac policy that was very expensive, his
new policy is not as good, but also not as expensive.
I'll ask again for more info.
Mikek

 

[amdx]

On 10/23/2013 12:39 PM, Bob F wrote:

amdx wrote:
I saw Obama on TV, he has ask that we tell others what Obamacare has
meant me.

I has meant my insurance premium has went up by 44.4% in the last
17 months. I will see the next increase in May 2014.
I checked on the price of Obamacare, the silver plan
is comparable in price, but the copay is about $2000 higher
then the $10,000 copay I have.
Note the low priced policy I had, increased to be as expensive as
Obamacare.


Obamacare will save me $356/month, as I found out by spending 40 minutes signing
up, including time spend digging out my records. Of course, I live in a liberal
state that created its own exchange as the bill intended, not one of the 36
conservative states that opted out and dumped their responsibility on the
federal government site.

Bob, please supply more information about the products.


Bob, I would like to compare your old with the new.
Would you fill in the missing info below.
Maybe some people really are saving money with Obamacare,
but I need the numbers to crunch.



I'm really curious if you're comparing apples to apples, regarding
your old and new policies.

How do the deductibles compare?
How do the copays compare?
How does the out of pocket compare?
Did you already have the things included in your premium that Obamacare
has forced on the the rest of us?
Such as, free yearly physical, free mammograms, free gynecological exam,
free colonoscopy and some others I can't quickly find.
The point, these aren't really free, the company has to charge a
higher premium to give these at no charge. That's why I wonder if you
had a high cost policy already.
Would you give me more details.
Thanks, Mikek

 

[Bob F]

krw@attt.bizz wrote:

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 20:47:49 -0500, amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote:

On 10/25/2013 7:20 PM, Bob F wrote:
krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Too bad your governor, who didn't believe the ACA would come to
pass, didn't prepare your state for it, eh?

Wrong again, dumbshit. His governor (and mine) didn't drink the
KoolAid, as yours obviously did.

I just heard on the news that 36 states are having real problems
with the federal site. Funny, but that's exactly how many states
bagged out of their chance to do it themselves. There go those
silly Republicans again, creating a problem, and then blaming it on
anyone but themselves.


It's not the states having problems, it's the people in those
states relying on the Federal government site.

The point being missed here is that apparently the states are capable
of such a thing and the federal government isn't. The economies of
scale should be working exactly the opposite way. Of course the
federal site was a no-bid contract given to one of Moochell's buddies.

The fact is that the bill as passed was written for the states to do this job as
they saw best, and funds were not include for the Feds to do the job for the
states. Then as time goes on, the right wing states chose to ignore their
responsibilty to their own citizens, so the feds had to pick up their slack, but
the Republicans in congress still didn't accept paying for their responsibility.
Every state that didn't opt-in screwed their own citizens by making it harder to
sign up and denying them some coverages.

 

On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 09:33:06 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 19:01:46 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:15:26 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Bring it on, fuckwad. We won't be using pikes on you.


Oh, please. Save your projectile vomiting for your teabaggin'
buddies.

Your (zero) IQ is showing.

Pot calling the kettle black again.

You lefties would call people racist for saying the same that,
lefty.

LOL! Too bad you can't think.

You're the lefty, Lefty. It's amazing how you deny your own beliefs.
Idiots do that.

And only right wingers behave like you. What do the koch brothers pay you for
this?

That's all you lefties have; lies. Keep it up, you're doing Slowman
proud.

 

On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 09:44:08 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:17:26 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
How exactly is employer mandated insurance any different than
government mandated insurance. And what is wrong with the
Republican concept of a mandate. It worked for Romney. The Repubs
pushed it for years before the Democrats decided they could do it
if the Repubs like it so.

The keyword is "mandated", moron. If it's mandated, it's a tax. If
you're forcing one person to pay for another, it's theft.

Why didn't you stop this Republican idea before the Democrats
devided to go along with it?

You're lying, again, Lefty. We can always tell; you're typing.

Really?

Really. All you can do is lie. It's all any lefty can do.

 

On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 10:52:09 -0700, "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com>
wrote:

krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 20:47:49 -0500, amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote:

On 10/25/2013 7:20 PM, Bob F wrote:
krw@attt.bizz wrote:
Too bad your governor, who didn't believe the ACA would come to
pass, didn't prepare your state for it, eh?

Wrong again, dumbshit. His governor (and mine) didn't drink the
KoolAid, as yours obviously did.

I just heard on the news that 36 states are having real problems
with the federal site. Funny, but that's exactly how many states
bagged out of their chance to do it themselves. There go those
silly Republicans again, creating a problem, and then blaming it on
anyone but themselves.


It's not the states having problems, it's the people in those
states relying on the Federal government site.

The point being missed here is that apparently the states are capable
of such a thing and the federal government isn't. The economies of
scale should be working exactly the opposite way. Of course the
federal site was a no-bid contract given to one of Moochell's buddies.

The fact is that the bill as passed was written for the states to do this job as
they saw best, and funds were not include for the Feds to do the job for the
states. Then as time goes on, the right wing states chose to ignore their
responsibilty to their own citizens, so the feds had to pick up their slack, but
the Republicans in congress still didn't accept paying for their responsibility.
Every state that didn't opt-in screwed their own citizens by making it harder to
sign up and denying them some coverages.

You're lying again, but that's not surprising anyone.