Politics

Out of context: Reply #26877

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 33,468 Responses
  • monospaced3

    It only took 34 words for Senate Republicans to strip away maternity care, mental health benefits, and ambulatory services.

    http://theweek.com/speedreads/70…

    • It strips away the "requirements", meaning you can be part of a singles health plan that doesn't also charge you for parental care if you don't need them.omg
    • Is that right?monospaced
    • You see, that's bullshit. Pregnancy is just one of 10 things it removes. It also removes emergency services and ambulatory care. Rehab, etc. not just pregnancy.monospaced
    • Yes, you might be able to sign up for a Singles & Mental Health Issue Plan that provides the services you may need without the additional costs for breeding.omg
    • might? what the hell are you talking about?monospaced
    • Who knows what competitive packages insurance companies will offer now that they're not "required" by law to offer them.omg
    • keep sucking that trump dick omg.inteliboy
    • So you're only speculating and don't actually know if anything you're saying is true. Got it.monospaced
    • meanwhile we're reading the ACTUAL BILLmonospaced
    • again, it strips away the "requirements", correcting your original bullshit introductory. I only provided an example of how it can improve your insurance plan.omg
    • listen to yourselfmonospaced
    • by not requiring then companies can't leverage the economies of scale for that service. therefore, it will become more expensive to offer.dorf
    • It means the policies will cover less and be more expensive for when you actually need coverage. Fuck you if you're pregnant tho.monospaced
    • Mono, if you become pregnant, you could just switch to a different plan. Doesn't make sense to pay for 60 lifetimes of babies if you're only having one.omg
    • Maybe it would be cheaper, $500 instead of $1000 for example. But before you'd be paying $500 every year at 18 for the rest of your life.omg
    • I'd rather pay $1000 (even if pricier) than pay $30,000 over a 60 year period.omg
    • That's not true. You can't get sick and THEN get insurance; that's literally the one thing you can't do. That's the issue everyone has with the pre existingmonospaced
    • conditions! The whole point of a singles non pregnant plan is that it DOES NOT cover pregnancy. It's way more expensive f you have that "condition" you dumbfuckmonospaced
    • also your numbers make no sense; it's like you have never had or used health insurance before almostmonospaced
    • Under the AHCA, pregnancy, along with rape or domestic violence is not classified as a precondition.omg
    • Pregnancy is more expensive unless you get the folks who are NOT having babies paying for it. Your logic is sound.omg
    • It's not only strange that you'd classify pregnancy as a sickness, but how you expect others outside of that group of baby makers to pay for your baby.omg
    • I'm not classifying pregnancy as illness. The bill is you dunce.monospaced
    • What's strange is that you think someone can get pregnant and then change their plan. This bill makes pregnancy a pre existing condition you asshole.monospaced
    • Pregnancy is a covered right everywhere except under this new plan, designed ONLY to give corporations tax breaks. It's swampy as fuck and you don't care at allmonospaced
    • So the plan is for corporations to spend money on people, which in exchange will get tax breaks. You probably prefer they spend nothing.omg
    • So how does a company get tax breaks if they don't cover pregnancy? Tell me how your swampy logic works hereomg
    • I'm not wrong dude.monospaced
    • They offer smaller policies that cover less with less responsibility and a lower tax burden, all at the expense of a shitteir policiy that covers less. Simple.monospaced
    • You're talking about a lower end product that may possibly have all the features most would want from a health insurance plan.omg
    • What you're not including is that for 2018, individuals will be able to double their savings from the current $3400 to $6650 and $13300 for familiesomg
    • So if they need more coverage, they can use their savings to upgrade and add needed features to their plan.omg
    • Also when you say the rich get tax breaks. That's because they were getting charged an additional 2.35% for Medicare surtax.omg
    • So really they're paying the same surtax as everyone else which is 0%. It's like paying more $ for the same burger at McDonalds because you make more.omg
    • Now that it's equal can you really say they're getting tax breaks?omg
    • lol use savings??? that's the issuemonospaced

View thread