With Obamacare, you'll do neither.
Click the Pic
Support Free Republic
Posted on 10/08/2013 9:44:44 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Sounds like Germany in the early thirties to me.
The Dem Party and O are the ‘snake oil’ folks of yesteryear..
back with a vengeance..
a spending addiction..
and an agenda..
Bushel baskets and wheelbarrows of dollar bills to buy a loaf of bread, milk, beer..
No way.. It could never happen here.
or could it? 8-o
But just think what gold-plated coverage all those winos, druggies and illegal aliens are going to get. Doesn’t that just warm your heart?
Barack Obama: Brother Love’s Traveling Salvation Show
As word gets out that folks will actually have to pay for medical care... obamacare is rapidly loosing its luster. Too bad they weren’t paying attention years ago!
“But she and her retired husband, both 51, wouldn’t pay $7,200 in premiums for high-deductible coverage. It’s cheaper to pay the fine, she said. Besides, she added, “we’re healthy”
LOL, that isn’t a “fine” lady, it’s a TAX
and here you are, happy to pay it because it’s cheaper than obamacare
democrats gotcha!
ka ching
That point was 100% clear to me back in 2010. I fail to understand why these people didn't get it as well.
Headline too long. Should read:
“Obama sold voters bill of goods”
All you need to do is promise everything in the world and you get elected. Reminds me of something:
“Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9“All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.””
Just pay the fine and when you get sick, buy health care.
Most Americans believe that they will still collect something for nothing from this program. They are unaware that it will reduce their “Earned Income Tax Credit” in February if they don’t take the expensive coverage.
As another FReeper pointed out, your coverage doesn’t start paying for 6 months, so it better be a long drawn out disease.
““But she and her retired husband, both 51, wouldn’t pay $7,200 in premiums for high-deductible coverage. It’s cheaper to pay the fine, she said. Besides, she added, “we’re healthy””
I’ve had insurance coverage on me since my 20s and at that age I can see going without it perhaps until marriage, but at 51? By that age, medical stuff is likely brewing whether you know it or not.
Will it pay retroactively? In other words, can you just wait 6 months to pay?
Right. Just read about a govt worker who was told he’ll get back pay if he signs up - has no real alternative as he has a family
It has the makings of a real pull and push game in which people have to scramble if they want to have a family.
To anyone who says let it take effect, fall flat and then pick up the pieces I say stop dreaming. If you want to be a moderate, you’re on the fence, in the middle of the road with oncoming traffic.
Any attribution of any good will coming from these people, democrats, is just plain naivite.
Prayers, ok, hope, ok, but trust? Idiotic
===============================
HERE'S ANOTHER DISSATISFIED OBAMACARE CUSTOMER
<><> “The plan that Congress is considering will provide health insurance to millions of Americans who don’t have it and control costs for millions more who do.” — Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa, calling for Congress to pass ObamaCare, March 16, 2010
<><> “Right now, unless you and the Obama administration enact an equitable fix, the ACA will shatter not only our hard-earned health benefits, but destroy the foundation of the 40-hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class.”— Hoffa in a July 2013 letter to Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the top Senate and House Democrats.
==========================================
BAIT AND SWITCH LAWS---WIKI EXCERPT--Bait-and-switch is a form of fraud commonly used in retail sales but also employed in other contexts......even in politics.
First, customers are "baited" by sellers advertising products or services at a low price, but when customers visit the store, they discover that the advertised goods are not available, or the customers are pressured by sales people to consider similar, but higher priced items ("switching").
The intent of the bait-and-switch tactic is to encourage purchases of substituted goods, making consumers satisfied with the available stock offered, as an alternative to a disappointment or inconvenience of acquiring no goods (or bait) at all, and reckoning on a seemingly partial recovery of sunk costs expended trying to obtain the bait. It suggests that the seller will not show the original product or service advertised but instead will demonstrate a more expensive product or a similar product with a higher margin.
In the United States, courts have held that the purveyor using a bait-and-switch operation may be subject to a lawsuit by customers for false advertising, and can be sued for trademark infringement by competing manufacturers, retailers, and others who profit from the sale of the product used as bait. However, no cause of action will exist if the purveyor is capable of actually selling the goods advertised, but aggressively pushes a competing product.
Likewise, advertising a sale while intending to stock a limited amount of, and thereby sell out, a loss-leading item advertised is legal in the United States. The purveyor can escape liability if they make clear in their advertisements that quantities of items for which a sale is offered are limited, or by offering a rain check on sold-out items.
===================================================
BAIT AND SWITCH IN POLITICS In lawmaking, "caption bills" that propose minor changes in law with simplistic titles (the bait) are introduced to the legislature with the ultimate objective of substantially changing the wording (the switch) at a later date in order to try to smooth the passage of a controversial or major amendment.
Rule changes are also proposed (the bait) to meet legal requirements for public notice and mandated public hearings, then different rules are proposed at a final meeting (the switch), thus bypassing the objective of public notice and public discussion on the actual rules voted upon.
While legal, the political objective is to get legislation or rules passed without expected negative community review
I have no personal experience, but I really doubt that Medicaid is “gold plated” coverage.
No sh** Sherlock. What was your first clue?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.