- 2,908
Oh, indeed. Condi is more than willing and able to do the deed.....were it not for the problem of how one whips the knickers off of someone who has never worn anything other than a pant suit.
Look for the "Escape Hatch" W/SCOTUS
- Thread starter Yagents
- Start date
Oh, indeed. Condi is more than willing and able to do the deed.....were it not for the problem of how one whips the knickers off of someone who has never worn anything other than a pant suit.
Not sure about hating the ACA, but to me, the law is pretty clear. Follow it. Don't like it, change it. It isn't about the ACA to me, its about doing what the law (any law) says.
That's why its 7-2. 2 will vote political / social concerns. The rest will vote the law. Pretty simple. I also stated its an easy fix, though again, politics will get in the way.
The Chevron deference is a smoke screen in this case. It doesn't give agencies the latitude to change written law, just to interpret it when vague or to 'add' relevant related clarity. This is not the case here. In fact, the Chevron deference specifically excludes it being used in this case, or I guess more precisely, is exactly what the argument is about.
It does help that I quit selling health insurance, due to Somarco's advice, several years ago. I don't have a dog in the fight, other than my tax dollars and my grandkids tax dollars.
Dan
I'm going to hear - probably - nasty remarks from fellow Republicans on this, but I do support ACA. This is a good law...AND if you have "republican" business sense, you would have taken advantage of the law being an insurance agent.
This argument at the Supreme Court is very shaky, and should be thrown out. First, there is no standing with the Plaintiffs. Absolutely nothing. Second, it has become politicized. But, now we have to wait until June for answer. And if it rules against ACA...then Republicans have no answer. They really don't. What are they going to do with millions losing insurance?
You know, I signed up my OWN family on our income via the ACA. Instead of paying 1,257.00 per month...I'm paying 578.00 per month based upon our salary. Huge difference!
I want to know, from those people who are against this law....what are you going to do when I have to pay the 1200 premium? I, as an insurance agent, will not pay that amount. I will drop my own plan. AND, I call phony, if there are no agents here who put themselves through the ACA. I speak with honesty.
Republicans speak of "Freedom option," but it is crap. It still destroys what I have an insurance. Seriously, GOP on DOMESTIC ISSUES are a joke. Foreign...I agree Democrats stink.
However, sticking to the subject:
It is absolutely disgusting, that millions in the USA will be dropped from health insurance, due to 4 words.
If that is your ethics, and you stand by those four words...then I hope you can 'ethically' hold around 9,000 Americans dying yearly - with lack of insurance, on your hands.
Joke: We are the richest/ advanced/greatest country in the world! We even pay for all Israelis to have universal insurance (WE PAY THEIR BILLS!)...but WE will not give our OWN people a piece of money. Ted Cruz, won't, but he will die for Israel! Hell in some states, we pay the lowest sales tax - 5%, 7%, etc.. Go overseas! Here I leave places like Aldis paying 100.00 for a week worth of groceries, and in London...I buy 1 nights dinner if lucky on that price.
You know...looking back in history:
Women given right to vote. Horrible thing.
Civil rights legislation. Horrible thing.
Medicare. Horrible thing.
ACA. Horrible thing.
And, that is my 2 cents.
This argument at the Supreme Court is very shaky, and should be thrown out. First, there is no standing with the Plaintiffs. Absolutely nothing. Second, it has become politicized. But, now we have to wait until June for answer. And if it rules against ACA...then Republicans have no answer. They really don't. What are they going to do with millions losing insurance?
You know, I signed up my OWN family on our income via the ACA. Instead of paying 1,257.00 per month...I'm paying 578.00 per month based upon our salary. Huge difference!
I want to know, from those people who are against this law....what are you going to do when I have to pay the 1200 premium? I, as an insurance agent, will not pay that amount. I will drop my own plan. AND, I call phony, if there are no agents here who put themselves through the ACA. I speak with honesty.
Republicans speak of "Freedom option," but it is crap. It still destroys what I have an insurance. Seriously, GOP on DOMESTIC ISSUES are a joke. Foreign...I agree Democrats stink.
However, sticking to the subject:
It is absolutely disgusting, that millions in the USA will be dropped from health insurance, due to 4 words.
If that is your ethics, and you stand by those four words...then I hope you can 'ethically' hold around 9,000 Americans dying yearly - with lack of insurance, on your hands.
Joke: We are the richest/ advanced/greatest country in the world! We even pay for all Israelis to have universal insurance (WE PAY THEIR BILLS!)...but WE will not give our OWN people a piece of money. Ted Cruz, won't, but he will die for Israel! Hell in some states, we pay the lowest sales tax - 5%, 7%, etc.. Go overseas! Here I leave places like Aldis paying 100.00 for a week worth of groceries, and in London...I buy 1 nights dinner if lucky on that price.
You know...looking back in history:
Women given right to vote. Horrible thing.
Civil rights legislation. Horrible thing.
Medicare. Horrible thing.
ACA. Horrible thing.
And, that is my 2 cents.
- Thread starter
- #104
Oh sure, drag me into this. Gee thanks.
Don't you know no one ever takes me seriously?
Well, I have clients paying that much and more, and I have ZERO subsidized clients. None. Nada.
If you would rather go without insurance than pay the full premium (if you no longer qualified for a taxpayer handout) then you must not be committed to this industry and you surely don't understand risk management.
You can make this political if you want, but that's not what this is all about.
But FWIW, it was a poorly written law that accomplished none of the objectives, has been horribly implemented and manipulated for political gain.
It is also doomed to fail, sooner rather than later, due to the complexity and cost.
Agents with a dog in this fight will bail before the law goes belly up when commissions go to $0, and they will, again, sooner rather than later.
I assume you are talking about the taxpayer handouts.
No one will be dropped if the handouts are cancelled.
Now go have some fun. Doesn't seem like you are having any now.
If I ever decide to drop subsidy business, I'm blaming you.
I've never met you in person, but you are brilliant AND like Charles Schultz. That's good enough for me!
And who the heck is having fun right now? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?
I'm all for opinions from the left, the right, and anything else. But that was an absurd thing to say.
First, you just told us, "I, as an insurance agent, will not pay that amount. I will drop my own plan."
That was my first sign that you maybe weren't the world's best insurance agent.
Then, you told us that your (unsubsidized) premium is about $1200 a month. Join the crowd. Lots of us pay high premiums, and pay taxes too. Of course, before ACA our premiums and tax burden were both lower.
But, before we got to that line, you told us that you were subsidized to the tune of about $680 a month. What? Not enough prospects during OEP for you to sell health insurance to, so that you can earn your own living?
Helping poor people, those physically and mentally incapable of earning their own way, or people who cannot earn enough to pay for a huge, but necessary, expense like health insurance is one thing. Subsidizing someone who just doesn't get out there and work 15 hours a day 7 days a week during OEP like the rest of us is something else.
My post here today is not about those who want this law or who don't want this law. It's not about Republicans or Democrats. It's specifically about YOUR argument. That was ridiculous.
- 249
I assume this is another way of saying that if health agents got 30% comp on every ACA case they wrote that they would LOVE this law?
Are you pissed because it is a bad law or are you pissed because you can't make any money with it?
So where do you think the $8,148 you receive comes from? You're good with taking my tax dollars to subsidize you while I get to pay the full premium? Why am I responsible for your shortcomings?
What was your premium before the law? Mine was half of what it is today. And I have higher deductibles now than before the law was passed. So now I pay twice as much while you get over $8,000 of my tax dollars. All because I EARN (yes, I earn what I make) more than you? And yes, I know you aren't necessarily taking my personal tax dollars. I used that to give it a little more personal feel.
Then you ask, "what are you going to do when I have to pay the 1,200 premium". As if that's another person's responsibility. The better question is what are YOU going to do to provide for YOUR family? Too many people expect others to solve their problems instead of taking on that responsibility themselves.
Imagine 10 million people receiving the same subsidy you get. That's $80 billion per year. Where do we as a country get that money? Oh, I know, we'll just take more from the people who are already paying more. No reason for those people to have more than others regardless of how hard they work or the risk they take.
Regardless of how this bill was sold (i.e. - not add one dime to the debt), we all know that isn't true. I'm almost to the point to say screw it, let the bill stand and let's see how bad it is 10-20 years down the road. But I worry for my young adult children and for the day they have children. But hey, as long as you get your $8,000+ per year all is good, right?
----------
I don't care if they paid 100% I wouldn't like this law. It is a bad law that will cost those of us who actually pay taxes a ton of money and will likely still increase the debt of this country. It limits access to care and raises premiums.
And as for your last question, there are plenty of agents making some serious change with this law. You keep talking about agents being mad about making less money when that's not the case for those who are geared up to focus on it during OEP.
I don't know if it's your intention, but you're coming across as an arrogant, pompous arse. If that is your intention, the you're doing a fine job.
"Man who go to bed with itchy butt wake up with stinky finger"
Confucius
Oh sure, NOW you tell me not to take you seriously....
You could have told me that a few months ago, then I could have been a navigator and made some real money.
Dan
