you will be forced to drop your private insurance

[nadinbrzezinski]

Yup, that is the current rumor in RW radio land.

No you won't... unless, qualifier used by expert... if your employer decides to no longer provide insurance, in which case, at least in states with an exchange, you will have access to insurance anyway.

But that gem is now in RW radio land.

[rucky]

1. Then they better have their heart attack now. n/t

[freshwest]

11. Because Obama may be re-elected, too, so get ready, right wing lurkers:

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. I recomend either of these paradises for our friends

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14094503

(Somalia)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiti

Haiti

It is far more to their liking, I am betting

[laundry_queen]

19. Ha! Love it! nt

[banned from Kos]

28. They speak French there too!

[freshwest]

30. And they eat poutine and love the Queen! Buncha dang furriners!

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. They're also saying we don't have enough health care workers

I guess they forgot about that whole JOB CREATION thing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Well VERY PARTIALLY they got a point on that one

but it's gotta do a lot more with AMA policies, which fortunately YOUNGER docs are pushing to change.

[BadgerKid]

26. Do you know which AMA policies are those?

One might be to keep the supply of doctors lower in order to keep salaries higher. Partly because medical students loans are expensive.

In dentistry there is talk about creating a middle tier of dentists allowed to perform procedures such as fillings and possibly extractions.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Limiting the number of medical students

[GoCubsGo]

29. The stupid. It hurts.

Been hearing that little bit of idiocy for a while. As if people aren't going to get sick regardless of how many health care workers we have.

[rustydog]

3. I will be forced to drop my private insurance and be forced to buy private insurance?

Those bastards killed Kenny!

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Well the exchanges will actually drop the cost

of health care... and by extension of insurance.

I see this as Social Security circa 1935, which has nothing at all to do with the current system

[nenagh]

5. Thanks nadin,,,

That's stated as fact on CNN also... all today .. *unreal*

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. There is a reason I avoid the Conservative News Network

damn I miss Turner!

[HopeHoops]

7. Don't forget the mandatory anal probes. That's in the bill SOMEWHERE.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Actually it is... preventative care

Weird mood... but...

[HopeHoops]

14. Okay. You got me. Colonoscopies are included in the bill as preventative proven procedures.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. And prostate exams

Yup, a really weird mood.

[DCBob]

10. RW radio land is also telling people they will go to jail if they dont buy insurance.

idiots.

[freshwest]

12. That's been out there since the ACA was announced, and they threatened to kill Democrats.

Remember Palin's target list?

All for those voting for Death Panels.

Like Giffords.

It worked in 2010, will it work in 2012?

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Given one of our bright guys from Michigan

threatened armed insurrection like THIS FAST... we will see something not pretty.

[freshwest]

24. Thank goodness DU has the Gungeon! I mean that, so I do show appreciation for liberal gun folks.

The right wing needs to know Democrats who support ALL the amendments to the Constitution, ain't afraid of the second. They might calm down knowing it. I don't think it will come to that, though, really I don't. The wingnuts are full of hot air, the great majority of them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. FEAR...

No more needed.

[liberal N proud]

17. And "they" will take your guns away.

The right wing fear machine is no longer effective.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. My I need to learn to hug them

Yup, our guns... doing a bad impersonation here, something 'bout cold dead hands.

[Swede Atlanta]

20. Actually the opposite is the case.........

Small businesses (under 50 FT employees) are exempt. That is the vast majority of "small businesses" in America except in Repuke-speak where they consider the number of owners in determining "small". So for example if the Koch brothers set up a business together and each invested $3BN in the company, but they were the only owners, the R's would consider that a small business that shouldn't have to provide healthcare for their employees even if the company turns $30BN in revenues a year and generates a 15% annual return.

So for truly small businesses nothing changes except with the eventual establishment of the exchanges they will be able to pool together with other individuals and small businesses and purchase as part of a "group" and enjoy the cost savings. It will help small businesses which want to provide health insurance to provide it.

But other businesses >50 FT employees must provide health insurance or pay a penalty. And the minimum coverage required to satisfy this requirement is specified at something like 60% of the actual cost of the health care.

So...
(1) Small businesses that do not today have a requirement to provide health insurance still will not but will have tools to be in a better position to offer it. And for those that can't afford or choose not to afford it, individuals will have the ability to buy into a state exchange.
(2) Larger businesses > 50 FT employees will be required to provide health insurance. This is no different than having to pay into workman's compensation, employer payroll taxes, etc. Now this may lead some companies to keep their employment just below the 50 level mark just to avoid coming under the law. But even these businesses will now be able to purchase in the exchanges.

Today my employer is a large multi-national company. They are self-insured which means they actually pay for all of the healthcare. They have an insurance company that administers the program on their behalf.

It is possible some self-insured companies will look at actually buying in an exchange rather than self-paying. But this will only be a financial option for them. They will still have an obligation under the law to provide the minimum required health insurance or pay up to a $3K fine, per employee, per year.

[Honeycombe8]

22. That may be. And that's scary. But maybe not. Still, should ins. be tied to employment?

Should ins. be tied to employment, in teh first place? Many people, myself included, stay employed at places only for the insurance. That's not good for the economy.

IF it becomes a problem that employers drop insurance as benefits, then I suspect the govt will step in to subsidize or do something else, coupled with an increase in wages.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. By 2014 you can chose to drop your private employer insurance

and buy into the exchanges.

And you cannot be denied for pre existing conditions.

[Honeycombe8]

25. I did not know that. Schwing! That is great news. nt

[Posteritatis]

27. I've heard two particularly "good" ones so far today

One, that the legislation outlaws private health insurance and that no providers will be permitted to sell insurance anymore, and two, that the legislation specifies physicians' salaries by requiring they all be paid the same as a GP.

Yeeeeah.

Same people in that discussion kept insisting that, as a Canadian, I needed to go through a government tribunal to see my doctor...

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. I love fantasy writers...

[Mister Ed]

33. No worries. The Death Panels will be sending you to the guillotine anyway...

...so who needs private health insurance when they're dead?