Let’s go over Barack Obama’s acumen when it comes to insurance, shall we?
When I was young, just got out of college, I had to buy auto insurance. I had a beat-up old car. And I won’t name the name of the insurance company, but there was a company — let’s call it Acme Insurance in Illinois. And I was paying my premiums every month. After about six months I got rear-ended and I called up Acme and said, I’d like to see if I can get my car repaired, and they laughed at me over the phone because really this was set up not to actually provide insurance; what it was set up was to meet the legal requirements. But it really wasn’t serious insurance.
Lest you think I’m making this up, there’s video at the link. What young Barry had contracted for was obviously minimum liability insurance. It’s cheap. It covers the legal requirement to have insurance so you can drive your car legally but doesn’t cover collision damage. You see commercials for this insurance on cable all the time. The commercials typically look like they were produced on a budget of about $15 and feature an animated general or, in the Baltimore area, Ravens football players, surrounded by scantily-clad women, while they attempt to rap. Classy stuff. Whether you pay your premiums every month is irrelevant to what kinds of repairs are paid for in the event of an accident. That’s in the contract, for those who bother to read it. Depending on what young Barry said to the insurance pros when he asked them to pay for repairs to his car, he probably deserved to be laughed at. But chances are, the insurance pros didn’t laugh at him. But maybe they did, who knows for sure? Barry says lots of things that turn out not to be, strictly speaking, true.
At any rate, fast forward a few years, and young Barry isn’t so young and he can afford better insurance for his cars, though he gets a few company cars and a helicopter and a jet now, so he probably still hasn’t looked into the details of insurance much over the years. Perhaps his wife handles the family insurance nowadays. Maybe his former pastor did, or that guy in the neighbor who helped him launch his political career. It doesn’t really matter.
Last week Barry decreed that health insurance companies would provide a service to millions of people, free of charge henceforth.
Asked what impact the requirement will have on their costs in the year to two years after it goes into effect, 40 percent of the participants said they expect the requirement will increase costs through higher pharmacy expenses.
I bet you could knock Barry over with a feather when he reads that. If he ever bothers to.
The survey of pharmacy directors at the health plans was conducted on Wednesday by Reimbursement Intelligence, which advises pharmaceutical, medical device and other companies on reimbursement issues. The firm did not name the insurance plans it surveyed.
Of the health plans, 20 percent said costs would even out because they already budget for contraception in the premium, 6.7 percent said it would drive up pharmacy costs but decrease medical costs, while 33.3 percent weren’t sure. None said it would lead to net savings.
If middle aged Barry has figured out how to dispense billions of pills at no cost to anyone, perhaps he can turn his powerful mind toward performing lesser miracles next week.
Words like liability, collision, and insurance are obviously not included in the vocabulary tests administered at Columbia.
Obama lied about his Mom’s health insurance and lied about many other things so I have no reason to believe he is telling the whole truth here.
If we are going to give out free birth control it should be to low income women of child bearing age. The best way to do it would be through EBT cards because at least in theory these are women of limited means. You can add a separate credit that can only be used for birth control at the pharmacy.
Actually, most low income women in that age group are probably on some sort of state medical plan, such as Medicaid. The best way to dispense the birth control would be through those plans.
I also suspect quite a few of them already have such a benefit.
birth control is not expensive…not nearly as expensive as viagra…why is there no debate on this?..
Men should NOT be deciding the question of whether or not to provide birth control for women…
Does the boinker have more privileges in this system/society than the potentially boinked?.. The men don’t have the potential of getting pregnant. Why should they have any say so?
was that crude?..
Off the top of my head, most people probably aren’t even aware of the viagra angle. But — there’s a difference between viagra, which does treat an actual disease, and the contraceptive/abortifacient mandate, which does not (unless you’re in that fringe that considers pregnancy a disease). The numbers of potential users of viagra vs the pill probably tips the cost scale over toward the pill, wouldn’t you think? Plus, the government lacks the Constitutional authority to dictate its policy on churches and religious groups in the first place. My own quick take is that neither should be mandated in anyone’s coverage, but I’m libertarian that way. The Obama regime has also flatly lied about the cost, which is the point of this piece. As one commenter noted the other day, we’ve now gone from ObamaCare as a means to insure the uninsured, to mandating lifestyle choices at others’ expense. That isn’t how the bill we weren’t allowed to see before its passage was sold to the nation.
The fact is, thanks to Obama’s irresponsible debt, we’re going to need more Americans in the future. His mandate will deliver fewer Americans.
It is this type of thinking which strips away any choice regarding reproductive rights from men.
Why should they (men) have any say so?
Because of this one very simple biological fact: it takes two to tango.
Until the day that females become capable of mitosis. At which point I will gladly cede all reproductive responsibility to the fairer sex.
Enough with the Viagra canard. Viagra isn’t remotely comparable to birth control. Now if they were covering Viagra but not fertility drugs, then you’d have a point, but it is absurd to suggest that a drug plan must cover a drug that causes a medical problem (infertility) in order to cover one that treats a medical problem (impotence). Must a drug plan intended to save lives also cover suicide pills?
I can’t imagine why any insurance company would cover Viagra, except perhaps to reduce the incidence of suicides among older men who can’t have sex anymore. (And while I have seen no studies on this, I would not be at all surprised if there is a connection.) More importantly, if the government required insurers to cover Viagra, I would be pretty upset. This is not the government’s job.
Each state lets a legislative commitee dictate a formulary which is a list of Rx drugs the health insurance companies have to cover (a major stumbling block to interstate health insurance). After Viagra was approved here in GA, the pill got approved as well! Even though it had been around for 25 years longer. What a coinkidink!
Bottom line: The President of the United States has dictated that a private company give out a good or service for FREE. That is the core of this issue. A private company is being told they will give out a good/service for free. That is not in the Constitution. Where is the public outrage? It is NOT a contraceptive issue. Our government is telling a private company that they must give out a good/service for FREE! Can’t say it any clearer.
I know the insurance company, most likely, …it was owned by a law firm in downtown Chicago, they tried nearly every case, rarely settling. Since going to trial in Cook County in those days would take four, five, six years, and an appeal could take another year or two…the “insurer” could hold onto their “claim money” for up to eight years.
Since the value of money would often double in seven years, there was an incentive to pay in “future dollars” over “present dollars”.
The system was broken, because the system was corrupt. Only Democrats could become judges in Chicago and much of Cook County. Many of them were inferior and failed lawyers. Not all. But most.
Juries in Cook County were notorious for runaway verdicts and lawyers were famous for “forum shopping” for the right judge.
“Big pocket” defendants were at the mercy of a corrupt and gamed system.
Since insurance is “pooled risk”, it depends upon a fair system to implement. There is and was nothing fair about Chicago’s system. Democratic machine politics invades every element and for much of Cook County as well.
When the Democratic Party moved hard left, Chicago politics moved hard left. The South Side Irish had dominated the scene, with the downtown 1st ward being run by a uniquely “organized” Italian influence. When Richie Daley didn’t want to wait for Jane Byrne to leave, he ran against her…they split the white vote and Harold Washington became mayor.
That brought hard leftism to Chicago on steroids. The Socialist Scholars convention saw this as the time to make their move. Obama was being groomed from the days he was plucked out of Occidental in California and brought cross country to Columbia…a school with admissions standards he had ZERO chance of meeting, either by way of high school or college test scores or grades.
He had NEVER achieved any honors of any type. Nor did he at Columbia.
With such an academic record of mediocrity, he gained entrance to Harvard Law School. How? Nobody is permitted to find out. But Don Warden is said to have been an influence somehow.
Obama did not write a single scholarly article, yet became an “officer” for the Law Review. How? Nobody is permitted to find out. But, it has NEVER been accorded to anyone else with such a lack of achievement and production.
The Socialist Scholars put him under the wing of a mentor, Jeremiah Wright. He learned how to work with ACORN/SEIU and UNO. He then was groomed for State Senator. Under the hard left of Alice Palmer, Danny Davis and the New Party…a Socialist Scholars creation, along with Jan Schakowsky and Robert Creamer.
The hard left was now dominating the political landscape in Chicago. Obama needed to pump up his resume. He got a job with a law firm with ties to City Government and a “lecturing” gig at the University of Chicago in Hyde Park, a hotbed of hard leftism.
You can’t “pool risk” in a gamed system. You can’t pool risk in a system that is designed to destroy capitalism. If you don’t know precisely what was on the agenda for the Socialist Scholars, you have no way to evaluate why this attack on insurance, natural resources, manufacturing, energy, banking, finance, real estate, mortgages, student loans, major organized religion…are all about.
You can’t possibly understand. You may have an inkling, but unless and until you dive deeply into the Socialist Scholars agenda, you can’t understand a fraction of it. You may think you do, but you are fooling yourself.
Every single thing that is taking place now, has a meaning completely different from what appears on the face of it.
Every single thing that is taking place now, has a meaning completely different from what appears on the face of it.
Monumentally different than all the furry, gooey lies in which it is all wrapped for consumption by the useful idiots.
Very frustrating to see “them” put it out there (whatever “it” may be on any given day) and then watch everybody running around, huffing and puffing, expending energy on refuting them.
While “they” laugh all the way to the bank and put another notch on the gun handle.
I agree, totally, with your description of Obama as completely unqualified not only to be President, but for every single position/college etc that he has ever held.
BUT – I’m still sceptical of his being raised as a pawn in a larger conspiracy by the left. After all, my scepticism would mean that this Leftist Agency could not put, so to speak, all their Obamas-in-one-basket. They would have to realistically, have a number of potential candidates for the Role of Robotic Messiah-of-the-Socialist TakeOver of the US. Have we any indication of such candidates?
And, they’d have to have the willing compliance of the American people to actually want socialism and, a messiah, and, the total dissipation of their civic, religious and economic freedoms. Some certainly want this, either preferring to be safe-as-serfs or powerful-as-lords. But does everyone?
I guess we wont be seeing any scientific papers coming out any time soon about all the nasty results of synthetic hormones in our ecosystem, specifically affecting the animal life in our rivers, not to mention ingestion by the non target human population via drinking water.
Eco-fascists hate human beings more than they love fish.
There was the report of girly-man trout in Colorado a few years ago (something like 75% female, 10% male trout). There’s something seriously wrong when “male” is outnumbered by “other”.
The ones I just laugh at, are the women who wouldn’t DREAM of eating beef or chicken that isn’t “hormone-free”, but they’re on the Pill. And if you point out that THAT is why she had a stroke at the age of 27, you’re the Evil One.
Barry needs to also read the World Health Organization report about contraceptives that classifies them as carcinogens.
You are a racistbigothomophobewhowantswomentodie.
And you Jeanette are a moron.
When Obamacare was passed, didn’t Obama give an Executive Order stating that Federal Money would NOT be used for abortions? That was the only way he could get those miserable “Blue Dog” democrats to vote for it. Remember those days? Well, now that insurance companies are going to be required to provide birth control AND abortions to all of the women on their policies, and since now the insurance companies are going to be subsidized for all of this by the Federal Government, aren’t we using Federal money to pay for abortions? And isn’t the “Morning After Pill” a form of abortion as well, and now we’re being forced to pay for it? Isn’t this what Pelosi wanted from the very start? So now Executive Orders are meaningless too, unless of course they’re used to stop oil, coal, or natural gas companies from doring their jobs. Am I missing something here?
I think the rule of thumb is that we’ll sign/promise anything and then sneak what we’re really after under the radar ex post facto.
Exactly as Bawney Fwank described “single payer” in one of his too candid moments, as in…(I paraphrase)…”Ok, initially we’ll pretend to go with the survivability of private insurance companies, but, on the heels of national “healthcare”, they’ll eventually go under when unable to compete.”
Barry says lots of things that turn out not to be, strictly speaking, true.
Ya think ?
In order to yank the heartstrings of the brain dead while Obamacare was under consideration, Barry lied about his mom’s coverage when she was diagnosed with uterine cancer.
She had insurance coverage, but Barry went into a long lament as to how she wad denied coverage & couldn’t get it.
He “remembers” the agony she went through at that predicament.
For the record, being on the birth control pill for long stretches of time (like over 5 years) is not recommended by the medical establishment. That that has been the case since “the pill” came onto the scene.
Same with hormone replacement therapy for older women. All that estrogen/progesterone tends to promote breast cancer, a small detail not widely advertised.
Anyway, Barry and his fellow eugenicists at HHS are recommending something that is, in fact, adverse to “women’s health”, while the liberal yellers and screamers are demanding it.
Well, now that religious charities, hospitals,etc., are not really religious value promoters like the church or the seminary and are thus not violating their religion based freedom of conscience against providing free contraception, what exactly is the basis for their tax exempt status? Surely since they’re no longer a religious milieu by government edict, they shouldn’t be getting a tax exemption for being a “religion”. Or is the accounting trick of ordering the private insurance company, hired by the Church to provide free contraception designed to politically quiet the Catholic liberals who now go along like sheep at the proffered accounting sleight of hand (since the costs are passed along in higher premiums and many hospitals are self insured)? Now that church based charities are no longer doing religion by government edict, does that mean they no longer have a tax exempt status? Or will that tax exemption now be the quid pro quo for keeping those people of profound religious principle on the Obama reservation?
I’m kind of insulted by all the shrieking from proggs that women are incapable of obtaining the birth control they choose unless the government is forcing organizations to and companies to provide it for “free”[sic].I did some asking around yesterday, and women who were of childbearing age in the 1960s and 1970s paid for pills and diaphragms et al if they wanted them.
Adding it to the list of ways the big-government crowd infantilizes adults. The company your daddy works for is going to fund your sexploits from the day you turn 13 and your mom takes you to the gyn to get you your first shot of Depo Provera (easier than teaching you to value yourself enough to put off sex until you graduate HS) until the day you turn 26 and finally age out of their coverage. Ugh.
Yikes. Here’s a suggestion: Let someone ELSE be the guinea pig about Depo Provera’s long term effects.
Here’s an outline from Michelle Malkin on what Obama’s socialist takeover of the health economy is doing to the US economy. Read it and note the increased taxes on the ECONOMIC Health of this nation, because of Obama’s take-over of the health economy.
Note: – a production industry in the health economy already pays 35% of its profits in federal taxes. Add to that, another 4-5% in state taxes.
REMEMBER – profits go to purchase new equipment, expand production, hire new workers; profits don’t go (as the progressives think) into the CEO’s old socks.
Now, Obama’s Health Economy will ADD 15% more in taxes. Got that? That means that the profits that will be taken by the Govt – are 55%!!!! So, for every hundred dollars earned by the company, 55 dollars will go to the govt. To fund what? To be redistibuted to people who earn nothing and do not make any wealth to be taxed? To pay for Obama’s constant use of AirForce One in his campaign travels?
Note: since, with Obama’s takeover of the economy, only 45% is left to the company – they can’t hire more people, can’t expand their business, can’t repair equipment, can’t produce more goods. That’s what Obama is setting up. A DEAD ECONOMY.
“In typical Obama-transparent fashion, the Internal Revenue Service quietly released a complex thicket of medical device tax implementation rules in a Friday document dump earlier this month. Barring congressional intervention, the medical device tax will go into full effect in 2013.
Cook Medical, which manufactures products for everything from endovascular therapy, critical care medicine and general surgery, to diagnostic and interventional procedures, to bioengineered tissue replacement and regeneration, gastroenterology and endoscopy procedures, urology, and obstetrics and gynecology, has called for the levy’s repeal. Cook Group chairman Stephen Ferguson noted the tax burden amounted to a whopping 55 percent of its profits.
“For a company like ours, which pays 35 percent of our net earnings in federal corporate taxes and another 4 to 5 percent in state and local corporate taxes, the excise tax translates to another payment that will consume 15 percent more of our earnings,” he estimated. “This creates tremendous pressure for us to move manufacturing to Europe and other parts of the world.” According to the trade publication Mass Device, the company has already canceled plans to build a new factory in the U.S. because of the Obamacare tax burden.
Stryker, a maker of artificial hips and knees based in Kalamazoo, Mich., announced in November that it would slash 5 percent of its global workforce (an estimated 1,000 workers) this coming year to reduce costs related to Obamacare’s taxes and mandates.”
Read the above. This is what Obama is doing to the US economy.
yeh…all that and why in the world if it is the best thing since sliced bread or beer in a can did so many companies request waivers. DHHS should also be asked and have to provide the criteria for the waivers.
Why should we be forced to pay for the Kardashians’ birth control? Because that’s basically what it boils down to.
“Why should we be forced to pay for the Kardashians’ birth control?”
We are paying for birth control for the population of the planet of Kardashia?
Well, if it is logical for the Government to pay for Viagra and contraception at the same time, then why should the inhabitants of other planets be outside of our government’s charitable responsibilities?
I love the bleatings of all these morons who buy a “Third Party Fire and Theft” insurance policy for their vehicles because its CHEAP. Then cannot understand why THEIR car is not covered for damage. Oh and Contraception is not a RIGHT and pregnancy is not a DISEASE.