Skip to main content

[Also available in green]

Near the end of a long article in the Washington Post about the resistance people have in Oklahoma to buying car insurance or being told what to do by the government, we encounter an anonymous man who has no health insurance and doesn't like the insurance mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act:

On a recent morning at the center, patients waited in avo­cado-green chairs to pick up medicine or see a doctor. John, 37, who would not give his last name, said he could not afford health insurance for himself, his wife and his five children on his $38,000 salary as an apartment manager. He said he resents the idea that the government could compel him to do something he may not be able to afford.

“I don’t think the government should have the right to force people to do anything unless it’s following a criminal law or something,” he said.

This man has a large family. It's larger than can be accounted for by the Kaiser Foundation health care subsidy calculator, which only will allow me to enter a maximum family size of four.  Since he has a family size of seven, I can't get a precise measure of what this man stands to get under ObamaCare, but it will be more generous than what I report here.  

A 37 year-old man with a family of four and an annual income of $38,000 is making 162% of the poverty rate.  A typical health care plan for such a family would cost $11,384, so it's easy to see why this man cannot afford a policy.  Under the new law, the maximum percentage of income a person/family has to pay for the premium if eligible for a subsidy is 4.56%. What this means is that the government will give this man $9,650 a year to insure himself and his whole family.  He is obligated to pay $1,734.  

Let's break this down.  Right now, he has no health insurance and it will cost him over eleven thousand dollars to buy a policy for his family.  Under the new law, he can cover his whole family for $1,734 or he can pay a tax penalty of $695 and keep his entire family uninsured.  So, essentially, the true cost of getting insured is $1,139.  The true cost of remaining uninsured is $695 and all the untold risk that entails.  

And, again, because his family size is seven and not four, I am underestimating the benefit he will receive.  

Now, I hate the mandate because it attempts to compel people to buy private for-profit health insurance, and I don't think we should use insurance as the way to pay for health care.  But this guy is probably totally unaware of the real choice he is facing.  He is being offered a chance to avoid the risk of foreclosure on his house and total bankruptcy if any of his seven family members become seriously ill for a price tag of less than $1,800 a year when a normal policy currently costs in excess of $11,000 and would constitute more than a quarter of his annual income.  

On top of that, his annual out-of-pocket expenses will be capped at $4,167 (based on a family of four) while he currently has no cap on that whatsoever.  

He is being offered an incredible deal.  But he's been indoctrinated into believing that his liberty is being threatened.  I hope John reads this, because he needs to know what President Obama did for his family, and he needs to take advantage of it.  

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (250+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xanthippe2, Terri, maggiejean, Gooserock, majcmb1, LeftHandedMan, sunbro, rexymeteorite, petesmom, doroma, FG, jdld, twigg, ask, yet another liberal, sharman, mwk, durrati, Lorikeet, begone, Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle, NJpeach, Calvino Partigiani, JanetT in MD, greengemini, ZappoDave, Pam from Calif, SueM1121, jan4insight, Ekaterin, oldliberal, Calouste, CDH in Brooklyn, furi kuri, samoashark, GreyHawk, Trix, Bob Duck, jennifree2bme, AaronInSanDiego, scribe, stevenaxelrod, Lawrence, marianevans, mofembot, radarlady, CocoaLove, Red Bean, OLinda, winkk, markthshark, Matt Z, uciguy30, agincour, LibbyLuLu, riverlover, Nulwee, KroneckerD, rat racer, camlbacker, sharonsz, concernedamerican, bkamr, Kitty, theKgirls, litho, skohayes, spunhard, itsbenj, Onomastic, cskendrick, secret38b, Richard Cranium, 57andFemale, rapala, Crashing Vor, MartyM, sebsgf, nannyboz, vicki, Fighting Bill, Foundmyvoice, eeff, bronte17, NoMoreLies, Emerson, Smoh, Hillbilly Dem, Wee Mama, No one gets out alive, WinSmith, gulfgal98, rockhound, filkertom, MKSinSA, SaintC, MRA NY, OleHippieChick, Stripe, zukesgirl64, joedemocrat, gwilson, maybeeso in michigan, kestrel9000, Heart n Mind, lineatus, semiot, kerflooey, Getreal1246, Gowrie Gal, Lefty Ladig, blue aardvark, Deep Texan, annrose, anodnhajo, TexasTom, gloriana, parker parrot, Hirodog, checkerspot, pamelabrown, Oh Mary Oh, TheLizardKing, ORDem, Only Needs a Beat, NYmama, Eddie L, Mets102, Gary Norton, Glen The Plumber, Mr Raymond Luxury Yacht, bwintx, Habitat Vic, highacidity, high uintas, Geenius at Wrok, Tchrldy, Rona, therehastobeaway, avsp, EdinStPaul, zerelda, Quantumlogic, litoralis, TrueBlueMajority, nomandates, pat bunny, hyperstation, weaponsofmassdeception, OhioNatureMom, MKinTN, Debby, RO45, freeport beach PA, Wary, sethtriggs, Its a New Day, mkfarkus, boofdah, pvlb, Tea and Strumpets, anyname, AgavePup, MJ via Chicago, Cronesense, Arahahex, jnhobbs, OIL GUY, be the change you seek, hungrycoyote, texasmom, joynow, Shockwave, VA Breeze, 2thanks, Robynhood too, DianeNYS, SnyperKitty, Catte Nappe, Jeff Simpson, dksbook, Lost and Found, Nowhere Man, pileta, puakev, jim283, arizonablue, Chi, PhilW, banjolele, fumie, GeorgeXVIII, boran2, SoCalSal, Jim R, Railfan, NapaJulie, Unit Zero, Sylv, artmartin, Floja Roja, Pinko Elephant, ammaloy, Kamakhya, Sybil Liberty, rb608, GRLionsFan, eru, NoisyGong, askew, cotterperson, Loudoun County Dem, p gorden lippy, jolux, Diogenes2008, azrefugee, Crabby Abbey, sumitsu, Hill Jill, steamed rice, Sapere aude, edsbrooklyn, Avila, Land of Enchantment, MarkInSanFran, puck nc, estreya, nickrud, side pocket, michelewln, ColoTim, Gay CA Democrat, TXdem, Blu Gal in DE, itskevin, ccmask, Larsstephens, lissablack, science nerd, ParkRanger, slowbutsure, Amayi, Flyswatterbanjo, TigerMom, kevin k, UtahLibrul, dmhlt 66, Panacea Paola, SherwoodB, Justus
  •  booman ... (33+ / 0-)

    From your lips to John's ears.

    The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    by maggiejean on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 09:54:23 PM PDT

  •  He should indeed be that man's hero (74+ / 0-)

    and the fact that he is not is a tragedy. For him most of all.

    The 'he may not be able to afford' part just kills me. Find out first. Don't get your info from Rush or Hannity about it, find out for yourself. This poor fool probably doesn't know less than a damned thing about the ACA, let alone if he can't afford anything given to him in the future in it. Somebody who likes him, and millions just like him,  staying sick, struggling, and stuck on stupid told him that any antidote he might be offered was always going to be more poisonous than the poison, and something in him makes him believe it's true.

    Obama has done more for this guy than a dozen Ronald Reagans and George W. Bushes combined. I bet he still has the Bush 2000 bumpersticker on his pick-up. It's so fucking galling.

    How much hate do you have to have for a black President you didn't vote for, and for black people you don't know in general, to think that somebody trying to bring you healthcare is trying to kill you, or that poor black people can rig elections so rich white people cannot vote freely and fairly, because the President is not only a Democrat, but a Democrat who isn't white?

    Nothing helps the Oligarchs and OverClass stay on top more than people with absolutely jackshit and barely treading water hating on and resenting other people, also with jackshit who are also barely treading water themselves, for their being screwed in the Koch Brothers version of the old experiement in screwing most of America for the benefit of the rich and powerful few.

    When I was a kid, the person who celebrated the most when Reagan was re-elected by a landslide in 1984 was this haggard lady in one of the worst of the bottom floor apartments in the run-down apartment building I lived in. She was barely getting by with three kids on what limited foodstamps, public housing aid, and welfare she could get from the state of Massachusetts and the federal government.

    I never forgot that, or forgot the day she ranted and raved about how Michael Dukakis took her benefits away when the Reagan administration cut her lifelines when they could. I was 14, and even I knew who fucked her over so it was harder for her and her kids to get by.

    Reagan? To blame? She wouldn't hear it. St. Ronald Reagan.

    I bet that poor woman is somewhere out there in the Tea Party somewhere right now, "No Socialism!" signs and T-Shirts and all, if she's not dead.

    Somebody without a pot to piss in lauding the people who fucked him over, while damning the people trying to keep him from drowning, is one of the things that hurts my heart the most about being an American in 2012. It happens all the time.

    I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

    by LeftHandedMan on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 10:05:04 PM PDT

    •  That is the purgatory the right wing has... (21+ / 0-)

      created in this country through a relentless campaign of lies and obfuscation.

      I feel for this guy in a way. But I find it unfathomable and frankly unconscionable that a grown man of reasonable intelligence responsible for the lives of six people plus himself wouldn't bother to take the time and initiative to find out the facts about the ACA before dismissing it out of hand.

      People like him are quick to take the word of right wing politicians who tell them that anything to do with the government is bad, right wing politicians who, incidentally, want to become the government.

      Head meet wall.

      "That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history." ~ Aldous Huxley

      by markthshark on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 03:12:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  GOP reps validate Frightwing radio lies (8+ / 0-)

        Bachmann & Co. spew the same rightwing rhetoric, lies, and disinformation on the House and the Senate floors!

        "Tax cuts for the 1% create jobs." -- Republicans, HAHAHA - in China

        by MartyM on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 03:54:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  it's not a tragedy if self-inflicted. (13+ / 0-)

        count me among those who laugh at videos of idiots shooting themselves in the foot, (or buttocks, or whatever).
        this guy's approach to the whole issue is "the gubmint's gonna make me buy something I don't want".
        What's important about this is that is where all thought stops.
        This is a conservative disease. The recent study linking conservative political alignment to lazy, surface-only thinking is the kind of thing only liberals will notice, by definition. I have thought a lot about that study and how I approach discussions with people who operate this way. It's frankly terrifying. We progressives often make the mistake of assuming there is an effort of thought that has brought this man to this conclusion, and if we walk him back through it, we'll find the place where he "misunderstood" or believed some minor lie, or whatever. He didn't and we shouldn't. There was no empirical basis for his conclusions. He was presented with a set of statements that comported with a self-centered worldview, and That. Was. It.

        In his mind a number of broken synapses combine to create a major short-circuit.
        To wit;
        1. health insurance is a product like any other. If I don't  want a green sedan, nobody should force me to buy one. This conveniently removes the giant obstacles of mortality, misfortune, or disease not only for himself, but his family.
        2. I am not sick now, therefore I will never be sick. this guy almost certainly doesn't actually believe this consciously, but his behavior demonstrates it is an operating principle.
        It is a delusion of convenience; the exact same type of justification heroin users employ until they actually become addicts.
        3. The conflation of health insurance with other commodities does not extend to other aspects of his life. If he owns a home, the bank forced him to buy homeowner's insurance; not for his protection, but for the bank's. Same with car insurance, liability insurance for his apartment rentals, etc. Everything he buys has extra cost added on to it as producers and middlemen pass their expenses on to him, the consumer. If it's so terrible for government to force him to buy things (that he will definitely need) why isn't it a problem for business to force him to buy things he may or may not ever need? Especially when these mandates are for their benefit, not his?
        4. He is making potentially life and death decisions for others. Sure they're his family (which in RW circles these days is awfully close to "property" in practice), but uninformed decision-making with their well-being is hazardous to their health; like a "Christian Science" clown trying to pray away Stage 3 cancer in a child. Most sane people call that child endangerment.
        5. As the diary points out, he is wrong. Flat-out, factually incorrect. Gets a red X on the paper wrong. Putting out a fire with napalm wrong. The guy's wrong, ok?

        Class war has consequences, and we are living them.

        by kamarvt on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 06:14:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, this diary is terribly insulting (0+ / 0-)

          by implying that not only is this guy ignorant, he's also very very stupid.

          Not that the two things are mutually exclusive, of course (but, generally they are not, the ignorance tends to be quite willful).

        •  Actually this guy's approach to the whole issue is (6+ / 0-)

          ...

          "the gubmint's gonna make me buy something I don't want for those people I don't like."
          There. Fixed it for you. IMO it's the heart of the conservative philosophy, and why working-class voters like John lower the lever for Republicans every fucking time.

          Seen on Facebook: "Rich people are not the cause of a robust economy, they are the result of a robust economy."

          by boofdah on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 08:02:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  An odd suggestion (0+ / 0-)

          Do not analyze John by what he says - that is more heavily influenced by propaganda than what he really believes. Analyze what he sees in reality that leads him to believe in that propaganda:

          1. Health insurance is not exactly "a product like any other", it is $1734 a year that he believes he cannot afford, and with that family he is probably right. That $1734 may be a choice between health insurance and protein. (Maybe in reality he is faced with a choice between health insurance and the latest cell phones for his children so they can be with the cool kids in school, but he's an American - brainless consumerism is a separate issue. - in analyzing his beliefs it is still a consideration.)

          2. Assuming he is truthful about how much the day to day expenses of his family are, again it is not, "I'm not sick, so I don't feel like paying." it's, "I'm not sick, so I'll pay the rent instead."

          3. Why do you assume he accepts this? Just because he doesn't rant about them? He cannot do anything about those things, but the ACA is an open discussion. He usually does not even see the others, but the ACA is on the news every night. When your car won't start you don't complain about the traffic.

          4. You condemn John for making the wrong moral choice, but you assume it is the wrong choice by isolating it. In 20 years his children may say something you won't want to hear when the bill for the ACA subsidies comes due. (yes, yes, the CBO says... It's not what the CBO tells him, it's what he sees and believes. )

          (In my opinion the ACA IS the wrong moral choice. I believe that health care is the moral obligation, not giving thousands of dollars to insurance companies - but that is counterproductive for this discussion.)

          Personally I am in much better economic shape than John, (though for most of my life I was much worse) and I am uninsured, because in my present situation I get better care for far less money by being uninsured. In my case the poorer care and higher cost in my present outweighs the future risks. That would not be the case if I had John's family. In his shoes I would believe and chose differently, but looking beyond his choice of words I find it difficult to condemn him.

    •  If only (12+ / 0-)

      This guy has been screwed over, like hundreds of millions of other Americans, by the current oligarchic control of government that's killing the middle class.  I can't really blame him for not wanting to spend $1700 a year on health insurance when he's got five kids to feed on $38K a year.  Of course his family needs health care, and of course he won't be able to afford it without insurance.  But I can't imagine where he's having to pinch pennies now, much less what it'd take for him to put food on the table and shoes on the kids' feet without that money that would go to health insurance premiums.

      Obama and today's Democrats haven't done nearly enough to begin to reverse the ever-widening income inequality that's putting this man and his family in that position.  If they did, he might see a champion to thank and vote for.  But they're not, and he doesn't.  Democrats under the president have done a lot more for banksters than for him.  Of course this guy's interests are better served by the president than by Romney, but not better enough.  It doesn't help win hearts to overstate the case.  

      Obama should be this guy's hero.  The distance between what that "should" would mean, and where we are now, is the measure of the Democratic party's failure to live up to its heritage and its role in our politics.

      Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. --- Howard Zinn

      by Dallasdoc on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 05:58:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  exactly (7+ / 0-)

        I don't have $1700 extra dollars anywhere to buy health insurance, either (and I only have one kid).

        So, in his situation, I'd have to eat the penalty, too.  In cases like that, the penalty is just another cost, something else for which you have to lay out cash you don't have.

        When you live paycheck to paycheck, $1700 is a lot of money.

        Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

        by a gilas girl on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:23:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  And you have all the answers (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hill Jill, estreya, ColoTim

        as to how the President could have accomplished what you wish he had?  Obama and the Democrats haven't done nearly enough?  Holy crap.  You tell me exactly how they could have accomplished any more than they did faced with the stonewalling of the Republicans.  Do you think any of our responsible leaders including Obama actually want to charge this man a single red cent for his family's health care?  I have read or seen zero to indicate they didn't bust their asses to get us as far as they could on the road to a true single payer system with the numbers they had.  No Obama won't be this man's hero but he damned well should be yours.

        "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism." -- Carl Sagan

        by artmartin on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 10:32:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Heh (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TimmyB, chase

          Pity Obama took Medicare for All off the table then, isn't it?  Do you think that with over a year's worth of arm-twisting and brinksmanship, that would have been a tougher sell than the ACA?  Not likely.  People understand the concept and it's broadly popular.  But Obama didn't want to push for it, so he took it off the table at the start.

          Obama is certainly not my hero, and I wonder why you'd choose such a flawed and compromised politician as yours.  I have higher standards in heroes than that.

          Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. --- Howard Zinn

          by Dallasdoc on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 12:08:06 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  GOP Didn't "Stonewall" Health Insurance Reform (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Dallasdoc, chase

          Those who  live in a fantasy land can blame the GOP all they want for the way health insurance reform turned out, but it wasn't the GOP who foisted this shitty law on the people.

          Health insurance reform was passed by a solidly Democratic House.  It was passed using reconciliation procedures in the Senate, which could not be fillibustered by the GOP and required only a majority to pass.  59 of 100 Senate seats were held by the Democrats, and a 50-50 tie could have been decided by the Vice President.

          So the GOP can't be blamed for how shitty the Health Insurance Reform law turned out.  Obama and the Democrats are 100% responsible for this law.  And this law, because it is so unpopular with Americans, is why the Dems lost in 2010.  

          These are simple facts.  Those of us who live in the real world, we look over past performance when things go wrong, and try to learn from our mistakes.  If you want to ignore the facts, and instead blame the GOP or some other boogy man for what the Dems did, well, you are just ensuring that political defeats will continue in the future.  

          Those who claim "there is no need for any corrective action on the Dems part because everything that goes wrong is the GOP's fault" are lemmings marching into the sea. "Stay the course" is the strategy to follow when you have sweeping victory after sweeping victory.  When you lose and you stay the course however, you are only ensuring worse defeats in the future.        

          •  You seem to be assuming that the 59 votes (0+ / 0-)

            for the Democrats would have all been in favor of a Medicare for all bill.  There were several Democrats who weren't in favor of healthcare reform and it took a LOT of arm twisting to get anything passed.  Yes, it was passed under reconciliation, but had the Democrats proposed Medicare for all, or something similar to a Universal coverage or Single Payer system, they wouldn't have achieved 50 votes to even allow Biden's vote to make a difference.  Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Joe Lieberman and many others were against reform that extreme.

            I would have loved for a form of Single Payer or offering a government option, and it sure seemed like that option was pulled off the table early on.  However, I now believe it would not have passed and it would have delayed passage even longer.

            This law is unpopular because the Democrats haven't been explaining it.  When it's explained, which is the diarist's point, people like the various provisions.  The one part that people object to is forcing people to buy insurance from private companies or pay a tax/fine/penalty.  And if the Democrats were to come out and explain not only all the subsidies to help people afford this but also how they're increasing the shared risk pool so everyone's rates can go down, plus how no more than 20% of the amount paid can be used for non-medical purposes so perhaps those huge bonuses won't be so disgusting anymore, people wouldn't hate it quite so badly.

            •  But the People You Name aren't GOPers (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Dallasdoc, chase

              This shitty law was authored by Dems, and only by Dems, and nothing you write challenges that simple fact.  

              The one part that people object to is forcing people to buy insurance from private companies or pay a tax/fine/penalty.
              This entire law is a giveaway to insurance companies.  More and better spin isn't going to change that fact either.  

               

    •  George McGovern (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kevin k, LeftHandedMan

      McGovern said that he knew he was going to lose his Senate seat in 1980 when two elderly women declared that they weren't voting for him because of his vote to "give away" the Panama Canal. Then they paid for their groceries with food stamps.

      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson

      by Blue Boomer on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 01:10:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  People are strange sometimes (21+ / 0-)

    I have a couple next door who don't have insurance but have an Impeach Obama sticker on their car.

    Recently, the girlfriend told me her boyfriend was laying floors at a dental office (he's a handyman/carpenter) in exchange for some dental work she needed done.

    Today she came over and it was obvious that she had had some cosmetic surgery done on her face, which I'm assuming was not cheap.

    I guess it's all a matter of priorities, but frankly I just don't get people sometimes.

    •  they have so little and Obama is taking it away! (6+ / 0-)

      At least that's what they've been brainwashed to believe.

      Clinton refused to give tax cuts to the super wealthy and Frightwing radio and later Fox (when they began in 1996) sreamed Democrats "raise taxes" - omitting the part that the tax increase was only for the wealthy - NOT the middle class, the job creators.

      I'm so glad Clinton will deliver the Keynote speech at the Convention!

      "Tax cuts for the 1% create jobs." -- Republicans, HAHAHA - in China

      by MartyM on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 03:58:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What Are Their Grounds For Impeachment? (13+ / 0-)

    What act of treason has the President ever committed?

    Do they watch a lot of FOX?  Do they listen to Rush Limbaugh?  If so, logic won't penetrate.  In the meantime, her boyfriend can keep laying floors at the dentist office.

    They're probably not going to be able to afford a dentist for a very long time.  

  •  given his family size and income (11+ / 0-)

    would he qualify for expanded medicaid if his state doesn't opt out?

    "Okay, until next time. Keep sending me your questions, and I will make fun of you... I mean, answer them." - Strong Bad

    by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 01:01:57 AM PDT

  •  Would to god people like this man (10+ / 0-)

    were open to receiving facts. But so many are not, and such ignorance threatens to overturn something that benefits millions and millions of our fellow citizens. Sigh.

  •  Jebus! A ghost! (5+ / 0-)

    I need to get over to the green side more often.

  •  I largely agree with everything you've written (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NoMoreLies, sethtriggs

    but let me just tease out this guy's perspective a little bit more. just a little.

    what he's thinking is about suddenly having what amounts to (when you factor in the penalty) a brand new $100 per month bill (just under 100 actually) that I didn't have to pay before but will now. and the penalty is less. that's all this guy is thinking.

    I don't really sympathize with this POV, I would actually find a single person on about the same income with no kids having to pay the same or more to be much more valid in complaining. if you've got kids, though, shouldn't it be a major priority to get whatever health care you can for them? of coyurse. but some people just have their heads in the sand and nothing gets through until something terrible happens to either them or their kids. it's really sad.

    Think of me what you will, I've got a little space to fill. - Tom Petty

    by itsbenj on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 03:41:39 AM PDT

    •  If you don't have that $100 a month (9+ / 0-)

      then you don't have that $100 a month. I think the attitude of dems on this mandate has been incredibly callous, and this diary is no exception to that.

      •  I am not (11+ / 0-)

        being callous.  I don't think the man is aware of his true choice.  I tried to make that clear.

        •  Well I disagree (5+ / 0-)

          The pro-mandate arguments have been incredibly callous for a long time now. I actually find it unfathomable that they're being pushed by liberals.

          •  I'm only pro-mandate (10+ / 0-)

            to the extent that it is better than having this guy and his family uninsured because they are priced out of the health care market.  

            I would finance health care the way we finance Medicare.  

            But that wasn't an option with our Congress.

            •  He's still priced out (6+ / 0-)

              Just because something is on sale doesn't mean you can afford it. This guy is trying to feed a family of seven on $38k a year and insurance would cost him almost 5% of his income, not counting copays and deductables.

              •  Please (8+ / 0-)

                He is not priced out.  He needs to prioritize.  With a family that large, he's probably paying close to $1,700/yr in health care/dental even if they're all healthy and have nice teeth.  All wellness exams are now free.  Prescriptions have small co-pays.

                He is quite likely to save money.  

                •  You have no idea how people like on that money (6+ / 0-)

                  I think it is very likely that there is very little or no fat in that budget. I know several families in almost this exact scenario. There is nothing left to trim from their budgets. And your assertion that they can save on dental care is just crazy. Do you know how many families of this size and income level go without, or absolute bare minimum? You think they're spending $1700 a year they don't have on dental care even if they're healthy? Nuts. Absolutely nuts.

                  This is EXACTLY what I meant about being callous. They are still priced out, and your insults about their priorities will not change that.

                  •  Did (7+ / 0-)

                    I say that he was spending $1700 on dental care?

                    Did I say that?

                    Did I?  

                    Because you seem to base your entire rebuttal on the premise that I said he pays $1,700 on dental care.  

                    What I said is that a family with seven people is very likely in incur health care costs in excess of $1700 a year, even if they are all relatively healthy.  I did not say all of that money would come from dental care.  Of course, considering the cost of orthodontics, it's very possible that the family does pay that much in dental care.  

                    So, what's my point?  

                    My point is that he isn't losing $1700 when by buys health insurance.  He is saving money on prescriptions and wellness exams and he could easily wind up saving money when all is said and done.

                    As I noted in the piece, the numbers are for a family of four.  With five kids, this guy might qualify for Medicaid.  And, in any case, his subsidy is bigger and his premium cost lower that what I posted.  

                    It's very likely that the difference in cost between his tax penalty and his premium payment comes in at less than $800, or $67/month.  If you can't trim $67/month to gain a $9000 benefit for your family that insures you against catastrophe, you should be on Medicaid.  

                    •  I find it laughable that he's paying that much (5+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      TJ, BradyB, hardhatmama, chase, TimmyB

                      in medical care when it would clearly be beyond what he could afford. Dental or otherwise. I know families like this. They're my friends and family. They are not spending anything CLOSE to that on medical care because there isn't any money for medical care. They go without unless it is absolutely urgent.

                      And he doesn't have to come up with the difference from the penalty - he has to come up with the $150 a month the policy costs beyond his current budget. It isn't any less money because you're going to fuck him over with a penalty if he doesn't buy. This is just a flat out bullshit line of argument.

              •  OK. I hear what you're saying, and I'm gonna admit (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Christin, Hill Jill, TXdem

                that I do feel callous when you put it this way... I cannot help it, the thought crosses my mind why does someone who makes 38K a year have five children, which he/they obviously cannot afford to take care of? Yes clearly its their right to have as many children as they want, but if they cannot afford a hundred dollars a month to provide health insurance for those kids, then how are they affording to pay for their actual medical care that they need? Do they get their vaccinations and basic care growing up? Do they see a dentist so they will keep their teeth? (I know, the stupid health care system doen't even include dental, don't get me started on that). Who will pay if one of them gets injured or seriously ill?

                The point is, if a person cannot afford the very low cost of subsidized health insurance, then they cannot afford to have five kids -- not without help from the government at least!

                One way or another, the public will pick up the costs for it, so yes, sure, I understand why he's personally upset, because he just thinks about what he's being "forced" to do -- pay at least a few hundred dollars a year towards those costs -- but he is not thinking about the fact that raising five kids costs a lot of money -- more than he has -- and that without the help and support of the government and those taxes, his kids would have jack.

                And I do think he needs to take at least a tiny bit of the responsibility for the costs of having such a large family, whether he likes it or not. So, yes, call me callous... it's true.

                Funny that you prompted me to write that, with your comment... because I have always been strongly opposed to the mandate. And now here I am defending it... and 'getting it' as to why it makes sense after all. Ah-mazing...  

                •  So to hell with him then? (5+ / 0-)

                  To hell with the kids too?

                  And it is not a few hundred a year. It is a few thousand. $150 a month on a budget that is already, I'm sure, stretched about as tight as it can be.

                  •  No, that's not at all what I said (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Christin, Hill Jill, TXdem

                    Those kids need health care. That's the point. And other things too. The parent who refuses to get insurance for them or take responsibility for the fact that they need this few hundred dollars (it is not a few thousand, in fact as I was thinking about this more, with a such a large family and low income, they probably qualify for a full waiver anyway, and get free medicaid services) but the parent who refuses to even spend 1200 a year to insure them is the one saying "to hell with them" -- in my opinion. I am saying they deserve at least basic care, vaccines, etc. which insurance will provide, whether their parent is happy about having to provide it or not.

                    •  Do you fail to understand (6+ / 0-)

                      that it isn't that the parent is unhappy to provide it, but that the parent DOESN'T HAVE THAT MONEY. You all act like people on the threshhold of poverty can magically conjure up $150 a month.

                      •  No, I don't think that at all (4+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Christin, Hill Jill, TXdem, sharman

                        Look, I probably should not have commented because I have to go to work soon and I do not have time to continue a lengthy discussion of clarifications and so on. I DO get that. I have argued your very position in the past re people who insist that we can all comfortably afford our taxes to go back to Clinton rates, when I have been in the position on not having the leeway of a few hundred a month in increased costs. I do not have children. One reason is because I cannot afford them. (One of many reasons.)

                        If someone has five kids THEY COST MONEY. People have choice about how many kids they have, so if they have that many, they are responsible for quite a bit of medical and health care costs. That is not my fault. It's simply a fact of life.

                        A parent MUST find some way to provide at least the basics of what their kids need -- and the government and the rest of us have to pay for the difference. If you have children, there are certain things you HAVE TO pay for, or someone does. A family truly at the poverty level is exempt from the mandate and probably has medicaid anyway, so those are not the people I'm talking about - it's those anti-government types who will refuse to get insurance because they don't want it and whine they shouldn't have to pay for it, that I'm thinking about. So that's all I have time to say... you can either listen or put some other spin on my comments and have the last word, at least for now.

                  •  The ACA will not force individuals at the poverty (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Hill Jill, TXdem

                    level to pay for healthcare. These individuals will be  eligible to receive Federal subsidies, based on a sliding scale, in the form of tax credits, for the purchase of health insurance when the exchanges become available.

                    •  The poverty line is way too low (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      itsbenj

                      and many people above it are hanging on by the skin of their teeth.

                      If you tell someone who is barely keeping their nose above water that they have a choice between paying an extra $700 a year or paying an extra $1100 a year, don't expect their reaction to be gratitude.

                      You can't get blood from a stone. But this is what the ACA is all about, bloody stones.

                      Bradley Manning 2012

                      by chase on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 11:29:59 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  You are offering non specific hypothetical (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        TXdem

                        figures and using them to criticize the ACA. If the individual is unable to pay for healthcare due to poverty such an individual would receive Federal subsidies based upon a sliding tax credit scale to allow him or her to afford healthcare under the ACA.

                        •  No I am not. (0+ / 0-)

                          I'm using the same numbers the diarist provided for the same specific example. All you're doing is putting your hands over your ears and chanting the same meaningless platitude over and over again - you're not actually providing a counter-argument or providing any numbers to back up your claim.

                          If the individual is unable to pay for healthcase but is ABOVE the poverty line, the Federal subsidies will NOT cover their entire healthcare cost. If the Federal subsidies cover anything LESS than a full 100% of health insurance costs, then the ACA represents a mandatory increase in the individual's annual cost of living. That is a mathematical fact.

                          Cut the fucking cheerleading, open your eyes and pay attention to reality.

                          Bradley Manning 2012

                          by chase on Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 11:22:03 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

              •  I think this family would be eligible for Medicaid (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Iberian, SoCalSal, TXdem

                under ACA, if I'm not mistaken. Which would offset its cost tremendously. At the outset the Federal government would pay the cost for all these newly eligible medicaid members in its entirety.  And then later scale back paymnent to around 90 percent.

                •  $38K? (0+ / 0-)

                  no, this family wouldn't be qualifying for Medicaid, without even factoring in that many states are going to refuse the Medicaid expansion as the SCOTUS has recently allowed for. whatever subsidy they've qualified for is already factored into the math that has been done thus far.

                  Think of me what you will, I've got a little space to fill. - Tom Petty

                  by itsbenj on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 11:23:51 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Blame Republicants. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            artmartin, TXdem, ColoTim

            Individual Mandate was the Heritage Foundation's idea. Dems grudgingly put it in the law instead of Single Payer as a COMPROMISE to let the R's have something in the law that they could claim was theirs. Of course we saw how many R's voted for the ACA, and how they're all now SHOCKED! that the ACA would have a mandate.

            All because the GOP definition of compromise is "100% of what I want or nothing gets done." You know, kinda like a 2-year-old.

            •  I blame the dems for passing and supporting (6+ / 0-)

              a republican plan. I blame the dems for 'compromising' at every opportunity with no reciprocal support.

              •  well finally (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                ColoTim

                we see who you really are quince.  The Democrats didn't compromise at every opportunity like it was some master plan.  They compromised because to not do so MEANT THEY GOT NOTHING AT ALL.  This has been gone over and over on this site and it's an irrefutable fact.  No bully pulpit or twisting arms could have pulled out one additional single vote to stop the Republican blockades that occurred during this process.  You want the dems to act like you need?  Give them SUBSTANTIAL majorities in Congress enough to overcome any Republican blockade.  And people like Joe Lieberman and Blue Dog Dems don't count.  This trollish behavior is uncalled for on here.

                "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism." -- Carl Sagan

                by artmartin on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 10:42:22 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Was going to reply (0+ / 0-)

                  until I got to the 'trollish behavior' part.

                  Shoo.

                  •  Let's see Quince (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    ColoTim, sharman

                    we're 99 days away from the most critical election in our lifetime and here you are throwing arrows at the President and the Democrats for not doing enough in the most hostile environment I've seen an administration face and putting down fellow progressives who are trying to salvage some tiny degree of hope and positivity from a bill that clearly is flawed and not what ANY Democrat wanted in its final form.  Single payer, Medicare for all was advanced by the House, endorsed by the White House but didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing the Senate.  Your attempts to alter history and math by throwing out this claim they didn't do enough is trash.  They got a comprehensive health care bill passed, warts and all, at a time when the media is owned by the right, any semblance of a responsible Republican leader is gone, and more money was thrown in opposition by big business and Wall Street than for nearly any other issue.  

                    Yeah this family is going to have a tough maybe impossible time paying for his mandated health insurance but nobody's going to come and haul his ass of to jail if he can't pay for it or the penalty.  Were the ACA not in place he'd have ZERO options instead of this meager one.  Nobody here is being callous except you.

                    "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism." -- Carl Sagan

                    by artmartin on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 11:58:40 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  lol (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      chase

                      Your revisionist history is ridiculous.  The only people at fault for a republican health insurance (not care) bill is the democrats. They got no help from republicans, but they had everything they needed to pass a real bill. Medicare for all was never  endorsed by the white house. Baucus had single payer advocates arrested for merely showing  up.  A public option was 'supported' by the white house, until they dropped it in negotiations and still continued to publicly support it while they had already given it away (see Daschle's book).

                      The president got exactly the bill he wanted, as Feingold said.

                      Romneycare.

                •  The Fantasy Continues....... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  quince, chase

                  Why do some blame the GOP for how shitty the reform law turned out when they had absolutly no power to change the bill?  

                  The Dems had huge majorities in both the House and Senate.  HIR passed in the Senate using reconciliation procedures that could not be fillibustered.  There were 59 Dem seats, and a Dem Vice President to break a 50-50 tie.

                  So, at the end of the day, the GOP blockade didn't blockade shit.  What we have is a Dem passed plan that sucks.

                  It sucks so bad that voters put the House back in GOP hands in 2010.  

                  Please explain how the GOP has any responsibility for how shitty the reform law turned out, because I just can't see it.  

      •  You don't? or you wont? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        weaponsofmassdeception

        or you don't have your priorities straight. Are you telling me that for a family of 9, nine, health care for a $100 a month is some king of outrageous imposition?

        Besides a family of 9 qualifies for more subsidies and clearly for Medicare and if they don't they live in Texas or Arkansas or some other Republican fief where they can be freer than the wind and the sun, to toil and rot and take their 9 kids to the ER

        •  If you don't have the money, you don't have it (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BradyB, hardhatmama, chase, TimmyB

          $38k a year to feed seven people does not have much fat in the budget. And this is exactly what I meant about dems being callous about this. to hear liberals insulting people by telling them they don't have their priorities straight is just incredible to me.

          •  I'm not insulting (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            congenitalefty, sethtriggs, SoCalSal

            I will love to help this family and check their finances, and help them to find the help they are missing from federal and local governments. This family is poor under federal guidelines

            For a family of 7 in 2011 the hhs poverty guideline is 33,810
            they should be covered by Medicaid.

            And I agree that the people in the borderline are going to be the ones harmed the more by ACA. I've said several times that what needs to happen is a rise on the federal poverty level this can be doe through the Department of Agriculture

          •  The guy is at a clinic, picking up medicine... (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            artmartin, Hill Jill, TXdem, ColoTim, CS in AZ

            That's where the interview was done. How much is he spending already on out-of-pocket health care for that family? Not sure if it's over $100/month, but the delta probably isn't that large.

            Plus, he's only 1 broken arm away from a financial catastrophe... not that kids ever break arms or anything.

            I myself went without insurance for a few years, and just got lucky I didn't get seriously sick during that time... I only had to get a cyst removed from my mouth, which cost ~$400. At the time, I considered myself a self-righteous libertarian, but now I just realize that I was lucky and short-sighted.

            What if one of this guy's kids gets seriously sick, does he think that a collection jar at the local 7-11 will do the trick? Ha... What'll happen is that his kids will get the care they need, and the rest of us will have to pay for it.

            Anyway, while I can understand this guy's perspective, I also understand how irresponsible it is. In the end, it's his kids that are at the most risk here.

            Freedom isn't free. So quit whining and pay your taxes.

            by walk2live on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 08:40:58 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  To see you (0+ / 0-)

            attacking the character of others on here in post after post gives me true insight into who you are.  

            "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism." -- Carl Sagan

            by artmartin on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 10:43:38 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, I'm telling you that. (7+ / 0-)

          health care isn't needed every day.  Food, shelter, utilities and transportation is.

          $100/month when you don't have it, is money you don't have, no matter how "reasonable" it seems to outsiders.

          When folks are literally living paycheck to paycheck, stuff you don't absolutely need, can be foregone.

          Being forced to spend money you don't have on stuff you don't have an immediate need for can feel exploitative.  

          I lived for 8 years without any health care coverage because I couldn't afford it and keeping a roof over my head was far more important.

          Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

          by a gilas girl on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:29:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  correx: (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            quince, gooderservice

            Food, shelter, utilities and transportation ARE.

            Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

            by a gilas girl on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:30:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Health care isn't needed every day...UNTIL (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TimmyB

            the day you need health care.
            Sickness, poverty and crushing debt. What a uniquely American combination.

            -4.38, -7.64 Voyager 1: proof that what goes up never comes down.

            by pat bunny on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:38:39 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Did you ever visited the ER? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Hill Jill, TXdem

            I imagine anyone with 5 children goes there at least once o twice a year. The cheapest visit to ear I've ever seen, I've seen quite a few, was around 300 dollars. Common ones around 500, that is just to be there a get some topic treatment. Anything more any analytic any tests any treatment and the bill goes to over 1000 and from there the sky is the limit.

            I'll bet a family of with 5 children already pays more yearly

            •  I went to the ER once (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              quince, Iberian, TXdem

              when my friend insisted.  I had cut my hand and tried for two hours to get it to stop bleeding.  My neighbor insisted upon taking me to the ER to get it sewn up and I argued with her for those two hours explaining that I couldn't afford it.

              She told me they had to take me and bodily put me in her car and drove me.

              It cost $850 to have two stitches.  I'm still paying off that bill; it's part of the financial hole that 7 years of unemployment left me at the bottom of.

              Luckily, my child never got sick in the time we had no insurance, so I never had to take him to the ER, doctored everything on my own.

              But, I did have long term, behavioral health treatment from the city I live in; it saved my life.  Was a sliding scale, which meant, until my disability payments came through, I paid nothing because I had nothing.  I'm still paying off that debt too, once my payments changed.

              Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

              by a gilas girl on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 08:52:43 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  There are emergency care centers now and they (0+ / 0-)

              are definitely not that expensive.  That is where most people even those I work with go if they are having an emergency.

    •  health insurance (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SoCalSal, TXdem, ColoTim, sharman

      Since this man is an apartment manager, I would bet that he gets free rent in addition to the $38000 salary.  That may be why he cannot get Medicaid.

    •  Also, what coverage will he get without the (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chase, TimmyB

      deductible?

      My beef if that you are paying the $1700, and then if anything happens beside a check up, you are paying everything up to the $4700 anyway.

      What benefit are you really getting from that insurance UNLESS there is a catastrophe, and in which case you could just declare bankruptcy and move on anyway?

      Rick
      -9.63 -6.92
      Fox News - We Distort, You Deride

      by rick on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 09:04:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  But real Amurricans want repeal... (7+ / 0-)

    ...so their sick dying kids are free to die.

    We have in our midst a large subset of the population that thinks a lot more like Jonestown than the rest of us, and they are called conservatives.

    Only it's worse: they want to burn all the furniture in the room while locking everyone in the room.

    And they don't want some tax-funded fire department to rescue anyone.

    Last but not least , the chuckles of the rich guys in gas masks, crouched low on the floor near the one open door, don't bother them at all.

  •  excellent point (0+ / 0-)

    Effectively made.  Now why can't the administration and the campaign do the same?  They've done an abysmal job of doing what the diarist just did brilliantly.  

    •  HM? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      artmartin, TXdem

      I've seen Axelrod, Obama and others desribe exactly this hundreds of times. It's more a matter of breaking through all the competing noise.

    •  why can't the administration/campaign do the same? (6+ / 0-)

      three main reasons:

      1. they don't get as many words to do it in.

      2. they don't get as much time to make their argument.

      3. they don't have a way to reach John.

      In all likelihood, John does not consume any factual news media.  In all likelihood, "John" does not watch network news.  Even if he did, only a few minutes are devoted to domestic political news, less than that is devoted to the president, and if the president gets to speak for himself at all, less than 30 seconds are played of what the president actually says.

      Even BooMan, talented as he is, could not make the above argument in less than seven syllables or in a sound bite of less than 30 seconds.

      "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
      Mitt Romney is not the solution. He's the PROBLEM

      by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:43:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Why is it that idiots are the ones that breed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roadbed Guy

    like rabbits?  Idiocracy in action....

    NOW SHOWING
    Progressive Candidate Obama (now - Nov 6, 2012)
    Bipartisan Obama returns (Nov 7, 2012)

    by The Dead Man on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 04:57:13 AM PDT

  •  good diary but sorry the actual cost is (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TJ, erush1345, Iberian, PapaChach, BradyB, TimmyB

    what he has to pay not the difference after the penalty. he still has to find that money somewhere

    $1,734 or he can pay a tax penalty of $695 and keep his entire family uninsured.  So, essentially, the true cost of getting insured is $1,139.

    "I'm sculpting now. Landscapes mostly." ~ Yogi Bear

    by eXtina on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 05:09:42 AM PDT

  •  Meh. (12+ / 0-)

    A family of four living on only 162% of poverty being presented with a brand new monthly bill for $150 is not good optics, and is not going to make people living on the edge any happier, even if they are getting better healthcare out of it.

    The ACA is good for people with disposable income who can actually afford to add new bills and for those who will be completely subsidized, for those without, not so much.

    The President is not my hero, he's my President.  But Mitt Romney definitely strikes me as petting long haired white cats behind closed doors while talking on intercoms to henchmen.

  •  HHS outreach? (7+ / 0-)

    In that center where John is getting his care, there should be signs, flyers, and, ideally, a TV showing a continuous video presentation on what is really in the ACA.  These communications materials should contain a phone number where people can get more information about how to enroll. There should also be some kind of training for personnel in health clinics like this, so the staff could answer questions and help patients take advantage of what is in the act.

    I hope HHS has some kind of outreach planned that they will roll out when the coverage provisions become effective. A few ads on television are not adequate. Surely there is enough money in the bill to fund an effective program of outreach.

    Great diary. It's really criminal they way the right has characterized a law that promises so much help to people like John.

    "...in a society governed passively by free markets and free elections, organized greed always defeats disorganized democracy." Matt Taibbi

    by Getreal1246 on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 06:05:48 AM PDT

    •  Yes (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sethtriggs, Catte Nappe, TXdem

      When the Affordable Care Act  has been around for awhile, John and others will see how it works and almost certainly start to appreciate it.  I think that's why the right has demonized it so intensely.  Once it gets started, it's here to stay or even, eventually, single payer.  I hope the repealers don't get a chance to try.

       My extended family contains some dedicated, vote-against-your-self-interest, right-wing fear victims.  Recently spent a (long) car ride being lectured about the "sales tax that would be imposed whenever you sell your house to pay for Obamacare."  (Apparently, as marzook pointed out in this diary, the tax only applies to a small fraction of sellers-- very high-income people whose houses are worth more than $500,000 at sale.) My relative had read the scare email marzook refers to and freaked.  To her credit, after I said  I was sure it was inaccurate, she actually checked it out and emailed me back and apologized.  The right-wing (temporarily) lost a knee-jerk believer.  I don't have any hope for a long-term conversion, however.  

      Another of the extended group is self-employed without any health insurance at all because he can't afford it.  You'd think he'd see the Affordable Care Act as a good thing, but, based on long experience, I know that he won't until, God forbid, he actually needs medical assistance and realizes that it's available.

      Let the Bush tax cuts expire.

      by Rona on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:36:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  that's actually a good idea (0+ / 0-)

      "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
      Mitt Romney is not the solution. He's the PROBLEM

      by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:44:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  He may be grateful (0+ / 0-)

    If and when that actually happens.

  •  don't confuse the ignorant with math (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    artmartin

    they didn't like math in school.  math is even harder than reading: some folks do it only when there is on way to avoid it.

    seriously.  we are talking about folks who have a hard time figuring out whether toilet paper at 10 rolls for $15 is a better deal than 4 double rolls for $8.  "But ah'm gettin' 10 whole rolls instead a four!"

    And you are asking them to make a much more complicated financial decision than that.

    "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
    Mitt Romney is not the solution. He's the PROBLEM

    by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:23:08 AM PDT

  •  Well, Oklahoma is ground zero for ignorant pride. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    EdinStPaul, TXdem, ColoTim

    Evidence: Tom Coburn keeps getting elected.

    I rest my case.

  •  And (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ColoTim

    The Obama Administration, with all the resources at its command, with an amazingly articulate President to lead the effort, has not been able to communicate this to the man in question.

    It seems like they hardly even tried and that is political malpractice.

    I grew up in Wisconsin in the Sixties and Seventies, and the Wisconsin court system allows you to enter in a person's name and find out all the court cases they have been involved in state-wide.  Just fooling around entering in the names of friends and acquaintances from High School, it found an amazing number who had been sued by a clinic or pediatric hospital, followed shortly by foreclosure by a bank.

    That the Obama campaign can't seem to make its case to these people -- these are the white working-class sons of Archie Bunker who tend to vote Republican -- based on what the ACA will save them them is inexcusable.

    This aggression will not stand, man.

    by kaleidescope on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:37:36 AM PDT

  •  The disconnect that people here have (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sethtriggs, hardhatmama, TXdem, ColoTim

    from the reality they live is unbelievable. We are so frightened of "socialized healthcare" we would do anything to avoid it.

    My best friend's sis in Germany has cancer. We are all worried for her but we aren't worried that she won't get the best of care. Her first visit to the hosp was to place radioactive pouches around the tumor. They kept her in for over a week to get her ready for her coming run of chemo and to build her up.

    She went home for a week and then started chemo, she stays overnight if she feels she needs it. She will have 3 wks of treatment, then three week at a spa near the Austrian border. She goes back for 3 more wks then to the French wine country to build up her blood and to work on her calm, her family goes with her for that one. No cost. German med is about mind/body.

    I told my friend that I was so conflicted to be envious of her treatment while still acknowledging her pain. My niece had lung cancer and died last yr. Chemo...go home and fend for yourself. Radiology....ya sick? Sorry, go home and fend for yourself. I'm sorry, it shouldn't be this way.

    "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

    by high uintas on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 07:42:26 AM PDT

  •  sidebar: payment data base & CA exchanges (0+ / 0-)

    http://projects.propublica.org/...

    Drug companies have long kept secret details of the payments they make to doctors and other health professionals for promoting their drugs.

    But 12 companies have begun publicizing the information, some because of legal settlements.

    ProPublica pulled their disclosures into a database so patients can search for their doctor. Accepting payments isn’t necessarily wrong, but it can raise ethical issues.

    http://blog.health-access.org/...

    CA health insurance exchange

    A former Bain Capital man and Romney supporter says income inequality shows our economy is working. Edward Conard, former managing director and partner at Bain Capital from 1993-2007, worked side-by-side with Mitt Romney.

    by anyname on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 08:10:55 AM PDT

  •  Even if you (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LuckyLu, TXdem

    laid it out for this guy, I'll bet he'd still find a reason to be opposed to it, because he's been told that it's socialism, and we all know that's bad, right? Even if you prove to him that it's to his advantage, he'll still believe it's bad for the country, or that lazy brown people and illegals will take advantage of it, or death panels, or something.

    You can't fix stupid.

    "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

    by happy camper on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 08:25:21 AM PDT

  •  7 on $38k/yr (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TXdem

    could not afford much of anything for health care, even $100/month, unless OK cost of living is extremely low. I wonder if the family would qualify for Medicaid?

    The sh*t those people [republicans] say just makes me weep for humanity! - Woody Harrelson

    by SoCalSal on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 10:13:46 AM PDT

  •  in same boat and agree w john (0+ / 0-)

    when i was made redundant in 2008 i went w/out insurance for fam of 6.  we paid out of pocket. doctors were happy to deal w us since we didn't have insurance to hassle with and we paid about 50% of 'market'.  o's was a big loser on this site, and now it's heroic.  o can be my hero on other stuff.  but health care isn't it.  dems need to learn how to talk straighter.  'bending the cost curve' shouldn't enter D vocab, when we're paying 100% extra for a rigged system.  & it's patronizing to suggest john's best interest is making out a few grand

    i need a rails developer to help me with a cool map project

    by rasfrome on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 11:52:46 AM PDT

  •  What percentage of his income (0+ / 0-)

    is paying for petroleum industry profits? Subsidizing development of the F-35? Was loaned to TBTF banks in 2008?

    Why is that not a problem for him?

    "A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself." - Joseph Pulitzer

    by CFAmick on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 12:02:14 PM PDT

  •  He'd rather his kids suffer horribly (0+ / 0-)

    and his money go to health insurance companies.

    These people want the rich to have their kids' college tuition, because learning stuff would make their kids hate them.

Mary, Kitty, Sylv, vicki, TXdem, Trix, ROGNM, Sean Robertson, panhu, Chi, filkertom, itsbenj, teacherken, askew, Jeff Simpson, Geenius at Wrok, Gooserock, alkatt, Avila, sumitsu, Emerson, Debby, Shockwave, donna in evanston, cotterperson, hyperstation, jdld, eeff, LeftHandedMan, Richard Cranium, MarkInSanFran, scribe, concernedamerican, bronte17, litho, cskendrick, cyberKosFan, parker parrot, Wee Mama, annrose, teresahill, sharman, ask, highacidity, mkfarkus, Kerry Conservative, barath, bincbom, jennifree2bme, itskevin, Rona, jalbert, Cedwyn, high uintas, CocoaLove, SnyperKitty, dksbook, sviscusi, ammaloy, dejavu, Getreal1246, Subversive, Kamakhya, pat bunny, Lawrence, agincour, yet another liberal, texasmom, mnguitar, Chirons apprentice, Catte Nappe, never forget 2000, riverlover, bwintx, zerelda, ybruti, Sembtex, Hillbilly Dem, tomjones, NapaJulie, furi kuri, boran2, azrefugee, Gowrie Gal, rapala, maybeeso in michigan, radarlady, NoMoreLies, TexasTom, DianeNYS, Unit Zero, v2aggie2, JanetT in MD, SherwoodB, ZappoDave, TigerMom, EJP in Maine, Gary Norton, boofdah, eru, Beetwasher, Pam from Calif, GreyHawk, sunbro, SBandini, spunhard, Blu Gal in DE, Floja Roja, Ekaterin, Land of Enchantment, Jim R, begone, Nowhere Man, redcedar, Hirodog, gwilson, edwardssl, hungrycoyote, 8ackgr0und N015e, kestrel9000, Rolandz, Wary, fou, MJ via Chicago, twigg, bubbanomics, PapaChach, BB10, Stripe, nannyboz, PhilW, markthshark, Little, Nulwee, Babylon, Sapere aude, Msanger, Cronesense, Habitat Vic, Loudoun County Dem, camlbacker, ColoTim, gloriana, puakev, edsbrooklyn, Matt Z, Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle, joedemocrat, jnhobbs, OIL GUY, uciguy30, GeorgeXVIII, Ralphdog, VA Breeze, MKinTN, gundyj, Justus, OleHippieChick, Foundmyvoice, skohayes, lineatus, NYmama, pamelabrown, hwmnbn, bluesheep, mofembot, Diogenes2008, lissablack, wv voice of reason, maggiejean, pileta, artmartin, weaponsofmassdeception, Glacial Erratic, Calouste, litoralis, greengemini, carolyn urban, TheOtherJimM, be the change you seek, pvlb, MKSinSA, winkk, 57andFemale, Flyswatterbanjo, Tortmaster, astral66, Larsstephens, Lefty Ladig, Railfan, KroneckerD, NJpeach, estreya, brunoboy, Tea and Strumpets, secret38b, michelewln, eb23, Crabby Abbey, Lost and Found, freeport beach PA, Eddie L, gulfgal98, anonevent, sharonsz, jim283, nickrud, Betty Pinson, ericlewis0, USHomeopath, petesmom, stevenaxelrod, therehastobeaway, Its a New Day, slice, Quantumlogic, Onomastic, spindr27, kerflooey, Hill Jill, slowbutsure, jardin32, Amayi, iowacaucus, UtahLibrul, OhioNatureMom, Mr Raymond Luxury Yacht, kevin k, zukesgirl64, AgavePup, sethtriggs, SueM1121, durrati, marianevans, rexymeteorite, Calvino Partigiani, Mets102, blue aardvark, jolux, SoCalSal, jham710, ParkRanger, allergywoman, No one gets out alive, Only Needs a Beat, Heart n Mind, anodnhajo, Gay CA Democrat, TheLizardKing, NJMaverick, wordfiddler, Deep Texan, 2thanks, congenitalefty, xajaxsingerx, jan4insight, Arahahex, MartyM, doroma, Vote4Obamain2012, avsp, arizonablue, rat racer, PowWowPollock, Kinak, Glen The Plumber, Robynhood too, Sue B, sebsgf, nomandates, Panacea Paola, Dancun74, Mikesq, Icicle68, Smoh

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site