Brosurance: ObamaCare Just Hit New(er) Lows

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Oh, Indigo, I wish you were not so trusting on government and their deceiving ways, but I guess you forgot how under Obama the IRS has done more than just collecting taxes.

I am not giving up on you, my friend I like you that much.

edit on 23-10-2013 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 11:03 AM
link   

marg6043
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Oh, Indigo, I wish you were not so trusting on government and their deceiving ways, but I guess you forgot how under Obama the IRS has done more than just collecting taxes.

I am not giving off on you, my friend I like you that much.



If your claim is premised on not trusting the IRS to follow the laws in place, then that is one thing.

But claiming that the law gives the IRS access to Medical Records is false..BS...Propaganda...and no one should tolerate that in a debate, whatever side of the fence you sit upon.

I do not "trust" in the moral conduct of the IRS, I trust in the practical reality of the law vs. lies told to the contrary.

If the IRS was ever to illegally breach my Medical records, I would be grateful...it would be like winning the lottery because the law clearly forbids it and in order for them to do it they would have to serve a warrant like they did in California and collect the records by accident, because the Obamacare system of regulation doesn't even provide them access...only financials. Either way, the courts would reward me with a very nice pay-day....and the IRS would be slammed down hard....And the IRS knows this well....and thus would not risk such a breech...they would have no reason for the risk.

Not a moral trust, just an awareness of how things work.



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


I disagree, Indigo the IRS will have access to medical records when they have to go after individuals to check if they are meeting requarments with the Obamacare mandate AKA taxes.

Sorry for that is the truth.



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   

marg6043
reply to post by Indigo5
 


I disagree, Indigo the IRS will have access to medical records when they have to go after individuals to check if they are meeting requarments with the Obamacare mandate AKA taxes.

Sorry for that is the truth.



Sorry marg...The law does not permit it, nor does logic dictate it.

In order to meet the requirements of the Mandate all the IRS needs to know is income level for subsidies and whether or not you have insurance.

There is no law that requires them to access medical records...to the contrary, there is a tonnage of law that forbids it.

This has been publicly explained and claims to the contrary thoroughly debunked by non-partisan orgs.

You can state otherwise...but I can claim that Ted Cruz is a lizard person/alien. How to have a factual discussion in that context?



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Indigo5
[SNIP]
Your premise of "the government [having] carte blanche access to individual's medical records and documents?" is also wholly false.

[SNIP]

Disappointing to see someone of your status on ATS (Deny Ignorance) perpetuate and defend thorough debunked propaganda.


Oooh, hyperbolic doe eyes...

www.aapsonline.org...

This predates Obamacare by 10 years, but note how much simpler the electronic medical record reporting MANDATE in Obamacare makes the government's intrusions. Now they don't even need to involve anyone outside of the government in their search through the records.

www.aclu.org...

"National Security and Intelligence Activities Or Protective Services. We may disclose your health information to authorized federal officials who are conducting national security and intelligence activities or providing protective services to the President or other important officials."


Now, you tell me if you believe a government who has used the NSA to datamine virtually every piece of electronic communication used by any American citizen over the past couple of years in the name of "national security" isn't going to simply apply the same rule to these electronic health records? If you believe that, then please... I have a bag full of brightly colored magical beans I'd love to give you an opportunity to invest in.

Hey, it isn't like it hasn't ALREADY HAPPENED before the stupid law even hit its stride:
www.ohiolibertycoalition.org...


Indigo5
ACA/Obamacare does not allow the IRS in any way, shape or fashion to acces medical records.

washingtonexaminer.com...

Explaining the PHI release ruling, HHS said Obamacare "is a government program providing public benefits, is expressly authorized to disclose PHI ... that relates to eligibility for or enrollment in the health plan to HHS for verification of applicant eligibility for minimum essential coverage as part of the eligibility determination process for advance payments of the premium tax credit or cost-sharing reductions."

PHI= Protected Health Information



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Indigo5
Sorry marg...The law does not permit it, nor does logic dictate it.


There's your first problem right there, you're trying to apply the letter of the law to a lawless president and logic to an illogical goofball administration, congress, and law.



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
The IRS refers to releasing medical records in their own guidelines.

Obviously, those medical records *ARE* accessible by the IRS.

The bureaucrats do in fact have *Access To* medical records !!!!

They are nosy bastards


-IRS- Part 11. Communications and Liaison; Chapter 3. Disclosure of Official Information


11.3.18.3 ...........

12. When access is requested to medical records, including psychological records, the Disclosure Manager may determine that such release could have an adverse effect on the individual, and that release will be made only to a physician authorized in writing to have access to such records.

a "Disclosure Manager" makes the "Decision" ?????





11.3.18.5.2 ......

4. If the request pertains to a record subject to the amendment provisions is adequate to permit processing, and the record exists and is available, a determination must be made as to whether the proposed amendments should be incorporated by considering the following:

A. The processing official should keep in mind that the portion of a record which is subject to correction because it is not accurate, relevant, timely, or complete is generally the information which pertains to the individual—such as his or her education, financial transactions, medical history, criminal history, or employment history. The portion of the record must tell us something about the individual in order to be amendable. Records may contain information about other individuals, about actions taken by the IRS in regard to the individual (in a situation unrelated to tax administration), or other items which are in no way descriptive or characteristic of the individual; such information is not subject to the amendment provisions. However, the information may nevertheless be reflective upon the individual and subject to amendment if incorrect. For instance, a statement that the IRS has taken action against an individual would reflect upon the individual and should be amended if incorrect.

a "processing official" ????


Section 18. Privacy Act Access and Amendment of Records

Hmmm.

edit on Oct-23-2013 by xuenchen because:




posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


You know what boggles my mind, though? Here we sit less than 6 months after revelations that the current government has used the NSA, IRS, and HHS to collect massive amounts of personal data, communications and communication histories, personal financial information, and even politicized voter/support information on essentially every citizen of the country, all in complete absentia of any concern over breaking the law, and some folks must continue to keep their imaginary security bubble around themselves saying "the government won't pry into our medical records because it isn't expressly called for in the law."

Seriously? How in the world does that type of naievete exist in the information age? This is the reason most commercials for amazing looking food products have a "actual product appearance may vary" warning label attached to them... because there are people who really believe that a Big Mac should be the size of a softball and then when they order one sit there wondering "Why don't this burger look like the one in the commercial?"



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 




burdman30ott6
the fact that under the ACA the government will have carte blanche access to individual's medical records and documents?


And despite Politifact, fact-Check and every other person who understands the law…declaring that claim complete and utter “pants on fire” nonsense….You explain your claim by citing that…

(A) Doctors must keep records
(B) The NSA hacks into records

So (C) because of ACA the government will have carte blanche access to individual's medical records and documents?

Thus a commercial showing a creepy old man probing a young ladies vagina is an accurate representation of ACA?

No offense, but it’s kind of useless to debate with that kind of ideologically fueled offense to rational thought and logic.
edit on 23-10-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 01:19 PM
link   

burdman30ott6

Indigo5
Sorry marg...The law does not permit it, nor does logic dictate it.


There's your first problem right there, you're trying to apply the letter of the law to a lawless president and logic to an illogical goofball administration, congress, and law.


And in order for you to claim the falsehoods you claim...you must first exclude Laws and Logic.

It is an ideology that first demanded it's followers exclude the "news"...then fact-checkers...then science...then statistics and math...and finally logic itself is suspect.
edit on 23-10-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


With the states of affairs in our nations today with the government I feel very comfortable to say that given the scandals involving the IRS today the law means crap unless is as you know Obamacrap.



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Indigo5
Thus a commercial showing a creepy old man probing a young ladies vagina is an accurate representation of ACA?


yes.



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   

burdman30ott6

Indigo5
Thus a commercial showing a creepy old man probing a young ladies vagina is an accurate representation of ACA?


yes.



Indigo5
No offense, but it’s kind of useless to debate with that kind of ideologically fueled offense to rational thought and logic.
edit on 23-10-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join