Affordable Care Act, Wow Just WOW.

What do you think about the "Affordable Care Act" that is now being enforced across the country?

It is already and is going to continue to raise insurance rates for the average American.

For example, people who smoke are going to now have a huge increase every month, if they lie about smoking it is apparently considered "fraud". There is now apparently going to be a "Living Well Promise" for insurance companies, where you are made to take a "health assessment" which asks you very personal questions about your life style (many of which should not have anything to do with how much you pay for your insurance, of course this is where they target smokers for example- in their privacy invading questionare).

“If a tobacco user does not check the box, and we later found out through a review of medical records or other reasons that he or she is a tobacco user, that is considered fraud,” Schultz said. “An insurance policy may be terminated if one commits fraud and does not share accurate medical information.”

More info- www.suntimes.com... 23188991-418/affordable-care-act-smoking-sends-health-premiums-higher.html

So wow.. Just wow.. I wonder whats going to be next- People who consume average amounts of alcohol, any at all even, get a huge increase on their health insurance too? Or people who don't exercise every day or people who don't eat what the government defines as a "PROPER" nutritional diet getting insurance increases as well? Not stretches at all. This is just wow.

I'm shocked.

reply to post by TheIceQueen


What you should be looking at is the penalties after the first year if you do not have Insurance.

reply to post by TheIceQueen


Has anyone been sent a letter, my friend got a letter that freaked her out, I haven't read it, but she said it was shocking.

reply to post by TheIceQueen

What do you think about the "Affordable Care Act" that is now being enforced across the country?

It's worse than Obamacare! J/K :-))

For example, people who smoke are going to now have a huge increase every month, if they lie about smoking it is apparently considered "fraud".

It's ok. It's just smokers, and I don't smoke. Worthless morons!

So wow.. Just wow.. I wonder whats going to be next- People who consume average amounts of alcohol, any at all even, get a huge increase on their health insurance too? Or people who don't exercise every day or people who don't eat what the government defines as a "PROPER" nutritional diet getting insurance increases as well? Not stretches at all. This is just wow.

It's ok. It's just drinkers, and I don't drink.
It's ok. I exercise. Those who don't are lazy.
It's ok. I eat what the government tells me to.

That's the attitude you're going to get from many. Until it hits them right where they live. Then they'll be upset, and might figure out they should have stopped it, back when it was just those worthless smokers.

reply to post by TheIceQueen


Not to mention the "Forced Home Inspections"!

According to an Obamacare provision millions of Americans will be targeted.

The Health and Human Services’ website states that your family will be targeted if you fall under the “high-risk” categories below:
•Families where mom is not yet 21.
•Families where someone is a tobacco user.
•Families where children have low student achievement, developmental delays, or disabilities.
•Families with individuals who are serving or formerly served in the armed forces, including such families that have members of the armed forces who have had multiple deployments outside the United States.

Ben Swann

This whole program disguised as "Healthcare" would make Stalin and Mao, very proud!

reply to post by seeker1963


You know there is plenty of things wrong with Obamacare without people out and out lying about what is in it. Please don't post disinformation, it muddies the waters. Deny ignorance and all.

www.snopes.com...

No provision of the PPACA authorizes federal agents to undertake "forced home inspections." What this item (erroneously) references is the PPACA's creation of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV), which "facilitates collaboration and partnership at the federal, state, and community levels to improve health and development outcomes for at-risk children through evidence-based home visiting programs" by awarding development grants to states that "currently have modest home visiting programs and want to build on existing efforts."

The grant program is intended to assist states (not the federal government) in conducting voluntary in-home visits to high-risk households with children younger than the age of five to help match those families with government services related to issues such as maternal and child health, child development, school readiness, economic self-sufficiency, and child abuse prevention. (These home visiting programs are not something new created by Obamacare; there were extant home visiting programs in nearly every state prior to the passage of the PPACA.)

reply to post by Krazysh0t

It is still jack boots coming unannounced to your door to check on you if you're going by the rules. you have to be in the system to understand, WIC EBT does not count. my half sister went through this and she deserved it, 10 kids over a 6 year period not one is with her, if it was not for the unannounced inspections or visits I hate to think what would have happened to them kids. DWS did right in this case, but they do over do it Obama care might add some more teeth to this

reply to post by TheIceQueen


It IS shocking.

However . . . folks who have read about globalism . . .


twoday.net...

18. "No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation." David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

etc.

or even 'merely' the horrific corrupt stuff the O was guilty of BEFORE anyone much knew about him . . .

should not be surprised or shocked any longer.

And they are just warming up. We 'ain't seen nothin' yet!'

Buckle seatbelts. This is an "E" ticket ride.

reply to post by Krazysh0t


And using snopes for facts, especially about the obama administration, is useless.
Snopes outright lies for Obama, the fda, the ama, Monsanto.
All the usual suspects, so snopes threads are useless.

reply to post by Krazysh0t



So is this a lie??? Right out of the .gov website......

The purpose of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Competitive Grant program is to award Development Grants to States that currently have modest home visiting programs and want to build on existing efforts. Successful applicants will sufficiently demonstrate the capacity to expand or enhance their evidence-based home visiting programs. The funding provided will build on the formula funding already provided to States and territories to support the quality implementation of home visiting programs. Additionally, this funding opportunity will continue the program's emphasis on rigorous research by grounding the proposed work in relevant empirical literature, and by including requirements to evaluate work proposed under this grant. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, approximately $12,000,000 will be available to support competitive Development Grants to eligible States and jurisdictions under the MIECHV program. $125,000,000 will be awarded on a formula basis to grantees funded under HRSA-11-187 for the MIECHV program. Successful applicants will be awarded FY 2012 competitive Development Grant funds, in addition to the FY2012 MIECHV formula based funds. Priority for Serving High-Risk Populations and Programmatic Areas of Emphasis As directed in the legislation , successful applicants will give priority to providing services to the following populations: a) Eligible families who reside in communities in need of such services, as identified in the statewide needs assessment required under subsection (b)(1)(A). b) Low-income eligible families. c) Eligible families who are pregnant women who have not attained age 21. d) Eligible families that have a history of child abuse or neglect or have had interactions with child welfare services. e) Eligible families that have a history of substance abuse or need substance abuse treatment. f) Eligible families that have users of tobacco products in the home. g) Eligible families that are or have children with low student achievement. h) Eligible families with children with developmental delays or disabilities. i) Eligible families who, or that include individuals who, are serving or formerly served in the Armed Forces, including such families that have members of the Armed Forces who have had multiple deployments outside of the United States." In addition, the Health Resources and Service Administration (HRSA) and the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) have identified the following programmatic areas of emphasis. Applicants may propose to address one or more of these areas in response to this funding opportunity announcement: o Emphasis 1: Improvements in maternal, child, and family health o Emphasis 2: Effective implementation and expansion of evidence-based home visiting programs or systems with fidelity to the evidence-based model selected o Emphasis 3: Development of statewide or multi-State home visiting programs o Emphasis 4: Development of comprehensive early childhood systems that span the prenatal-through-age-eight continuum o Emphasis 5: Outreach to high-risk and hard-to-engage populations o Emphasis 6: Development of a family-centered approach to home visiting o Emphasis 7: Outreach to families in rural or frontier areas o Emphasis 8: The development of fiscal leveraging strategies to enhance program sustainability For a more detailed description of each area of emphasis, please see Appendix A: MIECHV Programmatic Emphasis Areas.

hrsa.gov

Seems pretty clear to me. Perhaps Snopes and yourself should do a little digging before you call people liars?

reply to post by Krazysh0t


I think you're splitting hairs.

TYRANNY ALWAYS INCREASES THE TYRANNY.

All the 'legal' illegalities are merely the formal "CAMEL'S NOSE UNDER THE TENT."

You're bright enough to know that.

They are masters at frog-in-the-bucket incrementalism.

Give them a micrometer and they'll take a light year.

THAT'S THEIR NATURE.

THAT'S THEIR STRATEGY.
THAT'S THEIR DESIGN.
THAT'S THEIR COMPULSION.
THAT'S THEIR POWER-MONGERING DNA.

I realized this was a horrific sham for a lot of tyrannical stuff back when Hillary was pushing for it.

There's never been a worse, more satanized, devious, mean-spirited etc. woman in the Whitehouse. And she's gearing up to get there again, this time on top.

The O-UN-CARE laws are merely the shoehorn to shove everyone into as much tyranny as the oligarchy can get away with as soon as possible.

I think you know that deep down somewhere.

Skorpy
What you should be looking at is the penalties after the first year if you do not have Insurance.

Doesn't really matter what the penalties are .... if you simply don't pay them. There may be consequences, but at some point in our existance, we are going to have to stand for something.

Going along with the sheep to the slaughterhouse is a choice, it is a voluntary stance.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Could this be the one you are asking about??? Edit: Actually it probably isn't just because it is only two pages. So I can only imagine what three more pages could contain....

Wellness Questionnaire

I don't think I will be answering any of these questions anytime soon....

reply to post by PtolemyII


In all seriousness, can you show a major story covered for fact content on Snopes that is outright false for how they present it? I'd run with a thread on that, myself (and I'm serious too) if you could. It would have to be clear, unambiguous and on major points which matter...not incidental or secondary issues to what they review.

I've used snopes for quite some time though. I find them much like Wikipedia, with a much better track record. That is to say, never a direct source ...but one of the best references for finding original sources, since they do itemize and source almost everything I see them claim or debunk?

I just wanted to ask, as a clear and demonstrated contradiction on basic facts would literally make a story all it's own.

ABSOLUTELY INDEED. I AGREE.

However, such a mass of text is virtually painful for old eyes and even younger ones won't bother reading such a wall of text . . . I'll paragraph it liberally . . . for easier reading

seeker1963
reply to post by Krazysh0t

 

[Trying to get the government website stuff to post right]

So is this a lie??? Right out of the .gov website......

The purpose of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Competitive Grant program is to award Development Grants to States that currently have modest home visiting programs and want to build on existing efforts. Successful applicants will sufficiently demonstrate the capacity to expand or enhance their evidence-based home visiting programs.

.
The funding provided will build on the formula funding already provided to States and territories to support the quality implementation of home visiting programs. Additionally, this funding opportunity will continue the program's emphasis on rigorous research by grounding the proposed work in relevant empirical literature, and by including requirements to evaluate work proposed under this grant.
.

In Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, approximately $12,000,000 will be available to support competitive Development Grants to eligible States and jurisdictions under the MIECHV program. $125,000,000 will be awarded on a formula basis to grantees funded under HRSA-11-187 for the MIECHV program. Successful applicants will be awarded FY 2012 competitive Development Grant funds, in addition to the FY2012 MIECHV formula based funds.

.

Priority for Serving High-Risk Populations and Programmatic Areas of Emphasis As directed in the legislation , successful applicants will give priority to providing services to the following populations:

.

a) Eligible families who reside in communities in need of such services, as identified in the statewide needs assessment required under subsection
.

(b)(1)(A). b) Low-income eligible families.
.

c) Eligible families who are pregnant women who have not attained age 21.
.

d) Eligible families that have a history of child abuse or neglect or have had interactions with child welfare services.
.

e) Eligible families that have a history of substance abuse or need substance abuse treatment.
.

f) Eligible families that have users of tobacco products in the home.
.

g) Eligible families that are or have children with low student achievement.
.

h) Eligible families with children with developmental delays or disabilities.
.

i) Eligible families who, or that include individuals who, are serving or formerly served in the Armed Forces, including such families that have members of the Armed Forces who have had multiple deployments outside of the United States."

.

In addition, the Health Resources and Service Administration (HRSA) and the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) have identified the following programmatic areas of emphasis. Applicants may propose to address one or more of these areas in response to this funding opportunity announcement: o Emphasis
.

1: Improvements in maternal, child, and family health o Emphasis
.

2: Effective implementation and expansion of evidence-based home visiting programs or systems with fidelity to the evidence-based model selected o Emphasis
.

3: Development of statewide or multi-State home visiting programs o Emphasis
.

4: Development of comprehensive early childhood systems that span the prenatal-through-age-eight continuum o Emphasis
.

5: Outreach to high-risk and hard-to-engage populations o Emphasis
.

6: Development of a family-centered approach to home visiting o Emphasis
.

7: Outreach to families in rural or frontier areas o Emphasis
.

8: The development of fiscal leveraging strategies to enhance program sustainability For a more detailed description of each area of emphasis, please see Appendix A: MIECHV Programmatic Emphasis Areas.

.

hrsa.gov

Seems pretty clear to me. Perhaps Snopes and yourself should do a little digging before you call people liars?

Thanks for posting that. Folks who have eyes to see and ears to hear ought to already be awake. The others . . . may never awaken until it's far too late.

Sigh.

reply to post by TheIceQueen


I don't know if you have ever applied for health insurance before...but questions about smoking and the yada yada consequences about "fraud" have always been there. If an insurer finds that you lied, they can drop you. It has always been that way.

reply to post by seeker1963

seeker1963
reply to post by Krazysh0t

 

So is this a lie??? Right out of the .gov website......

The purpose of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Competitive Grant program is to award Development Grants to States that currently have modest home visiting programs and want to build on existing efforts.

hrsa.gov

Seems pretty clear to me. Perhaps Snopes and yourself should do a little digging before you call people liars?

Right there...first sentence? Do you know what a "grant" is?

They grant money to STATES that want to build upon existing programs for home visits for at risk children. NOT THE FED. NOT OBAMACARE. NOT LAWS...JUST a GRANT TO HELP THE STATES SPOT KIDS IN BAD SITUATIONS. OPTIONAL STATE LEVEL PROGRAMS.

See what you posted below...I'll afford you confusion rather than "liar"...but your continued defending of the falsehood is questionable.

seeker1963
reply to post by TheIceQueen

 

Not to mention the "Forced Home Inspections"!

EX:
According to an Obamacare provision millions of Americans will be targeted.

The Health and Human Services’ website states that your family will be targeted if you fall under the “high-risk” categories below:
•Families where mom is not yet 21.
•Families where someone is a tobacco user.
•Families where children have low student achievement, developmental delays, or disabilities.
•Families with individuals who are serving or formerly served in the armed forces, including such families that have members of the armed forces who have had multiple deployments outside the United States.
END EX

Ben Swann

This whole program disguised as "Healthcare" would make Stalin and Mao, very proud!

seeker1963
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

Could this be the one you are asking about??? Edit: Actually it probably isn't just because it is only two pages. So I can only imagine what three more pages could contain....

Wellness Questionnaire

I don't think I will be answering any of these questions anytime soon....

edit on 23-10-2013 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)

Sounds identical to what Humana has, however Humana has a "vitality health assessment" that people who have Humana must take and give accurate answers on (if they don't- it's "fraud"), same thing, different name.
www.humana.com...

i guess ol ted was right.

Lyrics:

In the early morning hours there's a din in the air;
mayhem's on the loose.
Stormtroopers comin',
and you better be prepared.
Got no time to choose.


Get ready. Get ready. Get ready.
Stormtroopers comin'.
Get ready. Get ready. Get ready.
Stormtroopers comin'.

Comin' up that street, jackboots steppin' high.
Got to make a stand.
Looking in your windows and listen to your phone.
Keep a gun in your hand.

Get ready. Get ready. Get ready.
Stormtroopers comin'.
Get ready. Get ready. Get ready. .
*Stormtroopers* comin' around


Two hundred down, and it's comin' 'round again.
Got no second choice.
Where's the justice and where's that law.
Raise your healthy voice.

Get ready. Get ready. Get ready.
Stormtroopers comin'.
Get ready. Get ready. Get ready.
Stormtroopers comin'.
Get ready. Get ready. Get ready.
Stormtroopers comin'.

Get ready. Get ready. Get ready.
Stormtroopers comin'.
Get ready. Get ready. Get ready.
Stormtroopers comin'.

Ted Nugent

seeker1963
reply to post by Krazysh0t

 

So is this a lie??? Right out of the .gov website......

"The purpose of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Competitive Grant program is to award Development Grants to States that currently have modest home visiting programs and want to build on existing efforts. Successful applicants will sufficiently demonstrate the capacity to expand or enhance their evidence-based home visiting programs. The funding provided will build on the formula funding already provided to States and territories to support the quality implementation of home visiting programs."

ETA: Put external text tags in quotes since the ex tags weren't working in the quote tags for some reason.

From the snopes article (again):

The grant program is intended to assist states (not the federal government) in conducting voluntary in-home visits to high-risk households with children younger than the age of five to help match those families with government services related to issues such as maternal and child health, child development, school readiness, economic self-sufficiency, and child abuse prevention. (These home visiting programs are not something new created by Obamacare; there were extant home visiting programs in nearly every state prior to the passage of the PPACA.)

You are misrepresenting your original post. You claimed that these are forced home invasions due to Obamacare. Both snopes and your follow up link say that this is just a grant to help states with programs that are already in place. Look, all you need to do is look at my post history to see that I am no fan of Obamacare, but I also don't condone misrepresenting things to make them worse than they really are.