Republicans Jamming It Up Your Ass

[NATI BENGALS]

Republicans are in power. So you better believe there is an assault in progress on lower and middle class Americans.

This one is a mind blowing invasion of privacy.
http://m.fox19.com/fox19/db/330522/content/t4dSGVpA

But what do you expect when you put the ones who fight tooth and nail for big business in power?

Down party lines. Republicans say your genetic testing information and family medical history go to your employer or you can be penalized.

Hmm. Republicans looking out for the working class? Or giving big business a legal intrusion into your private life and something to consider when they are in a mad dash to maximize profits.

Well Timmy is getting old and he does have a family history of cancer and diabetes. If we fire him now that year of unemployment will be a lot less expensive than his potential health issues on our company plan.

Thanks Republicans! Always looking out for the people. In no way could I see this one having negative consequences on the working class.

Holy shit...

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2017, 12:05 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Republicans are in power. So you better believe there is an assault in progress on lower and middle class Americans.

This one is a mind blowing invasion of privacy.
http://m.fox19.com/fox19/db/330522/content/t4dSGVpA

But what do you expect when you put the ones who fight tooth and nail for big business in power?

Down party lines. Republicans say your genetic testing information and family medical history go to your employer or you can be penalized.

Hmm. Republicans looking out for the working class? Or giving big business a legal intrusion into your private life and something to consider when they are in a mad dash to maximize profits.

Well Timmy is getting old and he does have a family history of cancer and diabetes. If we fire him now that year of unemployment will be a lot less expensive than his potential health issues on our company plan.

Thanks Republicans! Always looking out for the people. In no way could I see this one having negative consequences on the working class.

Holy shit...

Do you think you should be able to wreck your car, keep it a secret, open a new insurance policy, then claim the damage? 

[HarleyDog]

When rich people get richer, people are working. When you take money from the rich, jobs are lost. Not that hard to understand.

[GMDino]

(03-11-2017, 12:13 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Do you think you should be able to wreck your car, keep it a secret, open a new insurance policy, then claim the damage? 

Answering with a question is bad form.

To answer your question: No.

Nor do I think if your dad was in an accident when he turned 50 that should affect your insurance rates because you might get in an accident too.

I also don't think humans are the same as cars or that the insurance companies profits are more important that taking care of citizens.

I know, I know..."gotcha".

[BmorePat87]

The bill doesn't compel you to give up this information. It merely allows businesses to offer incentives to those who are healthier. If you volunteered for those workplace programs, you would agree to release medical information.

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2017, 12:27 AM)GMDino Wrote: Answering with a question is bad form.

To answer your question: No.

Nor do I think if your dad was in an accident when he turned 50 that should affect your insurance rates because you might get in an accident too.

I also don't think humans are the same as cars or that the insurance companies profits are more important that taking care of citizens.

I know, I know..."gotcha".

What was his question that required an answer?

I did see he asked a rhetorical question that required no response. 

I too think citizen care is more important that insurance company profits. But I don't see the relevance. 

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-11-2017, 12:30 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The bill doesn't compel you to give up this information. It merely allows businesses to offer incentives to those who are healthier. If you volunteered for those workplace programs, you would agree to release medical information.

If you choose privacy you risk penalty. You can word that however you like. 

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-11-2017, 12:13 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Do you think you should be able to wreck your car, keep it a secret, open a new insurance policy, then claim the damage? 

Well. 

I'm talking about the Republican party forcing individuals to turn over their private health information and their families private health information to an employer or risk financial penalty. You ok with that?

So...

Yes i have car insurance?

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2017, 12:30 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The bill doesn't compel you to give up this information. It merely allows businesses to offer incentives to those who are healthier. If you volunteered for those workplace programs, you would agree to release medical information.

We discussed this in a Business Law class and it was one of the things I liked about the ACA (at least I think it was part of it, as it is not my discipline).

They had programs where insurance companies could give you discounts if you tracked your fitness (signing into gym, wearing fitness tracker, ect..). This was voluntary of course, you could choose privacy but you didn't get the discount. 

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-11-2017, 12:15 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: When rich people get richer, people are working. When you take money from the rich, jobs are lost. Not that hard to understand.

Yea. They would get even richer if we just brought back slave labor and executed the sick too.

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-11-2017, 01:06 AM)bfine32 Wrote: We discussed this in a Business Law class and it was one of the things I liked about the ACA (at least I think it was part of it, as it is not my discipline).

They had programs where insurance companies could give you discounts if you tracked your fitness (signing into gym, wearing fitness tracker, ect..). This was voluntary of course, you could choose privacy but you didn't get the discount. 

https://www.statnews.com/2017/03/10/workplace-wellness-genetic-testing/?s_campaign=tw&utm_content=buffer1c244&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer"Rigorous studies by researchers not tied to the $8 billion wellness industry have shown that the programs improve employee health little if at all. An industry group recently concluded that they save so little on medical costs that, on average, the programs lose money. But employers continue to embrace them, partly as a way to shift more health care costs to workers, including by penalizing them financially."

[Benton]

http://www.snopes.com/genetic-testing-bill/

Sounds like if you voluntarily get a risk assessment, you can get cheaper insurance. But there's nothing forcing anyone to get testing.

Much like the GOP scare of death squads and forced abortions, there's smoke but no fire.

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-11-2017, 01:20 AM)Benton Wrote: http://www.snopes.com/genetic-testing-bill/

Sounds like if you voluntarily get a risk assessment, you can get cheaper insurance. But there's nothing forcing anyone to get testing.

Much like the GOP scare of death squads and forced abortions, there's smoke but no fire.

No it isnt forcing you to do anything. 

Either "volunteer" to give up private genetic information or pay a 50% higher premium.

From your link
NCD had urged the EEOC to promulgate that regulation and was appreciative of the agency’s attempt to allow employers to carry out effective wellness programs while limiting the potential for coercion that could lead employees to submit to medical examinations and inquiries regarding information that they otherwise would have preferred to keep confidential. The reward permitted under this legislation seem to tip that delicate balance.

[hollodero]

(03-11-2017, 12:15 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: When rich people get richer, people are working. When you take money from the rich, jobs are lost. Not that hard to understand.

 That is the most American-sounding economic idea my European eyes ever witnessed here. Guess you were ironic, but still that sentence impersonates the simplistic perception we get from your way of thinking perfectly.
Great stuff 

[Benton]

(03-11-2017, 01:38 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: No it isnt forcing you to do anything. 

Either "volunteer" to give up private genetic information or pay a 50% higher premium.

From your link
NCD had urged the EEOC to promulgate that regulation and was appreciative of the agency’s attempt to allow employers to carry out effective wellness programs while limiting the potential for coercion that could lead employees to submit to medical examinations and inquiries regarding information that they otherwise would have preferred to keep confidential. The reward permitted under this legislation seem to tip that delicate balance.

I sell pies for $2.

Everybody pays $2.

I tell everybody if they'll provide their own oven (and thereby lower my price) I'll sell them a pie for $1... but only if their oven meets my specs. If it looks dirty, then you pay $2, or maybe you don't even get a pie. Don't want me looking in your oven? Pay the standard $2 and we both take our chances.

I'm not forcing anyone to buy a pie at a higher rate. I'm just offering it at a lower rate to some if it looks like it will lower my cost. 

I have a family history of Type 1 diabetes, and familial ALS. There's no way I'd submit to a genetic test because (most likely) I'd be flagged. I imagine the overwhelming majority of the population would be flagged for one potential illness or another. But I have no issue with companies offering me a lower rate if I'm dumb enough to participate. 

[NATI BENGALS]

(03-11-2017, 03:16 AM)Benton Wrote: I sell pies for $2.

Everybody pays $2.

I tell everybody if they'll provide their own oven (and thereby lower my price) I'll sell them a pie for $1... but only if their oven meets my specs. If it looks dirty, then you pay $2, or maybe you don't even get a pie. Don't want me looking in your oven? Pay the standard $2 and we both take our chances.

I'm not forcing anyone to buy a pie at a higher rate. I'm just offering it at a lower rate to some if it looks like it will lower my cost. 

I have a family history of Type 1 diabetes, and familial ALS. There's no way I'd submit to a genetic test because (most likely) I'd be flagged. I imagine the overwhelming majority of the population would be flagged for one potential illness or another. But I have no issue with companies offering me a lower rate if I'm dumb enough to participate. 

Where is the part if you take the deal and get a $1 pie they are able share and sell your internet browser history?

"Vendors operating the programs are often not required to follow the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which restricts the information doctors and hospitals can share regarding their patients." you snopes article

[JustWinBaby]

Sooooo.....Repubicans are "jamming it up your ass" just like the Democrats did?

At least the media is being more critical and objective evaluating this than they did with Obamacare.

[JustWinBaby]

(03-11-2017, 03:16 AM)Benton Wrote: But I have no issue with companies offering me a lower rate if I'm dumb enough to participate. 

I assume you meant to say you have no issue with companies offering a lower rate if your health history merits it.

However, I will agree insurance should operate with fewer risk pools. That would be a socially equitable redistribution.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-11-2017, 12:30 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The bill doesn't compel you to give up this information. It merely allows businesses to offer incentives to those who are healthier. If you volunteered for those workplace programs, you would agree to release medical information.

In my experience, wellness programs are a reaction to Obamacare. Insurance companies can't deny you for a pre-existing condition. So they increase the rates for everyone (effectively a penalty for everyone.) Then for the few who jump through the hoops required, they get an "incentive" which really penalty forgiveness.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-11-2017, 12:13 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Do you think you should be able to wreck your car, keep it a secret, open a new insurance policy, then claim the damage? 

Do you think you should be charged more because your Dad wrecked his car, but you haven't?