Trump admin rescinds Obamacare hhs contraceptive mandate

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2017, 04:50 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I was responding to what I quoted, not to what I didn't quote. You would have to be playing some ridiculous "word game" to take my specific response to your specific remark in order to turn it into a response to another remark I wasn't responding to.

Health insurance doesn't cover nicer cars, but it should cover prescriptions. What prescriptions a patient is prescribed should be between the patient and their health care provider. The employer shouldn't have any role in dictating what prescriptions a patient will or will not receive.

Yeah, we can't expect someone to follow the conversion, just chiming in is more constructive.

Healthcare must impose limits on what it covers; especially electives. Should healthcare cover Breast enhancement. 

[*bfine32*]

So the narrative has now went from they aren't denied contraception, they must pay for it to sex is healthful; so insurance should cover contraception. The things we come up with.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2017, 06:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yeah, we can't expect someone to follow the conversion, just chiming in is more constructive.

I did follow the conversation and I responded to your specific quote. That's why I quoted it. Simultaneously, I didn't respond to the remark I didn't quote. Isn't that how the quote feature works? You made a comment about societies which promote sex for reasons other than procreation. Well, look no further than practitioners of Western medicine. No amount of trying to redirect my comment to another quote article wasn't responding to the I'll change that despite your efforts.

Quote:Healthcare must impose limits on what it covers; especially electives.

No shit, Sherlock. Why does the employer get to decide what prescription your wife's insurance will and will not cover, for example?

Quote:Should healthcare cover Breast enhancement. 

Depends upon what plan the customer pays for and the employer shouldn't get to decide what the patient does or doesn't receive.

Guess what? The Army paid for my elective procedure after I tore my meniscus for the second time. Pretty much everything ortho does is elective. Unless it is a life saving procedure during an emergency; it's elective. That cardiac cath you had: elective. Since your cardiac cath costs a helluva lot more than 12 months of birth control pills maybe insurance companies should cut those elective procedures? Something tells me you don't think your elective procedures should be touched.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2017, 06:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So the narrative has now went from they aren't denied contraception, they must pay for it to sex is healthful; so insurance should cover contraception. The things we come up with.

That's not the narrative at all. That's you playing more "word games" as usual.

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2017, 07:36 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: 1) I did follow the conversation and I responded to your specific quote. That's why I quoted it. Simultaneously, I didn't respond to the remark I didn't quote. Isn't that how the quote feature works? You made a comment about societies which promote sex for reasons other than procreation. Well, look no further than practitioners of Western medicine. No amount of trying to redirect my comment to another quote article wasn't responding to the I'll change that despite your efforts.


2) No shit, Sherlock. Why does the employer get to decide what prescription your wife's insurance will and will not cover, for example?


Depends upon what plan the customer pays for and the employer shouldn't get to decide what the patient does or doesn't receive.

3) Guess what? The Army paid for my elective procedure after I tore my meniscus for the second time. Pretty much everything ortho does is elective. Unless it is a life saving procedure during an emergency; it's elective. That cardiac cath you had: elective. Since your cardiac cath costs a helluva lot more than 12 months of birth control pills maybe insurance companies should cut those elective procedures?  Something tells me you don't think your elective procedures should be touched.

1) Yes, you have mastered the quote feature; the keeping up with the conversation at hand not so much

2). Because they provide the insurance?

3) I suppose you could elect not to walk and I could elect for blood not to flow to my heart. As I have said if it is for personal health issues it should be covered; as I have learned an IUD's function is to reduce menstrual cramps.  Other than that I see no issues with an employer choosing what is covered if they are the ones providing the insurance. Take out supplemental insurance of find an employer that has a health plan you like. 

I understand there are those that say the Government should mandate what the employer should provide, but maybe just giving the employee the money they spend on healthcare. (I received it once; it was called a "cafeteria plan") and allow the individual to decide. As you have stated Pill Control Pills are not that expensive. 

Of all the issues. Employers not being required to provide contraception is fairly low on the list

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2017, 07:37 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: That's not the narrative at all. That's you playing more "word games" as usual.

As always you are correct, No one has pointed to the health benefits of sex. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2017, 07:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 1) Yes, you have mastered the quote feature; the keeping up with the conversation at hand not so much

2). Because they provide the insurance?

3) I suppose you could elect not to walk and I could elect for blood not to flow to my heart. As I have said if it is for personal health issues it should be covered; as I have learned an IUD's function is to reduce menstrual cramps.  Other than that I see no issues with an employer choosing what is covered if they are the ones providing the insurance. Take out supplemental insurance of find an employer that has a health plan you like. 

I understand there are those that say the Government should mandate what the employer should provide, but maybe just giving the employee the money they spend on healthcare. (I received it once; it was called a "cafeteria plan") and allow the individual to decide. As you have stated Pill Control Pills are not that expensive. 

Of all the issues. Employers not being required to provide contraception is fairly low on the list

The employer isn't providing the insurance, they sponsor the insurance. They pay half the premiums. The patient pays the other half of the premiums plus the cost of co-pays and the deductible. Meaning the employee pays more than 50%. If the employee doesnt pay they don't get insurance. The employers aren't required to provide contraception, the insurance plan is required to cover contraception. I didn't say birth control wasn't that expensive. I said it was cheaper than your ELECTIVE procedure. It's not my fault you don't know what is and isn't an elective procedure and picked a reeeeeeeeally poor example which back fired, but the fact remains a cardiac cath is elective and I correctly guessed you belueve your elective procedures should be covered.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2017, 07:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As always you are correct, No one has pointed to the health benefits of sex. 

Oh, of is that the false narrative you're promoting or was it, "sex is healthful; so insurance should cover contraception."

Please show me where I wrote sex is healthful so insurance should cover contraception.

Next to Lucie, you are the last person who should complain about word games and playing "gotcha."

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2017, 08:44 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The employer isn't providing the insurance, they sponsor the insurance. They pay half the premiums. The patient pays the other half of the premiums plus the cost of co-pays and the deductible. Meaning the employee pays more than 50%.  If the employee doesnt pay they don't get insurance.   The employers aren't required to provide contraception, the insurance plan is required to cover contraception. I didn't say birth control wasn't that expensive. I said it was cheaper than your ELECTIVE procedure. It's not my fault you don't know what is and isn't an elective procedure and picked a reeeeeeeeally poor example which back fired, but the fact remains a cardiac cath is elective and I correctly guessed you belueve your elective procedures should be covered.

Yes it has backfired. I have been foiled again by you and your brilliant comparison of heart surgery and knee surgery to condoms. 

[StLucieBengal]

(10-11-2017, 06:31 PM)Benton Wrote: And they’re still paying for insurance, which is covering lifestyle choices that lead to health matters (heart diseas, diabetes, etc). A heart cath is available for purchase without insurance, too. Or insulin.

Anyone is free to find a new job with an employer who wishes to offer every type of birth control. Besides places like hobby lobby do offer birth control just not the entire list mandated by Obamacare. People get birth control just not a compete list.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2017, 09:04 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yes it has backfired. I have been foiled again by you and your brilliant comparison of heart surgery and knee surgery to condoms. 

You used breast augmentation surgery as an example of an elective procedure, not condoms. At least try to keep your own shit straight.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2017, 11:36 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Anyone is free to find a new job with an employer who wishes to offer every type of birth control. Besides places like hobby lobby do offer birth control just not the entire list mandated by Obamacare. People get birth control just not a compete list.

Again, why does an employer paying less than half the cost of the insurance get to dictate what prescriptions will and won't be covered? There are a lot of ignorant business owners out there who shouldn't be involved in other people's medical decision making. Should an anti-vaxxer owner be allowed to deny their employees vaccination coverage because of the owner's sincerely held belief in bullshit? No.

It's the patient's insurance, not the company's insurance. The employees are paying hundreds each month in premiums so it's not like they are getting shit for free. When I worked for a California based company I was paying almost $1K/mo for health insurance. I laugh at the idea I was paying roughly $12K/yr, but my wife was getting "free" birth control.

If these were Muslim owned companies forcing Sharia onto employees via health insurance you and bfine would have a shit fit. But, since it is "Christian" companies like Hobby Lobby forcing their religious views into employee's health insurance benefits you two are willing to turn a blind eye.

Either offer the health insurance or don't. But, employers shouldn't be able to force their religious beliefs onto employees by hijacking their insurance.

The new proposal means Hobby Lobby can offer employees health insurance with no contraceptive choices instead of limited choices.

[Benton]

(10-11-2017, 11:36 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Anyone is free to find a new job with an employer who wishes to offer every type of birth control. Besides places like hobby lobby do offer birth control just not the entire list mandated by Obamacare. People get birth control just not a compete list.

And if this was heart disease, diabetes or other conditions resulting from unhealthy lifestyles, you can bet your nascar tickets it would be as covered as other choices. Falling back on trying to make it a free market choice is ludicrous unless employers are going to have the freedom to stop covering by obese employees, employees who drink, employees who smoke, employees who don’t exercise at least 20 minutes a day.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-12-2017, 02:32 AM)Benton Wrote: And if this was heart disease, diabetes or other conditions resulting from unhealthy lifestyles, you can bet your nascar tickets it would be as covered as other choices. Falling back on trying to make it a free market choice is ludicrous unless employers are going to have the freedom to stop covering by obese employees, employees who drink, employees who smoke, employees who don’t exercise at least 20 minutes a day.

I'm fine if employers stop covering issues that come from obesity. Especially if they offer help or cover costs for exercise, etc.

And add your whole list there as I am ok. I really think if you make terrible choices and refuse help then you should have to deal with the repercussions.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-12-2017, 02:46 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I'm fine if employers stop covering issues that come from obesity. Especially if they offer help or cover costs for exercise, etc.

And add your whole list there as I am ok. I really think if you make terrible choices and refuse help then you should have to deal with the repercussions.

(05-14-2015, 10:14 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote:

Tommy, uh I mean Tyrone, you're obviously obese so you're okay with your health insurance not covering any potential health problems you might have as a result of your terrible choices?

[Belsnickel]

(10-12-2017, 02:46 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I'm fine if employers stop covering issues that come from obesity. Especially if they offer help or cover costs for exercise, etc.

And add your whole list there as I am ok. I really think if you make terrible choices and refuse help then you should have to deal with the repercussions.

Too bad these things will never happen. Capitalism has led us to a country where employers seek to wring as many waking hours out of their employees leaving little to no time for hobbies, family, or exercise. We are unhealthy as hell in this country, and a lot of it has to do with the exploitation of labor causing a terrible work/life balance.

/socialist rant

[StLucieBengal]

(10-12-2017, 10:05 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Tommy, uh I mean Tyrone, you're obviously obese so you're okay with your health insurance not covering any potential health problems you might have as a result of your terrible choices?

Oh so now that's my photo? Make up your mind fatal attraction.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-12-2017, 10:54 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Too bad these things will never happen. Capitalism has led us to a country where employers seek to wring as many waking hours out of their employees leaving little to no time for hobbies, family, or exercise. We are unhealthy as hell in this country, and a lot of it has to do with the exploitation of labor causing a terrible work/life balance.

/socialist rant

Dont employers end up paying more for obese workers?

[GMDino]

(10-12-2017, 12:37 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Dont employers end up paying more for obese workers?

As an obese worker I can say...no.

They pay more for OLDER workers.

[Benton]

(10-12-2017, 02:46 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I'm fine if employers stop covering issues that come from obesity.   Especially if they offer help or cover costs for exercise, etc.

And add your whole list there as I am ok.   I really think if you make terrible choices and refuse help then you should have to deal with the repercussions.

I'm ok with it, but you would have to dismantle our entire healthcare system if insurance is going to stop paying for heart attacks, diabetes, ED, etc. People can't afford a heart cath without insurance, so if insurance isn't going to cover heart caths, then there's two options: let the market decide what people can afford (which is going to be next to nothing in this economy) or we continue to subsidize part of the costs and let healthcare providers decide what a heart cath is worth, eliminating it as an option for a large portion of people.