3 ms·

> First, non-competes are rarely so airtight that a person can't work in their field for another employer. I assume you've based this conclusion on your extens

> First, non-competes are rarely so airtight that a person can't work in their field for another employer. I assume you've based this conclusion on your extensive experience reading noncompetes from many different verticals in many different markets, and not just what the average tech worker sees. > The whole "pre-existing" condition FUD is crap, too, since the new healthcare bill doesn't do away with that "protection". No, it simply makes it impossible to take advantage of any protections by allowing insurance companies to charge any price they deem fit to the most vulnerable patients. > Americans badly need any replacement that might control costs better. I don't disagree with you here, but neither does the AHCA. And its glaringly obvious to anyone that knows healthcare policy well that the ACA has plenty of room to be adjusted to correct inadequacies. The "Repeal and Replace" mantra on the far right is just political gamesmanship. If Republicans really cared about free markets, they would have brought to the table measures that helped create an educated market, like pricing transparency and enforcing laws against anticompetitive behavior. > I should add that I don't think it is fair that un-insurable people push their problems onto the rest of us because all that does is bring everyone down! It's nice to think we can look out for our nation's most vulnerable people, but what if we can't do that and maintain viable economic growth? What then? Man, I gotta hand it to you, this is some Grade A supertrolling here. In the span of just a few sentences you've managed to combine fear, a begrudged sympathy, and a false dichotomy into what passes for an argument, flimsy though it is. Maybe read up on the idea of the veil of ignorance[1] for that first point. Had you put it a different way I might agree with you in principle—we should stop talking about healthcare as insurance and start talking about how to provision healthcare for everyone. Its not insurance when everyone is guaranteed to need it at some point in their lives. There's nothing in doing so that demands we limit economic growth—the US is for all intents and purposes the only developed country in the world that fails achieve this. [1] https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Veil_of_ignorance https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Veil_of_ignorance

valuearb 9y ago
Yes, it's not like the ACA isn't stunningly badly designed. I used to insure my family for $400 a month until it banned the use of pre-existing conditions for determining rates, and now the cheapest available insurance is $1800 a month, which my family can't afford. Remember when Obama said we could keep our existing plans? Edit: corrected my misuse of AHCA.
- rectang 9y ago
  You're criticizing the ACA. The AHCA is the current Republican proposal passed by the House.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  Please stop confusing the ACA with the AHCA.
- pja 9y ago
  That was entirely by design. You might not have liked it, but it was an expected outcome.
fivestar 9y ago
I see the "I don't disagree" bit a lot on here. You mean you agree, then, correct? Then why not just say "I agree!" Is that so hard for you? I'm not "super trolling" I really want an answer as to why my insurance doubled in the past few years while all I got was a bunch of bs shoved up my ass, which is all I ever get! "the US is for all intents and purposes the only developed country in the world that fails achieve this" I disagree with that statement--I don't think you get how bad healthcare is even in Europe. Yes, you can get "free" treatment there, but your taxes run 60%, unemployment is ridiculously high, and the outcomes are no better! Where is the magical answer that socialized medicine provides? Here's an idea--let's outlaw insurance completely. I look at my monthly budget and between car insurance, homeowner's insurance, health insurance, and two life insurance policies, I'm seeing a pretty good bit of my take home going up in smoke here. It's bullshit--my biggest takeaway in all of this is that insurance is simply bullshit.
- wayn3 9y ago
  100% of your takehome, the takehome of your children and the takehome of their children is going up in smoke in perpetuity if you ever get sick without insurance. "Well then just dont get sick" is a bit of a stupid way of life. Getting sick is rarely optional. Blue collar workers get injured. Thats just the nature of their jobs. If you work in a coal mine, your lung is fucked up, at some point. If you work in construction, it fucks up your back. Wishing for medical care to be outlawed is not just a bit retarded. Even if you're one of those wholly arrogant retards who think that people who "didnt manage to not be blue collar" - someone has to do it. Its conceptually impossible for the entire population to make it big. Even if every indivdual had the "chance" to be a millionaire, not all of them can be. Insurance is just about the most basic necessity you can think of, to maintain society. Or you can just solve it with outlawing insurance, forcing everyone who ran a streak of bad luck into crippling debt and then imprisoning them. Thats what they did in the middle ages. We progressed past that for the better.
- karmajunkie 9y ago
  > I see the "I don't disagree" bit a lot on here. You mean you agree, then, correct? Then why not just say "I agree!" Is that so hard for you? Ok then, I disagree: a replacement is not needed. What is needed is to amend the original law to address shortcomings. > I really want an answer as to why my insurance doubled in the past few years while all I got was a bunch of bs shoved up my ass, which is all I ever get! I won't speak to your particular case because there are too many variables at play between individual markets. One problem is that you don't know what would have happened had the market, such as it was, been left alone in 2008. I know I'd have been screwed several times over in that case—my provider tried to rescind coverage on my 2yo son just after the child provisions took effect, and the ACA prevented that. Additionally, (and I'm assuming you lean right given your argument) its disingenuous for the GOP and GOP voters to pretend that the ACA is problematic on its merits, when they have been doing everything in their power to ensure it fails for the last 9 years. States that refused the medicaid expansion have only themselves to blame for the substantial number of problems in those states. You can't yell "because FREEDOM" and cut your nose off to spite your face, then complain because you got a nosebleed.

valuearb 9y ago

Yes, it's not like the ACA isn't stunningly badly designed. I used to insure my family for $400 a month until it banned the use of pre-existing conditions for determining rates, and now the cheapest available insurance is $1800 a month, which my family can't afford. Remember when Obama said we could keep our existing plans? Edit: corrected my misuse of AHCA.

rectang 9y ago
You're criticizing the ACA. The AHCA is the current Republican proposal passed by the House.
maxerickson 9y ago
Please stop confusing the ACA with the AHCA.
pja 9y ago
That was entirely by design. You might not have liked it, but it was an expected outcome.

fivestar 9y ago

I see the "I don't disagree" bit a lot on here. You mean you agree, then, correct? Then why not just say "I agree!" Is that so hard for you? I'm not "super trolling" I really want an answer as to why my insurance doubled in the past few years while all I got was a bunch of bs shoved up my ass, which is all I ever get! "the US is for all intents and purposes the only developed country in the world that fails achieve this" I disagree with that statement--I don't think you get how bad healthcare is even in Europe. Yes, you can get "free" treatment there, but your taxes run 60%, unemployment is ridiculously high, and the outcomes are no better! Where is the magical answer that socialized medicine provides? Here's an idea--let's outlaw insurance completely. I look at my monthly budget and between car insurance, homeowner's insurance, health insurance, and two life insurance policies, I'm seeing a pretty good bit of my take home going up in smoke here. It's bullshit--my biggest takeaway in all of this is that insurance is simply bullshit.

wayn3 9y ago
100% of your takehome, the takehome of your children and the takehome of their children is going up in smoke in perpetuity if you ever get sick without insurance. "Well then just dont get sick" is a bit of a stupid way of life. Getting sick is rarely optional. Blue collar workers get injured. Thats just the nature of their jobs. If you work in a coal mine, your lung is fucked up, at some point. If you work in construction, it fucks up your back. Wishing for medical care to be outlawed is not just a bit retarded. Even if you're one of those wholly arrogant retards who think that people who "didnt manage to not be blue collar" - someone has to do it. Its conceptually impossible for the entire population to make it big. Even if every indivdual had the "chance" to be a millionaire, not all of them can be. Insurance is just about the most basic necessity you can think of, to maintain society. Or you can just solve it with outlawing insurance, forcing everyone who ran a streak of bad luck into crippling debt and then imprisoning them. Thats what they did in the middle ages. We progressed past that for the better.
karmajunkie 9y ago
> I see the "I don't disagree" bit a lot on here. You mean you agree, then, correct? Then why not just say "I agree!" Is that so hard for you? Ok then, I disagree: a replacement is not needed. What is needed is to amend the original law to address shortcomings. > I really want an answer as to why my insurance doubled in the past few years while all I got was a bunch of bs shoved up my ass, which is all I ever get! I won't speak to your particular case because there are too many variables at play between individual markets. One problem is that you don't know what would have happened had the market, such as it was, been left alone in 2008. I know I'd have been screwed several times over in that case—my provider tried to rescind coverage on my 2yo son just after the child provisions took effect, and the ACA prevented that. Additionally, (and I'm assuming you lean right given your argument) its disingenuous for the GOP and GOP voters to pretend that the ACA is problematic on its merits, when they have been doing everything in their power to ensure it fails for the last 9 years. States that refused the medicaid expansion have only themselves to blame for the substantial number of problems in those states. You can't yell "because FREEDOM" and cut your nose off to spite your face, then complain because you got a nosebleed.