- 4,122
- 640
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
there are accounts that do that. i wouldnt suggest it though because it can be confiscated as well word to FDR. better to have it on you under the mattress style and you dont pay any storage fees on top of that
ACA: Affordable Care Act (better known as OBAMACARE) - Enrollment Starts October 1st - You In?
there are accounts that do that. i wouldnt suggest it though because it can be confiscated as well word to FDR. better to have it on you under the mattress style and you dont pay any storage fees on top of that
- 2,682
- 5,571
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
Even conservative economist say if you raise the age and income limit, it's most definitely sustainable. O, and let's stop these scumbags from raiding it too, but I doubt that happens.
- 4,122
- 640
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
it merely buys the program a few more years of life left. thats it. THINK ABOUT IT. where does SSI get their money from? TAXES. we have unemployment at around 25% and majority of the ones working are working at low wages. that aint gonna help SSI at all. it needs middle to high income earners for it to be sustainable, lots of it.
- 2,682
- 5,571
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
That's why I said, remove the income limits. Also, gutting the tax base to give tax cuts to 'job creators' has serious consequences. You just said it yourself, it comes from taxes. Cutting taxes for the rich does NOTHING, the working class poor and 'middle' class has to make up for it.
Do you remember Economic Stimulus Act of 2008? Where Bush was giving out $600 checks to individuals? That money came from SS.
Do you remember Economic Stimulus Act of 2008? Where Bush was giving out $600 checks to individuals? That money came from SS.
Last edited by a moderator:
- 4,122
- 640
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
poor people dont pay taxes when they get it back in the form of a tax refund.
SS HAS NO MONEY. ITS ALL LIABILITIES.
- 4,122
- 640
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- 2,682
- 5,571
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
This is just false man, the poor absolutely pays SS tax. SS would have money if the government would STOP raiding it because it runs up huge deficits over the years.
- 4,122
- 640
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
why wouldnt they raid it? THE MONEY IS SITTING THERE TO GIVE OTHERS FREE GOODIES FOR VOTES. this is government and politicians you talking about. they give no dambs about money cause it aint theirs and would happily use it to get re-elected.
- 207
- 43
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2004
So you tell someone that investing in a 401K is worthless because of high fees (false), the risk of the government seizing your account (unlikely) and the devaluation of the dollar over time yet you recommend stashing money in the mattress? I hope you aren't giving out financial advice to anyone on a regular basis.
To the poster who asked, continue to invest in your 401K (in low fee funds), take advantage of employer matching, and take advantage of any tax breaks you can qualify for with having a 401K.
- 14,952
- 4,207
- Joined
- May 26, 2003
I just do the 4% my company match, lol dudes on NT stay saying 401k sucks, but avg can't just buy gold bricks and keep it under their bed. The time we spend saving trying to get one our dollar decreases value and the gold might be going up making it where we could never buy it (if that makes sense)
- 4,122
- 640
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- 4,122
- 640
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
so put it in a long term fund thats denominated in USD so that it can continue to decay while you accumulate USD denominated financial products? da fuq?
if you cant afford gold, buy silver. its the poor mans gold
Last edited:
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
The video in the link gives more details about the specifics of the vulnerabilities of the current site. I.E. no background checks for navigators & the ability to infect your computer from visiting the site.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101225308
[h1]No security ever built into Obamacare site: Hacker[/h1]
It could take a year to secure the risk of "high exposures" of personal information on the federal Obamacare online exchange, a cybersecurity expert told CNBC on Monday.
"When you develop a website, you develop it with security in mind. And it doesn't appear to have happened this time," said David Kennedy, a so-called "white hat" hacker who tests online security by breaching websites. He testified on Capitol Hill about the flaws of HealthCare.gov last week.
"It's really hard to go back and fix the security around it because security wasn't built into it," said Kennedy, chief executive of TrustedSec. "We're talking multiple months to over a year to at least address some of the critical-to-high exposures on the website itself."
According to the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversaw the implementation of the website, the components used to build the site are compliant with standards set by Federal security authorities.
"The privacy and security of consumers' personal information are a top priority for us. Security testing happens on an ongoing basis using industry best practices to appropriately safeguard consumers' personal information," said the spokesperson.
Another online security expert—who spoke at last week's House hearing and then on CNBC—said the federal Obamacare website needs to be shut down and rebuilt from scratch. Morgan Wright, CEO of Crowd Sourced Investigations said: "There's not a plan to fix this that meets the sniff test of being reasonable."
Last month, a Sept. 27 government memorandum surfaced in which two HHS officials said the security of the site had not been properly tested before it opened, creating "a high risk."
HHS had explained then that steps were taken to ease security concerns after the memo was written, and that consumer information was secure. Technicians fixed a security bug in the password reset function in late October, the agency said.
But on CNBC, Kennedy disputed those claims, saying vulnerabilities remain on "everything from hacking someone's computer so when you visit the website it actually tries to hack your computer back, all the way to being able to extract email addresses, users names—first name, last name—[and] locations."
Healthcare.gov
Government officials and contractors have been working around the clock for weeks, releasing fixes on HealthCare.gov nightly with the goal of meeting the Obama administration's self-imposed deadline of the end of the month to have the site working smoothly.
"When you look at the site itself, it could be really good. It could do really well. They're just not building the security into the site itself," said Kennedy. "Putting your information on there is definitely a risk."
The federal portal serves 36 states not operating their own health insurance exchanges. Fourteen other states and the District of Columbia run their own marketplaces. All of them launched on Oct. 1 as part of the Obamacare provision mandating most Americans have health-care coverage for next year or face tax penalties.
(Read more: Obamacare extensions for 2014 and 2015 deadlines)
Kennedy said those state-operated exchanges also face security risks. "These are going to be a large area for attack." He pointed to a problem on the Vermont website on Friday. Officials overseeing the Vermont Health Connect website confirmed a security breach on the system last month.
When it comes to securing personal information online, Kennedy cited Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter as models for the industry. He even said the IRS website does regular testing to help "ensure that when the websites come out they're protected."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101225308
[h1]No security ever built into Obamacare site: Hacker[/h1]
It could take a year to secure the risk of "high exposures" of personal information on the federal Obamacare online exchange, a cybersecurity expert told CNBC on Monday.
"When you develop a website, you develop it with security in mind. And it doesn't appear to have happened this time," said David Kennedy, a so-called "white hat" hacker who tests online security by breaching websites. He testified on Capitol Hill about the flaws of HealthCare.gov last week.
"It's really hard to go back and fix the security around it because security wasn't built into it," said Kennedy, chief executive of TrustedSec. "We're talking multiple months to over a year to at least address some of the critical-to-high exposures on the website itself."
According to the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversaw the implementation of the website, the components used to build the site are compliant with standards set by Federal security authorities.
"The privacy and security of consumers' personal information are a top priority for us. Security testing happens on an ongoing basis using industry best practices to appropriately safeguard consumers' personal information," said the spokesperson.
Another online security expert—who spoke at last week's House hearing and then on CNBC—said the federal Obamacare website needs to be shut down and rebuilt from scratch. Morgan Wright, CEO of Crowd Sourced Investigations said: "There's not a plan to fix this that meets the sniff test of being reasonable."
Last month, a Sept. 27 government memorandum surfaced in which two HHS officials said the security of the site had not been properly tested before it opened, creating "a high risk."
HHS had explained then that steps were taken to ease security concerns after the memo was written, and that consumer information was secure. Technicians fixed a security bug in the password reset function in late October, the agency said.
But on CNBC, Kennedy disputed those claims, saying vulnerabilities remain on "everything from hacking someone's computer so when you visit the website it actually tries to hack your computer back, all the way to being able to extract email addresses, users names—first name, last name—[and] locations."
Healthcare.gov
Government officials and contractors have been working around the clock for weeks, releasing fixes on HealthCare.gov nightly with the goal of meeting the Obama administration's self-imposed deadline of the end of the month to have the site working smoothly.
"When you look at the site itself, it could be really good. It could do really well. They're just not building the security into the site itself," said Kennedy. "Putting your information on there is definitely a risk."
The federal portal serves 36 states not operating their own health insurance exchanges. Fourteen other states and the District of Columbia run their own marketplaces. All of them launched on Oct. 1 as part of the Obamacare provision mandating most Americans have health-care coverage for next year or face tax penalties.
(Read more: Obamacare extensions for 2014 and 2015 deadlines)
Kennedy said those state-operated exchanges also face security risks. "These are going to be a large area for attack." He pointed to a problem on the Vermont website on Friday. Officials overseeing the Vermont Health Connect website confirmed a security breach on the system last month.
When it comes to securing personal information online, Kennedy cited Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter as models for the industry. He even said the IRS website does regular testing to help "ensure that when the websites come out they're protected."
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
You have to remember the people that pay no taxes dont get SSI back, just federal and state. Also SSI will only pay you based on how much you put in. Say I made 100k inmy life time and you only made, my checks every month will be alot highers then yours
Where would we buy gold or silvers from if i wanted to buy it now
- 3,937
- 2,069
- Joined
- May 26, 2006
I swear when it comes to important things Americans have THE shortest memories on the planet.
Of course Obama was against the individual mandate, because at the time of those videos he was pushing for a public option. Which most Republicans did not support. The whole idea was to offer government run health insurance and offer it at a rate much lower than the current insurance companies, to drive prices lower through competition.
The GOP was against this, citing that the government has no business competing in the private sector and it would lead to more government control. Their solution to fighting a public option was to add a mandate into the law to make sure that it wasnt just the rich paying for the ACA.
It was one of the main things that Obama compromised on to get the remaining democrats to support the bill.
Then when the public option was finally defeated, that's when the GOP flipped the script and started the whole unconstitutional angle, of trying to get the law thrown out.
I understand that it was a few years ago but how do people not remember this?
Of course Obama was against the individual mandate, because at the time of those videos he was pushing for a public option. Which most Republicans did not support. The whole idea was to offer government run health insurance and offer it at a rate much lower than the current insurance companies, to drive prices lower through competition.
The GOP was against this, citing that the government has no business competing in the private sector and it would lead to more government control. Their solution to fighting a public option was to add a mandate into the law to make sure that it wasnt just the rich paying for the ACA.
It was one of the main things that Obama compromised on to get the remaining democrats to support the bill.
Then when the public option was finally defeated, that's when the GOP flipped the script and started the whole unconstitutional angle, of trying to get the law thrown out.
I understand that it was a few years ago but how do people not remember this?
- 4,122
- 640
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
i use scottsdalesilver
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
No, it means you pay the first $6,350 of your medical expenses for the year and THEN they will start covering you. If your expenses are under that, the insurance won't cover your expenses
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
I've been racking my brain for a while now and can't find an answer, so hopefully someone here can help me out. What areas have given precidence for the government to compete against private businesses to drive down the cost? The only situation I can think of might be Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, but that's only if you consider them a government backed company before the takeover (which was only implicit)
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
Naw all preventive care is covered Also all prescribed medicne is covered.
I cant see a deductible of 6k that seem a little high. Deductible is only for major illness or surgery even then i had a major surgery and I never had to pay my deductible
What usually happens is that the insurance will subtract your deductible from the cost of your bill so you will still be left paying some $$ to hospital
Atleast my car insurance work like that, they will subtract my deductible from my payout check
Last edited:
- 9,253
- 3,007
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2005
Obama Lifts Health Mandate for Those With Canceled Plans
Americans whose health plans are being canceled because their coverage doesn’t meet Obamacare rules will be exempt from the mandate that they carry insurance, under a change announced by the Obama administration.
Officials estimated the change will affect fewer than 500,000 people as a Dec. 23 deadline looms to purchase health policies to be eligible for coverage beginning Jan. 1. People losing coverage also will be eligible to buy high-deductible “catastrophic” insurance the law usually limits to those younger than age 30.
Insurers warned that the new exemptions, which would last a year and potentially longer for consumers granted hardship exceptions, risk destabilizing the new marketplaces if younger, healthier people who now carry cheap policies opt out of buying replacement coverage.
“This latest rule change could cause significant instability in the marketplace and lead to further confusion and disruption for consumers,” Karen Ignagni, the president of America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry’s Washington lobby group, said in an e-mail from a spokesman.
The Obama also administration yesterday gave its first estimate of the number of people who may be without coverage after their policies were canceled for failing to meet the requirements of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. Fewer than 500,000 Americans will lose insurance starting Jan. 1 because their policies don’t meet the law’s requirements and they haven’t found new coverage, according to administration officials who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity.
Guidance Issued
The exemption from the law’s individual mandate was announced separately yesterday in guidance issued by the U.S. Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services.
“This is a common-sense clarification of the law,” Joanne Peters, a spokeswoman for U.S. Health Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, said in an e-mail. “For the limited number of consumers whose plans have been canceled and are seeking coverage, this is one more option.”
In California, more than 1 million policy holders received letters from their current insurers saying their coverage will be canceled after Dec. 31 because their plans don’t comply, and hundreds of thousands were canceled in other states.
That has stoked the political backlash against President Barack Obama’s signature health-care law and came on top of the botched October rollout of the government-run insurance exchange where people are supposed to shop for health coverage.
Policy Changes
Obama has responded with a flurry of last-minute policy changes to give people more time to sign up for insurance and blunt the effect of cancellations.
He announced Nov. 14 that states could allow plans to extend current policies for a year. At least 22 states, including California and New York, have said they won’t allow insurers to extend expiring plans, according to Ignagni’s group. Instead, people in those states will have to buy new policies that comply with the law, either directly from insurers or through government-run marketplaces.
A week later, he pushed back the deadline to sign up for coverage effective Jan. 1 by eight days, to Dec. 23.
On Dec. 13 the administration urged insurers to provide more leniency to people shopping for new coverage by allowing them to pay for plans later in January and sign up retroactively for coverage beginning Jan. 1. The government also asked insurers to cover care from any doctor or hospital in January and to cover refills of prescriptions during the month regardless of any network restrictions.
Payment Window
The industry said this week that it would allow payment for coverage beginning Jan. 1 as late as Jan. 10. While insurers haven’t agreed to the other requests, they are automatically enrolling in new plans many policy-holders who would otherwise lose coverage..
The government is trying to reach people seeking new policies who may have experienced bugs or errors in the federal enrollment system before the Dec. 23 deadline, said the officials who briefed reporters. More than 2 million e-mails have been sent to people who tried to sign up in October and November and hit technical problems, the officials said, and government call centers have placed more than 600,000 phone calls to those customers.
It's crumbling.
Americans whose health plans are being canceled because their coverage doesn’t meet Obamacare rules will be exempt from the mandate that they carry insurance, under a change announced by the Obama administration.
Officials estimated the change will affect fewer than 500,000 people as a Dec. 23 deadline looms to purchase health policies to be eligible for coverage beginning Jan. 1. People losing coverage also will be eligible to buy high-deductible “catastrophic” insurance the law usually limits to those younger than age 30.
Insurers warned that the new exemptions, which would last a year and potentially longer for consumers granted hardship exceptions, risk destabilizing the new marketplaces if younger, healthier people who now carry cheap policies opt out of buying replacement coverage.
“This latest rule change could cause significant instability in the marketplace and lead to further confusion and disruption for consumers,” Karen Ignagni, the president of America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry’s Washington lobby group, said in an e-mail from a spokesman.
The Obama also administration yesterday gave its first estimate of the number of people who may be without coverage after their policies were canceled for failing to meet the requirements of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. Fewer than 500,000 Americans will lose insurance starting Jan. 1 because their policies don’t meet the law’s requirements and they haven’t found new coverage, according to administration officials who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity.
Guidance Issued
The exemption from the law’s individual mandate was announced separately yesterday in guidance issued by the U.S. Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services.
“This is a common-sense clarification of the law,” Joanne Peters, a spokeswoman for U.S. Health Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, said in an e-mail. “For the limited number of consumers whose plans have been canceled and are seeking coverage, this is one more option.”
In California, more than 1 million policy holders received letters from their current insurers saying their coverage will be canceled after Dec. 31 because their plans don’t comply, and hundreds of thousands were canceled in other states.
That has stoked the political backlash against President Barack Obama’s signature health-care law and came on top of the botched October rollout of the government-run insurance exchange where people are supposed to shop for health coverage.
Policy Changes
Obama has responded with a flurry of last-minute policy changes to give people more time to sign up for insurance and blunt the effect of cancellations.
He announced Nov. 14 that states could allow plans to extend current policies for a year. At least 22 states, including California and New York, have said they won’t allow insurers to extend expiring plans, according to Ignagni’s group. Instead, people in those states will have to buy new policies that comply with the law, either directly from insurers or through government-run marketplaces.
A week later, he pushed back the deadline to sign up for coverage effective Jan. 1 by eight days, to Dec. 23.
On Dec. 13 the administration urged insurers to provide more leniency to people shopping for new coverage by allowing them to pay for plans later in January and sign up retroactively for coverage beginning Jan. 1. The government also asked insurers to cover care from any doctor or hospital in January and to cover refills of prescriptions during the month regardless of any network restrictions.
Payment Window
The industry said this week that it would allow payment for coverage beginning Jan. 1 as late as Jan. 10. While insurers haven’t agreed to the other requests, they are automatically enrolling in new plans many policy-holders who would otherwise lose coverage..
The government is trying to reach people seeking new policies who may have experienced bugs or errors in the federal enrollment system before the Dec. 23 deadline, said the officials who briefed reporters. More than 2 million e-mails have been sent to people who tried to sign up in October and November and hit technical problems, the officials said, and government call centers have placed more than 600,000 phone calls to those customers.
It's crumbling.
Last edited:
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
double post
$45 a month for plat plan for me. i aint mad!
$45 a month for plat plan for me. i aint mad!
Last edited:
gllahone84
Banned
- 11,727
- 1,912
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2011
The hoax...
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
I'm still wondering how he can place line item actions on a bill without congressional approval.