Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Ted Cruz Gets His Health Insurance From...

wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2013 8:39:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
...none other than Goldman Sachs, where his wife is an investment banker.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

So, while Cruz shuts down the government and campaigns to defund a program that (regardless of how flawed it is) is aimed at making health care more affordable for all Americans, Cruz doesn't need to care, as the Vampire Squid itself has its tentacles in his...orifices. Not that I'm biased, of course.

Complete and utter hypocrisy? Or does this somehow afford (pun intended) Cruz a better perspective on health care?

Discuss.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2013 1:33:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Actually, it doesn't make health care more affordable for all americans. It makes "insurance" cheaper, on the backs of those who don't want it, so those that can't get it, can also have it.

Take my case:
I am looking at spending about $280/month for me and my wife for insurance on the exchange. I don't think we'll qualify for any tax credits or subsidies.

Compare this to the about $200/month about 2 years ago, for insurance I still didn't want (co-pay wasn't high enough).

Now, in either scenario, I can't afford it, nor can I afford the tax I'll pay for not having it.

But, let's look at the math by comparing plans (from memory):
The difference in payments were about $80/month or $960/year. I don't remember the duductible for the new plan, nor the co-pay, but the old plan was $5K and $60. If we assume the new plan is the same, then it isn't more affordable, is it?

Now, let's assume this new plan is $3K deductable and $0 copay. It is a better deal, I would think than the old similar plan was. However, is it more affordable healthcare overall?
If, over 3 years, I were to go to the doctor three times and the hospital once, which plan comes out ahead for affordability of healthcare?
For the plan I want that I couldn't find priced at $200/month...
Doctor plus scripts is about $300 x 3 = $900.
Major medical incident is $5000
Insurance costs $200 x 36 = $7,200
Total cost of healthcare = $13,100

New plan:
Doctor plus scripts $30 copay x 3 = $90 (assuming $20 copay for visit and $10 for scripts)
Major medical incident is $3000
Insurance cost $280 x 36 = $10,080
Total cost of healthcare = $13,170

Not more affordable, is it?
Keep in mind I haven't gone to the doctor but thrice in the last 10 years, as most young adults are likely to do.
My work here is, finally, done.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2013 2:25:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/25/2013 1:33:56 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Actually, it doesn't make health care more affordable for all americans. It makes "insurance" cheaper, on the backs of those who don't want it, so those that can't get it, can also have it.

Take my case:
I am looking at spending about $280/month for me and my wife for insurance on the exchange. I don't think we'll qualify for any tax credits or subsidies.

Compare this to the about $200/month about 2 years ago, for insurance I still didn't want (co-pay wasn't high enough).

Now, in either scenario, I can't afford it, nor can I afford the tax I'll pay for not having it.

But, let's look at the math by comparing plans (from memory):
The difference in payments were about $80/month or $960/year. I don't remember the duductible for the new plan, nor the co-pay, but the old plan was $5K and $60. If we assume the new plan is the same, then it isn't more affordable, is it?

Now, let's assume this new plan is $3K deductable and $0 copay. It is a better deal, I would think than the old similar plan was. However, is it more affordable healthcare overall?
If, over 3 years, I were to go to the doctor three times and the hospital once, which plan comes out ahead for affordability of healthcare?
For the plan I want that I couldn't find priced at $200/month...
Doctor plus scripts is about $300 x 3 = $900.
Major medical incident is $5000
Insurance costs $200 x 36 = $7,200
Total cost of healthcare = $13,100

New plan:
Doctor plus scripts $30 copay x 3 = $90 (assuming $20 copay for visit and $10 for scripts)
Major medical incident is $3000
Insurance cost $280 x 36 = $10,080
Total cost of healthcare = $13,170

Not more affordable, is it?
Keep in mind I haven't gone to the doctor but thrice in the last 10 years, as most young adults are likely to do.

that's not what the OP asked you.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2013 2:55:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/25/2013 2:25:53 PM, 000ike wrote:

that's not what the OP asked you.

It's not hypocritical if it's not true.
My work here is, finally, done.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2013 5:21:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/24/2013 8:39:14 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
So, while Cruz shuts down the government and campaigns to defund a program that (regardless of how flawed it is) is aimed at making health care more affordable for all Americans, Cruz doesn't need to care, as the Vampire Squid itself has its tentacles in his...orifices. Not that I'm biased, of course.

Ted Cruz has a great insurance plan from Goldman Sachs and he wants everyone else in the world to also have the opportunity to have the same high quality free market health insurance that he has.

Keep in mind that he is rallying to actually cut off his own health insurance coverage. He is trying to detach health insurance from employers which is contrary to what he currently receives, employer provided health insurance.

Obama is imposing high cost, low quality Obamacare on Americans while exempting himself, Congress, and his cronies.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2013 5:32:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
From your own article:

"The senator is on his wife"s plan, which comes at no cost to the taxpayer and reflects a personal decision about what works best for their family," the spokeswoman, Catherine Frazier, said.

"Ted is very much a visionary," Heidi Cruz Nelson told the Times. "He is very strategic, and he"s very practical, and he does what needs to be done, not what everybody wants him to do."
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2013 5:38:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
According to Slate (Left-wing publication):

"Democrats, I think unfairly, are using Heidi Cruz"s credentials and views to make Ted Cruz"s stances about Obamacare seem hypocritical. Indeed Cruz gets his health coverage through his wife"but he would get serviceable health coverage through the Senate if his wife stayed at home. It"s not necessarily hypocritical to believe that this particular program is bad for the U.S., while also receiving health insurance through one"s job. At the same time, the default would have hurt Goldman Sachs"and arguably Heidi Cruz"dearly.

As the Times points out, Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein went to the White House during the shutdown to encourage congress not to default.

You might think Cruz"s principles are wackadoo (and I certainly do), but he does stick to them, and I"m increasingly uncomfortable with the way wives are picked over holding views that are different from their political husbands."

http://www.slate.com...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2013 7:17:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/25/2013 5:21:07 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 10/24/2013 8:39:14 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
So, while Cruz shuts down the government and campaigns to defund a program that (regardless of how flawed it is) is aimed at making health care more affordable for all Americans, Cruz doesn't need to care, as the Vampire Squid itself has its tentacles in his...orifices. Not that I'm biased, of course.

Ted Cruz has a great insurance plan from Goldman Sachs and he wants everyone else in the world to also have the opportunity to have the same high quality free market health insurance that he has.

I'm sure you realize that more than 99.9% of the population will not be afforded the "same high quality free market health insurance" that Goldman Sachs is able to afford to its employees.

Your advocacy is nothing more than a pipe dream, and that's putting it lightly. It's another version of "separate but equal", except instead of whites vs blacks, this time it's the 1% (or perhaps the 5%) vs everyone else.

Keep in mind that he is rallying to actually cut off his own health insurance coverage. He is trying to detach health insurance from employers which is contrary to what he currently receives, employer provided health insurance.

Here you contradict your prior paragraph.

Obama is imposing high cost, low quality Obamacare on Americans while exempting himself, Congress, and his cronies.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2013 7:25:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/25/2013 5:38:54 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
According to Slate (Left-wing publication):

"Democrats, I think unfairly, are using Heidi Cruz"s credentials and views to make Ted Cruz"s stances about Obamacare seem hypocritical. Indeed Cruz gets his health coverage through his wife"but he would get serviceable health coverage through the Senate if his wife stayed at home. It"s not necessarily hypocritical to believe that this particular program is bad for the U.S., while also receiving health insurance through one"s job. At the same time, the default would have hurt Goldman Sachs"and arguably Heidi Cruz"dearly.

I'm not sure who the author of that Slate article was, but here she lays bare why it would matter where Cruz gets his insurance from. The Goldman Sachs health insurance is private health insurance, whereas what a senator would normally have is public health insurance. This is, to my limited knowledge, the entire crux of the debate, and if senators were more reliant upon the public health insurance they would have by right of public office, perhaps they'd be more sympathetic with extending some form of that health coverage to America as a whole.

As the Times points out, Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein went to the White House during the shutdown to encourage congress not to default.

You might think Cruz"s principles are wackadoo (and I certainly do), but he does stick to them, and I"m increasingly uncomfortable with the way wives are picked over holding views that are different from their political husbands."

http://www.slate.com...
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?