Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

June 02, 2026, 04:46:24 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Recent

Members
  • Total Members: 142
  • Latest: Hal9000
Stats
  • Total Posts: 179865
  • Total Topics: 1496
  • Online Today: 469
  • Online Ever: 4316
  • (October 16, 2025, 04:40:42 PM)
Users Online
Users: 3
Guests: 330
Total: 333

WTF happened to the WTF happened to the WTF happened with Trump today thread?

  • 9579 Replies
  • 895857 Views

0 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.

*

Hal9000

  • **
  • 63
  • +3/-7
  • I'm sorry illiniray, I'm afraid i can't do that.
    • View Profile
Many people describe the American health insurance system as a Ponzi Scheme because of:

1. You pay more and more but often get little back

If you’re healthy, you may pay thousands a year and rarely use it. That feels like you're funding someone else’s care.

2. Costs keep rising faster than wages

Premiums go up, deductibles go up, out-of-pocket expenses go up. It feels like insurers take more without improving benefits.

3. Employer-based coverage creates dependence

Lose your job → lose insurance. That instability feels unfair and arbitrary.

4. Opaque pricing

Nobody knows what anything costs until after it’s billed. That erodes trust and gives the scheme-like impression.

5. Profit motive inside something essential

Insurers profit when you don’t use healthcare, which feels backwards.
Just what do you think you're doing, illiniray?

*

illiniray

  • *****
  • 9370
  • +628/-2099
    • View Profile
Ask it what it did specifically for healthy, young, self-employed people. I asked it and got this, which is fairly accurate to my experience as a young healthy male at the time:

I lost my coverage because Pekin exited health insurance after ACA, and my options to reenroll were very limited/very expensive. I went from paying $97 a month for a $2500 deductible plan to $300 some. And that was a lot more relative money in 2013 than it is today.

You were getting a bargain because you were in a very low risk category. If you developed a health condition, became overweight, etc, that would have changed.
“Taking a trip? Where to?”  -“Wherever I end up, I guess. -“Man, I wish I was you." -Well, hang in there.”

*

ThePAMan

  • *****
  • 31847
  • +609/-2447
  • Because "PussyMan" and "PenisMan" were trademarked
    • View Profile
You were getting a bargain because you were in a very low risk category. If you developed a health condition, became overweight, etc, that would have changed.

Or had 3 kids....
Mark Carman: "The Whitlock!...Caleb Williams failed Wayne Whitlock." Been told I need to take my dick out my mouth so maybe I "wont [sic] sound like such a fucking faggot all the time[.]"

Tempo: "PAMan is a pot stirrer and agent provocateur"

*

illiniray

  • *****
  • 9370
  • +628/-2099
    • View Profile
Or had 3 kids....

Or had a member of his household who was pregnant or thinking about getting pregnant.
“Taking a trip? Where to?”  -“Wherever I end up, I guess. -“Man, I wish I was you." -Well, hang in there.”

*

Custard

  • *****
  • 12331
  • +238/-2983
    • View Profile
You were getting a bargain because you were in a very low risk category. If you developed a health condition, became overweight, etc, that would have changed.

I am pretty familiar with how it works. ACA forced me, as a young healthy male working 80 hours a week trying to get my business off the ground to subsidize others at my own expense.

13 years later and I’m still healthy (I work very hard at it, and good genes knock on wood) and still likely being overcharged. At least now my employer picks up most of my healthcare costs. It was a significant burden at the time.

You’re kind of proving my point that some people were significantly negatively impacted despite doing everything “right” because it was for the greater good.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2025, 09:29:18 PM by Custard »
Poster Boy for White Male Indifference

AOTC on basically everything measurable

“Custard, you were RIGHT!” -Tempo

*

Custard

  • *****
  • 12331
  • +238/-2983
    • View Profile
Or had 3 kids....

Healthy young self-employed people had kids all the time on insurance prior to ACA. I was just lucky enough to be at the perfect age and career stage to get fucked by the policy changes. Same way all the people my age bought their first homes right about the time the housing crisis happened.

I have gathered here that no one really cares if a healthy white male has to pay 3x or more for the same coverage as long as it’s subsidizing coverage for others who may or may not have had it previously. And it doesn’t matter at all if those people work or don’t work, take care of themselves or don’t, etc.

My perspective would likely be different had I been older, unhealthy, unable to work, etc.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2025, 09:32:19 PM by Custard »
Poster Boy for White Male Indifference

AOTC on basically everything measurable

“Custard, you were RIGHT!” -Tempo

*

ridingthegrange

  • *****
  • 1626
  • +744/-15
    • View Profile
I get how it works. ACA forced me, as a young healthy male trying to get my business off the ground to subsidize others at my own expense. 13 years later and I’m still healthy (I work very hard at it, and good genes knock on wood) and still likely being overcharged. At least now my employer picks up most of my healthcare costs. It was a significant burden at the time.

You’re kind of proving my point that some people were significantly negatively impacted despite doing everything “right” because it was for the greater good.

Glad you're healthy and working on it.  It doesn't get easier as time flies by.  I think that doing things for the greater good is what's right. We ask our soldiers to do that every day.  This wouldn't be a great place to live otherwise.  Count your blessings.

*

ThePAMan

  • *****
  • 31847
  • +609/-2447
  • Because "PussyMan" and "PenisMan" were trademarked
    • View Profile
Healthy young self-employed people had kids all the time on insurance prior to ACA. I was just lucky enough to be at the perfect age and career stage to get fucked by the policy changes. Same way all the people my age bought their first homes right about the time the housing crisis happened.

I have gathered here that no one really cares if a healthy white male has to pay 3x or more for the same coverage as long as it’s subsidizing coverage for others who may or may not have had it previously. And it doesn’t matter at all if those people work or don’t work, take care of themselves or don’t, etc.

My perspective would likely be different had I been older, unhealthy, unable to work, etc.

Consider that Illinois residents feel your pain as we are getting screwed on insurance because Florida is an  overbuilt hurricane zone. That's how it works.
Mark Carman: "The Whitlock!...Caleb Williams failed Wayne Whitlock." Been told I need to take my dick out my mouth so maybe I "wont [sic] sound like such a fucking faggot all the time[.]"

Tempo: "PAMan is a pot stirrer and agent provocateur"

*

Custard

  • *****
  • 12331
  • +238/-2983
    • View Profile
Consider that Illinois residents feel your pain as we are getting screwed on insurance because Florida is an  overbuilt hurricane zone. That's how it works.

CustardGPT Overview:

No, Illinois residents are not primarily getting “screwed” on insurance due to Florida being an “overbuilt hurricane zone.” While Florida’s frequent and severe hurricanes contribute to elevated costs in the global reinsurance market (which insurers use to spread risk), leading to some upward pressure on property insurance rates nationwide, this is not the main driver for Illinois’ rising premiums. Illinois faces its own significant local risks and factors that more directly explain high or increasing insurance costs.

Homeowners Insurance

•  Florida’s impact via reinsurance: Major hurricanes in Florida (and other disaster-prone areas like California wildfires) have driven up global reinsurance prices in recent years. Insurers pass these higher costs on to policyholders everywhere, contributing to national home insurance premium increases (up ~24-40% in recent years across the U.S.). Experts note this as a factor in rising rates even in lower-risk states.

•  But Illinois’ increases are largely local: Illinois has seen sharp premium hikes (e.g., ~50% over three years through 2024, with State Farm implementing a 27% increase in 2025), driven primarily by frequent severe convective storms, tornadoes, hail, and wind events in the Midwest. These “inland catastrophes” have caused billions in claims, plus inflation in rebuilding costs. Illinois ranks high in tornado and hail activity, making it one of the fastest-rising states for premiums—second only to Utah in percentage increases recently.

•  Comparison of averages (2025 data):
   •  Florida: ~$4,400–$5,600+ annually (highest in the U.S., often 3–4x the national average due to direct hurricane risk).
   •  Illinois: ~$2,100–$2,900 annually (middle of the pack nationally, below the U.S. average of ~$2,300–$2,500).
   •  Florida residents pay far more overall because their policies directly cover massive hurricane/wind/flood risks, while Illinois’ are tied to storms like derechos and hail.
Florida’s “overbuilding” in coastal/hurricane-prone areas exacerbates its own crisis (insurer exits, litigation, high deductibles), but it doesn’t disproportionately subsidize or burden Midwestern states like Illinois through cross-state pooling—rates are regulated and risk-priced state-by-state.

In summary, both states face rising insurance costs from climate-amplified weather, but Illinois’ issues stem more from Midwest storms, theft, and urban risks than from subsidizing Florida’s hurricane exposure. Nationwide reinsurance ripple effects exist for home insurance, but they’re secondary here compared to local drivers. Shopping quotes, bundling policies, or improving home fortifications (e.g., for hail) can help mitigate costs in Illinois.


Illinois residents get screwed on everything. Maybe you should hit up Flo at Progressive for a quote on bundling your insurance!
Poster Boy for White Male Indifference

AOTC on basically everything measurable

“Custard, you were RIGHT!” -Tempo

*

illiniray

  • *****
  • 9370
  • +628/-2099
    • View Profile
Healthy young self-employed people had kids all the time on insurance prior to ACA.

Covering kids pre aca  wasn't that difficult. Put them on a 500 deductible and buy cheap 500 dollar accident policies.

Maternity benefits was another thing. A lot of individual market policies excluded complications of pregnancy. Some would would flat out  decline coverage if anyone in the household was pregnant or considering getting pregnant -- even if that person was not named on the policy.

The ACA mandated maternity benefits for all policies, even for men, as one 10? Essential coverages. It also mandated gender neutral rates. This lowered rates for women, raised rates for men. Especially for child bearing age women, and young single men.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2025, 07:14:59 AM by illiniray »
“Taking a trip? Where to?”  -“Wherever I end up, I guess. -“Man, I wish I was you." -Well, hang in there.”

*

ThePAMan

  • *****
  • 31847
  • +609/-2447
  • Because "PussyMan" and "PenisMan" were trademarked
    • View Profile
CustardGPT Overview:

No, Illinois residents are not primarily getting “screwed” on insurance due to Florida being an “overbuilt hurricane zone.” While Florida’s frequent and severe hurricanes contribute to elevated costs in the global reinsurance market (which insurers use to spread risk), leading to some upward pressure on property insurance rates nationwide, this is not the main driver for Illinois’ rising premiums. Illinois faces its own significant local risks and factors that more directly explain high or increasing insurance costs.

Homeowners Insurance

•  Florida’s impact via reinsurance: Major hurricanes in Florida (and other disaster-prone areas like California wildfires) have driven up global reinsurance prices in recent years. Insurers pass these higher costs on to policyholders everywhere, contributing to national home insurance premium increases (up ~24-40% in recent years across the U.S.). Experts note this as a factor in rising rates even in lower-risk states.

•  But Illinois’ increases are largely local: Illinois has seen sharp premium hikes (e.g., ~50% over three years through 2024, with State Farm implementing a 27% increase in 2025), driven primarily by frequent severe convective storms, tornadoes, hail, and wind events in the Midwest. These “inland catastrophes” have caused billions in claims, plus inflation in rebuilding costs. Illinois ranks high in tornado and hail activity, making it one of the fastest-rising states for premiums—second only to Utah in percentage increases recently.

•  Comparison of averages (2025 data):
   •  Florida: ~$4,400–$5,600+ annually (highest in the U.S., often 3–4x the national average due to direct hurricane risk).
   •  Illinois: ~$2,100–$2,900 annually (middle of the pack nationally, below the U.S. average of ~$2,300–$2,500).
   •  Florida residents pay far more overall because their policies directly cover massive hurricane/wind/flood risks, while Illinois’ are tied to storms like derechos and hail.
Florida’s “overbuilding” in coastal/hurricane-prone areas exacerbates its own crisis (insurer exits, litigation, high deductibles), but it doesn’t disproportionately subsidize or burden Midwestern states like Illinois through cross-state pooling—rates are regulated and risk-priced state-by-state.

In summary, both states face rising insurance costs from climate-amplified weather, but Illinois’ issues stem more from Midwest storms, theft, and urban risks than from subsidizing Florida’s hurricane exposure. Nationwide reinsurance ripple effects exist for home insurance, but they’re secondary here compared to local drivers. Shopping quotes, bundling policies, or improving home fortifications (e.g., for hail) can help mitigate costs in Illinois.


Illinois residents get screwed on everything. Maybe you should hit up Flo at Progressive for a quote on bundling your insurance!

The word primarily is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Mark Carman: "The Whitlock!...Caleb Williams failed Wayne Whitlock." Been told I need to take my dick out my mouth so maybe I "wont [sic] sound like such a fucking faggot all the time[.]"

Tempo: "PAMan is a pot stirrer and agent provocateur"

*

ThePAMan

  • *****
  • 31847
  • +609/-2447
  • Because "PussyMan" and "PenisMan" were trademarked
    • View Profile
Mark Carman: "The Whitlock!...Caleb Williams failed Wayne Whitlock." Been told I need to take my dick out my mouth so maybe I "wont [sic] sound like such a fucking faggot all the time[.]"

Tempo: "PAMan is a pot stirrer and agent provocateur"

*

Somewhere in Mn

  • *****
  • 12723
  • +179/-2623
    • View Profile
"A new county-level dataset from Johns Hopkins University researchers reveals a national decline in the measles-mumps-rubella, or MMR, vaccination rate among U.S. children since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic."
"Out of 2,066 counties studies, 1,614 counties, or 78%, reported drops in vaccinations. The average county-level vaccination rate fell from 93.92% pre-pandemic to 91.26% post-pandemic—an average decline of 2.67%, moving further away from the 95% herd immunity threshold to predict or limit the spread of measles."

https://hub.jhu.edu/2025/06/03/united-states-measles-vaccination-rate-declines/

Thanks, Joe.

*

Somewhere in Mn

  • *****
  • 12723
  • +179/-2623
    • View Profile
Well done Trumpers.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/5647002-measles-status-outbreaks-kennedy/
Fiona Havers stepped down from her 13 year position with the CDC a couple of weeks after the June 3 article (see previous post☝️) that showed a 5 year decline in vaccination under her watch. Lol.

*

illiniray

  • *****
  • 9370
  • +628/-2099
    • View Profile
Fiona Havers stepped down from her 13 year position with the CDC a couple of weeks after the June 3 article (see previous post☝️) that showed a 5 year decline in vaccination under her watch. Lol.

No results found for Fiona Havers "5 year decline in vaccinations under her watch".

Why are people no longer vaccinating their children?

AI Overview

People don't vaccinate their kids due to safety concerns (side effects, additives like thimerosal, autism myths), distrust in science/government, religious beliefs, personal philosophy (natural immunity), misinformation, and practical barriers like cost or access, with decisions complexly tied to social circles and beliefs about risk vs. benefit.

Key Reasons for Vaccine Hesitancy/Refusal:

Safety Concerns & Misinformation:

Fear of Side Effects: Worry about fevers, soreness, or more serious reactions, despite evidence that severe reactions are rare.

Autism Link: Lingering belief in a debunked link, stemming from a discredited study.

Unsafe Ingredients: Concerns about preservatives like thimerosal (mercury) or other vaccine components, which are present in tiny, safe amounts.
Overloading the Immune System: Belief the schedule is too aggressive or that vaccines contain too many toxins.

Distrust & Beliefs:

Mistrust in Science/Pharma: Skepticism towards medical institutions, pharmaceutical companies, or government health advice.

Personal Beliefs/Natural Immunity: Preference for "natural" immunity from getting sick, viewing vaccines as unnatural.

Religious Objections: Specific religious doctrines may conflict with vaccines or their ingredients, though many religions support vaccination.

Social & Cultural Factors:

Social Influence: Decisions influenced by family, friends, and online communities, often reinforcing anti-vaccine sentiments.

Political Affiliation: Studies show some political leanings correlate with vaccine hesitancy.

Practical Barriers:

Cost & Access: High costs or difficulty accessing clinics, especially for uninsured families or in under-resourced areas.
Perceived Low Risk:

Belief that childhood diseases are mild or unlikely to infect their child, especially after vaccination success reduced visible outbreaks.
“Taking a trip? Where to?”  -“Wherever I end up, I guess. -“Man, I wish I was you." -Well, hang in there.”