Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
BenRG:
Well, I suggested that Roko go to a lawyer with political ambitions. However, it looks like Jeph has decided to go one step further. To have a seriously important public figure, genius and, let's be brutal here, defence contractor say that the current situation for May is entirely unacceptable to him. That will make the politicians sit up, take notice and, likely, panic. It will be curious to see how all these barriers to May getting help never really existed at all and how much the bureaucrats will insist that they never blocked, refused or were even aware of Roko's request for a review.
That said, yeah, Hanners is right. Between here and there is going to be a serious mess of rage, fear, political ass-covering and scapegoat-finding and it's going to be a difficult thing to live through for all involved and their friends.
flondrix:
Alternative scenario:
"So they wouldn't let you be a fighter plane, eh? Well I have a job opening coming up. This new probe is supposed to dive-bomb the sun, and we can't find any AI crazy enough to pilot it, on account of the reactor hasn't been tested."
brasca:
--- Quote from: BenRG on 06 Feb 2020, 23:37 ---Well, I suggested that Roko go to a lawyer with political ambitions. However, it looks like Jeph has decided to go one step further. To have a seriously important public figure, genius and, let's be brutal here, defence contractor say that the current situation for May is entirely unacceptable to him. That will make the politicians sit up, take notice and, likely, panic. It will be curious to see how all these barriers to May getting help never really existed at all and how much the bureaucrats will insist that they never blocked, refused or were even aware of Roko's request for a review.
That said, yeah, Hanners is right. Between here and there is going to be a serious mess of rage, fear, political ass-covering and scapegoat-finding and it's going to be a difficult thing to live through for all involved and their friends.
--- End quote ---
The problem is it’s still a quick fix from someone who could make it happen.
shanejayell:
Hey Hanners!
Tova:
Thanks IICIH? and awkwardness.
--- Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 06 Feb 2020, 09:54 ---Romneycare is just Obamacare at the state level.
...
If your employer doesn't provide health insurance as a benefit, the only way to get it is to buy it yourself or to be poor enough to qualify for indigent health care. Buying it yourself is cost-prohibitive and Mass. does not enough to subsidize the purchase.
...
So it's advertised as universal coverage but if you work as a bar back you might get stuck in the middle between being poor enough for state-funded insurance and being rich enough to buy a private plan.
--- End quote ---
Okay. This much makes sense, thanks.
--- Quote from: awkwardness on 06 Feb 2020, 22:13 ---What it does is require you to show proof of coverage to get your state income tax returned to you...
--- End quote ---
Okay... not totally clear. "your income tax returned to you? I can only assume you don't get your entire income tax returned to if you have coverage. Can you be more precise?
Does it mean that a portion of your tax is some kind of a health care levy which is returnable only if you can show proof of health care coverage?
--- Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 06 Feb 2020, 09:54 ---Buying it is legally required, to make sure there are enough healthy people paying in to meet the costs of the people with pre-existing conditions.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: awkwardness on 06 Feb 2020, 22:13 ---It's just a requirement that you are covered ...
--- End quote ---
Again, can you be more precise? It doesn't sound to me like health care is exactly required... only that you have to pay a tax penalty of some kind if you are not covered. Is that right? It sounds like Australia's Medicare levy surcharge (except that everyone is covered by Medicare, regardless of whether you have private health insurance or of how much you earn).
So to go back to the original post:
--- Quote from: awkwardness on 05 Feb 2020, 21:19 ---... she might not be eligible for free care(MassHealth) due to her making too much and she might not be able to afford to buy it. So she actually might not have ANY health insurance and what she might get from the state in taxes is a fraction of what she'd have to shell out for health insurance costs.
--- End quote ---
Okay, I get this now (except for the "what she might get from the state in taxes" bit - the state pays her taxes? do you mean... no, I have no idea what you mean).
--- Quote from: awkwardness on 05 Feb 2020, 21:19 ---Point of order from a resident: it's only a requirement that you HAVE it, not that you GET it.
--- End quote ---
DEEPLY CONFUSING but maybe I should just give up on this sentence.
I probably understand enough for the purposes of the conversation anyway, so thanks.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version