Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

rdking647

(5,113 posts)
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 11:49 AM Oct 2013

refuses to sign up for the ACA but has 10 kids on medicaid

“I don’t think that the government should be involved in health care or health insurance,” says Greg Collett, a 41-year-old software developer in Caldwell, Idaho, who would rather pay the fine for now -- $95 the first year -- than signup.

“I calculated it out and it is cheaper for me for the next four years to pay the fine rather than get coverage,” Collett said. “At some point where it would make financial sense to pay for insurance rather than pay fines, I will make the decision from a financial standpoint.”


Collett, who is married and has 10 children, says the kids are covered by Medicaid, the joint state-federal health insurance plan for people with low income and children who are not covered.

But it’s “absolutely not okay,” that they are, Collett says quickly. “There are a lot of people out there that’ll cry foul."

Collett, whose children are home-schooled, likens taking Medicaid to sending children to public school. He also does not approve of government-funded public schools. “The government is taking your money. They are spending it on things they shouldn’t be,” he says. “Trying to get whatever you can back -- I have nothing against that. You have to at some point try and get your tax dollars back.”

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care-holdouts-uninsured-resisting-obamacare-8C11338371

20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
refuses to sign up for the ACA but has 10 kids on medicaid (Original Post) rdking647 Oct 2013 OP
He's selfish JustAnotherGen Oct 2013 #1
...and people like this vote.....pretty scary. russspeakeasy Oct 2013 #2
Thankfully, his children get health coverage even if this guy is opposed. Skinner Oct 2013 #3
If His Kids Qualify For Medicare, Sir The Magistrate Oct 2013 #9
He said in the article that his kids get Medicaid. Skinner Oct 2013 #11
I Understand He said It, Sir The Magistrate Oct 2013 #12
if he were to get sick rdking647 Oct 2013 #4
Of course they'll treat him ... surrealAmerican Oct 2013 #20
Another selfish Republican asshole CanonRay Oct 2013 #5
Reprehensible treestar Oct 2013 #6
That is what a Republican is. texanwitch Oct 2013 #7
I will pay for his vasectomy. DURHAM D Oct 2013 #8
+ infinity BrotherIvan Oct 2013 #16
I'm going to guess that he's caught in the "family glitch".... Barack_America Oct 2013 #10
Not true. Most health plans have a "Employee+Spouse+children" option which Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #13
A lot of plans are starting to move to a piecemeal approach. Barack_America Oct 2013 #19
What a dumb reporter. There is no such thing as a public school that isn't taxpayer funded. duffyduff Oct 2013 #14
Who cares Travis_0004 Oct 2013 #15
The second guy in the article pisses me off even more. Nine Oct 2013 #17
I am opposed to government running nadinbrzezinski Oct 2013 #18

Skinner

(63,645 posts)
3. Thankfully, his children get health coverage even if this guy is opposed.
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 11:54 AM
Oct 2013

Last edited Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:25 PM - Edit history (1)

The Magistrate

(95,255 posts)
9. If His Kids Qualify For Medicare, Sir
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:11 PM
Oct 2013

He cannot possibly be paying an amount in taxes that would be a patch on what the government pays into the pool on their behalf, even f they remain healthy, let alone what the cost of any real medical episode would be.

By his own standards, the man is a leech and a mooch, a standing example of what is wrong with this country: no U.S. or Colorado tax-payer should have to pay for his kids, that is just not something government should be doing....

The Magistrate

(95,255 posts)
12. I Understand He said It, Sir
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:29 PM
Oct 2013

It is doubtless a state 'insure the kids' program, which allows people over the poverty line in some degree to qualify, and poverty line is always calculated on a 'number in household' basis. But even with that number of children, his income could not be very high, and so the tax he pays will be exceeded by the costs to the program of his children's insurance.

 

rdking647

(5,113 posts)
4. if he were to get sick
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 11:56 AM
Oct 2013

i wish the hospital would just refuse to treat him....(i know they cant but....)

maybe rush limpdick could pay for his treatment

surrealAmerican

(11,364 posts)
20. Of course they'll treat him ...
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 01:40 PM
Oct 2013

... and they'll charge him for it too. Then he and his wife and ten children will be homeless. I wonder if he'd still think it made economic sense to pay the fine instead of getting insurance then.

texanwitch

(18,705 posts)
7. That is what a Republican is.
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:00 PM
Oct 2013

Stupid and they don't give a damn about anybody else.

I just wonder now how many are going to miss their government aid now.

This guys 10 kids might loose their medicare now.

BrotherIvan

(9,126 posts)
16. + infinity
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:54 PM
Oct 2013

Fuck's sake!! And he's homeschooling his brood to be just as ignorant as he is!! I vote for birth control in their water.

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
10. I'm going to guess that he's caught in the "family glitch"....
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:15 PM
Oct 2013

...meaning that he himself is offered "affordable" coverage from his employer; therefore, his children cannot participate in the exchanges no matter the cost of their employer-based coverage. Buying insurance for that many kids could easily run someone 50% of their income. But if that were the case, he would be exempted from the penalties.

Unless this story is about declining "affordable" insurance for just himself while keeping the kids on Medicaid. In that case, he's just a moocher and we'll all be paying for his ER care. Thankfully the state has made better choices for his children and they're covered.

 

Pretzel_Warrior

(8,361 posts)
13. Not true. Most health plans have a "Employee+Spouse+children" option which
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:31 PM
Oct 2013

Is a set premium whether you have 1 kid or 7. That is my understanding.

I'm wondering if this guy is working as independent consultant. Otherwise, why not get the company's coverage for himself since it is a good "financial" decision to make for most sane people.

This guy is such a turd.

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
19. A lot of plans are starting to move to a piecemeal approach.
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 01:32 PM
Oct 2013

This is particularly true if you're not under a group plan and are buying as an individual, which is what I'm supposing this guy is doing.

My family was recently under such a plan, until my employer decided to offer insurance. Each of us was a separate charge. There was no "family" option.

 

duffyduff

(3,251 posts)
14. What a dumb reporter. There is no such thing as a public school that isn't taxpayer funded.
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:39 PM
Oct 2013

That is part of what makes it a public school though not all of it.

Ten cents says the guy complaining is a Mormon which may account for his attitude. There are lots and lots of them in Idaho.

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
15. Who cares
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:46 PM
Oct 2013

The ACA says that having insurance is optional, provided you pay a tax. He is choosing to pay the tax instead, which is his choice.

Nine

(1,741 posts)
17. The second guy in the article pisses me off even more.
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:57 PM
Oct 2013
He might eventually sign up for health insurance on an exchange, or Medicare when he gets old enough. “I am not a martyr. I’ll have to deal with it and maybe I’ll be forced to get on the bandwagon and say fine,” he said.


Dumbass acts like he's doing the rest of us a favor. All he's saying is that he doesn't want to pay now while he's youngish and healthy, but when he's older or gets sick or injured, that's when he'll (reluctantly) join the rest of us sheeple "on the bandwagon" and get the free healthcare he didn't want to contribute to. Arrogant, entitled prick.

ETA - Travis, I agree with you in essence. I don't begrudge anyone paying the alternative tax penalty or even qualifying for exemptions. It's just the attitudes these creeps have. They always see themselves as the givers and others as the takers, no matter how out of sync that is with reality.
 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
18. I am opposed to government running
Sat Oct 5, 2013, 12:59 PM
Oct 2013

Medical care, but my kids are on Medicaid, a government run program. I am reminded of the elderly at a tea party rally, keep the Government out of my Medicare and social security.

Head hurts

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»refuses to sign up for th...