If You Can Afford Cell Phones, iPads, Video Games, Nike Shoes, Netflix, Then Under The ACA...

[Yavin4]

you will be able to afford health insurance.

If you cannot afford those things, then you will qualify for health insurance under the expanded Medicaid provision.

If your asshat Republican governor refuses the expanded Medicaid provision, vote him or her out or move to another state that accepts the expanded Medicaid provisions.

I want a single payer system, but there is no way that single payer can make it out this congress, no matter who is elected President.

[NYC_SKP]

1. K/R (nt)

[Luminous Animal]

2. I pay $19000 annual+ for insurance of my family of 3. And I have none of the above...

No cable, no cell phone, no car, and I rent. I buy nothing new except socks and undiies.

[Yavin4]

5. The ACA LOWERS Your Cost for Health Insurance

You will be able to find a cheaper plan for your family.

BTW, how much do you pay your ISP for internet access?

[Luminous Animal]

12. Really. I am 55 years old and ACA guarantees that people my age can be charged 3 times more

for insurance than younger people.

I pay $15 a month for my ISP. That's what I signed up for many many years ago and whenever they try to raise it, I spend several hours on the phone to keep at $15 a month.

[MADem]

37. Have you run your details through this site?

http://www.healthcare.gov/

Are you taking the insurance deduction on your income tax as well for paying that much in insurance costs?

[progressivebydesign]

61. All insurance companies completely charge 3x more than people younger. this has not changed. n/t

[leveymg]

51. Not so far it hasn't. BC/BS has gone up significantly since ACA passage.

Paying $14.4K/yr for a small family. That's up from $9K previously. There simply are no cost-containment measures in the ACA, which is part of the reason why I've never been very enthusiastic about it.

[bornskeptic]

57. If your household income is over 400% of the poverty level

you may not see much decrease, but if you are below that your cost will go down at least $4000, and much more if you are much below 400%.. Nobody ever claimed premium costs would go down before the ACA is implemented in 2014.

[leveymg]

58. Health coverage has gone up, drastically. Poverty line for family of 3 is $19K. You do the math.

We're getting screwed.

[lumberjack_jeff]

53. Then it doesn't harm you.

In fact, if that high cost is due to preexisting conditions, you should get a break.

You obviously already consider health coverage a very high priority, so the mandate is a non-issue.

[progressivebydesign]

59. you pay $1,600 a month for health insurance? I pay $200.. and I"m in my 50s. n/t

[Hissyspit]

3. What a bunch of crap rationalization.

"Move to another state." Jesus Christ.

[Yavin4]

4. How So?

People buy all manner of consumer items. The ACA makes health insurance as affordable as a flat screen TV.

[Hissyspit]

6. I can't afford a flat screen TV and I can't afford health insurance.

And a lot of the stuff you listed is necessary for my job. I DO NOT KNOW if I will have affordable health insurance available to me. NO ONE has shown it to me. We'll see.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=889379

"The penalty is far cheaper"

Yeah, for me, it's about $844. The $700 I get back every year that helps me from going bankrupt each year.

Looks like I'll probably be able to get into the exchange (maybe) and pay $4,180 for insurance. Which I can't afford. That's $1,000 a quarter, or about $300 plus every month. So I will have $844 taken from me every year. And have no insurance.

Yay."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=edit&forum=1002&thread=888920&pid=889423

"You will have the option of buying a health plan through your state's exchange with federal assistance. Based on your income, your annual premiums for that plan would be no more than $4,180. Your maximum out-of-pocket costs for deductibles and co-payments would be capped at 30 percent of the total cost."

I didn't even mention the money I would spend on deductibles.

"You are exempt from the penalty if the least expensive plan option in your area exceeds eight percent of your income."

How do I determine the "least expensive plan option in" my area? Is it some near-worthless insurance? $4,180 is about eight percent of my income, so I MIGHT be exempt from the penalty, but I can't count on that.

I'm hoping that this is wrong and I will be able to afford insurance by 2016 as things improve.

Don't get me wrong. There is much in ACA that is excellent and necessary. Despite being rather disgusted at the lousy strategies and compromises that went into creating it, I am glad it passed and the mandate was upheld. And, yes, there is MASSIVE disinformation out there, and I appreciate your post.

But:

1. Declare victory where victory is real: Democrats should declare victory for the popular provisions of the law: no exclusions for pre-existing conditions, coverage for those who can't afford it, the extension of coverage for children to age 26. Wendell Potter offers a great example of how to "sell" this law to the American people.

2. Don't BS the public: But Democrats would be foolish to oversell this law. In response to the ruling, the President said today that the Court has "reaffirmed a fundamental principle that here in America -- in the wealthiest nation on Earth – no illness or accident should lead to any family’s financial ruin." That's the wrong approach for a number of reasons, one of which is that people still feel that they can't afford health care - and they're right.

A majority of those who declare bankruptcy due to medical expenses already have health insurance, and the protections in this law aren't enough to prevent that from happening. Premiums and out-of-pocket costs continue to rise for insured Americans. Health insurance costs rose more last year than they had in six years, to more than $15,000 for a family of four, and they've risen by 50 percent since 2003. Democrats should acknowledge these problems, discuss ways this law will help and, most importantly, promise to do more in the next term.

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2012062628/dont-kid-yourself-its-still-corporate-court-here-are-10-ways-respond

And I am still seriously considering Canada. Not kidding.

I will probably be able to get some kind of health insurance cheaper than that, but not by getting rid of my Netflix subscription. So I probably end up with insurance and no penalty, which is the preferred outcome, but it will cost me and insurance companies will still suck. I have never voted for a Republican and if I have to move from my state, I will just go to another country.

Your argument is offensive rationalization and dependent on people's situations and just pisses people off. Not useful.

[Yavin4]

8. Use The Calculator At The Link

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/what-health-bill-means-for-you/

Then come back to me.

In the end, you will be able to find a plan that suits your needs.

Think of buying health insurance like buying electricity or water.

[Hissyspit]

11. That's where I got the numbers in my post.

I believe I'm the first person on DU to post that link.

I do think of buying health insurance like buying electricity or water. Health insurance costs INCREDIBLY MORE. Don't lecture me.

"In the end, you will be able to find a plan that suits your needs."

O.K. prove it.

Try again.

[Yavin4]

13. Where Are You Getting $4100 A Year????

How many people are in your household? What is your annual income?

[Hissyspit]

15. 1 person. $44,000.

And now you are going to make all kinds of other assumptions about me that will make you look foolish.

It's up to $4,100 is from the WaPo calculator. It is the MOST I would have to spend. As I have said, I probably will end up being able to get some kind of insurance, but no one has shown me how much it is going to cost, how good it is going to be and it will adversely affect me financially.

[Yavin4]

16. A Portion of That $4180 Is Tax Deductible Right?

The $4180 exceeds 7.5% of your gross income.

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc502.html

So you will actually pay even less than $4180.

[Ruby the Liberal]

22. That moves to 10% floor in 2014.

Just FYI.

Saw that today for the first time. Meh.

[MADem]

10. Don't take this the wrong way, but unless you are already a dual citizen, Canada doesn't want you.

You need to be rich or have a very desirable/needed skill (and if you can't afford health insurance, I'm guessing you don't have one of those). They only want young people, too, not people who "need" insurance. If you're a multi-millionaire who is intent on starting up a business and hiring Canadians, they won't mind if you are older, but if you're a millionaire, insurance isn't a worry, either, is it?

You could try marrying someone who is a citizen, I suppose, but first you'd have to meet them!

There was a lot of "sky is falling" BS when RMoneycare hit MA. Now the overwhelming majority of people are very pleased with it.

[Hissyspit]

14. Well, you would be wrong.

"if you can't afford health insurance, I'm guessing you don't have one of those."

I've been looking into for a long time. I have a needed skill. It would just depend on finding a job.

But even if I can't get into Canada, how does that change any of my other points?

[MADem]

18. You have a needed skill that isn't present in the Canadian population, or in any of the

immigrant nations that get fast-tracked for citizenship in Canada? That there's a shortage of in Canada?

Knock yourself out, then. Here's the decision planning matrix so you can find out if your talent is still needed by the government: http://www.cic.gc.ca/app/ctcvac/english/index

I think you're looking at worst case scenarios. You sound like a lot of people in MA when the law took effect here, who are now saying it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

You will "pay" for your health insurance if you ever find your way to Canadian citizenship, too, you know--they just take it out of your taxes.

You'll also have to spend three years in Canada as a non-citizen before you can apply for citizenship.

Let us know how you do with your citizenship application. If you get up there soon, you'll experience a bit of deja vu--Harper's like Bush, only not quite as corn-pone.

[Hissyspit]

20. I've read that website.

Last edited Mon Jul 2, 2012, 01:06 AM - Edit history (1)

It would be under a Federal Skilled Worker program. And I'm perfectly aware of Harper. But all of that is beside the point. You didn't answer the final question I asked, which is really what I've been talking about: The OP's attitude and ill-advised argument strategy. Telling people to move to another state.

And by the way, I would LOVE to pay higher taxes for real universal health care.

[MADem]

36. Itemize your income taxes. Are you self-employed?

If not, does your employer offer health insurance? Are you uninsured now? Are you over 26? Pre-existing health issues? There are so many things that factor into the whole equation.

You can get a deduction on your federal taxes for your health insurance and medical costs which will bring down that total number. That's happening already.

Ref: http://www.businessweek.com/small-business/taxes-selfemployed-can-deduct-health-insurance-02072012.html

Without knowing your state/details, it's hard to tell you much, but you might want to check this out--it will give you insurance options specific to your state:

http://www.healthcare.gov/

[Hissyspit]

39. Yes, there are so many things that factor into the whole equation. Which is why the absolutist

statements of the OP are useless, fallacious and divisive.

But to answer your questions, no, my employee does not offer health insurance because I am a contract employee. I am well over 26. Yes, I have pre-existing health issues.

North Carolina is behind on getting its state-based exchange systems up by the beginning of next year, so it will be 2013 before we can see what they come up.

As for the http://www.healthare.gov link, I'm glad the site it there, but I'm not seeing anything affordable. In fact, the more I look at it, the angrier I get. Every individual plan is a joke. I guess I will sign up for short-term catastrophic insurance again through Assurant and see what comes out of the exchange in 2013 and 2014.

[MADem]

45. Are you factoring in the tax refund as well?

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc502.html

I look at the OP as a straw man argument that serves as a jumping off point for discussion of the topic. I wouldn't get overly wrapped around the axle as to sneakers and iPads and what-not. It's an all-too-common device here at DU to make somewhat outrageous and overly dramatic statements in order to generate conversation on a subject--certainly not the first time I've seen that kind of thing here. Just consider the source and don't take these things too personally--I try not to, it's a waste of energy, really, when you think about it!

I don't know if you've come across these pages yet, but they might be useful to you:

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/resources/nc.html
http://www.healthcare.gov/law/features/choices/pre-existing-condition-insurance-plan/nc.html
http://www.inclusivehealth.org/questions.htm (non-profit insurer in NC)

[Comrade_McKenzie]

7. As long as it allows the poor to buy those things along with ACA...

And still allow enough money for the essentials.

A lot of people want to do more than just survive.

[Yavin4]

9. Everyone Has to Prioritize Their Spending

You don't buy $500 jeans if you cannot afford your utility bill.

[Merlot]

25. Yes, if all those people without insurance would just prioritize their spending

And while were at it, can we stop those welfare queens from buying Cadillacs?

[girl gone mad]

17. These threads are so off-putting.

The items you list are one time expenses, with the exception of cell phone bills and Netflix, both of which are markedly cheaper than any health insurance premiums.

[Skittles]

19. self-delete

don't want to get into this shit

[Ruby the Liberal]

21. Netflix is like $10 a month

Should have stuck with the 133% paid and up to 400% subsidized arguments. The others are one time purchases.

[GoCubsGo]

47. You can get a Tracfone or Net 10 phone for that price, too.

And, minutes for them are relatively cheap, too.

[Fumesucker]

23. Why do you assume DUers are stupid?

All those things are one time purchases except Netflix which is like $10 a month or so..

Health insurance on the other hand is a constant, monthly, life long expense, month after month, year after year, decade after decade.

[Zalatix]

40. Interesting point. You win the math test.

[laundry_queen]

42. That was my thought as well.

Do ALL of those things TOTAL even make up one month of premiums? Two months at the MOST. Total fail.

[Merlot]

24. Netflix costs $8 per month

Not sure how that relates to health care costs.

Cell phones are no longer a luxury item, they are a practical necessity for many. Some are cheaper than landlines. Same for ipads - for some people it may be their only connection to the internet. And the internet is no longer optional - you need it to look for work, pay bills, keep up with the news, etc.

Putting these items in the same category as video games and nike shoes is disingenuous. It implies that people who don't have insurance are spending their money wastefully.

I say if you can't afford $500 per MONTH for health insurance, but you want to spend $500 ONCE to purchase an ipad that you can use to go online and look up symptoms when you're feeling sick, go for it.

[freshwest]

26. As far as moving to another state to get Medicaid, that has been going on for years. When a person

Or their family is facing death, they give up everything and move. It's been such a common practice for the desperate that states have taken it into their accounting. The people in the state recieivng these folks hate it. Having consumer goods or even a house is worth nowhere near as much as the life a family member. It's a fact of life that people have to move for benefits. Just another of the horrors facing the poor and disabled. EOM.

[Hissyspit]

27. What an effective talking point.

"You don't like it, just move!"

[freshwest]

29. That's not a 'talking point.' It's a matter of record about how badly the poor are treated.

My state has taken in people from other states who couldn't get Medicaid in the places they grew up in.

Some of these cases made the news back in 2001 when Bush slashed Medicaid matching funds and some states refused to make up the difference. Those who were unable to move, died where they were for lack of publicly paid medical care.

I know people with severely disabled children who have moved cross country because their jobs did not provide the insurance for catastrophic care. One mother ranked three different states, as Heaven, Purgatory and Hell.

It's not a joke. These are real people and real lives that are effected by this.

.

[Hissyspit]

32. I'm not saying you are using it as a talking point. The OP is using it as a talking point.

"ACA is great, but if your Repub governor messes it up, just move." Yeah, like all those people who had to uproot themselves for Medicaid.

It's a crappy argument. Nobody should have to move, period. Some people can't and never will. If you like ACA and Supreme Court mandate ruling, fine. But why would you ever want to argue it this way?

[OnyxCollie]

28. If you can afford an XBox, you're not poor.

You're borrowing your talking points from the Republicans.

[Hissyspit]

31. And yet it has 18 recs.

"If you can afford an XBox, you're not poor."

"If you don't like it, just move!"

"If you move to Canada to get universal health care, you'll have to pay for it with taxes!"

[OnyxCollie]

33. Those mighty defenders of the status quo,

the Blue Link Brigade, are proselytizing the neophytes to gain support for Obama's Heritage Institute-inspired health care mandate.

[limpyhobbler]

30. This is the worst argument ever for the ACA

Cell phone is a necessity if you don't have a land line. You put an Ipad in the same category as netflix? Sounds like a romney error.

It got me thinking though...

I keep hearing "those who can afford to buy insurance will be required to do so"... that's an argument for the mandate.

But how can the government possibly know what I can afford to do? They are just going by my income. But they are not taking into account my other expenses, like credit card payments, loan payments, transportation/car payments, car repairs, food, assistance to family. They don't know what I can afford unless they sit down and talk to me personally for a couple days.

The mandate sucks. It's trying to get blood out of a stone. Pretending the health care costs issue can be solved by forcing more people to pay. Most people that can truly afford it already have insurance.

The mandate is nothing but a favor to the private insurers. If the gov't is going to require me to pay for insurance, then the gov't should just sell me the insurance directly, to cut out the middle man and control the cost. Especially since the gov't already operates a top notch health insurance plan for people over 65.

[Raine]

34. TOTALLY agree. nt

[Zalatix]

35. Kind of hard to do when you can't even get rid of Rick Snyder or Scott Walker.

[dipsydoodle]

38. I'm UK and have got our NHS

He said smugly.

[Yavin4]

41. A Question for all of the posters on this thread who disagree with me

You would have no problem with the federal government implementing a national value added sales tax on all goods and services and a new payroll tax to pay for a single payer healthcare system, correct?

Because that's how other nations pay for a single payer health insurance system. Just note that sales taxes are extremely regressive.

BTW, I would have no problem with this, and I would prefer this system.

[laundry_queen]

43. Why does it have to be a regressive sales tax?

It could just as easily be a progressive income tax. Jesus. How dumb do you think DUers are "Because that's how other nations pay for a single payer health insurance system." I'm pretty sure they know it's with taxes.

[Yavin4]

46. A Sales Tax Is The Only Sure Fire Way To Make Everyone Pay Into The System

That's why nations with single payer also have national sales taxes.

[MADem]

49. The rich go offshore in that case. It's what happened in UK.

If you go too crazy with the "progressive" income tax, the wealthy just move ... to Ireland. Or somewhere else that will give them a better deal--and believe me, the countries are lining up to give the rich a better deal, after all, they are rich, they bring money in, they hire people and add to the economy, they usually don't cause too much trouble and if they do, well, they buy their way out of it, adding to the GDP--it's a win-win for the country that takes on these tax avoiders. You don't want your wealthiest people becoming tax exiles. That is what happened in UK.

Ask Paul McCartney and a host of other wealthy Brits. http://www.wolfgangsvault.com/blog/index.php/2010/04/so-you-wanna-be-a-tax-exile/

There's a delicate balance at work there. I can tell you I didn't like living with the UK VAT. It wasn't like sales taxes are here, where they nickle and dime you to death, they "pound and fiver" you over there. It's onerous, the cost of goods/services.

I don't claim to have the answers to this conundrum, but I will say that, after initial resistance, Massachusetts likes our system now. I think it's worth giving it a try. If other states come up with better ideas, if health care providers find more efficiencies to bring costs down, well, that's all good.

We've got to start somewhere, though, and Single Payer was just not going to happen.

[MADem]

48. Your point is entirely valid--it was the tone of your OP that has some up-in-arms.

Your point about the unrelentingly regressive nature of VAT is right on the mark as well.

Having lived in UK, this is what I have observed about costs in the shops. If you take away the £ sign, and substitute a $ sign, the price for whatever is being sold makes absolute sense. Otherwise, the foreign visitor from USA is paying a premium of fifty to seventy five cents on every dollar for goods or services, give or take, depending upon the GBP-USD rate of exchange.

Right now, as of this writing, a pound costs just under a buck sixty--so, say you're paying a pound for the thing you are buying, but in actuality, you're paying a buck for the thing itself, because that is all it is worth, and sixty cents is going for the VAT, basically.

People visiting UK meet people and learn what their salaries are, and through a quick calculation in their heads, say "Oooooh--doesn't he make a nice wage for THAT job!" But then, after they learn about high rents, absolutely VICIOUS supermarket prices (tiny cans at twice the price!), and absurd costs for everything, from consumer goods to electronics (save those that didn't fall off the truck, of course), they start to realize that the "good wage" they were a bit envious of is barely enough to make ends meet.

When Brits go to US overpriced tourist traps and marvel at how inexpensive everything is, you know there's a real difference in spending power.

[Yavin4]

54. Sorry for my tone.

I tend to get a little ticked off sometimes. But, your post is very enlightening. Most folks have this notion that Europe's social programs don't come at any costs. What they fail to see is that Europe has onerous sales taxes which fund their programs. It's why NYC is flooded with European tourists.

Sales taxes are the only real way that you can get EVERYONE to support the system. Relying on progressive income taxes won't work as it will be too easy to demagouge against them.

[MADem]

56. It didn't bother me, personally. I kind of saw what you were doing.

Throw out a discussion point, see who bites, see who agrees, see who refutes, etc. It makes for lively chat. I didn't take your remarks as accusatory or condescending--I saw them as conversation-provoking.

I have (not stinking rich, but well-enough-off) friends in UK who come to NYC and Boston during the Christmas season, with empty suitcases, to fill them up with holiday presents. The savings over what they would pay in UK is greater than the cost of a round trip ticket and a few days in a hotel!

In MA, we've 'enjoyed' a sales tax for as long as I can remember, and some towns add on a bit here and there (meals taxes, mostly), but we're talking five, six and a half percent or so. Some places I've been to in USA have eight and nine percent taxes, even more on some things, like hotels, but that is nothing compared to an effective surcharge that really comes down to a sixty or seventy percent tax by the time all is said and done, as we see with VAT.

I don't like those kinds of taxes because five to ten percent is one thing, but an effective fifty to seventy five percent tax on pretty much everything really does screw the poor and working class, and discomfits the middle class to no small extent.

Of course, everything always looks lovelier from the other side of the pond. Many people here is USA have a romantic vision of what UK health care is and isn't, and they don't realize what sacrifices in living standards at the "middle class" and below strata occur as a consequence of the scheme. There really is no such thing as a free lunch!

[NCTraveler]

44. "If You Can Afford Cell Phones, iPads, Video Games, Nike Shoes, Netflix, Then "

You should not be using food stamps to get your family by if things get tough. Think about what you could pawn that shit for.

[Fumesucker]

60. You ever actually pawn anything?

Pawn shops give you pennies on the dollar for items and they are largely full up with stuff right now, not really needing more.

[MADem]

63. I've never pawned anything....but I have watched those pawn shop shows on cable!

I sit there and say to myself, "Geez, you idiot--go to an auction house with that thing! They'll charge you a percentage fee, but you'll get way more money!"

[Fumesucker]

64. Auctions are a huge crapshoot..

I grew up going to auctions and shopping pawn shops, my parents were in the antique and jewelry business.

The kind of stuff the OP was talking about will get remarkably little money at a pawn shop or auction, for one thing it's all over Craigslist without any middlemen and few takers, used tech gadgets are a major glut on the market.

Try and find a pawn shop that doesn't already have a shelf full of video games, flat screen TVs and so forth, you'll be looking for a long time.

[MADem]

65. I was not talking about the OP's list. I was talking about some of the stuff I see people drag into

the pawnshops on those Basic Cable pawn shows. Unusual stuff, different stuff, one-of-a-kind stuff, historical stuff. Those pawn guys offer them pennies on the dollar for that stuff, too.

That stuff--not the electronics in the OP--will earn the seller more at auction.

Even with the auctioneer's fees.

[Fumesucker]

66. Maybe, you never really know for sure..

I think my own favorite recent example was two blocks of unused but rather rough vintage signature cue chalk that went for $25.00 plus shipping on ebay..

Flabbergasted it was worth that much I was... But then I thought about it and realized these are gamblers and superstition tends to be strong in that sort of person, having a unique/unusual cue chalk could easily be seen as a competitive advantage strictly from a psychological viewpoint.

However if you check the prices of the same item on ebay over a period of time you'll find quite a wide variation very often and ebay is about as busy an auction as you're likely to see, lots of eyes, lots of clicks..

It really depends who is bidding at any given auction and what they're looking for.

[MADem]

67. I fear we're separated by a common language, here!

I know a lot of people use EBay and all that, but I wasn't talking about virtual auction sites. I was talking about Sotheby's and Skinner's and other, perhaps less well known and less high-end, but still quite reputable, auction houses.

If you get your thing-a-ma-bob into the right auction, where the people bidding are all of a particular mind, you can often make some sweet money. The auction house does take their cut, but still, it's often a better payday if you do it that way. Not as quick, but less of a rip-off.

I've seen, on those pawn shows, guys walk in with vintage toys, antique this-or-thats, unusual memorabilia, antique cars, stuff like that, that put in a catalogue at the "right" auction, could bring a bundle.

http://www.skinnerinc.com/index.php

http://www.sothebys.com/en.html

[Fumesucker]

68. I was just using ebay as an easily searchable example...

A great many vintage and antique items end up on ebay, it's a vigorous market and prices in the thousands of dollars are not all that unusual..

Getting items into your Christies, Sotheby's and so forth is a matter of contacts as much as anything, Joe Schmoe from Kokomo is going to have a high hurdle to get anyone to pay attention to their piece no matter how awesome it might be, the auction houses are absolutely flooded with people trying to get their items in and you need some sort of introduction from a regular to get in if they are not familiar with you.

I know someone that has a large absolutely spectacular ornate Japanese ivory carving from late 19th century, they've been trying for a while to get it into a major auction house but without an official appraisal from an expert in Japanese antiquities they cannot get anyone to accept it. Trying to find and even more importantly vet such an expert is by no means a trivial undertaking.

Those shows you are watching leave out a great deal of critical detail and they're written, produced and edited for drama rather than to inform.

[MADem]

71. There are regional houses that do business, like Skinner's, which is also very high end.

As well as others that do niche work in regional environments.

If Joe Schmoe has an antique car, and it's in good nick or is repairable and has all its parts, you can bet an auction house that specializes in antique auto auctions would be interested if the auto is unique and likely to move. Their coordinator will send the truck to pick the car up, too, and deduct that plus administrative fees from the final sale.

It's not the seller, it's the quality of the seller's goods.

Ivory is problematic here in USA, owing to importation laws and "Save The Elephants" and so forth. It also doesn't always move as well as it might in UK and other locales. I would suggest your friend ask his auction house of choice which expert they use for vetting an item such as his. It might help if he calls, gets a name of a contact at the auction house and an email, and emails a photo of the item and a request for the name of the auction house's preferred appraisal expert, and then take it from there.

I realize the pawn shows pick and choose--otherwise, they'd be dull and boring. Who wants to watch some poor bastard selling their TV? Or even a crackhead trying to sell a stolen iPad? A crackhead selling a grubby old cassette tape Walkman, OTOH....now that's TV! They pick the people who come in with the most unusual items (and these are often the things I see where I say "You could get WAY more for that!!!&quot , they pick the people who are the biggest characters, or the most confrontational, or perhaps a bit drunk or high or unmedicated, anyone who is out of the ordinary.

I have seen those pawn guys get rock bottom prices for things that would sell for much, much more at a specialty auction, is all I am saying.

[NCTraveler]

70. Not sure what this has to do with my reply.

Unless it was to point out that my reply is stupid, just like the op. Which it is.

[L0oniX]

50. If you can afford to donate to DU and have internet connection you don't qualify for ACA...

ya think?

[AzDar]

52. I buy a pair of Nike kicks, I *get* Nike kicks...Forced to buy health *insurance* ,

and I don't necessarily get anything. Health insurance isn't health care.

[B2G]

55. This is the same argument the Repukes make about foodstamps

Interesting, isn't it?

[Puregonzo1188]

62. Wait, are we doing that thing where we blame poor people for their own problems?

I've heard this same argument before. And it wasn't about the ACA nor was it on a progressive website.

[Puzzledtraveller]

69. It isn't that simple, I do medicaid for a living.

[LeftyMom]

72. That's the big problem with this country, working people's children have it too good,

and big insurance companies don't make enough money.