Obamacare
Quote: Dicenor33Stalin and Hitler killed millions and yet some believe they were great leaders. If Obama care will kill 100 millions Americans I would not be surprised that Obama voters will name him the greatest president we have ever had.
Wow, is that you Glen Beck. Pretty crazy statement. Hmm, bitter.
How about this, I belong to the Republican party. Voted for Obama twice. seething? lol
Get real, your post is as absurd as Dali and I love Dali. Yes, please entertain me more with the absurd.
Quote: AZDuffmanA close look at s2dbaker's statements show he was buying COBRA coverage before and now an Obamacare policy. Apples to oranges. My guess is if not for Obamacare he could have shopped around just as easy, maybe even easier as private insurers have websites designed for more than 10 people at a time.
Quote: s2dbakerNo, that was not my experience. The Cobra policy was my least expensive option.
A few questions about this cost savings--I am skeptical at this point.
1. Was your policy under the Cobra act due to unemployment or some other loss of insurance?
The reason I ask--"COBRA provides certain former employees, retirees, spouses, former spouses, and dependent children the right to temporary continuation of health coverage at group rates. This coverage, however, is only available when coverage is lost due to certain specific events. Group health coverage for COBRA participants is usually more expensive than health coverage for active employees, since usually the employer pays a part of the premium for active employees while COBRA participants generally pay the entire premium themselves. It is ordinarily less expensive, though, than individual health coverage."
http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq-consumer-cobra.html
What that means for most people is that their Cobra policy is markedly more expensive than an employer-subsidized plan because they are paying the full bill.
2. What were your co-pays and out of pocket limits? How do they compare to the new plan?
Your new policy mentions out-of-pocket expenses to $11,000 or so...can you compare all of the numbers for us?
I am willing to believe some people may get a better deal under Obamacare. I just don't believe it is a good deal for either the entire country or even a majority of the people impacted by it.
Quote: terapinedI have a feeling you are just itching to fulfill a fantasy and get an Obamacare supporter to say, "Hey Timberjim, you were right and I was wrong" LOL.
Aint gonna happen. Get real.
I think there are already people starting to say supporting Obamacare as written was a mistake. They are called Democrats up for reelection in 2014.
Quote: terapinedThis is a country of power and sometimes laws.
Sometimes laws are able to triumph over power , sometimes not.
I voted for Obama not sure how it would impact the countrys future.
But if I voted for Macain or Rommney, not sure how it would have impacted the countrys future.
Sorry, no crystal ball.
I have a feeling you are just itching to fulfill a fantasy and get an Obamacare supporter to say, "Hey Timberjim, you were right and I was wrong" LOL.
Aint gonna happen. Get real.
Go USA, what a great country.
Ok - lets make it real simple. Who is going to pay for the subsidies in two years?
I am.Quote: timberjimOk - lets make it real simple. Who is going to pay for the subsidies in two years?
Quote: s2dbakerI am.
And how much is this going to cost NYS and how will they pay for it. Either cut services in other areas or raise taxes. How will it impact the residents of your state?
You failed to answer my other question about politicians.
New York will raise taxes (thus the answer 'I am'). The impact on my state will be minimal.Quote: timberjimAnd how much is this going to cost NYS and how will they pay for it. Either cut services in other areas or raise taxes. How will it impact the residents of your state?
You failed to answer my other question about politicians.
I don't accept the premise of your other question. Since you asked for no snark, you got second best, silence.
Quote: timberjimOk - lets make it real simple. Who is going to pay for the subsidies in two years?
Count me in to, I'm willing to see a raise in my taxes. Seriously, I spend alot of money on my camper, music festivals and 2 trips to Vegas this year. I'm willing to pay more. Just a regular hard working joe, never got a handout. Never been on unemployment. Just have compassion and am willing to pay more to society.In the long run, the extra cost will be minimal. If not, oh well, life is still good.
Quote: s2dbakerNew York will raise taxes (thus the answer 'I am'). The impact on my state will be minimal.
I don't accept the premise of your other question. Since you asked for no snark, you got second best, silence.
It is a fact. Do some research on how subsidies are structured as the law is written and then comment.
Quote: timberjimIt is a fact. Do some research on how subsidies are structured as the law is written and then comment.
are you crazy, watching football and being entertained by WOV.
do some research lol.
you do the reaearch and get back to me, life is to short for unnecessary research. Lol.
I guess you consider me an unimformed voter. But I can vote, isn't this a great country
Quote: terapinedare you crazy
It didn't take long for you to start name calling.
Quote: timberjimIt didn't take long for you to start name calling.
No funny or snarky stuff.
I'm sorry you took it that way.
I am sorry.
The term was being used in a humorous way, not trying to say a mental illness is involved.
Its commonly used expression used to convey an "exclamation" at the beginning of a sentence.
I never meant it to be literal.
I'll get right on that.Quote: timberjimIt is a fact. Do some research on how subsidies are structured as the law is written and then comment.
Quote: timberjimAre you supporting the right for politicians to ignore the laws as written, and apply it as they see fit?
Some politicians pay lip service to the idea that laws on the books should be enforced instead of making new ones, and then do little to make sure gun laws are enforced any better.
I posted a couple of questions about your particular insurance situation based on information you provided here. Should I expect an answer to them?
It is your choice since it is personal information but you did share other personal information that led to the question.
RonC
1) It was a weird situation. I work for a consulting company (K-Force) that grants access to its health insurance plan to people who work over 30 hours a week so I was paying about $300+ per month because they covered part of the cost to their group plan. Then about a year ago I took a week off during early December and combined with the day off for Christmas and a couple of sick days, I fell below the 30 hour average and they withdrew me from the plan. That's what put me on Cobra.Quote: RonCA few questions about this cost savings--I am skeptical at this point.
1. Was your policy under the Cobra act due to unemployment or some other loss of insurance?
The reason I ask--"COBRA provides certain former employees, retirees, spouses, former spouses, and dependent children the right to temporary continuation of health coverage at group rates. This coverage, however, is only available when coverage is lost due to certain specific events. Group health coverage for COBRA participants is usually more expensive than health coverage for active employees, since usually the employer pays a part of the premium for active employees while COBRA participants generally pay the entire premium themselves. It is ordinarily less expensive, though, than individual health coverage."
http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq-consumer-cobra.html
What that means for most people is that their Cobra policy is markedly more expensive than an employer-subsidized plan because they are paying the full bill.
2. What were your co-pays and out of pocket limits? How do they compare to the new plan?
Your new policy mentions out-of-pocket expenses to $11,000 or so...can you compare all of the numbers for us?
I am willing to believe some people may get a better deal under Obamacare. I just don't believe it is a good deal for either the entire country or even a majority of the people impacted by it.
2) I'm afraid that I can't answer that question completely. I've never hit my out-of-pocket expense cap on the Aetna plan, I'm not sure there is one and since I never received a detailed list of what it covers, I'll likely never know. I just spent 20 minutes on their website looking for that information. Like I said, the Aetna plan is a good plan but I did get expensive bills for blood work that I had to pay myself which will now be $50 (instead of $127). The co-pay for office visits is $20 and I think that goes down to $15 with the new plan but that's only $5 and I don't see the doctor often enough for that to matter.
I like knowing that the most I will have to pay per year is $11,000. Insert sentence here about some horrible long term illness that I'd rather not think about happening to me. I can take an $11,000 hit per year for quite few years. I'm afraid that's about as detailed as I want to get on my day off (which consultants don't get paid for!!)
Quote: timberjimAnd how much is this going to cost NYS and how will they pay for it. Either cut services in other areas or raise taxes. How will it impact the residents of your state?
Rates in NYS are expected to drop 40% since the State minimum requirements closely match Obamacare.
Forty-one other states will see increases.
Nevada rates for example are expected to rise 179%.
The worst thing about these increases it that the additional funds spent on medical coverage are not Transfer Payments.
It is the equivalent of a tax increase.
It takes money from people that would otherwise have saved or invested it, or spent it on goods and services.
It will cause a drag on the economy in those States and likely the Nation.
When the subsidies dry up, it will get even worse.
Forbes Article
Quote: TankoRates in NYS are expected to drop 40% since the State minimum requirements closely match Obamacare.
Forty-one other states will see increases.
Nevada rates for example are expected to rise 179%.
The worst thing about these increases it that the additional funds spent on medical coverage are not Transfer Payments.
It is the equivalent of a tax increase.
It takes money from people that would otherwise have saved or invested it, or spent it on goods and services.
It will cause a drag on the economy in those States and likely the Nation.
When the subsidies dry up, it will get even worse.
Forbes Article
Sounds like yet another sop to uncompetitive states, make everyone else have bad regulations to eliminate competitive advantage.
So this means Harry Reid is sweatin' it really hard right now?Quote: TankoNevada rates for example are expected to rise 179%.
Quote: s2dbaker1) It was a weird situation. I work for a consulting company (K-Force) that grants access to its health insurance plan to people who work over 30 hours a week so I was paying about $300+ per month because they covered part of the cost to their group plan. Then about a year ago I took a week off during early December and combined with the day off for Christmas and a couple of sick days, I fell below the 30 hour average and they withdrew me from the plan. That's what put me on Cobra.
2) I'm afraid that I can't answer that question completely. I've never hit my out-of-pocket expense cap on the Aetna plan, I'm not sure there is one and since I never received a detailed list of what it covers, I'll likely never know. I just spent 20 minutes on their website looking for that information. Like I said, the Aetna plan is a good plan but I did get expensive bills for blood work that I had to pay myself which will now be $50 (instead of $127). The co-pay for office visits is $20 and I think that goes down to $15 with the new plan but that's only $5 and I don't see the doctor often enough for that to matter.
I like knowing that the most I will have to pay per year is $11,000. Insert sentence here about some horrible long term illness that I'd rather not think about happening to me. I can take an $11,000 hit per year for quite few years. I'm afraid that's about as detailed as I want to get on my day off (which consultants don't get paid for!!)
I appreciate you taking the time to look into the answers.
My problem is not with "Healthcare Reform" as a whole; it is that we have such a poorly constructed bill that has shown to be a lot less than people were told it was going to be. My opinion is that many policy prices will go up and some will go down but most will also burden folks with more out-of-pocket expenses. The President is sorry about his promise; that does nothing to help the people of lesser means that will find themselves paying more for less than the same as they had before and unable to qualify for the subsidy.
Making it worse is not the way to make it better...except if your goal is for the new system to fail and you want to push towards single payer.
Quote: rob45So this means Harry Reid is sweatin' it really hard right now?
Nah, when he's up for re-election, he'll just lie his a** off like all Dems do. ;)
And the cutbacks in care well under way. New Jersey has already begun three years of major cutbacks in Medicare:Quote: TankoThe worst thing about these increases it that the additional funds spent on medical coverage are not Transfer Payments. It is the equivalent of a tax increase. . . . When the subsidies dry up, it will get even worse.
"This week's big Affordable Care Act story was that millions of Americans with individual health plans started receiving cancellation notices, despite repeated assertions by the Obama administration that they would be able to keep their health coverage if they preferred. Then NBC News reported Tuesday that even while President Obama repeatedly declared people could keep their existing health insurance plans he knew it wasn't true, since the White House was estimating in 2010 that Obamacare would result in the cancellation of policies for more than 7 million Americans.
People with individual health policies won't be the only ones losing their insurance policies, however. So will senior citizens - thousands in New Jersey alone - with Medicare Advantage coverage. . . .
Horizon BCBS of New Jersey said it had to end zero-premium Medicare Advantage plans with prescription coverage in the state due to cutbacks in federal Medicare, largely to help fund Obamacare. "The reason we had to change our plans and increase our premiums is increasing health-care costs and continued federal cuts to the Medicare Advantage program, more than $200 billion in the next 10 years," said Thomas Rubino, director of public affairs for Horizon BCBSNJ of New Jersey." acpress
I have some issues with that Forbes article. I checked Nevada's exchanges and they got the numbers wrong by a lot. Forbes also doesn't say what the $119.90 (for a 40 year old male) health insurance plan pre-Obamacare covered or even from which company it was issued. The lowest cost Obamacare policy for someone my age in Nevada (living in zip code 89109) is $244 per month for a Bronze level plan. If I were 40 years old, it would be $178 per month. Compare that to what the Forbes article is saying, $371.52 which is more than double the reality. Even the most expensive Platinum level plan is $2 less than what the Forbes article is quoting.Quote: TankoRates in NYS are expected to drop 40% since the State minimum requirements closely match Obamacare.
Forty-one other states will see increases.
Nevada rates for example are expected to rise 179%.
Sometimes you just have to fact-check stuff for yourself.
Do not believe me! I might be lying. Check for yourself
Quote: rob45So this means Harry Reid is sweatin' it really hard right now?
Harry Reid is still a senator, wow.
I thought he was supposed to lose.
Oh yea, Tea Party got him re-elected. Amazing.
Tea party decided to nominate the unelectable Sharon Angle to run against Harry Reid.
Tea Party made sure Harry Reid was gonna stay a senator.
Harry has nothing to worry about if tea party has any influence on who he runs against in 2018, 5 years away, no worries.
ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt31nhleeCg
That's why Hillarycare bombed, she didn't lie about it like
Obama did. He had to lie or Obamacare would have never
passed. Now it's doomed, just like Hillarycare was doomed.
There are 2 ads back to back in the clip, they could have
been made today, they're so relevant.
As well, you have to measure the lack of efficiency with government and the lack of profit with profiting insurance companies (who are also inefficient). This will enable ObamaCare to provide services at lower prices which will drive consumers to ObamaCare. In a capitalist world, this SHOULD drive down costs as other companies compete and root out inefficiencies. As long as doctors continue to make more than anywhere else in the world they will bitch and complain, but they will stay in America.
Quote: boymimboMy feeling on ObamaCare is that it will eventually lower prices as people flock to subsidized healthcare and doctors get paid less for their services. This theoretically will drive up competition and will lower rates.
?????
Lower rates will drive up competition? How? If you lower the amount someone can make from something they fewer providers will enter the business, and many already in it will leave. This will cause either prices to rise or shortages of goods and services available.
Quote:As well, you have to measure the lack of efficiency with government and the lack of profit with profiting insurance companies (who are also inefficient). This will enable ObamaCare to provide services at lower prices which will drive consumers to ObamaCare. In a capitalist world, this SHOULD drive down costs as other companies compete and root out inefficiencies. As long as doctors continue to make more than anywhere else in the world they will bitch and complain, but they will stay in America.
When has the government done anything more efficient than the private sector?
What Obamacare will do is eventually try to force doctors and other professionals to work for less. Doctors will reply with a giant "SCREW YOU" and exit the medical business. I already know of at least one who plans to cut back to part time and use his mind and money in other ventures.
Liberals always forget that dynamic things happen in the economy. Lower doctor salaries and many will just do something else, as they are very smart they can.
Quote: AZDuffmanLower doctor salaries and many will just do something else, as they are very smart they can.
Look how many doctors have gone successfully into
politics. Look at Charles Krauthammer, he has an
MD and was also a shrink. Now he's a famous political
commentator. Instead of the best and brightest being
doctors, Obamacare will drive them into other more
lucrative fields. It's inevitable.
Quote: boymimboMy feeling on ObamaCare is that it will eventually lower prices as people flock to subsidized healthcare and doctors get paid less for their services.
Quote: boymimboAs long as doctors continue to make more than anywhere else in the world they will bitch and complain, but they will stay in America.
If doctors get squeezed too far, they will leave the business. These are people who spend many YEARS of their life getting the proper education and, many times, have huge bills to pay for when they complete it. They are smart enough to do other things. Their costs get higher has malpractice insurance prices rise--an issue that has not even been addressed.
I don't think making a salary of $150,000 or more is unreasonable for a doctor. How much would you like your doctor to make?
http://www.indeed.com/salary/Physician.html
Quote: boymimboAs long as doctors continue to make more than anywhere else in the world they will bitch and complain, but they will stay in America.
...but maybe not stay doctors.
Or maybe start looking for alternative sources of income. The de facto bribery from the pharmaceutical industry is already an open secret, as well as borderline recreational prescriptions. Whatever's done to curtail these in the future, how much do you think can be done to stop now downwardly mobile doctors who've spent their whole adult lives first striving toward, and then living, the prestige afforded doctors in the US?
Quote: terapinedHarry Reid is still a senator, wow.Quote: rob45So this means Harry Reid is sweatin' it really hard right now?
I thought he was supposed to lose.
Oh yea, Tea Party got him re-elected. Amazing.
Tea party decided to nominate the unelectable Sharon Angle to run against Harry Reid.
Tea Party made sure Harry Reid was gonna stay a senator.
Harry has nothing to worry about if tea party has any influence on who he runs against in 2018, 5 years away, no worries.
Please allow me to explain further, as I was not referring to Reid's position as a US Senator (although that is likely to be a concern for him in 2018; after all, it's extremely difficult to cover up an increase of 179%).
The example of Nevada merely reminded me of his position as Senate Majority Leader.
Current composition of the US Senate is D-53, R-45, I-2. Actually, the Independents caucus with the Democrats, so we might as well call it 55 to 45.
Reid's concern is that the Republicans do not have a majority after the upcoming elections.
We have 35 Senate races for 2014.
Of those seats up for election, 21 are currently held by Democrats, and 14 are currently held by Republicans.
The Republicans are hoping to retain all current seats, and gain six seats from the Democrats.
Of the fourteen Republican seats, twelve are solid Republican, one is leaning Republican (GA), and one is a toss-up (KY).
Georgia is expected to have rate increases of 92%, further increasing the chances of making it solid for the Republicans.
Kentucky will have one of the hottest races in 2014, but Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has the advantage of 47% increase in premiums after Obamacare, among other things.
So the Republicans stand little chance of losing Senate seats, and are focusing on the Democrats losing six.
Let's look at the position of the Senate races that have seats currently occupied by Democrats.
Of the twenty-one Democrat seats, seven are solid Democrat, five are likely Democrat (CO, HI, MA, MN, NH), five are leaning Democrat (AK, IA, LA, MI, NC), one is a toss-up (AR), two are leaning Republican (MT, WV), and one is likely Republican (SD).
The Republicans stand the strongest chance of taking SD, MT, and WV.
Arkansas is the other hotly contested race, but the Democrats are gonna have a heck of a time hiding that projected 138% increase in healthcare premiums.
So the Dems already stand a strong chance of giving four seats to the Republicans.
Keeping in mind the Republicans need to gain six, let's see if they can get two more.
Of the races that are "leaning Democrat", here are those states, along with the projected increase in healthcare premiums due to Obamacare in parentheses.
AK (+29%)
IA (+72%)
LA (+53%)
MI (+66%)
NC (+136%)
When numbers like these become well-known amongst the public, how possible is it that two of those states will move from the "leaning" column to the "toss-up" column?
Once again, I ask, is Harry Reid sweatin' it really hard right now?
Of this 50,000 an unknown but positive number just switched plans.
I thought we had 30 to 50 million people in the USA just "dying" to get health insurance?
This is only 1,000 per state or about 15 per county in the USA.
Could it be there never really was an uninsured problem in the first place?
Quote: s2dbakerI have some issues with that Forbes article. I checked Nevada's exchanges and they got the numbers wrong by a lot. Forbes also doesn't say what the $119.90 (for a 40 year old male) health insurance plan pre-Obamacare covered or even from which company it was issued. The lowest cost Obamacare policy for someone my age in Nevada (living in zip code 89109) is $244 per month for a Bronze level plan. If I were 40 years old, it would be $178 per month. Compare that to what the Forbes article is saying, $371.52 which is more than double the reality. Even the most expensive Platinum level plan is $2 less than what the Forbes article is quoting.
Sometimes you just have to fact-check stuff for yourself.
I agree.
And you should.
Those Nevada rates are deceiving subsidized rates.
Who do you think pays for those subsidies?
Read the article again.
The numbers reflected in the article refer to the underlying, or true costs before Federal subsidies.
In order to make it appear the Plan can work, the Feds added One-Trillion dollars in subsidies over the next ten years.
It's only just begun and it's already One Trillion in the red.
This is all unfunded money that is shoveled into the deficit.
A bill to be paid with interest, by us.
Without the subsidies, the individual market premiums would be 99% higher for men and 62% higher for women.
We are all paying the true costs one way or another, no matter which State we live in..
The Nevada rates that I posted are not subsidized. I went back and read the methodology that the study used to calculate the before and after rate. I think it's flawed but even so, I couldn't reproduce the results that they got.Quote: TankoI agree.
And you should.
Those Nevada rates are deceiving subsidized rates.
Who do you think pays for those subsidies?
Read the article again.
The numbers reflected in the article refer to the underlying, or true costs before Federal subsidies.
Some will find another way to make money.
Some will try to see more patients to balance their budget. That means they will be hurried all the time and the patient will get less time than they do now. I already know a doctor who brags about seeing 35 people in 90 minutes--he sucks. He is a pediatrician with a lot of people around town telling tales of things he missed...kids staying sicker longer because he was in a hurry.
Many will retire earlier than they had planned.
The doctors are not the problem.
his mighty arm, Obama is setting aside law and
proclaiming what he can't legally proclaim. He just
said awhile back, when the republicans wanted
to alter Obamacare, that, on no, you can't do that,
it's the 'law of the land'. But he thinks he can do it.
He can't.
He now wants insurance companies to offer the old
plans to the people who got cancelled. They won't,
and even if they do, it will be at a much higher price.
Nothing he said today will work, and it's all illegal
anyway. Obamacare is law, and it's his law, and
he's stuck with it.
Please, if there is a God, the Republicans will impeach the President.
he said Obama is living in a dream world and
getting very bad advice on what he did today.
He said insurance companies work at a glacial
rate and they can't just stop on a dime and
reverse everything that's been put into play.
He said Obama just made everything worse
by 10, it's just a huge confusing mess.
Quote: EvenBobJust saw a former insurance commissioner and
he said Obama is living in a dream world and
getting very bad advice on what he did today.
He said insurance companies work at a glacial
rate and they can't just stop on a dime and
reverse everything that's been put into play.
He said Obama just made everything worse
by 10, it's just a huge confusing mess.
What is the surprise here? Obama never had any sense for anything but reading a teleprompter. He doesn't understand how any management organization works. Kind of guy who thinks because a place "is a business" they magically make things happen. I am sure he thinks writing a policy is just typing a form and no underwriting or anything else is involved.
And the media said Sarah Palin was the ditz.
Quote: s2dbakerIMPEACH!!!!
Please, if there is a God, the Republicans will impeach the President.
Sorry, no god therefore no impeachment.
This is from Athiest central.
Peace out.
So of course the insurance industry is bitching.
Quote: KeyserWe're in this mess because Democrats tend to be poorly informed and poorly educated when it comes to the candidates and their policies.
You Sure? Asian American vote went big time for Obama. As a group, very highly educated.
Newt was actually disturbed by this trend. After Obama got elected, he said" We lost the Asian American vote and these people don't want anything from the Govt"
Quote: s2dbakerIMPEACH!!!!
Please, if there is a God, the Republicans will impeach the President.
Only because you know the spectacle would be so large that the not so bright would forget why there was an impeachment going on.
I hope no one even mentions impeachment--that would actually give the President an out. He'd say that the process of the impeachment was hindering his further ability to screw up the country.
I'll cling to my guns and bible; you cling to your President and his fatally flawed signature achievement.
Quote: rxwineI know why the insurance companies don't like it. Now if a insurer calls them they can't claim the government is forcing them to do this right now.
So of course the insurance industry is bitching.
That's it. Brilliant!!
The insurance industry was moving in the direction Obamacare sent them in. Now we've figured out that Obamacare is a total failure and they are going to be asked to turn on a dime.
Fine. Blame the problem on the insurance companies, the Republicans, whoever...it is squarely President Obama's fault.
Are you kidding? The teabaggers would break out in a collective case of glossolalia about it. It would be the lede on Hannity for months. The morons would eat it up.Quote: RonCOnly because you know the spectacle would be so large that the not so bright would forget why there was an impeachment going on.
