Obamacare: Obama just straight up lied to you, in your face (2 Viewers)

[matttyl]

Funny that "getting rid of the ACA means taking people's coverage away" when that's exactly what implementing it also did.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Funny that "getting rid of the ACA means taking people's coverage away" when that's exactly what implementing it also did.

Mitch and the GOP can blame others for the few million that had a few weeks of uncertainty as they were forced to consider new options. They have no such cover if they "pull the plug" now on the subsidized exchanges and expanded Medicaid and the age/gender/pre-existing condition regulations. And it only gets worst for them as time moves on. Unless the courts toss a wrench into this somewhere providing an unexpected and unprecedented wide opening, a fork was stuck in the repeal options a long time ago.

 

[Todd Andrews]

This Republican healthcare reform Obama put in place seems to be coming together pretty well.

 

[fourd]

What does repeal ObamaCare even mean anymore?

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but he would not say Friday what that would mean for the 413,000 Kentuckians who have health insurance through the state's health care exchange.

McConnell told reporters that the fate of Kynect - Kentucky's state-run health insurance exchange - is not linked to the federal health care law.

Say what?At least it is comforting to see the GOP still advocating the "race to the bottom" and getting rid of states rights.

"What I would have done instead is first of all tear down the walls, the 50 separate silos in which health insurance is controlled, and pit all the health insurance companies against each other in a national competitive market," he said. "Competition almost always works to keep prices down and quality up.

It shows a real lack of understanding of the issue.

I doubt it. I imagine he's just playing the chords (he thinks) he needs to play to win.

I'm sure he is doing that but I'll stand by my thought that he has zero understanding of the issue.

 

[fourd]

This Republican healthcare reform Obama put in place seems to be coming together pretty well.

That's far from a true statement.

 

[matttyl]

Hey, would you look at that...."Stephen Parente, a University of Minnesota health economist who advised Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) 2008 presidential campaign, used the Obama administration's final 2014 enrollment reports and his microsimulation model to project health plan prices and enrollment over the next decade. His projections, shared first with the Washington Post, find an increase in individual plan enrollment in 2015 and 2016, before sharply dropping off in 2017 and then slowly decreasing below 2015 levels by 2024. At the same time, he projects a steady decrease in employer coverage that will be steeper than the gains in Medicaid enrollment, resulting in a greater number of uninsured 10 years out."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/05/27/why-the-major-test-for-obamacare-premiums-might-wait-until-2017/

Now again Tim and Tommy, I never said that the number of uninsured will definitely increase - only that it very well could happen if certain things happen (like the current risk corridors do in fact expire in 2017 as Parente assumes, and that prices rise faster now with the ACA than they did before - which we don't yet know, and the healthier folks do decide to leave the pool when those prices go up and are replaced by sicker folks who jump in once they discover a health issue).

 

[Joe T]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The other shoe

"They’re saying we want to know what our options particularly for saving some money," she says. You’d think dropping employee health insurance might do that, but Connolly says the math is pretty clear.

As long as companies can write off contributions, employers and employees make out better than if worker’s got a stipend for an exchange because everyone would pay taxes on those stipends.

On top of that, Brian Marcotte with the National Business Group on Health says many employers question these exchanges.

"What’s different in terms of how care is delivered, how care is managed? Is it any better than what’s being done today," he says.

Remember many of the country’s largest employers are self-insured. Marcotte says businesses continue to believe they can do a better job controlling costs, but would be happy for the exchanges to prove them wrong.

Wonder where we have heard this before?

 

[MaxThreshold]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

This is great news for those on Obamacare!

 

[MaxThreshold]

This Republican healthcare reform Obama put in place seems to be coming together pretty well.

That's far from a true statement.

He thinks if he repeats it enough it will be true. Remember, though, this is the same guy that claims he's an "independent".

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max-

The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

 

[timschochet]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

 

[MaxThreshold]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max-

The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

At first I thought you were kidding about the website, but nope, it definitely is the Socialist website. Frankly, I'm not really that surprised you used this as a source.

 

[MaxThreshold]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

Yes.

 

[StrikeS2k]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

Anecdotal.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max-
The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

How was that article a positive? Was it this part.

And while business is booming for the insurers, there are new signs that health costs—both on the government exchanges and in private workplaces—are being increasingly shifted to workers and their families, threatening the availability and quality of medical services.

Or this

Insurers in most states are only beginning to submit their premium rate increases for 2015, so it is unclear how much they will be seeking to tap from the risk corridors and federal funds to cover shortfalls. However, one insurer, Humana Inc., announced in February that it expected to access three Obamacare risk-adjustment mechanisms for 2014 of between $250 million and $450 million. Humana, a for-profit managed health care company with over 11 million customers in 50 states, brings in $36.5 billion in annual revenue.

Or this

The excise tax set to go into effect in 2018 on “lavish” health plans—those with premiums greater than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families—will levy a 40 percent penalty on corporations. As with the other features of Obamacare, companies are expected to dodge the financial impact of this “Cadillac tax” through gutting their health coverage or passing the costs on to workers in the form of decreased wages and other benefit cuts.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max-
The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

How was that article a positive? Was it this part.

And while business is booming for the insurers, there are new signs that health costs—both on the government exchanges and in private workplaces—are being increasingly shifted to workers and their families, threatening the availability and quality of medical services.

Or this

Insurers in most states are only beginning to submit their premium rate increases for 2015, so it is unclear how much they will be seeking to tap from the risk corridors and federal funds to cover shortfalls. However, one insurer, Humana Inc., announced in February that it expected to access three Obamacare risk-adjustment mechanisms for 2014 of between $250 million and $450 million. Humana, a for-profit managed health care company with over 11 million customers in 50 states, brings in $36.5 billion in annual revenue.

Or this

The excise tax set to go into effect in 2018 on “lavish” health plans—those with premiums greater than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families—will levy a 40 percent penalty on corporations. As with the other features of Obamacare, companies are expected to dodge the financial impact of this “Cadillac tax” through gutting their health coverage or passing the costs on to workers in the form of decreased wages and other benefit cuts.

ALL of that is called a "success" by the American left.

 

[timschochet]

Of course it's anecdotal- what else would it be? But polls do demonstrate that they seem to like their healthcare over there.

 

[StrikeS2k]

Of course it's anecdotal- what else would it be? But polls do demonstrate that they seem to like their healthcare over there.

The ones that don't like it are dead.

 

[chauncey]

Talked to a business owner today, perfect example of what a #### bill obamacare is or just how stupid people are. His $650/mo Aetna plan he carried for "20 years" was canceled without his knowledge, he only found out a month ago when his wife went to pick up a prescription and informed her insurance was no good. Through the state exchange their premium would be $1400/mo based on income, while dirt bag unemployed brother only had to pay $50/mo. Also, his primary physician and the local hospital "wouldn't accept the state plan".

Luckily this hard working man was able to find a compliant bcbs policy for $750/mo which he is satisfied with. Age is 55-59.

Like I said, I can't figure out if the bill is a pos or this guy was a complete moron. I'm thinking maybe a little of both.

:Honda:

 

[Rich Conway]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

1. Have they ever tried any other system?2. You are, of course, aware that the U.S. subsidizes the health care systems of the rest of the world.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

What does that gave to do with anything regarding the United States and the VA as well?

 

[timschochet]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

What does that gave to do with anything regarding the United States and the VA as well?

JoeTs statement was "a govt run healthcare system sounds pretty fun"- obviously his implication is that the VA is a good example of that- it seems to me that most of western Europe would be a far better example.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

What does that gave to do with anything regarding the United States and the VA as well?

JoeTs statement was "a govt run healthcare system sounds pretty fun"- obviously his implication is that the VA is a good example of that- it seems to me that most of western Europe would be a far better example.

 

[timschochet]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

1. Have they ever tried any other system?2. You are, of course, aware that the U.S. subsidizes the health care systems of the rest of the world.

1. Of course they have. All the ones I've spoken to are over here now, and the discussion was by way of comparison. 2. That may be (it's a debatable point) but in this instance we're not talking about the cost of state run healthcare, only it's level of efficiency. The whole point of Joe Ts post was that the VA is evidence that state run health care is largely inefficient. But that's one small examples, and there are many others in which it has proven to be very efficient. There's no set rule one way or the other IMO.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max-
The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

How was that article a positive? Was it this part.

And while business is booming for the insurers, there are new signs that health costs—both on the government exchanges and in private workplaces—are being increasingly shifted to workers and their families, threatening the availability and quality of medical services.

Or this

Insurers in most states are only beginning to submit their premium rate increases for 2015, so it is unclear how much they will be seeking to tap from the risk corridors and federal funds to cover shortfalls. However, one insurer, Humana Inc., announced in February that it expected to access three Obamacare risk-adjustment mechanisms for 2014 of between $250 million and $450 million. Humana, a for-profit managed health care company with over 11 million customers in 50 states, brings in $36.5 billion in annual revenue.

Or this

The excise tax set to go into effect in 2018 on “lavish” health plans—those with premiums greater than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families—will levy a 40 percent penalty on corporations. As with the other features of Obamacare, companies are expected to dodge the financial impact of this “Cadillac tax” through gutting their health coverage or passing the costs on to workers in the form of decreased wages and other benefit cuts.

Who said it was a positive? Seems to me I stated that there were plenty of goodies in there for your pleasure.

 

[Joe T]

115 days to see a primary care physician. I wonder what the waits are on surgeries.

 

[timschochet]

115 days to see a primary care physician. I wonder what the waits are on surgeries.

But not in France, from what I was told. Everything was immediate, much quicker than here.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

ALL of that is called a "success" by the American left.

Best one can hope for with heritage foundation ideas.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max- The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

How was that article a positive? Was it this part.And while business is booming for the insurers, there are new signs that health costs—both on the government exchanges and in private workplaces—are being increasingly shifted to workers and their families, threatening the availability and quality of medical services.Or thisInsurers in most states are only beginning to submit their premium rate increases for 2015, so it is unclear how much they will be seeking to tap from the risk corridors and federal funds to cover shortfalls. However, one insurer, Humana Inc., announced in February that it expected to access three Obamacare risk-adjustment mechanisms for 2014 of between $250 million and $450 million. Humana, a for-profit managed health care company with over 11 million customers in 50 states, brings in $36.5 billion in annual revenue.Or thisThe excise tax set to go into effect in 2018 on “lavish” health plans—those with premiums greater than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families—will levy a 40 percent penalty on corporations. As with the other features of Obamacare, companies are expected to dodge the financial impact of this “Cadillac tax” through gutting their health coverage or passing the costs on to workers in the form of decreased wages and other benefit cuts.

Who said it was a positive? Seems to me I stated that there were plenty of goodies in there for your pleasure.

So you are trolling.

 

[Stinger Ray]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max- The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

How was that article a positive? Was it this part.And while business is booming for the insurers, there are new signs that health costs—both on the government exchanges and in private workplaces—are being increasingly shifted to workers and their families, threatening the availability and quality of medical services.Or thisInsurers in most states are only beginning to submit their premium rate increases for 2015, so it is unclear how much they will be seeking to tap from the risk corridors and federal funds to cover shortfalls. However, one insurer, Humana Inc., announced in February that it expected to access three Obamacare risk-adjustment mechanisms for 2014 of between $250 million and $450 million. Humana, a for-profit managed health care company with over 11 million customers in 50 states, brings in $36.5 billion in annual revenue.Or thisThe excise tax set to go into effect in 2018 on “lavish” health plans—those with premiums greater than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families—will levy a 40 percent penalty on corporations. As with the other features of Obamacare, companies are expected to dodge the financial impact of this “Cadillac tax” through gutting their health coverage or passing the costs on to workers in the form of decreased wages and other benefit cuts.

Who said it was a positive? Seems to me I stated that there were plenty of goodies in there for your pleasure.

Those don't seem like "goodies"

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max- The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

How was that article a positive? Was it this part.And while business is booming for the insurers, there are new signs that health costs—both on the government exchanges and in private workplaces—are being increasingly shifted to workers and their families, threatening the availability and quality of medical services.Or thisInsurers in most states are only beginning to submit their premium rate increases for 2015, so it is unclear how much they will be seeking to tap from the risk corridors and federal funds to cover shortfalls. However, one insurer, Humana Inc., announced in February that it expected to access three Obamacare risk-adjustment mechanisms for 2014 of between $250 million and $450 million. Humana, a for-profit managed health care company with over 11 million customers in 50 states, brings in $36.5 billion in annual revenue.Or thisThe excise tax set to go into effect in 2018 on “lavish” health plans—those with premiums greater than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families—will levy a 40 percent penalty on corporations. As with the other features of Obamacare, companies are expected to dodge the financial impact of this “Cadillac tax” through gutting their health coverage or passing the costs on to workers in the form of decreased wages and other benefit cuts.

Who said it was a positive? Seems to me I stated that there were plenty of goodies in there for your pleasure.

So you are trolling.

Nope!

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max- The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

How was that article a positive? Was it this part.And while business is booming for the insurers, there are new signs that health costs—both on the government exchanges and in private workplaces—are being increasingly shifted to workers and their families, threatening the availability and quality of medical services.Or thisInsurers in most states are only beginning to submit their premium rate increases for 2015, so it is unclear how much they will be seeking to tap from the risk corridors and federal funds to cover shortfalls. However, one insurer, Humana Inc., announced in February that it expected to access three Obamacare risk-adjustment mechanisms for 2014 of between $250 million and $450 million. Humana, a for-profit managed health care company with over 11 million customers in 50 states, brings in $36.5 billion in annual revenue.Or thisThe excise tax set to go into effect in 2018 on “lavish” health plans—those with premiums greater than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families—will levy a 40 percent penalty on corporations. As with the other features of Obamacare, companies are expected to dodge the financial impact of this “Cadillac tax” through gutting their health coverage or passing the costs on to workers in the form of decreased wages and other benefit cuts.

Who said it was a positive? Seems to me I stated that there were plenty of goodies in there for your pleasure.

Those don't seem like "goodies"

They aren't good arguments for those opposed to the ACA to repeat?

 

[Rich Conway]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

1. Have they ever tried any other system?2. You are, of course, aware that the U.S. subsidizes the health care systems of the rest of the world.

1. Of course they have. All the ones I've spoken to are over here now, and the discussion was by way of comparison. 2. That may be (it's a debatable point) but in this instance we're not talking about the cost of state run healthcare, only it's level of efficiency. The whole point of Joe Ts post was that the VA is evidence that state run health care is largely inefficient. But that's one small examples, and there are many others in which it has proven to be very efficient. There's no set rule one way or the other IMO.

Cost impacts efficiency. And, no, it's not debatable that the US subsidizes other countries' healthcare systems.

 

[Stinger Ray]

Lets work on pushing my "ADA score" a bit to the left-

More private insurers to hop on Obamacare gravy train

A number of private insurance companies that have not yet sold policies on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges plan to do so in the coming year. The reason is simple: the health care overhaul popularly known as Obamacare offers a virtually risk-free opportunity for insurers to increase their profits.

Insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group and Cigna, as well as smaller companies, plan to enter the Obamacare market in 2015 and beyond. “Insurers continue to see this as a good business opportunity,” Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the New York Times. “They see it as an attractive market, with enrollment expected to ramp up in the second year.”

I'm sure the World Socialists Web Site is on TheCommish's list of approved sources! Oh we can't leave this out for Max-
The ACA was designed from the start as a pro-corporate piece of legislation, boosting the bottom line of the insurance industry. The law’s core component, the so-called individual mandate, requires those without insurance from a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid to purchase coverage from a private insurer in the Obamacare “marketplace” or pay a penalty.

Plenty of other goodies in there for the Anti-ACA folks if they keep reading.

How was that article a positive? Was it this part.And while business is booming for the insurers, there are new signs that health costs—both on the government exchanges and in private workplaces—are being increasingly shifted to workers and their families, threatening the availability and quality of medical services.Or thisInsurers in most states are only beginning to submit their premium rate increases for 2015, so it is unclear how much they will be seeking to tap from the risk corridors and federal funds to cover shortfalls. However, one insurer, Humana Inc., announced in February that it expected to access three Obamacare risk-adjustment mechanisms for 2014 of between $250 million and $450 million. Humana, a for-profit managed health care company with over 11 million customers in 50 states, brings in $36.5 billion in annual revenue.Or thisThe excise tax set to go into effect in 2018 on “lavish” health plans—those with premiums greater than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families—will levy a 40 percent penalty on corporations. As with the other features of Obamacare, companies are expected to dodge the financial impact of this “Cadillac tax” through gutting their health coverage or passing the costs on to workers in the form of decreased wages and other benefit cuts.

Who said it was a positive? Seems to me I stated that there were plenty of goodies in there for your pleasure.

Those don't seem like "goodies"

They aren't good arguments for those opposed to the ACA to repeat?

Just you being a condescending ### again.

 

[MaxThreshold]

ALL of that is called a "success" by the American left.

Best one can hope for with heritage foundation ideas.

Wait...are you really ToddAndrews? Because he keeps saying the same thing about a failed idea a long time ago.

 

[matttyl]

Tim and Timmy, you both were quick to call me out on the possibility of more people being uninsured going forward - but when a health economist from the University of Minnesota comes out and says that's exactly what will happen neither of you have anything to say?

Maybe my statement of a distinct possibility wasn't so crazy after all, huh?

 

[Tau837]

A government run healthcare system sounds pretty fun:

The office, in its preliminary findings, determined that veterans in Phoenix waited an average of 115 days for a primary care appointment -- far longer than the VA's official statistics showed. Such inappropriate scheduling tactics, according to the report, may be the basis for claims of "secret" waiting lists.

Yikes.

Several Europeans I have met, especially the French, have raved to me about the efficiency of state run health care over there. How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

Several Europeans I have met, especially the Brits, have said to me that the U.S. healthcare system is far better than what was available to them before they came to the U.S. (These conversations primarily occurred pre-Obamacare, but I assume that wouldn't make a difference at this point.)

How would you explain this? Do you think they're lying?

 

[nottingham Forest]

Funny that "getting rid of the ACA means taking people's coverage away" when that's exactly what implementing it also did.

So I guess both sides can't use it as an argument anymore

 

[Tau837]

115 days to see a primary care physician. I wonder what the waits are on surgeries.

But not in France, from what I was told. Everything was immediate, much quicker than here.

So why then do so many people from all over the world, including Europeans, travel to the U.S. for significant healthcare treatments?

 

[Tau837]

no, it's not debatable that the US subsidizes other countries' healthcare systems.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Tim and Timmy, you both were quick to call me out on the possibility of more people being uninsured going forward - but when a health economist from the University of Minnesota comes out and says that's exactly what will happen neither of you have anything to say?

Maybe my statement of a distinct possibility wasn't so crazy after all, huh?

You mean that piece that said the "younger, healthier" folks that are still in non ACA individual plans will be one of two major factors causing big jumps in prices in 2017 when these "younger, healthier" folks are added to the ACA pools?

 

[timschochet]

Tim and Timmy, you both were quick to call me out on the possibility of more people being uninsured going forward - but when a health economist from the University of Minnesota comes out and says that's exactly what will happen neither of you have anything to say?

Maybe my statement of a distinct possibility wasn't so crazy after all, huh?

I suppose it's because while I read that piece, I didn't understand his thinking, or that his message was as clear as you're making it out, anymore than I understood you when you tried to explain yourself. I don't want to comment any further because I'm only going to end up putting my foot in my mouth, (as often happens when I try to write about stuff I don't understand.)

Let's make this very simple: if at ANY time in the future there are less Americans with health care insurance than there were when ACA started in January of this year, then Obamacare will have been a colossal failure of epic proportions, perhaps the biggest government failure I can remember. I just can't fathom that actually happening, but I guess we'll see.

 

[BassNBrew]

Tim and Timmy, you both were quick to call me out on the possibility of more people being uninsured going forward - but when a health economist from the University of Minnesota comes out and says that's exactly what will happen neither of you have anything to say?

Maybe my statement of a distinct possibility wasn't so crazy after all, huh?

I suppose it's because while I read that piece, I didn't understand his thinking, or that his message was as clear as you're making it out, anymore than I understood you when you tried to explain yourself. I don't want to comment any further because I'm only going to end up putting my foot in my mouth, (as often happens when I try to write about stuff I don't understand.)

Let's make this very simple: if at ANY time in the future there are less Americans with health care insurance than there were when ACA started in January of this year, then Obamacare will have been a colossal failure of epic proportions, perhaps the biggest government failure I can remember. I just can't fathom that actually happening, but I guess we'll see.

Agree with Tim here. I can't see gov't ever letting the numbers in the Marketplace going down. I can see huge cost increases, but those will paid for by the debt and middle class so no one will really care.

 

[jamny]

I.R.S. Bars Employers From Dumping Workers Into Health Exchanges

WASHINGTON — Many employers had thought they could shift health costs to the government by sending their employees to a health insurance exchange with a tax-free contribution of cash to help pay premiums, but the Obama administration has squelched the idea in a new ruling. Such arrangements do not satisfy the health care law, the administration said, and employers may be subject to a tax penalty of $100 a day — or $36,500 a year — for each employee who goes into the individual marketplace.

The ruling this month, by the Internal Revenue Service, blocks any wholesale move by employers to dump employees into the exchanges.

Under a central provision of the health care law, larger employers are required to offer health coverage to full-time workers, or else the employers may be subject to penalties.

Many employers — some that now offer coverage and some that do not — had concluded that it would be cheaper to provide each employee with a lump sum of money to buy insurance on an exchange, instead of providing coverage directly.
But the Obama administration raised objections, contained in an authoritative question-and-answer document released by the Internal Revenue Service, in consultation with other agencies.

The health law, known as the Affordable Care Act, builds on the current system of employer-based health insurance. The administration, like many in Congress, wants employers to continue to provide coverage to workers and their families.

“I don’t think that an employer-based system is going to be, or should be, replaced anytime soon,” President Obama said recently, when asked if the law might speed the erosion of employer-sponsored insurance.

When employers provide coverage, their contributions, averaging more than $5,000 a year per employee, are not counted as taxable income to workers. But the Internal Revenue Service said employers could not meet their obligations under the health care law by simply reimbursing employees for some or all of their premium costs.

Christopher E. Condeluci, a former tax and benefits counsel to the Senate Finance Committee, said the ruling was significant because it made clear that “an employee cannot use tax-free contributions from an employer to purchase an insurance policy sold in the individual health insurance market, inside or outside an exchange.”

If an employer wants to help employees buy insurance on their own, Mr. Condeluci said, it can give them higher pay, in the form of taxable wages. But in such cases, he said, the employer and the employee would owe payroll taxes on those wages, and the change could be viewed by workers as reducing a valuable benefit.

Andrew R. Biebl, a tax partner at CliftonLarsonAllen, a large accounting firm based in Minneapolis, said the ruling could disrupt arrangements used in many industries.

“For decades,” Mr. Biebl said, “employers have been assisting employees by reimbursing them for health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs. The new federal ruling eliminates many of those arrangements by imposing an unusually punitive penalty.”

When an employer reimburses employees for premiums, the arrangement is known as an employer payment plan. “These employer payment plans are considered to be group health plans,” the I.R.S. said, but they do not satisfy requirements of the Affordable Care Act.

Under the law, insurers may not impose annual limits on the dollar amount of benefits for any individual, and they must provide certain preventive services, like mammograms and colon cancer screenings, without co-payments or other charges.


But the administration said employer payment plans do not meet those requirements.

Richard K. Lindquist, the president of Zane Benefits in Park City, Utah, a software company that helps employers reimburse workers for health insurance costs, said, “The I.R.S. is going out of its way to keep employers in the group insurance market and to reduce the incentives for them to drop coverage.”

The ruling came as the Obama administration rushed to provide guidance to employers and insurers deciding what types of coverage to offer in 2015.

In a new regulation, the Department of Health and Human Services said it would provide financial assistance to certain insurers that experience unexpected financial losses this year. Administration officials hope the payments will stabilize premiums and prevent rate increases that could embarrass Democrats in this year’s midterm elections.

Republicans want to block the payments, which they see as a bailout for insurance companies that supported the president’s health care law.

In a separate rule, the administration prohibits states from imposing onerous restrictions on insurance counselors, who educate consumers and help them enroll in health plans. Under the rule, states cannot establish standards that impair the counselors’ ability to help consumers or to perform other tasks required by federal law.

In January, a federal district judge in Missouri found that the state was illegally obstructing the activities of insurance counselors, including those known as navigators. The state has appealed the decision.

Why would they object to something that would effectively add more people to Obamacare?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The second premise on that piece for why people will start bailing in 2017 is that insurance companies are pricing their plans now aggressively unafraid of losses since the government will bail them out make to break even. Those bail outs ending will mean that insurance companies will need to start pricing their policies so they break even without government help. When did companies start pricing their products to break even?

I guess the insurers could be trying to bait people in now with loss leader pricing knowing that consumer inertia will allow them to switch to more profitable pricing in the future and this model says that this will fail.

Also problematic with the piece is that the annual hikes in insurance (other than in 2017) that are being projected are roughly 5% a year which is basically the same as they have been overall for more than a decade. Now I understand that matttyl has linked in the past that same hasn't been true in the individual market, but those plans largely don't exist any more.

Now with 80/85% regulations in place for these policies to climb at a rate of 5% each year means that health care cost needs to climb roughly at that pace. If that is the case the ACA has failed, but I believe that most people in the industry believe that this is impossible because the economy can't sustain that growth no matter what the ACA does especially in the individual market.

Finally, we haven't actually seen this guy's research other than the PDF summaries so it could be that the problems are with the Washington Post and not the study.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I.R.S. Bars Employers From Dumping Workers Into Health Exchanges

Why would they object to something that would effectively add more people to Obamacare?

Because the democrats that added an employer mandate to the heritage foundation's plan that was originally created as an alternative to an employer mandate really believe that employer's should provide coverage.

 

[jamny]

I.R.S. Bars Employers From Dumping Workers Into Health Exchanges

Why would they object to something that would effectively add more people to Obamacare?

Because the democrats that added an employer mandate to the heritage foundation's plan that was originally created as an alternative to an employer mandate really believe that employer's should provide coverage.

That's unfortunate, imo, since I've always thought that priority one should be to establish affordable individual coverage to decouple the employer/employee connection. Too many people are forced to stay at a job they don't like only because of the insurance offered.

 

[matttyl]

I.R.S. Bars Employers From Dumping Workers Into Health Exchanges

Why would they object to something that would effectively add more people to Obamacare?

Because if they were on employer plans, they would be subsidized by the employer. If they go on Obamacare plans, they will be subsidized by taxpayers and they'd have to get a ton of more money to pay for those subsidies.

 

[matttyl]

I.R.S. Bars Employers From Dumping Workers Into Health Exchanges

Why would they object to something that would effectively add more people to Obamacare?

Because the democrats that added an employer mandate to the heritage foundation's plan that was originally created as an alternative to an employer mandate really believe that employer's should provide coverage.

That's unfortunate, imo, since I've always thought that priority one should be to establish affordable individual coverage to decouple the employer/employee connection. Too many people are forced to stay at a job they don't like only because of the insurance offered.

COBRA and HIPAA don't do enough in that regard? And those two are only needed for those who aren't insurable. If you're insurable (and you weren't living in a state where they had guaranteed issue already in place, like New York) individual coverage was already affordable.