Report your experience with getting insurance via ACA (1 Viewer)

[Schlzm]

Just got a call from a client of mine who was able to do a few things on the website. She is attempting to get coverage for her son 20 year old son only for now, and he has a somewhat serious pre-ex, but still works and has a small income (subsidy eligible as apparently she no longer claims him on taxes)

The website was unable to determine her son's identity, because he has no credit history (he still lives at home, so has never really needed one). The person on the chat feature told her to contact Experian so he could "obtain a credit history". She apparently did contact them, and they had no idea what do to to "get him a credit history."

Wait, out of all the posts you've placed re: ACA, you don't know whether credit history plays a role or not?

Huh?

Do you know if a credit history is required in order apply for health care insurance?

I have no idea, I've never thought about it honestly. You wouldn't think so because everyone HAS TO have coverage, or be fined. Some people simply don't have a credit history, and apparently you need one in order to obtain coverage on the exchange (which again is the only way to obtain a subsidy). If you can't obtain coverage on the exchange because of not having a credit history, your only option would be to obtain coverage OFF exchange and pay the full rate.....or be fined.

Information about Experian’s role in the Health Insurance Marketplace

link to Experian

In order to contact Experian Verification Services, you must first go through the online application process for your appropriate (state or federal) Health Insurance Marketplace and attempt to verify your identity <snip> If you are still unsuccessful, you may wish to attempt online identity verification again, <snip> If you are still unable to pass identity verification, you will receive another reference code. You can choose to call Experian Verification Services again with your new code...

I love how the only answer no matter where you turn is "keep trying until it works!". The American public has been conditioned for instant gratification guys, just saying.Schlzm

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I have no idea, I've never thought about it honestly. You wouldn't think so because everyone HAS TO have coverage, or be fined. Some people simply don't have a credit history, and apparently you need one in order to obtain coverage on the exchange (which again is the only way to obtain a subsidy). If you can't obtain coverage on the exchange because of not having a credit history, your only option would be to obtain coverage OFF exchange and pay the full rate.....or be fined.

I want to know where anyone feels this is GOP slanted? The folks who are blindly for this ACA seem to really vote from an emotional stand and if you like pull up Dennis Prager today, I stopped reading him a while back but a friend encouraged me to read it, very well done and he bashes both sides but surely the Left won't see it that way.

All Matty does is present facts, figures, quotes form articles, nowhere do I see him bashing Obama himself, I don't. If the folks who are for the ACA would just take a breath and read before they start getting so defensive we might be able to have a meaningful discussion in here.

Anything that is presented in terms of real dollars, the pro-ACA'ers stick their head in the sand or scream hateful things that have nothing to do with the task at hand. We get that you all want everyone to have health insurance, you don't have to keep holding that flag. Move over to the part where we have to start paying for this and let's deal with the real numbers. If you don't like what you are reading or it is turning into a living horror show for you...well then maybe you need to rethink your position a bit.

Let's list the facts again since no one wants to deal with it...

92% of people with health insurance get it from an employer...not 92% of the country obviously but 92% of the people already paying...not "gonna pay later this year", not gonna get it in Jan...92% of those currently paying b4 ACA kicks in.

8% of people with health insurance get it privately. This is mostly the small business owners.

-Most of you cannot even digest this little bit of information without turning it into a melee.

It has been well covered even thru the liberal media that on avg premiums for the 92% are going to rise somewhere between 10-25%. Some folks might have their premiums go up by 50%, some might not see any at all but on avg the money form this sector going out the door on premiums is going up. And it has to in order to pay for all those people who were not getting it before.

I haven't really come out and said this yet but sure in theory if were gonna cost my wife and I another 10% on our yearly premiums, I could live with it if I thought we were truly getting something for this money...but we're not. The whole thing is a fracking sham and the site which they had 4.5 years to build is a disaster right now.

Without going into all the ramifications from ACA because truly we don't know yet, we think we have an idea but we don't truly know so it's just conjecture at this point, both sides.

OK, now the 50% of the country who is not paying monthly on insurance...roughly 1/3 of those people cannot afford to pay monthly and they will be getting full subsidies from the government, this is what the Left in D.C are so very happy about, 1/3 of 50% or 1/6 of this country. I get it, the poor, the meek, they meed help, OK OK OK OK OK OK...can't say it enough.

The remaining 2/3 of that group or 1/3 of the country can afford insurance but do not purchase it , many of them gainfully employed, many of them are in their 20s, 30s, and 40s...that's a lot of money getting sucked up out of the economy and going to health care.

Try if you can and you live in a big city like I do in Miami or TG in San Diego, think about the folks in the MidWest who go to the doctor once a year for a check up and instead of health insurance, these people dip into their pockets and pay for it as they need it. Avg doctor's office visit in the MidWest, wanna take a guess how much that might cost? How about $75 to maybe $150. It just is senseless for a man 35 years old, makes $40,000 a year the hard way and never gets sick to start forking out tons of money for care he is never gonna use at that stage of his life.

Sure he can develop cancer but the folks saying that would have you believe that people in their 20s, 30s, and 40s are dropping like flies and that simply is not true, not even close. Sure we all know someone who has been taken from us way early in life but that is not the norm, it's not. My mother was 46, died of breast cancer but her health insurance had nothing to do with it. Her lack of control over her diet and exercise was the leading cause.

Now I haven't spoken about the ACA in terms of policy, or the White House, or can I even say Obama? Because I don't care, that debate ended 4.5-5 years ago but the plan didn't unroll until now, and why was that exactly? It sure didn't help them get the site launched. And so instead of debating policy we need to deal in the reality of the costs now and it seems to be a hard pill for many to swallow as it should be.

Why is having a conversation about the reality of who is going to pay for all this now, why is that so hard? Matty isn't shying away so why can't we discuss stuff without it turning into a 1 up game? Such a waste of time.

 

[Schlzm]

MoP, it's because a lot of people were saying this was going to be the outcome and a lot of other people were saying it wasn't and blah blah and now some don't want to accept reality. I am stricyl talkign about cost too, not even touching the other predictions that are coming true.

Schlzm

 

[tommyGunZ]

I have no idea, I've never thought about it honestly. You wouldn't think so because everyone HAS TO have coverage, or be fined. Some people simply don't have a credit history, and apparently you need one in order to obtain coverage on the exchange (which again is the only way to obtain a subsidy). If you can't obtain coverage on the exchange because of not having a credit history, your only option would be to obtain coverage OFF exchange and pay the full rate.....or be fined.

I want to know where anyone feels this is GOP slanted? The folks who are blindly for this ACA seem to really vote from an emotional stand and if you like pull up Dennis Prager today, I stopped reading him a while back but a friend encouraged me to read it, very well done and he bashes both sides but surely the Left won't see it that way.

All Matty does is present facts, figures, quotes form articles, nowhere do I see him bashing Obama himself, I don't. If the folks who are for the ACA would just take a breath and read before they start getting so defensive we might be able to have a meaningful discussion in here.

Anything that is presented in terms of real dollars, the pro-ACA'ers stick their head in the sand or scream hateful things that have nothing to do with the task at hand. We get that you all want everyone to have health insurance, you don't have to keep holding that flag. Move over to the part where we have to start paying for this and let's deal with the real numbers. If you don't like what you are reading or it is turning into a living horror show for you...well then maybe you need to rethink your position a bit.

Let's list the facts again since no one wants to deal with it...

92% of people with health insurance get it from an employer...not 92% of the country obviously but 92% of the people already paying...not "gonna pay later this year", not gonna get it in Jan...92% of those currently paying b4 ACA kicks in.

8% of people with health insurance get it privately. This is mostly the small business owners.

-Most of you cannot even digest this little bit of information without turning it into a melee.

It has been well covered even thru the liberal media that on avg premiums for the 92% are going to rise somewhere between 10-25%. Some folks might have their premiums go up by 50%, some might not see any at all but on avg the money form this sector going out the door on premiums is going up. And it has to in order to pay for all those people who were not getting it before.

I haven't really come out and said this yet but sure in theory if were gonna cost my wife and I another 10% on our yearly premiums, I could live with it if I thought we were truly getting something for this money...but we're not. The whole thing is a fracking sham and the site which they had 4.5 years to build is a disaster right now.

Without going into all the ramifications from ACA because truly we don't know yet, we think we have an idea but we don't truly know so it's just conjecture at this point, both sides.

OK, now the 50% of the country who is not paying monthly on insurance...roughly 1/3 of those people cannot afford to pay monthly and they will be getting full subsidies from the government, this is what the Left in D.C are so very happy about, 1/3 of 50% or 1/6 of this country. I get it, the poor, the meek, they meed help, OK OK OK OK OK OK...can't say it enough.

The remaining 2/3 of that group or 1/3 of the country can afford insurance but do not purchase it , many of them gainfully employed, many of them are in their 20s, 30s, and 40s...that's a lot of money getting sucked up out of the economy and going to health care.

Try if you can and you live in a big city like I do in Miami or TG in San Diego, think about the folks in the MidWest who go to the doctor once a year for a check up and instead of health insurance, these people dip into their pockets and pay for it as they need it. Avg doctor's office visit in the MidWest, wanna take a guess how much that might cost? How about $75 to maybe $150. It just is senseless for a man 35 years old, makes $40,000 a year the hard way and never gets sick to start forking out tons of money for care he is never gonna use at that stage of his life.

Sure he can develop cancer but the folks saying that would have you believe that people in their 20s, 30s, and 40s are dropping like flies and that simply is not true, not even close. Sure we all know someone who has been taken from us way early in life but that is not the norm, it's not. My mother was 46, died of breast cancer but her health insurance had nothing to do with it. Her lack of control over her diet and exercise was the leading cause.

Now I haven't spoken about the ACA in terms of policy, or the White House, or can I even say Obama? Because I don't care, that debate ended 4.5-5 years ago but the plan didn't unroll until now, and why was that exactly? It sure didn't help them get the site launched. And so instead of debating policy we need to deal in the reality of the costs now and it seems to be a hard pill for many to swallow as it should be.

Why is having a conversation about the reality of who is going to pay for all this now, why is that so hard? Matty isn't shying away so why can't we discuss stuff without it turning into a 1 up game? Such a waste of time.

B/c you don't have any data MOP. You're just inventing a bunch of bull#### to scare people.

Some will pay more, some will pay less.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

MoP, it's because a lot of people were saying this was going to be the outcome and a lot of other people were saying it wasn't and blah blah and now some don't want to accept reality. I am stricyl talkign about cost too, not even touching the other predictions that are coming true.

Schlzm

Some of these people actually thought there would NOT be increases for a lot of folks already paying into the system? TommyBoy has too many threads on it already but one in particular had a fantastic quote of a couple in California, I do believe they were of minority descent but they were staunch Linerals, very in favor of the ACA until their family premiums rose from $200 to $500+, in fact I think it was $600 and boy did their tune change when they found out it would cost them real money.

And that's the sad part of it. People don't get the actual numbers in front of them when they voice their opinions to their Reps in D.C. at the time this bill passed. But now when the numbers are in place and people are starting to see the true costs of all this...well now people want to say "Wait a minute"

I have nothing against our proud DNC and GOP types round here, the board would boring without them but at this stage of the game, you have to be able to communicate without finger pointing and name calling. I think most of the folks who are trying to help or show people are able to communicate those ideas. It's astonishing to me that intelligent people are not able to comprehend what is happening.

As Tim was saying earlier the ACA is here, it's gonna go forward, the sooner everyone gets the bottom line $ of what their personal costs will be the better. Even the 1st year the tax penalty is pretty light compared to what it turns into in 2015 and 2016 as a certain someone is leaving D.C.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

B/c you don't have any data MOP. You're just inventing a bunch of bull#### to scare people.

Some will pay more, some will pay less.

I gave a lot of data. Do you not believe 92% of people paying monthly premiums currently are getting their insurance thru their employers? 8% privately? Just give me that before we go any further? Can we agree on that or is that still a scare tactic TG?

 

[Schlzm]

MoP, it's because a lot of people were saying this was going to be the outcome and a lot of other people were saying it wasn't and blah blah and now some don't want to accept reality. I am stricyl talkign about cost too, not even touching the other predictions that are coming true.

Schlzm

Some of these people actually thought there would NOT be increases for a lot of folks already paying into the system? TommyBoy has too many threads on it already but one in particular had a fantastic quote of a couple in California, I do believe they were of minority descent but they were staunch Linerals, very in favor of the ACA until their family premiums rose from $200 to $500+, in fact I think it was $600 and boy did their tune change when they found out it would cost them real money.

And that's the sad part of it. People don't get the actual numbers in front of them when they voice their opinions to their Reps in D.C. at the time this bill passed. But now when the numbers are in place and people are starting to see the true costs of all this...well now people want to say "Wait a minute"

I have nothing against our proud DNC and GOP types round here, the board would boring without them but at this stage of the game, you have to be able to communicate without finger pointing and name calling. I think most of the folks who are trying to help or show people are able to communicate those ideas. It's astonishing to me that intelligent people are not able to comprehend what is happening.

As Tim was saying earlier the ACA is here, it's gonna go forward, the sooner everyone gets the bottom line $ of what their personal costs will be the better. Even the 1st year the tax penalty is pretty light compared to what it turns into in 2015 and 2016 as a certain someone is leaving D.C.

Everyone knew there were going to be cost increases, but they were only supposed to be leveraged against all the *evil* people in the country, not the *normal* people. Then you have the hardline shills who don't even want to play in reality and just throw bombs.Schlzm

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Just got a call from a client of mine who was able to do a few things on the website. She is attempting to get coverage for her son 20 year old son only for now, and he has a somewhat serious pre-ex, but still works and has a small income (subsidy eligible as apparently she no longer claims him on taxes)

The website was unable to determine her son's identity, because he has no credit history (he still lives at home, so has never really needed one). The person on the chat feature told her to contact Experian so he could "obtain a credit history". She apparently did contact them, and they had no idea what do to to "get him a credit history."

Wait, out of all the posts you've placed re: ACA, you don't know whether credit history plays a role or not?

Huh?

Do you know if a credit history is required in order apply for health care insurance?

I have no idea, I've never thought about it honestly. You wouldn't think so because everyone HAS TO have coverage, or be fined. Some people simply don't have a credit history, and apparently you need one in order to obtain coverage on the exchange (which again is the only way to obtain a subsidy). If you can't obtain coverage on the exchange because of not having a credit history, your only option would be to obtain coverage OFF exchange and pay the full rate.....or be fined.

Information about Experian’s role in the Health Insurance Marketplace

link to Experian

In order to contact Experian Verification Services, you must first go through the online application process for your appropriate (state or federal) Health Insurance Marketplace and attempt to verify your identity <snip> If you are still unsuccessful, you may wish to attempt online identity verification again, <snip> If you are still unable to pass identity verification, you will receive another reference code. You can choose to call Experian Verification Services again with your new code...

I love how the only answer no matter where you turn is "keep trying until it works!". The American public has been conditioned for instant gratification guys, just saying.Schlzm

Let's take the posted anecdote. The ACA system cannot verify the son's identity. The son's mother is instructed to contact Experian to go through manual verification. Experian publicizes this process on its public website. Its not a mystery. The son's mother calls Experian. And Experian employees don't know what she's talking about.

Now explain to me again. How is this a failure of the public sector? This is a case of private sector employees not knowing how to perform a job that their employer had contracted to provide to the government.

I mean, it's clear that the system architects contemplated that some people would be unable to be verified by a standard automated credit check. That's why they had a manual process in place.

 

[DrJ]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

And since TommyGunz is now Doubting Thomas, I guess we have to link and show our work for everything. I'll point to the Charlotte Observer which ran this yesterday or the day before. Shows what is happening and what Matty and lots of others are trying to point out. I'm sorry if anything that shows the true costs of this are anti-ACA but we gotta start talking real numbers at some point.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html

some of the highlights...

Pete Spell is accustomed to annual premium increases for the individual health insurance plan he buys from Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina.

But this year’s notice gave him a jolt. Instead of a typical 4- to 8-percent increase, Blue Cross’ estimate for next year would raise his monthly premium two and a half times, from $127 to $325, for a similar policy.

“That was a bit of shell shock,” said Spell, a 31-year-old accountant who lives in Davidson. “My paycheck didn’t go up 200 percent.

“I’m a young, healthy male,” he said. “I basically have insurance for that unknown thing that could happen.”

-Does that sound similar to what Matty, myself, many others have been posting? It's real and it is happening so stop acting like it isn't.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html#storylink=cpy

 

[tommyGunZ]

MoP, it's because a lot of people were saying this was going to be the outcome and a lot of other people were saying it wasn't and blah blah and now some don't want to accept reality. I am stricyl talkign about cost too, not even touching the other predictions that are coming true.

Schlzm

Some of these people actually thought there would NOT be increases for a lot of folks already paying into the system? TommyBoy has too many threads on it already but one in particular had a fantastic quote of a couple in California, I do believe they were of minority descent but they were staunch Linerals, very in favor of the ACA until their family premiums rose from $200 to $500+, in fact I think it was $600 and boy did their tune change when they found out it would cost them real money.

And that's the sad part of it. People don't get the actual numbers in front of them when they voice their opinions to their Reps in D.C. at the time this bill passed. But now when the numbers are in place and people are starting to see the true costs of all this...well now people want to say "Wait a minute"

I have nothing against our proud DNC and GOP types round here, the board would boring without them but at this stage of the game, you have to be able to communicate without finger pointing and name calling. I think most of the folks who are trying to help or show people are able to communicate those ideas. It's astonishing to me that intelligent people are not able to comprehend what is happening.

As Tim was saying earlier the ACA is here, it's gonna go forward, the sooner everyone gets the bottom line $ of what their personal costs will be the better. Even the 1st year the tax penalty is pretty light compared to what it turns into in 2015 and 2016 as a certain someone is leaving D.C.

So you're cherry picking a quote from a couple in a tommyboy anti-Obamacare thread and suggesting it's indicative of all of the liberals who support the ACA.

Why aren't you cherry picking the actual folks from THIS BOARD whose premiums are decreasing? I think it was BassNBrew and datonn who were going to be saving money every month while getting far better coverage.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

And you are bringing up an excellent point indirectly. The person who wasn't paying, now they pay $200 a month, that $200 was used before for things like entertainment. Now instead of going to the movies for $10-$15, they gotta stay home. Enough of that happens and suddenly we don't need all those folks at the movie theatre working so they cut back on staff or decrease hours for everyone there. It has a domino effect on things does it not?

 

[Schlzm]

MoP, it's because a lot of people were saying this was going to be the outcome and a lot of other people were saying it wasn't and blah blah and now some don't want to accept reality. I am stricyl talkign about cost too, not even touching the other predictions that are coming true.

Schlzm

Some of these people actually thought there would NOT be increases for a lot of folks already paying into the system? TommyBoy has too many threads on it already but one in particular had a fantastic quote of a couple in California, I do believe they were of minority descent but they were staunch Linerals, very in favor of the ACA until their family premiums rose from $200 to $500+, in fact I think it was $600 and boy did their tune change when they found out it would cost them real money.

And that's the sad part of it. People don't get the actual numbers in front of them when they voice their opinions to their Reps in D.C. at the time this bill passed. But now when the numbers are in place and people are starting to see the true costs of all this...well now people want to say "Wait a minute"

I have nothing against our proud DNC and GOP types round here, the board would boring without them but at this stage of the game, you have to be able to communicate without finger pointing and name calling. I think most of the folks who are trying to help or show people are able to communicate those ideas. It's astonishing to me that intelligent people are not able to comprehend what is happening.

As Tim was saying earlier the ACA is here, it's gonna go forward, the sooner everyone gets the bottom line $ of what their personal costs will be the better. Even the 1st year the tax penalty is pretty light compared to what it turns into in 2015 and 2016 as a certain someone is leaving D.C.

So you're cherry picking a quote from a couple in a tommyboy anti-Obamacare thread and suggesting it's indicative of all of the liberals who support the ACA.

Why aren't you cherry picking the actual folks from THIS BOARD whose premiums are decreasing? I think it was BassNBrew and datonn who were going to be saving money every month while getting far better coverage.

Anyone else want to share what they found for their rates on ehealth.com - both for what's available today in 2013 and what options you'll have next year?

Horrible is what they are.pre: Lowest = $193.25/mo, $25 copay, $10,00 deductible.

Highest = $600.62/mo, $20 copay, $1,000 deductible.

post: Lowest = $437.78/mo, $45 copay, $12,700 deductible.

Highest = $763.74/mo, $10 copay, $4,500 deductible.

Schlzm

 

[DrJ]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

And you are bringing up an excellent point indirectly. The person who wasn't paying, now they pay $200 a month, that $200 was used before for things like entertainment. Now instead of going to the movies for $10-$15, they gotta stay home. Enough of that happens and suddenly we don't need all those folks at the movie theatre working so they cut back on staff or decrease hours for everyone there. It has a domino effect on things does it not?

Probably. But if they just take a moment to laugh about it, they've replaced the value of the movie at least. I'm not sure on the dominoes and all of that, but how amusingly bad this is does provide some replacement value for the money in and of itself.

 

[datonn]

A couple thoughts I have on MoP's last post (Pete Spell Charlotte Observer):

1. People are okay with premiums going up 4-8% per year...when the rate of inflation in the United States hasn't been anywhere close to those levels since ~1991?! Sans a few brief periods in 2006 and 2008.

2. Do you think Mr. Spell has checked into plan pricing for ACA? My guess is no. His current BCBS plan might be the best he can do! But as a fellow BCBS customer for the past ~13 years...let me just say that I doubt it.

3. Might BlueCross BlueShield be increasing anyone and everyone's premiums and deductibles as much as they are legally allowed to (which is pretty-much as high as they want to go) to make up for them losing clients such as me...who will be saving $4,800/year in premium expenses by switching to another plan via ACA, along with having a $2,500 lower deductible? Just like other businesses, if folks all of the sudden can't make as much money from some folks, but other folks are "over a barrel" (or at least think they are), what are the odds that BCBS gouges said folks getting splinters?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

MoP, it's because a lot of people were saying this was going to be the outcome and a lot of other people were saying it wasn't and blah blah and now some don't want to accept reality. I am stricyl talkign about cost too, not even touching the other predictions that are coming true.

Schlzm

Some of these people actually thought there would NOT be increases for a lot of folks already paying into the system? TommyBoy has too many threads on it already but one in particular had a fantastic quote of a couple in California, I do believe they were of minority descent but they were staunch Linerals, very in favor of the ACA until their family premiums rose from $200 to $500+, in fact I think it was $600 and boy did their tune change when they found out it would cost them real money.

And that's the sad part of it. People don't get the actual numbers in front of them when they voice their opinions to their Reps in D.C. at the time this bill passed. But now when the numbers are in place and people are starting to see the true costs of all this...well now people want to say "Wait a minute"

I have nothing against our proud DNC and GOP types round here, the board would boring without them but at this stage of the game, you have to be able to communicate without finger pointing and name calling. I think most of the folks who are trying to help or show people are able to communicate those ideas. It's astonishing to me that intelligent people are not able to comprehend what is happening.

As Tim was saying earlier the ACA is here, it's gonna go forward, the sooner everyone gets the bottom line $ of what their personal costs will be the better. Even the 1st year the tax penalty is pretty light compared to what it turns into in 2015 and 2016 as a certain someone is leaving D.C.

So you're cherry picking a quote from a couple in a tommyboy anti-Obamacare thread and suggesting it's indicative of all of the liberals who support the ACA.

Why aren't you cherry picking the actual folks from THIS BOARD whose premiums are decreasing? I think it was BassNBrew and datonn who were going to be saving money every month while getting far better coverage.

How many newspaper articles need to be linked/clipped? You are asking for proof and we present that, you still don't like it.

Every time in these threads we have to stop engaging with you because you seem really off the ranch about this and unreasonable about the costs and who is paying for it. I don't want to make this a fight truly I don't but you are not presenting anything in the way that Matty and others have. They could type out a 5 paragraph explanation and you just type up 1 line that is basically saying "You're a liar, pants on fire"

It's pretty juvenile and you're not juvenile, I refuse to believe it. I think you mean well TG, I know you want to help everyone and you want everyone to be on a level playing field in an ideal World. All that said, can we get back to what is happening right now. I showed you an article from less than 48 hours ago. Do you really believe that all these subsidies...who do you think is paying for it? Do you think those folks in California I referenced, do you think they are alone? They clearly are not so I'm not trying to speak for anyone, simply showing what is happening.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

And you are bringing up an excellent point indirectly. The person who wasn't paying, now they pay $200 a month, that $200 was used before for things like entertainment. Now instead of going to the movies for $10-$15, they gotta stay home. Enough of that happens and suddenly we don't need all those folks at the movie theatre working so they cut back on staff or decrease hours for everyone there. It has a domino effect on things does it not?

Probably. But if they just take a moment to laugh about it, they've replaced the value of the movie at least. I'm not sure on the dominoes and all of that, but how amusingly bad this is does provide some replacement value for the money in and of itself.

Why would we possibly care whether jobs are created in the health care services industry or in the movie theater concession industry?

 

[Schlzm]

Just got a call from a client of mine who was able to do a few things on the website. She is attempting to get coverage for her son 20 year old son only for now, and he has a somewhat serious pre-ex, but still works and has a small income (subsidy eligible as apparently she no longer claims him on taxes)

The website was unable to determine her son's identity, because he has no credit history (he still lives at home, so has never really needed one). The person on the chat feature told her to contact Experian so he could "obtain a credit history". She apparently did contact them, and they had no idea what do to to "get him a credit history."

Wait, out of all the posts you've placed re: ACA, you don't know whether credit history plays a role or not?

Huh?

Do you know if a credit history is required in order apply for health care insurance?

I have no idea, I've never thought about it honestly. You wouldn't think so because everyone HAS TO have coverage, or be fined. Some people simply don't have a credit history, and apparently you need one in order to obtain coverage on the exchange (which again is the only way to obtain a subsidy). If you can't obtain coverage on the exchange because of not having a credit history, your only option would be to obtain coverage OFF exchange and pay the full rate.....or be fined.

Information about Experian’s role in the Health Insurance Marketplace

link to Experian

In order to contact Experian Verification Services, you must first go through the online application process for your appropriate (state or federal) Health Insurance Marketplace and attempt to verify your identity <snip> If you are still unsuccessful, you may wish to attempt online identity verification again, <snip> If you are still unable to pass identity verification, you will receive another reference code. You can choose to call Experian Verification Services again with your new code...

I love how the only answer no matter where you turn is "keep trying until it works!". The American public has been conditioned for instant gratification guys, just saying.Schlzm

Let's take the posted anecdote. The ACA system cannot verify the son's identity. The son's mother is instructed to contact Experian to go through manual verification. Experian publicizes this process on its public website. Its not a mystery. The son's mother calls Experian. And Experian employees don't know what she's talking about.

Now explain to me again. How is this a failure of the public sector? This is a case of private sector employees not knowing how to perform a job that their employer had contracted to provide to the government.

I mean, it's clear that the system architects contemplated that some people would be unable to be verified by a standard automated credit check. That's why they had a manual process in place.

Failure of both would be my guess. Yeah the information got posted on the website, but did the floor support people get trained on it? Is Experian's call center actually run by Experian or a third party? Is it even in the US? Too many variables that weren't addressed properly and it probably started from the top.Schlzm

 

[DrJ]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

And you are bringing up an excellent point indirectly. The person who wasn't paying, now they pay $200 a month, that $200 was used before for things like entertainment. Now instead of going to the movies for $10-$15, they gotta stay home. Enough of that happens and suddenly we don't need all those folks at the movie theatre working so they cut back on staff or decrease hours for everyone there. It has a domino effect on things does it not?

Probably. But if they just take a moment to laugh about it, they've replaced the value of the movie at least. I'm not sure on the dominoes and all of that, but how amusingly bad this is does provide some replacement value for the money in and of itself.

Why would we possibly care whether jobs are created in the health care services industry or in the movie theater concession industry?

True. It could even be swarms of IRS agents to levy fines or bigger jails to house non payers. All of this could replace the concession workers. So now we've replaced the movie and the workers. How could anyone not call this a win?

 

[Schlzm]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

And you are bringing up an excellent point indirectly. The person who wasn't paying, now they pay $200 a month, that $200 was used before for things like entertainment. Now instead of going to the movies for $10-$15, they gotta stay home. Enough of that happens and suddenly we don't need all those folks at the movie theatre working so they cut back on staff or decrease hours for everyone there. It has a domino effect on things does it not?

Probably. But if they just take a moment to laugh about it, they've replaced the value of the movie at least. I'm not sure on the dominoes and all of that, but how amusingly bad this is does provide some replacement value for the money in and of itself.

Why would we possibly care whether jobs are created in the health care services industry or in the movie theater concession industry?

Serious question. While laughter IS the best medicine, are slippery slopes covered under the pre-existing condition clause or are they treated as something else? Maybe like accupuncture?Schlzm

 

[tommyGunZ]

And since TommyGunz is now Doubting Thomas, I guess we have to link and show our work for everything. I'll point to the Charlotte Observer which ran this yesterday or the day before. Shows what is happening and what Matty and lots of others are trying to point out. I'm sorry if anything that shows the true costs of this are anti-ACA but we gotta start talking real numbers at some point.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html

some of the highlights...

Pete Spell is accustomed to annual premium increases for the individual health insurance plan he buys from Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina.

But this year’s notice gave him a jolt. Instead of a typical 4- to 8-percent increase, Blue Cross’ estimate for next year would raise his monthly premium two and a half times, from $127 to $325, for a similar policy.

“That was a bit of shell shock,” said Spell, a 31-year-old accountant who lives in Davidson. “My paycheck didn’t go up 200 percent.

“I’m a young, healthy male,” he said. “I basically have insurance for that unknown thing that could happen.”

-Does that sound similar to what Matty, myself, many others have been posting? It's real and it is happening so stop acting like it isn't.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html#storylink=cpy

Why didn't you quote this part?

When North Carolina officials decided not to set up a state insurance exchange, deferring instead to the federal government, they triggered a 3.5 percent service charge, tacked onto North Carolina’s insurance rates, to run the exchange.

Additionally, North Carolina officials opted not to expand Medicaid, the federal insurance program for the poor and disabled, and as a result, about 200,000 people who would have qualified for Medicaid will now qualify for insurance subsidies. Those people are widely expected to be in poorer health, prompting insurance companies to boost rates by an estimated 2 percent to compensate for the risk of insuring this population, said Mark Hall, a professor of law and public health at Wake Forest University.

The state’s decisions not to embrace the health care law likely dissuaded insurers from entering North Carolina’s market, inhibiting price competition, said Kerry Hall, spokeswoman for the N.C. Department of Insurance.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html#.UmbyG3Ckp6Q#storylink=cpy
So in an effort to score political points and "oppose Obamacare", NC elected officials (Pat McCroy and the morons in the state house) effectively drove up rates on their constituents.

And it's win-win for them, b/c they got to blast Obamacare, and now they'll get to blast the cost increases, knowing that only a small, small percentage will ever realize they helped drive those costs up.

 

[Schlzm]

MoP, it's because a lot of people were saying this was going to be the outcome and a lot of other people were saying it wasn't and blah blah and now some don't want to accept reality. I am stricyl talkign about cost too, not even touching the other predictions that are coming true.

Schlzm

Some of these people actually thought there would NOT be increases for a lot of folks already paying into the system? TommyBoy has too many threads on it already but one in particular had a fantastic quote of a couple in California, I do believe they were of minority descent but they were staunch Linerals, very in favor of the ACA until their family premiums rose from $200 to $500+, in fact I think it was $600 and boy did their tune change when they found out it would cost them real money.

And that's the sad part of it. People don't get the actual numbers in front of them when they voice their opinions to their Reps in D.C. at the time this bill passed. But now when the numbers are in place and people are starting to see the true costs of all this...well now people want to say "Wait a minute"

I have nothing against our proud DNC and GOP types round here, the board would boring without them but at this stage of the game, you have to be able to communicate without finger pointing and name calling. I think most of the folks who are trying to help or show people are able to communicate those ideas. It's astonishing to me that intelligent people are not able to comprehend what is happening.

As Tim was saying earlier the ACA is here, it's gonna go forward, the sooner everyone gets the bottom line $ of what their personal costs will be the better. Even the 1st year the tax penalty is pretty light compared to what it turns into in 2015 and 2016 as a certain someone is leaving D.C.

So you're cherry picking a quote from a couple in a tommyboy anti-Obamacare thread and suggesting it's indicative of all of the liberals who support the ACA.

Why aren't you cherry picking the actual folks from THIS BOARD whose premiums are decreasing? I think it was BassNBrew and datonn who were going to be saving money every month while getting far better coverage.

How many newspaper articles need to be linked/clipped? You are asking for proof and we present that, you still don't like it. Every time in these threads we have to stop engaging with you because you seem really off the ranch about this and unreasonable about the costs and who is paying for it. I don't want to make this a fight truly I don't but you are not presenting anything in the way that Matty and others have. They could type out a 5 paragraph explanation and you just type up 1 line that is basically saying "You're a liar, pants on fire"

It's pretty juvenile and you're not juvenile, I refuse to believe it. I think you mean well TG, I know you want to help everyone and you want everyone to be on a level playing field in an ideal World. All that said, can we get back to what is happening right now. I showed you an article from less than 48 hours ago. Do you really believe that all these subsidies...who do you think is paying for it? Do you think those folks in California I referenced, do you think they are alone? They clearly are not so I'm not trying to speak for anyone, simply showing what is happening.

TGunnz fishes with dynamite. Schlzm

 

[tommyGunZ]

B/c you don't have any data MOP. You're just inventing a bunch of bull#### to scare people.

Some will pay more, some will pay less.

I gave a lot of data. Do you not believe 92% of people paying monthly premiums currently are getting their insurance thru their employers? 8% privately? Just give me that before we go any further? Can we agree on that or is that still a scare tactic TG?

Sound about right. Do you have a link?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I got a headache now and I put the peace pipe down 2 weeks ago so stop making me ill GD!



Seriously, there isn't gonna be a middle ground to discuss this, it's obvious. Things are just gonna get worse in D.C. as we move forward...end of the World never but it is gonna get ugly and I won't say rioting in the streets but if this had hit at the same time Americans protested on Wall Street a couple years ago, I think both could have come together and an even bigger force could have happened.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

This is why I'm against curing cancer. I'd hate those people making Livestrong bracelets and pink ribbons to be out of a job.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

B/c you don't have any data MOP. You're just inventing a bunch of bull#### to scare people.

Some will pay more, some will pay less.

I gave a lot of data. Do you not believe 92% of people paying monthly premiums currently are getting their insurance thru their employers? 8% privately? Just give me that before we go any further? Can we agree on that or is that still a scare tactic TG?

Sound about right. Do you have a link?

G1

Just blink once in a while so I know there is a human being on the other side of that fracking computer.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

And you are bringing up an excellent point indirectly. The person who wasn't paying, now they pay $200 a month, that $200 was used before for things like entertainment. Now instead of going to the movies for $10-$15, they gotta stay home. Enough of that happens and suddenly we don't need all those folks at the movie theatre working so they cut back on staff or decrease hours for everyone there. It has a domino effect on things does it not?

Probably. But if they just take a moment to laugh about it, they've replaced the value of the movie at least. I'm not sure on the dominoes and all of that, but how amusingly bad this is does provide some replacement value for the money in and of itself.

Why would we possibly care whether jobs are created in the health care services industry or in the movie theater concession industry?

Serious question. While laughter IS the best medicine, are slippery slopes covered under the pre-existing condition clause or are they treated as something else? Maybe like accupuncture?Schlzm

If you want a serious answer, you might try posting a comprehensible question.

I'm sorry. It's hard to take people like MoP seriously on economic issues when they make comments that a show a fundamental lack of understanding of economics.

 

[Schlzm]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

And you are bringing up an excellent point indirectly. The person who wasn't paying, now they pay $200 a month, that $200 was used before for things like entertainment. Now instead of going to the movies for $10-$15, they gotta stay home. Enough of that happens and suddenly we don't need all those folks at the movie theatre working so they cut back on staff or decrease hours for everyone there. It has a domino effect on things does it not?

Probably. But if they just take a moment to laugh about it, they've replaced the value of the movie at least. I'm not sure on the dominoes and all of that, but how amusingly bad this is does provide some replacement value for the money in and of itself.

Why would we possibly care whether jobs are created in the health care services industry or in the movie theater concession industry?

Serious question. While laughter IS the best medicine, are slippery slopes covered under the pre-existing condition clause or are they treated as something else? Maybe like accupuncture?Schlzm

If you want a serious answer, you might try posting a comprehensible question.

I'm sorry. It's hard to take people like MoP seriously on economic issues when they make comments that a show a fundamental lack of understanding of economics.

I'm sorry, but who are you?Schlzm

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

And you are bringing up an excellent point indirectly. The person who wasn't paying, now they pay $200 a month, that $200 was used before for things like entertainment. Now instead of going to the movies for $10-$15, they gotta stay home. Enough of that happens and suddenly we don't need all those folks at the movie theatre working so they cut back on staff or decrease hours for everyone there. It has a domino effect on things does it not?

Probably. But if they just take a moment to laugh about it, they've replaced the value of the movie at least. I'm not sure on the dominoes and all of that, but how amusingly bad this is does provide some replacement value for the money in and of itself.

Why would we possibly care whether jobs are created in the health care services industry or in the movie theater concession industry?

Serious question. While laughter IS the best medicine, are slippery slopes covered under the pre-existing condition clause or are they treated as something else? Maybe like accupuncture?Schlzm

If you want a serious answer, you might try posting a comprehensible question.

I'm sorry. It's hard to take people like MoP seriously on economic issues when they make comments that a show a fundamental lack of understanding of economics.

I'm sorry, but who are you?Schlzm

I'm Ramsey Hunt Experience.

Would it help if I signed all my posts?

 

[Statorama]

MoP, it's because a lot of people were saying this was going to be the outcome and a lot of other people were saying it wasn't and blah blah and now some don't want to accept reality. I am stricyl talkign about cost too, not even touching the other predictions that are coming true.

Schlzm

Some of these people actually thought there would NOT be increases for a lot of folks already paying into the system? TommyBoy has too many threads on it already but one in particular had a fantastic quote of a couple in California, I do believe they were of minority descent but they were staunch Linerals, very in favor of the ACA until their family premiums rose from $200 to $500+, in fact I think it was $600 and boy did their tune change when they found out it would cost them real money.

And that's the sad part of it. People don't get the actual numbers in front of them when they voice their opinions to their Reps in D.C. at the time this bill passed. But now when the numbers are in place and people are starting to see the true costs of all this...well now people want to say "Wait a minute"

I have nothing against our proud DNC and GOP types round here, the board would boring without them but at this stage of the game, you have to be able to communicate without finger pointing and name calling. I think most of the folks who are trying to help or show people are able to communicate those ideas. It's astonishing to me that intelligent people are not able to comprehend what is happening.

As Tim was saying earlier the ACA is here, it's gonna go forward, the sooner everyone gets the bottom line $ of what their personal costs will be the better. Even the 1st year the tax penalty is pretty light compared to what it turns into in 2015 and 2016 as a certain someone is leaving D.C.

Everyone knew there were going to be cost increases, but they were only supposed to be leveraged against all the *evil* people in the country, not the *normal* people. Then you have the hardline shills who don't even want to play in reality and just throw bombs.Schlzm

All the "good" people got waivers. Leaving all of us "evil" people to pick up the bill.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

And since TommyGunz is now Doubting Thomas, I guess we have to link and show our work for everything. I'll point to the Charlotte Observer which ran this yesterday or the day before. Shows what is happening and what Matty and lots of others are trying to point out. I'm sorry if anything that shows the true costs of this are anti-ACA but we gotta start talking real numbers at some point.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html

some of the highlights...

Pete Spell is accustomed to annual premium increases for the individual health insurance plan he buys from Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina.

But this year’s notice gave him a jolt. Instead of a typical 4- to 8-percent increase, Blue Cross’ estimate for next year would raise his monthly premium two and a half times, from $127 to $325, for a similar policy.

“That was a bit of shell shock,” said Spell, a 31-year-old accountant who lives in Davidson. “My paycheck didn’t go up 200 percent.

“I’m a young, healthy male,” he said. “I basically have insurance for that unknown thing that could happen.”

-Does that sound similar to what Matty, myself, many others have been posting? It's real and it is happening so stop acting like it isn't.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html#storylink=cpy

Why didn't you quote this part?

When North Carolina officials decided not to set up a state insurance exchange, deferring instead to the federal government, they triggered a 3.5 percent service charge, tacked onto North Carolina’s insurance rates, to run the exchange.

Additionally, North Carolina officials opted not to expand Medicaid, the federal insurance program for the poor and disabled, and as a result, about 200,000 people who would have qualified for Medicaid will now qualify for insurance subsidies. Those people are widely expected to be in poorer health, prompting insurance companies to boost rates by an estimated 2 percent to compensate for the risk of insuring this population, said Mark Hall, a professor of law and public health at Wake Forest University.

The state’s decisions not to embrace the health care law likely dissuaded insurers from entering North Carolina’s market, inhibiting price competition, said Kerry Hall, spokeswoman for the N.C. Department of Insurance.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html#.UmbyG3Ckp6Q#storylink=cpy
So in an effort to score political points and "oppose Obamacare", NC elected officials (Pat McCroy and the morons in the state house) effectively drove up rates on their constituents.

And it's win-win for them, b/c they got to blast Obamacare, and now they'll get to blast the cost increases, knowing that only a small, small percentage will ever realize they helped drive those costs up.

And the Liberals in California did the same thing to those folks? You are now attacking the state of North Carolina? Let's just cut the state off from America like a bad boil, right? Pat McCroy single handedly drove up rates by 200% for the state of California? That would be like me blaming Obama ONLY for this mess. Do I really need to start my Nanci Pelosi rant...I gotta sit down, my chest is starting to hurt and I don't think my coverage is gonna cover me for self induced heart attacks.

 

[Schlzm]

Yeah yeah yeah, the numbers are all bad and stuff. But have you seen how much people pay for entertainment? This is probably going to be pretty cheap in comparison if we all take the time to sit back and laugh about it a little.

And you are bringing up an excellent point indirectly. The person who wasn't paying, now they pay $200 a month, that $200 was used before for things like entertainment. Now instead of going to the movies for $10-$15, they gotta stay home. Enough of that happens and suddenly we don't need all those folks at the movie theatre working so they cut back on staff or decrease hours for everyone there. It has a domino effect on things does it not?

Probably. But if they just take a moment to laugh about it, they've replaced the value of the movie at least. I'm not sure on the dominoes and all of that, but how amusingly bad this is does provide some replacement value for the money in and of itself.

Why would we possibly care whether jobs are created in the health care services industry or in the movie theater concession industry?

Serious question. While laughter IS the best medicine, are slippery slopes covered under the pre-existing condition clause or are they treated as something else? Maybe like accupuncture?Schlzm

If you want a serious answer, you might try posting a comprehensible question.

I'm sorry. It's hard to take people like MoP seriously on economic issues when they make comments that a show a fundamental lack of understanding of economics.

I'm sorry, but who are you?Schlzm

I'm Ramsey Hunt Experience.

Would it help if I signed all my posts?

Pleased to meet you sir/madam, and yes it would definately clear some things up.Schlzm

 

[DrJ]

What's even funnier that Obamacare itself is all of the people who the light seems to be going on for. Gee, a government program that purports to make things more affordable and yet does the exact opposite so the citizens are increasingly reliant on government help. It's almost like this hasn't actually happened before.

 

[tommyGunZ]

And since TommyGunz is now Doubting Thomas, I guess we have to link and show our work for everything. I'll point to the Charlotte Observer which ran this yesterday or the day before. Shows what is happening and what Matty and lots of others are trying to point out. I'm sorry if anything that shows the true costs of this are anti-ACA but we gotta start talking real numbers at some point.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html

some of the highlights...

Pete Spell is accustomed to annual premium increases for the individual health insurance plan he buys from Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina.

But this year’s notice gave him a jolt. Instead of a typical 4- to 8-percent increase, Blue Cross’ estimate for next year would raise his monthly premium two and a half times, from $127 to $325, for a similar policy.

“That was a bit of shell shock,” said Spell, a 31-year-old accountant who lives in Davidson. “My paycheck didn’t go up 200 percent.

“I’m a young, healthy male,” he said. “I basically have insurance for that unknown thing that could happen.”

-Does that sound similar to what Matty, myself, many others have been posting? It's real and it is happening so stop acting like it isn't.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html#storylink=cpy

Why didn't you quote this part?

When North Carolina officials decided not to set up a state insurance exchange, deferring instead to the federal government, they triggered a 3.5 percent service charge, tacked onto North Carolina’s insurance rates, to run the exchange.

Additionally, North Carolina officials opted not to expand Medicaid, the federal insurance program for the poor and disabled, and as a result, about 200,000 people who would have qualified for Medicaid will now qualify for insurance subsidies. Those people are widely expected to be in poorer health, prompting insurance companies to boost rates by an estimated 2 percent to compensate for the risk of insuring this population, said Mark Hall, a professor of law and public health at Wake Forest University.

The state’s decisions not to embrace the health care law likely dissuaded insurers from entering North Carolina’s market, inhibiting price competition, said Kerry Hall, spokeswoman for the N.C. Department of Insurance.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/20/4399545/charlotte-area-has-some-of-the.html#.UmbyG3Ckp6Q#storylink=cpy
So in an effort to score political points and "oppose Obamacare", NC elected officials (Pat McCroy and the morons in the state house) effectively drove up rates on their constituents.

And it's win-win for them, b/c they got to blast Obamacare, and now they'll get to blast the cost increases, knowing that only a small, small percentage will ever realize they helped drive those costs up.

And the Liberals in California did the same thing to those folks? You are now attacking the state of North Carolina? Let's just cut the sate off from America like a bad boil, right? Pat McCroy single handedly drove up rates by 200% for the state of California? That would be like me blaming Obama ONLY for this mess. Do I really need to start my Nanci Pelosi rant...I gotta sit down, my chest is starting to hurt and I don't think my coverage is gonna cover me for self induced heart attacks.

Rates in CA are not up 200%.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

If you want a serious answer, you might try posting a comprehensible question.

I'm sorry. It's hard to take people like MoP seriously on economic issues when they make comments that a show a fundamental lack of understanding of economics.

Stop acting like you are smarter than everyone, just makes your position weaker. What a lame argument to sit there and act all knowing like you're better than everyone.

I don't know you Ramsay but I thought you were just being funny, a proclamation about someone else's lack of understanding, it's the simplest way to try and get over on someone in here. I felt similar about TG, hell I have the GD insurance lic but I stop short of name calling or trying to act like I am smarter because deal with health insurance on a daily basis.

Can't wait to get out of this industry though as fast as possible. Maybe I can go back to Whole Foods and sell Swedish Fish on the candy aisle.

 

[Foosball God]

Just got a call from a client of mine who was able to do a few things on the website. She is attempting to get coverage for her son 20 year old son only for now, and he has a somewhat serious pre-ex, but still works and has a small income (subsidy eligible as apparently she no longer claims him on taxes)

The website was unable to determine her son's identity, because he has no credit history (he still lives at home, so has never really needed one). The person on the chat feature told her to contact Experian so he could "obtain a credit history". She apparently did contact them, and they had no idea what do to to "get him a credit history."

Wait, out of all the posts you've placed re: ACA, you don't know whether credit history plays a role or not?

Huh?

Do you know if a credit history is required in order apply for health care insurance?

I have no idea, I've never thought about it honestly. You wouldn't think so because everyone HAS TO have coverage, or be fined. Some people simply don't have a credit history, and apparently you need one in order to obtain coverage on the exchange (which again is the only way to obtain a subsidy). If you can't obtain coverage on the exchange because of not having a credit history, your only option would be to obtain coverage OFF exchange and pay the full rate.....or be fined.

Information about Experian’s role in the Health Insurance Marketplace

link to Experian

In order to contact Experian Verification Services, you must first go through the online application process for your appropriate (state or federal) Health Insurance Marketplace and attempt to verify your identity <snip> If you are still unsuccessful, you may wish to attempt online identity verification again, <snip> If you are still unable to pass identity verification, you will receive another reference code. You can choose to call Experian Verification Services again with your new code...

I love how the only answer no matter where you turn is "keep trying until it works!". The American public has been conditioned for instant gratification guys, just saying.Schlzm

Let's take the posted anecdote. The ACA system cannot verify the son's identity. The son's mother is instructed to contact Experian to go through manual verification. Experian publicizes this process on its public website. Its not a mystery. The son's mother calls Experian. And Experian employees don't know what she's talking about.

Now explain to me again. How is this a failure of the public sector? This is a case of private sector employees not knowing how to perform a job that their employer had contracted to provide to the government.

I mean, it's clear that the system architects contemplated that some people would be unable to be verified by a standard automated credit check. That's why they had a manual process in place.

It didn't sound like the mother called Experian. It sounds like she called the Exchange helpdesk which instead of telling her useful information erroneously told her that her son "has to get a credit history". Or maybe the helpdesk told her to go to the Experian site and she misinterpreted what they meant. Who can say?

 

[Keerock]

If you want a serious answer, you might try posting a comprehensible question.

I'm sorry. It's hard to take people like MoP seriously on economic issues when they make comments that a show a fundamental lack of understanding of economics.

Stop acting like you are smarter than everyone, just makes your position weaker. What a lame argument to sit there and act all knowing like you're better than everyone.

I don't know you Ramsay but I thought you were just being funny, a proclamation about someone else's lack of understanding, it's the simplest way to try and get over on someone in here. I felt similar about TG, hell I have the GD insurance lic but I stop short of name calling or trying to act like I am smarter because deal with health insurance on a daily basis.

Can't wait to get out of this industry though as fast as possible. Maybe I can go back to Whole Foods and sell Swedish Fish on the candy aisle.

FYI... Ramsay IS smarter than everyone. At least he was when he was "gayer".

 

[SacramentoBob]

If you want a serious answer, you might try posting a comprehensible question.

I'm sorry. It's hard to take people like MoP seriously on economic issues when they make comments that a show a fundamental lack of understanding of economics.

Stop acting like you are smarter than everyone, just makes your position weaker. What a lame argument to sit there and act all knowing like you're better than everyone.

I don't know you Ramsay but I thought you were just being funny, a proclamation about someone else's lack of understanding, it's the simplest way to try and get over on someone in here. I felt similar about TG, hell I have the GD insurance lic but I stop short of name calling or trying to act like I am smarter because deal with health insurance on a daily basis.

Can't wait to get out of this industry though as fast as possible. Maybe I can go back to Whole Foods and sell Swedish Fish on the candy aisle.

FYI... Ramsay IS smarter than everyone. At least he was when he was "gayer".

I reached my quota of positive votes for the day.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

If you want a serious answer, you might try posting a comprehensible question.

I'm sorry. It's hard to take people like MoP seriously on economic issues when they make comments that a show a fundamental lack of understanding of economics.

Stop acting like you are smarter than everyone, just makes your position weaker. What a lame argument to sit there and act all knowing like you're better than everyone.

I don't know you Ramsay but I thought you were just being funny, a proclamation about someone else's lack of understanding, it's the simplest way to try and get over on someone in here. I felt similar about TG, hell I have the GD insurance lic but I stop short of name calling or trying to act like I am smarter because deal with health insurance on a daily basis.

Can't wait to get out of this industry though as fast as possible. Maybe I can go back to Whole Foods and sell Swedish Fish on the candy aisle.

FYI... Ramsay IS smarter than everyone. At least he was when he was "gayer".

I'm not smarter than everyone. I am smarter than my cat.

The experience is kind of the same. When my cat runs into the sliding glass door because he sees me on my deck, I suppose I could try to take some time and explain to him the error of his ways. But I usually just laugh at him. I don't know if that hurts Otto's feelings, but he has the same remedy available to him as MoP. He can stop doing (or posting) stupid things.

 

[matttyl]

B/c you don't have any data MOP. You're just inventing a bunch of bull#### to scare people.

Some will pay more, some will pay less.

No, many (most) will pay a lot more so that some can have the option of paying anything at all. That's the only way this thing works. If there aren't enough people that decide to pay more, and opt to go without, this whole thing falls apart.

 

[Keerock]

B/c you don't have any data MOP. You're just inventing a bunch of bull#### to scare people.

Some will pay more, some will pay less.

No, many (most) will pay a lot more so that some can have the option of paying anything at all. That's the only way this thing works. If there aren't enough people that decide to pay more, and opt to go without, this whole thing falls apart.

 

[dallas]

HealthCare.gov pricing feature can be off the mark

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

HealthCare.gov pricing feature can be off the mark

So they will allow anonymous shopping and then estimate what the plans should cost and often times showing much cheaper prices than the actual plans. Wow. Is it too much to ask to put in the smoking question and birthdate question prior to calculating the plan prices?

 

[matttyl]

HealthCare.gov pricing feature can be off the mark

So in an effort to fix the website, they've made it worse? Sounds about right with the way things have been going. What a #######' mess.

 

[Black Box]

How are the most poor and vulnerable among us going to confirm their identity through a credit reporting agency when producing an ID to vote is too burdensome? And they're going to need the subsidy the most.

Sort of weird.

 

[TheIronSheik]

HealthCare.gov pricing feature can be off the mark

So in an effort to fix the website, they've made it worse? Sounds about right with the way things have been going. What a #######' mess.

Easy now. Sebelius has said it's too early to say if it's been a failure or a success. And she said that with a straight face.

 

[dallas]

HealthCare.gov pricing feature can be off the mark

So in an effort to fix the website, they've made it worse? Sounds about right with the way things have been going. What a #######' mess.

Easy now. Sebelius has said it's too early to say if it's been a failure or a success. And she said that with a straight face.

At this point they should just shut it down and delay everything. What is crazy is someone is actually making these decisions and thinks they are good ideas.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

B/c you don't have any data MOP. You're just inventing a bunch of bull#### to scare people.

Some will pay more, some will pay less.

No, many (most) will pay a lot more so that some can have the option of paying anything at all. That's the only way this thing works. If there aren't enough people that decide to pay more, and opt to go without, this whole thing falls apart.

I can't say it enough ways, Matty gets it and some folks are listening but I have a feeling since it is 1 out of 2 that have no health insurance that we have people in the FFA weighing in on a system they know very little about other than the far left press they are reading.

We need a new thread and poll, perhaps we have a super high number of folks with health insurance, would be interesting. I'll fire up the Mop-Mobile.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

B/c you don't have any data MOP. You're just inventing a bunch of bull#### to scare people.

Some will pay more, some will pay less.

No, many (most) will pay a lot more so that some can have the option of paying anything at all. That's the only way this thing works. If there aren't enough people that decide to pay more, and opt to go without, this whole thing falls apart.

Hey Kee, are you angry because you believe that post to be false? If so, can you share in what way so we can all learn? Or are you mad because you know that post is true and it pisses you off?

 

[Keerock]

B/c you don't have any data MOP. You're just inventing a bunch of bull#### to scare people.

Some will pay more, some will pay less.

No, many (most) will pay a lot more so that some can have the option of paying anything at all. That's the only way this thing works. If there aren't enough people that decide to pay more, and opt to go without, this whole thing falls apart.

Hey Kee, are you angry because you believe that post to be false? If so, can you share in what way so we can all learn? Or are you mad because you know that post is true and it pisses you off?

I'm mad because it's true... I will end up paying a lot more so some people can get away with paying little-to-none.