Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Obamacare: Obama just straight up lied to you, in your face (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter tommyboy
- Start date
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Survey finds state policies have critical impact on ACA applications, enrollment
A new survey by researchers at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health finds that the variable approaches states have taken to implementing the Affordable Care Act (ACA) have had major effects on whether low-income adults are aware of the law, whether they have applied and obtained coverage, and whether or not they think the law has helped them.
:
:
Surprisingly, more than half of low-income adults in the study said they had heard little or nothing about the law’s new coverage options.
well not really.
A new survey by researchers at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health finds that the variable approaches states have taken to implementing the Affordable Care Act (ACA) have had major effects on whether low-income adults are aware of the law, whether they have applied and obtained coverage, and whether or not they think the law has helped them.
:
:
Surprisingly, more than half of low-income adults in the study said they had heard little or nothing about the law’s new coverage options.
well not really.
The Commish
Footballguy
Whatever happened to the "insurance guy"? I am guessing this is what matttyl is, but it seems like there aren't nearly enough in his profession anymore. I remember the days when our insurance guy would come to our house and go over our needs with my parents to make sure we had what we needed and were covered appropriately. I couldn't tell you where I'd have to go to find someone like that in my town today. No idea.
The Commish
Footballguy
BassNBrew
Footballguy
100% expect status quo. SCOTUS has moved beyond legal decisions into political decisions. They won't rock the boat.
matttyl
Footballguy
Much of that issue now comes in where people see different people for different things. Years ago one agent could help you with your auto, home, life, health, and whatever else you needed. My agency still does this, but with a few different agents doing different things. More-so now, though, people will deal with different agencies and different carriers for each of their products. They might have their homeowners with Farmers, their auto with State Farm, their life with MetLife and their health with BCBS - each with a different agent.
matttyl
Footballguy
That's the (likely) trillion dollar question right now. Given the huge turmoil that a "strike down decision" will bring on (after the huge turmoil that the ACA brought onto the individual market just last year), I'm really hoping they don't.
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
As much as I want to disagree with this, I can't. I just don't see the SC ruling them illegal, unfortunately. Declaring them illegal is the RIGHT decision, but Roberts showed he wasn't interested in making the right decision but a political one instead.
Obama and the left got to Roberts last time and he caved. They're putting the same full-court press on him this time too and I don't see how he holds up since he fell so easily last time.
matttyl
Footballguy
I learn something new every day about this stuff. Didn't put this together till now....
If the SCOTUS strikes down subsidies, it will also affect the employer mandate to provide health insurance for employees or pay a fine — the penalty only applies if the employee receives a subsidy. If people are no longer eligible for subsidies, then employers won’t have to pay penalties.
If the SCOTUS strikes down subsidies, it will also affect the employer mandate to provide health insurance for employees or pay a fine — the penalty only applies if the employee receives a subsidy. If people are no longer eligible for subsidies, then employers won’t have to pay penalties.
Loan Sharks
Not a Wolf
To sum it up americans are cheap, people think a 5 minute google is good enough to make major financial decisions and agents cost money.
Think the difference between Progressive and State Farm. Progressive is cheap has far lower staff levels so help is limited. State Farm has agents that will explain the contract and help you make good decisions and more staff to help after a loss, but you get what you pay for and it will cost more.
There are way more Keystone Light insurance companies than Guinness these days.
Last edited by a moderator:
matttyl
Footballguy
Yes and no. The Keystone Lights are just much bigger. The Guinness companies, and there are many of them, typically don't have the huge customer base.
Last edited by a moderator:
matttyl
Footballguy
Well, Assurant couldn't find a buy for it's individual health insurance business - they were only able to sell off parts of their small group and supplemental plan segments. Moreover the will stop selling individual major medical plans in 5 days (mid year). That's crazy that a carrier can leave the market mid year. Sucks for people who have "qualifying events" the rest of this year, they'll have one less option of carriers to pick from.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
That subset of $46 billion or so over ten years is really the entire reason for the action. At least originally.
matttyl
Footballguy
Glad to see that they vetted the people they hired to help enroll people.
This wasn't the first time something like this happened, and it won't be the last.
This wasn't the first time something like this happened, and it won't be the last.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
This is really pointless. If you spend any time with gov't employees, you know this kind of stuff is gonna happen. I'd go as far as saying I'm surprised more of this sort of stuff hasn't been discovered.
matttyl
Footballguy
Interesting - if the SCOTUS strikes down subsidies, most Americans want the mandates in the coverage to go away thus making the coverage cheaper. Said in another way, they'd want the market to go back to the way it was prior to the ACA.
Oh, and Ohio's ACA expansion is already $1B over budget and growing.
Oh, and Ohio's ACA expansion is already $1B over budget and growing.
Just Win Baby
Footballguy
Dr Oadi
Footballguy
looking at these deductibles people are getting they are going to have to get supplemental insurance for them.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
From a letter I received, "On January 29, 2015, Anthem, Inc discovered that cyber attackers executed a sophisticated attack to gain unauthorized access to Anthem's IT system and obtained personal information relating to consumers who were or are currently covered by Anthem or other independent BCBS plans that work with Anthem. ….suspicious activity may have occurred over the course of several weeks...
Gee Spot
Footballguy
Jamny recommended I post this here (thanks Jamny!)
My father recently had trouble getting out of bed and his left leg started dragging when he walked so he went to the Dr. The diagnosis is stage 4 lung cancer along with two tumors in his brain.
He is 71 and has been unemployed and collecting SS for the last 3 or so years. He has Medicare Part A which covers hospital visits but did not sign up for Medicare Part B which covers the treatments they are recommending for him (first, cyberknife for the brain tumors then chemo or other drugs to 'maintain' the lung cancer). He didn't sign up for Medicare Part B because he couldn't/wouldn't pay the premiums and didn't tell my brother or me so he has no coverage for the treatments.
Is there any way to get him on Medicare Part B immediately? I read the Medicare web site and the earliest he could sign up would be next January and then benefits wouldn't kick in for another six months or so and I don't think he has that kind of time.
The FFA has always been a great resource so I would appreciate any advice or recommendations from anyone that may have had a similar experience or has expertise in this area.
I know he put himself in this situation but I'm just trying to help my dad and it feels kind of hopeless right now.....
My father recently had trouble getting out of bed and his left leg started dragging when he walked so he went to the Dr. The diagnosis is stage 4 lung cancer along with two tumors in his brain.
He is 71 and has been unemployed and collecting SS for the last 3 or so years. He has Medicare Part A which covers hospital visits but did not sign up for Medicare Part B which covers the treatments they are recommending for him (first, cyberknife for the brain tumors then chemo or other drugs to 'maintain' the lung cancer). He didn't sign up for Medicare Part B because he couldn't/wouldn't pay the premiums and didn't tell my brother or me so he has no coverage for the treatments.
Is there any way to get him on Medicare Part B immediately? I read the Medicare web site and the earliest he could sign up would be next January and then benefits wouldn't kick in for another six months or so and I don't think he has that kind of time.
The FFA has always been a great resource so I would appreciate any advice or recommendations from anyone that may have had a similar experience or has expertise in this area.
I know he put himself in this situation but I'm just trying to help my dad and it feels kind of hopeless right now.....
matttyl
Footballguy
I'm very sorry for your situation. The answer, unfortunately, is no. The earliest he could sign up would be what you said above. The only caveat to this, which I doubt would/could apply is if he gets hired by an employer with over 20 people, and then loses that coverage. That would be a "qualifying event" in which to enroll in part B now, I believe. You may want to look into Medicaid in your state.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is necessarily true since what it says is self-contradictory.
Both sides think this is an easy case that they should obviously win because it's so obvious. Both sides are wrong.
The Commish
Footballguy
Can he not just go sign up for an insurance plan on healthcare.gov?
By the way, why did they choose healthcare.gov as the domain? Why not federalinsurance.gov or some such?
Gee Spot
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
Audit only looking at subsidies paid from January to April of 2014 (when the total enrollment on the exchange was relatively small) found $2.8 billion in payments to carriers as "unverified". Yup, nearly $3b unaccounted for in the first 4 months of the exchanges alone. But what's a few billion here and there.....?
The Commish
Footballguy
We talked about technical checks and balances really early in this thread. I'm as surprised today as I was then that this is the case. It's been a long standing policy in Washington to "not worry too much" about tracking components of programs.
Foosball God
Foos
The Financial Management portion of the exchange wasn't really even going by that point. There are much better controls in place now, though that doesn't do anything about the past I realize.
matttyl
Footballguy
Thought I would bump this thread as there is talk that the SCOTUS might make their decision in the next few days. I thought it wouldn't be till the end of the month, but I think I heard on "Good morning America" this morning that it could happen today.
Anyway, a good read on what it all means is here.
I think the biggest problem we're facing it right in the article, but it's not about these exchanges: "Earlier this year, Joe, 64, developed cardiac problems during a routine stress test. He was rushed to the hospital, where his overnight stay exceeded $35,000." The cost of care, not the cost of insurance, has always been the issue.
Anyway, a good read on what it all means is here.
I think the biggest problem we're facing it right in the article, but it's not about these exchanges: "Earlier this year, Joe, 64, developed cardiac problems during a routine stress test. He was rushed to the hospital, where his overnight stay exceeded $35,000." The cost of care, not the cost of insurance, has always been the issue.
Blind Tiger
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
And New York wonders why pre-ACA they had the highest average cost of insurance......
New York is first state to allow pregnant women to sign up for Obamacare outside enrollment period
So you didn't follow the rules (technically, the law) when you had the chance, but that's ok, we'll still take care of you. What's next? Will an auto accident be a "life event"?!
New York is first state to allow pregnant women to sign up for Obamacare outside enrollment period
So you didn't follow the rules (technically, the law) when you had the chance, but that's ok, we'll still take care of you. What's next? Will an auto accident be a "life event"?!
Last edited by a moderator:
Sand
Footballguy
This isn't new - Obama has completely forgotten that there are three equal branches of government. He pitched a hissy fit when Netanyahu came to speak to Congress.
Sand
Footballguy
Honestly I can't see how this shouldn't be 9-0. It is as clear as anything I've seen. The law was clear. There was overwhelming evidence it was constructed that way on purpose. I don't see how SCOTUS can then turn around and say the law really doesn't say what it says nor what it was meant to say.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
The parsing of the subject in this thread has filled me with enough despair that I simply haven't been able to participate. Instead, would anyone let me know if, in 387 pages, anyone has brought up the question of why American business isn't in favor of single payer health care and getting out of this responsibility? Maybe it is and it's just keeping it on the Q-T, for all I know.
Thanks in advance and may the Lord's blessings go with you all.
Thanks in advance and may the Lord's blessings go with you all.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
I assume the 140 votes against were tea party Republicans who are upset that this would add to the budget deficit?ETA: actually, this adds 26 billion to the budget deficit over the next decade. http://www.cbpp.org/research/health/excise-tax-on-medical-devices-should-not-be-repealedIn a 280 to 140 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the Protect Medical Innovation Act (HR 160), which would repeal the 2.3% medical device excise tax.
In summary, the next time Tea Party Republicans talk about the deficit, remember that they only care about spending when it goes to poor people and minorities. Billion dollar giveaways to lucrative industries like the medical device business are A okay.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stinger Ray
Footballguy
I assume the 140 votes against were tea party Republicans who are upset that this would add to the budget deficit?ETA: actually, this adds 26 billion to the budget deficit over the next decade. http://www.cbpp.org/research/health/excise-tax-on-medical-devices-should-not-be-repealedIn a 280 to 140 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the Protect Medical Innovation Act (HR 160), which would repeal the 2.3% medical device excise tax.
In summary, the next time Tea Party Republicans talk about the deficit, remember that they only care about spending when it goes to poor people and minorities. Billion dollar giveaways to lucrative industries like the medical device business are A okay.
matuski
Footballguy
What in the hell are you babbling about?I assume the 140 votes against were tea party Republicans who are upset that this would add to the budget deficit?ETA: actually, this adds 26 billion to the budget deficit over the next decade. http://www.cbpp.org/research/health/excise-tax-on-medical-devices-should-not-be-repealedIn a 280 to 140 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the Protect Medical Innovation Act (HR 160), which would repeal the 2.3% medical device excise tax.
In summary, the next time Tea Party Republicans talk about the deficit, remember that they only care about spending when it goes to poor people and minorities. Billion dollar giveaways to lucrative industries like the medical device business are A okay.
matttyl
Footballguy
So first Rx companies got off scot free, now medical device companies will as well. But not insurance companies....oh no. They can be taxed, and were tens of billions last year alone - and they passed it right onto the consumers.In a 280 to 140 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the Protect Medical Innovation Act (HR 160), which would repeal the 2.3% medical device excise tax.
matuski
Footballguy
Yes.. I feel terrible for the insurance companies. They always get the short end of the stick amiright?So first Rx companies got off scot free, now medical device companies will as well. But not insurance companies....oh no. They can be taxed, and were tens of billions last year alone - and they passed it right onto the consumers.In a 280 to 140 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the Protect Medical Innovation Act (HR 160), which would repeal the 2.3% medical device excise tax.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Oops facts: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/obamacare-repeal-congressional-budget-office-deficit-119228.html?ml=po
Repealing the ACA would add $353B to the budget deficit Over the next decade.
Repealing the ACA would add $353B to the budget deficit Over the next decade.
matttyl
Footballguy
I'm not saying they do or they don't. It's obvious that any tax levied on the Rx company, the medical device company, or the insurance company was just going to be passed onto the consumer. This is exactly what happened with the insurance companies passing their additional cost right onto the insured (they didn't hide it at all), and it was tens of billions last year alone. The difference, to me, is that Rx companies make significantly more than the insurance companies. I believe the stat is that the top 3 or 4 or 5 insurance companies combined last year (or the year before, I don't recall) didn't make as much as the top Rx manufacturer.Yes.. I feel terrible for the insurance companies. They always get the short end of the stick amiright?So first Rx companies got off scot free, now medical device companies will as well. But not insurance companies....oh no. They can be taxed, and were tens of billions last year alone - and they passed it right onto the consumers.In a 280 to 140 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the Protect Medical Innovation Act (HR 160), which would repeal the 2.3% medical device excise tax.
matttyl
Footballguy
Or $137B. And in fact lower the budget deficit in the first few years - enough time to enact meaningful working legislation.
"But repealing the law's spending cuts and tax increases would add $137 billion to the federal deficit over the coming decade, CBO said in the report issued Friday, even though almost $1.7 trillion in coverage costs would disappear. Repeal would reduce deficits in the first few years but increase them steadily as time goes on."
The 140 votes were all Democrats.I assume the 140 votes against were tea party Republicans who are upset that this would add to the budget deficit?ETA: actually, this adds 26 billion to the budget deficit over the next decade. http://www.cbpp.org/research/health/excise-tax-on-medical-devices-should-not-be-repealedIn a 280 to 140 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the Protect Medical Innovation Act (HR 160), which would repeal the 2.3% medical device excise tax.
In summary, the next time Tea Party Republicans talk about the deficit, remember that they only care about spending when it goes to poor people and minorities. Billion dollar giveaways to lucrative industries like the medical device business are A okay.
Just Win Baby
Footballguy
Oops, facts: FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 375.The 140 votes were all Democrats.I assume the 140 votes against were tea party Republicans who are upset that this would add to the budget deficit?ETA: actually, this adds 26 billion to the budget deficit over the next decade. http://www.cbpp.org/research/health/excise-tax-on-medical-devices-should-not-be-repealedIn a 280 to 140 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed the Protect Medical Innovation Act (HR 160), which would repeal the 2.3% medical device excise tax.
In summary, the next time Tea Party Republicans talk about the deficit, remember that they only care about spending when it goes to poor people and minorities. Billion dollar giveaways to lucrative industries like the medical device business are A okay.
Similar threads
