Health Care changes

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 1 - 1033 of total 1033 in this topic
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Original Post - Oct 12, 2013 - 08:11am PT
Was up?
dirtbag

climber
Oct 12, 2013 - 09:02am PT
really?
5.samadhi

climber
Oct 12, 2013 - 09:05am PT
the government is providing a "marketplace" to monitor prices and force health insurance companies to reduce their premiums based on each individual's income.
5.samadhi

climber
Oct 12, 2013 - 09:35am PT
yeah because here in the USA we pay so much more taxes already than other countries a 2.5-7.5% tax on our income for healthcare is unjust :D :D :D
Sierra Ledge Rat

Mountain climber
Old and Broken Down in Appalachia
Oct 12, 2013 - 09:48am PT
The health care insurance companies earned over $12 billion dollars in profits.

They make profits by denying payments and cancelling the insurance of sick people.

With that $12 billion they bought the Republican party and launched a smear campaign to make people think that Obamacare is something that it's not.

Getting everyone into the insurance pool is the most fiscally-responsible strategy for our nation. How can the Republicans object to fiscal responsibility?

Don't want to pay for someone else's healthcare? Guess what genius - you already are. You're paying for other people's health care through a system that is convoluted, inefficient and unfair that does nothing but keep sick people sick, keeps poor people from getting care until they're almost dead, and makes insurance company CEOs rich.

I am a healthy man in my 50s and a small business owner, but I cannot get health insurance at any price. Me, and millions of other like me, are one accident or one major illness away from financial destitution and bankruptcy. How fiscally responsible is that policy? Obamacare will end this travesty.

Reeotch

Trad climber
4 Corners Area
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:29am PT
In America, which is the dead last developed country to officially establish universal health care, the new health law tries to make every part of the system profitable – for doctors, hospitals, insurers, pharmaceutical companies, medical equipment manufacturers, etc.

And, where are all these profits going to come from? When we allow a for-profit entities into the mix, how is that supposed to make things more affordable? Isn't this like just taking our tax money and giving it to some absurdly rich CEO. That money is not going to health care, its going in to private bank accounts.

But, allowing the government to administer the healthcare system, well that's socialism! What do you call Obamacare? Profitism?
Sierra Ledge Rat

Mountain climber
Old and Broken Down in Appalachia
Oct 13, 2013 - 01:13pm PT
And, where are all these profits going to come from? When we allow a for-profit entities into the mix, how is that supposed to make things more affordable? Isn't this like just taking our tax money and giving it to some absurdly rich CEO. That money is not going to health care, its going in to private bank accounts.

Good question.

If you buy into American capitalism, then the partly-line answer is this: When incentivized, private companies can do a better job than government at providing services at an overall lower cost. The incentive is a carrot of guaranteed profits. So it's a win-win situation with people getting better services at an overall lower cost, and the companies providing the services get to become rich.

However, I can tell you from experience (I work in the healthcare field) that capitalism and business models do not work in healthcare. The primary reason is the "Law of Unintended Consequences." Capitalism and business models generate a whole host so extremely harmful motivations that are destroying healthcare.

Example of an extremely harmful motivation? Drug addicts can go to any ER and demand fist-fulls of narcotics, and because they're "customers" like anyone else they walk out with fist fulls of narcotics. If the doctor doesn't give the "customer" what they want, the hospital CEO (with an MBA) terminates the doctor's hospital privileges due to "poor customer service." There thousands and thousands of other examples that clearly show that healthcare is not, and should not be, business. Times are changing.

What worked in the past isn't working anymore, and the business model will certainly lead to the downfall of healthcare. So many people's brains are so entrenched in the idea of capitalism that they are going to ride the capitalism train to hell. They won't even realize their mistakes until they hear Satan himself hollering "Last stop! Please disembark!"










couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 13, 2013 - 09:01pm PT



Dirtbag said:
"really? '

Really.



What am I suppose to be doing?




Outside

Trad climber
Truckee
Oct 13, 2013 - 09:31pm PT
Seems to me everyone needs to have insurance , just like for cars, the insured are now paying for the un-insured.
My insurance policy has gone down 15% with Obc.
It's about time !
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Oct 14, 2013 - 12:05am PT
Well my family policy went up 250% so Obamacare is the only option. Obviously the insurance company's way of ditching my family. Looks like I will pay about $7200 more per year and my deducible will go from $2500 to $5000.

So...$10K more per year for the same care ( hopefully). That is approx. 10K that I will not be spending in my community. If my small business does not grow this year, I will likely have to lay off an employee. We will see....

Good times.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 14, 2013 - 11:35am PT




So, if you have insurance but haven't registered on the exchanges, when tax time comes, are you paying the penalty because you didn't register?




HermitMaster

Social climber
my abode
Oct 14, 2013 - 12:55pm PT
I just signed up my inflatable sheep and got the "Clinton Discount"
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Oct 14, 2013 - 12:55pm PT
Unkown as to why a male may need maternity leave- or pediatric needs..

that's quite a stretch even for you ron.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Oct 14, 2013 - 01:03pm PT
too clever to be RJocks or LEB. Not abrasive enough to be Fatty or Coz...

definitely a first time poster just wanting to discuss health care on a climbing website..happens everyday...
Brandon-

climber
The Granite State.
Oct 14, 2013 - 03:05pm PT
Yeah, it sucks that more people are going to have health care soon.

How dare we? We are going to stifle health care providers main concern. Profits.

That's un American!
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Oct 14, 2013 - 03:42pm PT
No, you wouldn't've caved by now!
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Oct 14, 2013 - 05:45pm PT
keep it going ron!

which state offers the best health care product/package?
HermitMaster

Social climber
my abode
Oct 14, 2013 - 06:13pm PT
yahhhh exactly what a 55 yr old fixed single male needs,,, maternity coverage....FOR HIMSELF..

Ron's discussion seems entirely reasonable......

Why should people be forced to pay for overpriced insurance they will never use?




rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Oct 14, 2013 - 06:16pm PT
What happens if dumb f*#k Ron gets knocked up..? He won't be dissin the ACA then...Will he..?
HermitMaster

Social climber
my abode
Oct 14, 2013 - 06:22pm PT
And once we get rid of the repub party, we'll have it.

Obamacare was won without a single Republican vote. Exactly what the hell are you talking about?

More importantly: Obama didn't give us Universal Healthcare. He gave us a healthcare system where each and every American is expected to purchase over priced and unneeded insurance from private companies.

But, you keep pretending, Smudge.

LOL!!!!!
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 14, 2013 - 10:47pm PT
Anyone read it yet?



Vol. 78 Friday,
No. 169 August 30, 2013
Part VI
Department of Health and Human Services
45 CFR Parts 147, 153, 155, et al.
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Program Integrity: Exchange,
SHOP, and Eligibility Appeals; Final Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 Aug 29, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\30AUR3.SGM 30AUR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
54070
Federal Register
/ Vol. 78, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
1
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act;
Establishment of Exchanges and Qualified Health
Plans; Exchange Standards for Employers, 77 FR
18310 (March 27, 2012).
2
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act;
Standards Related to Reinsurance, Risk Corridors
and Risk Adjustment, 77 FR 17220 (March 23,
2012).
3
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; HHS
Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters for 2014
and Amendments to the HHS Notice of Benefit and
Payment Parameters for 2014, 78 FR 15410 and
15541 (Mar. 11, 2013).
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
45 CFR Parts 147, 153, 155, and 156
[CMS–9957–F]
RIN 0938–AR82
Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act; Program Integrity: Exchange,
SHOP, and Eligibility Appeals
AGENCY
:
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION
:
Final rule.
SUMMARY
:
This final rule implements
provisions of the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act and the Health Care
and Education Reconciliation Act of
2010 (collectively referred to as the
Affordable Care Act). Specifically, this
final rule outlines Exchange standards
with respect to eligibility appeals,
agents and brokers, privacy and
security, issuer direct enrollment, and
the handling of consumer cases. It also
sets forth standards with respect to a
State’s operation of the Exchange and
Small Business Health Options Program
(SHOP). It generally is finalizing
previously proposed policies without
change.
DATES
:
These regulations are effective
on September 30, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
Leigha Basini at (301) 492–4380, or
Noah Isserman at (301) 492–4401 for
general information and matters relating
to parts 155 and 156.
Seth Schneer at (301) 492–4405 for
matters relating to the SHOP.
Jacob Ackerman at (301) 492–4179 for
matters relating to part 147.
Jaya Ghildiyal at (301) 492–5149 for
matters relating to part 153.
Christine Hammer at (301) 492–4431
for matters relating to part 155 subpart
F.
Paul Tibbits at (301) 492–4229 for
matters relating to part 156, subpart K.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
Electronic Access
This
Federal Register
document is
also available from the
Federal Register
online database through
Federal Digital
System (FDsys),
a service of the U.S.
Government Printing Office. This
database can be accessed via the
internet at
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys
.
Acronyms and Short Forms
Because of the many organizations
and terms to which we refer by acronym
in this proposed rule, we are listing
these acronyms and their corresponding
terms in alphabetical order below:
Affordable Care Act The Affordable Care
Act (which is the collective term for the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
(Pub. L. 111–148) and the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Pub.
L. 111–152))
AV Actuarial Value
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CHIP Children’s Health Insurance Program
CMP Civil Money Penalty
CMS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
DOI State Department of Insurance
DOL U.S. Department of Labor
EFT Electronic Funds Transfer
EHB Essential Health Benefits
FEHB Federal Employees Health Benefits
FFE Federally-facilitated Exchange
FFE API Federally-facilitated Exchange
Application Programming Interface
FF–SHOP Federally-Facilitated Small
Business Health Options Program
GAO United States Government
Accountability Office
GLBA Gramm Leach Bliley Act
HHS U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services
HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–
191, as amended) and its implementing
regulations
IRS Internal Revenue Service
LEP Limited English Proficiency
MAGI Modified Adjusted Gross Income
MLR Medical Loss Ratio
NAIC National Association of Insurance
Commissioners
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PCIP Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan
PHI Protected Health Information
PHS Act Public Health Service Act
PII Personally Identifiable Information
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
QHP Qualified Health Plan
SHOP Small Business Health Options
Program
The Code Internal Revenue Code of 1986
TIN Taxpayer Identification Number
Executive Summary
Starting on January 1, 2014, qualified
individuals and qualified employees
will be able to be covered by private
health insurance coverage through
competitive marketplaces called
Affordable Insurance Exchanges, or
‘‘Exchanges’’ (also called Health
Insurance Marketplaces). This rule sets
forth standards for eligibility appeals,
verification of eligibility for minimum
essential coverage, and treatment of
incomplete applications. It also
establishes additional consumer
protections regarding privacy and
security; clarifies the role of agents,
brokers, and issuer application assisters
in assisting consumers with obtaining
Exchange coverage; provides for the
handling consumer cases; and
establishes non-discrimination
standards for methods of premium
payment. Finally, it sets forth provisions
regarding a State’s operation of the
SHOP.
Although many of the provisions in
this rule will become effective by
October 1, 2013, we do not believe that
affected parties will have difficulty
complying with the provisions by their
effective dates, because the standards
are based on existing standards
currently in effect in the private health
insurance market, were previously
addressed in the Exchange Blueprint
process, discussed in agency-issued sub-
regulatory guidance, or discussed in the
preambles to the Exchange
Establishment Rule,
1
Premium
Stabilization Rule,
2
or the HHS Notice
of Benefit and Payment Parameters for
2014.
3
In addition to comments on the
substance of the provisions we are now
finalizing, we sought input on ways to
implement the proposed policies to
minimize burden.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Legislative Overview
B. Stakeholder Consultation and Input
II. Provisions of the Proposed Regulations
and Analysis of and Responses to Public
Comments
A. Part 147—Health Insurance Reform
Requirements for the Group and
Individual Health Insurance Markets
1. Fair Health Insurance Premiums
B. Part 153—Standards Related to
Reinsurance, Risk Corridors, and Risk
Adjustment Under the Affordable Care
Act
1. Subpart F— Health Insurance Issuer
Standards Related to the Risk Corridors
Program
C. Part 155—Exchange Establishment
Standards and Other Related Standards
Under the Affordable Care Act
1. Subpart A—General Provisions
2. Subpart B—General Standards Related to
the Establishment of an Exchange
3. Subpart C—General Functions of an
Exchange
4. Subpart D—Exchange Functions in the
Individual Market: Eligibility
Determinations for Exchange
Participation and Insurance Affordability
Programs
5. Subpart E—Exchange Functions in the
Individual Market: Enrollment in
Qualified Health Plans
6. Subpart F—Appeals of Eligibility
Determinations for Exchange
Participation and Insurance Affordability
Programs
VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 Aug 29, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\30AUR3.SGM 30AUR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
54071
Federal Register
/ Vol. 78, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
4
Section 1321(c) of the Affordable Care Act
erroneously cites to section 2736(b) of the PHS Act
instead of 2723(b) of the PHS Act. This was clearly
a typographical error, and we have interpreted
section 1321(c) of the Affordable Care Act to
incorporate section 2723(b) of the PHS Act.
7. Subpart H—Exchange Functions: Small
Business Health Options Program
(SHOP)
D. Part 156—Health Insurance Issuer
Standards Under the Affordable Care
Act, Including Standards Related to
Exchanges
1. Subpart A—General Provisions
2. Subpart C—Qualified Health Plan
Minimum Certification Standards
3. Subpart D—Federally-facilitated
Exchange Qualified Health Plan Issuer
Standards
4. Subpart I—Enforcement Remedies in
Federally-facilitated Exchanges
5. Subpart K—Cases Forwarded to
Qualified Health Plans and Qualified
Health Plan Issuers in Federally-
facilitated Exchanges by HHS
6. Subpart M—Qualified Health Plan Issuer
Responsibilities
III. Collection of Information Requirements
IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis
V. Regulations text
I. Background
A. Legislative Overview
The Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act (Pub. L. 111–148) was enacted
on March 23, 2010. The Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act of 2010
(Pub. L. 111–152), which amended and
revised several provisions of the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act, was
enacted on March 30, 2010. In this final
rule, we refer to the two statutes
collectively as the ‘‘Affordable Care
Act.’’
Subtitles A and C of Title I of the
Affordable Care Act reorganized,
amended, and added to the provisions
of Title XXVII of the Public Health
Service Act (PHS Act) relating to health
insurance issuers in the group and
individual markets and to group health
plans that are non-Federal governmental
plans. As relevant here, section 2701 of
the PHS Act (fair health insurance
premiums) provides that the premium
rate charged by a health insurance
issuer for non-grandfathered health
insurance coverage in the individual or
small group market may vary with
respect to a particular plan or coverage
only based on family size, rating area,
age (within a ratio of 3:1 for adults), and
tobacco use (within a ratio of 1.5:1).
Starting on October 1, 2013 for
coverage starting as soon as January 1,
2014, qualified individuals and
qualified employers will be able to
enroll in qualified health plans
(QHPs)—private health insurance that
has been certified as meeting certain
standards—through competitive
marketplaces called Exchanges or
Health Insurance Marketplaces. The
Departments of Health and Human
Services, Labor, and the Treasury have
been working in close coordination to
release guidance related to QHPs and
Exchanges in several phases. The word
‘‘Exchanges’’ refers to both State
Exchanges, also called State-based
Exchanges, and Federally-facilitated
Exchanges (FFEs). In this final rule, we
use the terms ‘‘State Exchange’’ or
‘‘FFE’’ when we are referring to a
particular type of Exchange. When we
refer to ‘‘FFEs,’’ we are also referring to
State Partnership Exchanges, which are
a form of FFE.
In the proposed rule, we encouraged
State flexibility. Sections 1311(b) and
1321(b) of the Affordable Care Act
provide that each State has the
opportunity to establish an Exchange.
Section 1311(b)(1) gives each State the
opportunity to establish an Exchange
that both facilitates the purchase of
QHPs and provides for the
establishment of a Small Business
Health Options Program (SHOP) that
will help qualified employers enroll
their qualified employees in QHPs.
Section 1311(b)(2) contemplates the
separate operation of the individual
market Exchange and the SHOP under
different governance and administrative
structures, permitting the individual
market Exchange and SHOP to be
merged if States have adequate
resources to assist both populations
(individual and small employers).
Section 1321(a) of the Affordable Care
Act provides general authority for the
Secretary of Health and Human Services
(referred to throughout this rule as the
Secretary) to establish standards and
regulations to implement the statutory
requirements related to Exchanges,
QHPs, and other components of Title I
of the Affordable Care Act.
Section 1321(c)(1) requires the
Secretary to establish and operate an
FFE within States that either: do not
elect to establish an Exchange or, as
determined by the Secretary, will not
have any required Exchange operational
by January 1, 2014.
Section 1321(c)(2) of the Affordable
Care Act authorizes the Secretary to
enforce the Exchange standards using
civil money penalties (CMPs) on the
same basis as detailed in section 2723(b)
of the PHS Act.
4
Section 2723(b) of the
PHS Act authorizes the Secretary to
impose CMPs as a means of enforcing
the individual and group market
reforms contained in Title XXVII, Part A
of the PHS Act when a State fails to
substantially enforce these provisions,
as determined by the Secretary.
Section 1311(d)(4)(A) of the
Affordable Care Act directs that each
Exchange must implement procedures
for the certification, recertification, and
decertification of health plans as QHPs,
consistent with guidelines developed by
the Secretary.
Section 1312(c) of the Affordable Care
Act directs a health insurance issuer to
consider all enrollees in all health plans
(other than grandfathered health plans)
offered by such issuer to be members of
a single risk pool for each of its
individual and small group markets.
Section 1312(c) of the Affordable Care
Act also gives States the option to merge
the individual and small group markets
within the State into a single risk pool.
Section 1312(e) of the Affordable Care
Act directs the Secretary to establish
procedures under which a State may
permit agents and brokers to enroll
qualified individuals and qualified
employers in QHPs through an
Exchange, and to assist individuals in
applying for advance payments of the
premium tax credit and cost-sharing
reductions.
Section 1313 of the Affordable Care
Act, combined with section 1321 of the
Affordable Care Act, provides the
Secretary with the authority to oversee
the financial integrity, compliance with
HHS standards, and efficient and non-
discriminatory administration of State
Exchange activities. Section
1313(a)(6)(A) of the Affordable Care Act
specifies that payments made by,
through, or in connection with an
Exchange are subject to the False Claims
Act (31 U.S.C. 3729, et seq.) if those
payments include any Federal funds.
Under section 1411 of the Affordable
Care Act, the Secretary is directed to
establish a program for determining
whether an individual meets the
eligibility standards for Exchange
participation, advance payments of the
premium tax credit, cost-sharing
reductions, and exemptions from the
shared responsibility payment under
section 5000A of the Code.
Section 1411(g) of the Affordable Care
Act specifies that information provided
by an applicant or received from a
Federal agency may be used only for the
purpose of, and to the extent necessary
in, ensuring the efficient operation of
the Exchange, including for the purpose
of verifying the eligibility of an
individual to enroll through an
Exchange, to claim a premium tax credit
or cost-sharing reduction, or for
verifying the amount of the tax credit or
reduction.
Section 1411(h) of the Affordable Care
Act sets forth civil penalties that any
person may be subject to if he or she
fails to provide correct information or
VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 Aug 29, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\30AUR3.SGM 30AUR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
54072
Federal Register
/ Vol. 78, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
5
Questions and Answers Related to Health
Insurance Market Reforms (April 26, 2013).
Available at:
http://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Resources/
Fact-Sheets-and-FAQs/qa
_
hmr.html
.
knowingly and willfully provides false
or fraudulent information under section
1411(b), or improperly uses or discloses
information provided by an applicant or
another Federal agency under section
1411(b), (c), (d), or (e).
Sections 1412 and 1413 of the
Affordable Care Act and section 1943 of
the Social Security Act (the Act), as
added by section 2201 of the Affordable
Care Act, contain additional provisions
regarding eligibility for advance
payments of the premium tax credit and
cost-sharing reductions, as well as
provisions regarding simplification and
coordination of eligibility
determinations and enrollment with
other health programs.
Unless otherwise specified, the
provisions in this final rule related to
the establishment of minimum
functions of an Exchange are based on
the general authority of Secretary under
section 1321(a)(1) of the Affordable Care
Act.
B. Stakeholder Consultation and Input
HHS has consulted with stakeholders
on a number of polices related to the
operation of Exchanges, including the
SHOP, and premium stabilization
programs. HHS has held a number of
listening sessions with consumers,
providers, employers, health plans, and
State representatives to gather public
input. HHS consulted with stakeholders
through regular meetings with the
National Association of Insurance
Commissioners (NAIC); regular contact
with States through the Exchange
establishment grant process and the
Exchange Blueprint approval process;
and meetings with tribal leaders and
representatives, health insurance
issuers, trade groups, consumer
advocates, employers, and other
interested parties. We considered all of
the public input as we developed the
policies in the proposed rule and this
final rule.
II. Provisions of the Proposed
Regulations and Analysis of and
Responses to Public Comments
A proposed rule, titled ‘‘Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act;
Program Integrity: Exchange, SHOP,
Premium Stabilization Programs, and
Market Standards’’ (78 FR 37032), was
published in the
Federal Register
on
June 19, 2013 with a comment period
ending on July 19, 2013. In total, we
received 99 public comments on the
proposed rule from various
stakeholders, including States, health
insurance issuers, consumer groups,
agents and brokers, provider groups,
Members of Congress, Tribal
organizations, and other stakeholders.
Of the comments received, about 22
were substantially identical submissions
related to non-discrimination standards,
Web-brokers, incomplete applications,
and payment method non-
discrimination standards for the
unbanked. We received a few comments
that were outside the scope of the
proposed rule. In this final rule, we
provide a summary of each proposed
provision, a summary of the public
comments received and our responses to
them, and the policies we are finalizing.
We are not finalizing all the provisions
from this proposed rule. This final rule
includes those provisions that need to
be effective for the beginning of open
enrollment on October 1, 2013. We will
finalize the other provisions at a later
date.
Another proposed rule, entitled
‘‘Essential Health Benefits in Alternative
Benefit Plans, Eligibility Notices, Fair
Hearing, and Appeal Processes for
Medicaid and Exchange Eligibility
Appeals and Other Provisions Related to
Eligibility and Enrollment for
Exchanges, Medicaid and CHIP, and
Medicaid Premiums and Cost Sharing’’
(78 FR 4594), was published in the
Federal Register
on January 22, 2013
with a comment period ending on
February 13, 2013. We received a total
of 741 comments from various
stakeholders including individuals,
State Medicaid agencies, advocacy
groups, and Tribal organizations. In this
final rule, we are only addressing from
that proposed rule the provisions
related to appeals in Part 155 Subpart F
and § 155.740. Other provisions from
the January 22, 2013 proposed rule were
finalized in a final rule, titled ‘‘CMS–
2234–F: Medicaid and Children’s Health
Insurance Programs: Essential Health
Benefits in Alternative Benefit Plans,
Eligibility Notices, Fair Hearing and
Appeal Processes, and Premiums and
Cost Sharing; Exchanges: Eligibility and
Enrollment’’ (78 FR 42160) published in
the
Federal Register
on July 15, 2013.
A. Part 147—Health Insurance Reform
Requirements for the Group and
Individual Health Insurance Markets
1. Fair Health Insurance Premiums
(§ 147.102)
We proposed two clarifications in
§ 147.102, which implements section
2701 of PHS Act regarding fair health
insurance premiums. In paragraph (a),
we proposed to add a reference to the
single risk pool standard codified in
§ 156.80 to clarify the connection
between section 1312(c) of the
Affordable Care Act and section 2701 of
the PHS Act with respect to the
development of rates and premiums for
health insurance coverage in the
individual and small group markets.
In paragraph (a)(1)(ii), we proposed to
clarify that for rating purposes under
section 2701 of the PHS Act, the
geographic rating area is determined in
the small group market using the
principal business address of the group
policyholder, and in the individual
market using the address of the primary
policyholder, regardless of the location
of other individuals covered under the
plan or coverage. These proposed
standards would apply both inside and
outside of the Exchanges and are
consistent with previously released
guidance describing our intended
approach.
5
We solicited comments on
this proposal.
Comment:
While some commenters
supported our proposal that issuers in
the small group market apply rates
based on the employer’s principal
business address, other commenters
noted that issuers in some States have
already developed administrative
systems and rates for 2014 based on
guidance from State regulators to use
each employee’s place of residence.
These commenters requested that States
have flexibility to use either employer
or employee address when rating for
geography.
Response:
We believe it is important
that all issuers offering coverage within
a State, both through the Exchanges and
outside of the Exchanges, use a
consistent geographic rating
methodology to promote the accuracy of
the risk adjustment program established
under section 1343 of the Affordable
Care Act. Further, we believe that rating
based on the employer’s principal
business address is consistent with
current prevailing industry practice and
will simplify administration of the
geographic rating factor. We recognize,
however, that issuers in some cases may
have relied in good faith on guidance or
instructions from States to rate based on
employee address for 2014. Thus, while
we are finalizing our proposed policy
that geographic rating be based on the
employer’s principal business address
generally for plan years beginning on or
after January 1, 2014, we are also
providing in this final rule that where
issuers can demonstrate that they have
relied in good faith on different
guidance from a State insurance
regulator prior to the issuance of this
final rule, the amendments to
§ 147.102(a)(1)(ii) will not apply until
the first plan year beginning on or after
VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 Aug 29, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\30AUR3.SGM 30AUR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
54146
Federal Register
/ Vol. 78, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Subpart M—Qualified Health Plan
Issuer Responsibilities
§ 156.1230 Direct enrollment with the QHP
issuer in a manner considered to be
through the Exchange.
(a) A QHP issuer that is directly
contacted by a potential applicant may,
at the Exchange’s option, enroll such
applicant in a QHP in a manner that is
considered through the Exchange. In
order for the enrollment to be made
directly with the issuer in a manner that
is considered to be through the
Exchange, the QHP issuer needs to
comply with at least the following
requirements:
(1)
QHP issuer general requirements.
(i) The QHP issuer follows the
enrollment process for qualified
individuals consistent with § 156.265.
(ii) The QHP issuer’s Web site
provides applicants the ability to view
QHPs offered by the issuer with the data
elements listed in § 155.205(b)(1)(i)
through (viii) of this subchapter.
(iii) The QHP issuer’s Web site clearly
distinguishes between QHPs for which
the consumer is eligible and other non-
QHPs that the issuer may offer, and
indicate that advance payments of the
premium tax credit and cost sharing
reductions apply only to QHPs offered
through the Exchange.
(iv) The QHP issuer informs all
applicants of the availability of other
QHP products offered through the
Exchange through an HHS-approved
universal disclaimer and displays the
Web link to and describes how to access
the Exchange Web site.
(v) The QHP issuer’s Web site allows
applicants to select and attest to an
advance payment of the premium tax
credit amount, if applicable, in
accordance with § 155.310(d)(2) of this
subchapter.
(2)
QHP issuer application assister
eligibility application assistance
requirements.
If permitted by the
Exchange pursuant to § 155.415 of this
subchapter, and to the extent permitted
by State law, a QHP issuer may permit
its issuer application assisters, as
defined at § 155.20, to assist individuals
in the individual market with applying
for a determination or redetermination
of eligibility for coverage through the
Exchange and for insurance affordability
programs, provided that such issuer
ensures that each of its application
assisters at least-
(i) Receives training on QHP options
and insurance affordability programs,
eligibility, and benefits rules and
regulations;
(ii) Complies with the Exchange’s
privacy and security standards adopted
consistent with § 155.260 of this
subchapter; and
(iii) Complies with applicable State
law related to the sale, solicitation, and
negotiation of health insurance
products, including applicable State law
related to agent, broker, and producer
licensure; confidentiality; and conflicts
of interest.
(b)
Direct enrollment in a Federally-
facilitated Exchange.
The individual
market Federally-facilitated Exchanges
will permit issuers of QHPs in each
Federally-facilitated Exchange to
directly enroll applicants in a manner
that is considered to be through the
Exchange, pursuant to paragraph (a) of
this section, to the extent permitted by
applicable State law.
§ 156.1240 Enrollment process for
qualified individuals.
(a)
Premium payment.
A QHP issuer
must—
(1) Follow the premium payment
process established by the Exchange in
accordance with § 155.240.
(2) At a minimum, for all payments in
the individual market, accept paper
checks, cashier’s checks, money orders,
EFT, and all general-purpose pre-paid
debit cards as methods of payment and
present all payment method options
equally for a consumer to select their
preferred payment method.
(b) [Reserved]
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance
Program)
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital
Insurance; and Program No. 93.774,
Medicare—Supplementary Medical
Insurance Program)
Dated: August 13, 2013.
Marilyn Tavenner,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
Approved: August 15, 2013.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
[FR Doc. 2013–21338 Filed 8–28–13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:01 Aug 29, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\30AUR3.SGM 30AUR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3


I couldn't make it past the title.

HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Oct 15, 2013 - 11:23am PT
Ron complained
Health care providers announced more layoffs than any other industry last month — 8,128 — largely because of reductions by hospitals, according to outplacement firm Challenger Gray and Christmas. So far this year, the health care sector has announced 41,085 layoffs, the third-most behind financial and industrial companies.

This is for a complex number of reasons that you can't begin to comprehend. New Hampshire laid off over a thousand healthcare workers a couple years ago because the Republicans killed emergency funding to the states which resulted in New Hampshire rigging their taxes to rob the larger hospitals of cash. We have also been hit by the sequester cuts. We are also facing the stark reality that cost increases can't continue to outpace inflation by 200-300% each year. Sooner or later healthcare has to become more value oriented and that is what is happening.

Ron you may be a competent taxidermist but you are nothing close to a budget wonk much less an expert in the dizzyingly complex world of healthcare finance. Just stop already.
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
Oct 15, 2013 - 12:28pm PT
That's the publication of a final rule in the federal register. It includes comments and responses. The regulation will be published in the CFR without all the extraneous language. Standard stuff that's been going on for decades, but why not post it on supertopo like it's something extraordinary?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Oct 15, 2013 - 12:39pm PT
That explains it. It's all Yorlanda's (wink wink..brown person) fault.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Oct 15, 2013 - 12:43pm PT
Ron...Bad news dude...! No one has told you but Yorlanda is the Death Panel CEO....The good news....Supertopo is planning a memorial for you this spring...RJ
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Oct 15, 2013 - 02:52pm PT
Ron posted
I spent 40 minutes on the phone yesterday talking to a rep from the GOVT site ... "Yorlanda" could not explain or answer any of the questions i asked her. She DID refer me to other sites which i had previously seen..It was a circular travel she pointed me in..

I think we can all agree the support system is overwhelmed and in need of improvement. It would have been nice if Republicans had spent the last 4 years helping us prepare for this and improving on the law instead of banning support staff from helping people like you (based on what state you live in) or trying to repeal the law instead of improve it.

Repubs spent the last 4 years trying to make sure the law wouldn't work and are now crowing gleefully "see I told you it wouldn't work."
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 15, 2013 - 03:04pm PT
I think we can all agree the support system is overwhelmed and in need of improvement. It would have been nice if Republicans had spent the last 4 years helping us prepare for this and improving on the law instead of banning support staff from helping people like you (based on what state you live in) or trying to repeal the law instead of improve it.

Repubs spent the last 4 years trying to make sure the law wouldn't work and are now crowing gleefully "see I told you it wouldn't work."

It would have been nicer if the Democrats included the Republicans in devising the law in the first place, or left themselves open to consider changes in the law. "We need to pass the law to see what it contains" is no way to devise legislation affecting 16% of the economy.

I still believe its authors intended the law to fail in such a way that single payer health care would be the only available option. Time will tell.
stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Oct 15, 2013 - 04:11pm PT
It would have been nicer if the Democrats included the Republicans in devising the law in the first place, or left themselves open to consider changes in the law. "We need to pass the law to see what it contains" is no way to devise legislation affecting 16% of the economy.

I still believe its authors intended the law to fail in such a way that single payer health care would be the only available option. Time will tell.

Well, let's see. Big parts of it were based on a law passed by a GOP governor in MA(later GOP presidential candidate). And going further back then that, it incorporates many ideas from a Heritage Foundation proposal. So not exactly a screaming liberal idea. That would have been single payer, or Medicare-for-all. This did include some compromises.

And I think many Democrats would be open to changes. But there would need to be compromises as well. Not just requests for repealing all or part of the act. If the House came forward and said we'd like stronger malpractice protection, but we're willing to accept higher taxes on drug manufacturers, don't you think that would generate some discussion? Instead we get demands for repeal, extortion of the public by refusing to fund the rest of the govt, and no good proposals for alternatives.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 16, 2013 - 11:30am PT
Even over at the Daily Kook they've finally figured it out.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/30/1242660/-Obamacare-will-double-my-monthly-premium#
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Oct 16, 2013 - 12:34pm PT
Yahh and they will also pay for things like CONTRACEPTION so youngsters can go willy nilly and have their jollys for free. And if you thought the welfare bastard children problem was bad before,, just wait.

Uh... what?
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
Oct 16, 2013 - 12:36pm PT
Having been both a contraception user and father I can conclusively say that contraception is far cheaper.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Oct 16, 2013 - 01:29pm PT
Ron complained
ohw and 10 out of 10 friends ive asked have had their premiums go UP...

Because they were paying for the lowest possible amount of health insurance before and now have comprehensive coverage.

Ron whined
Yahh and they will also pay for things like CONTRACEPTION so youngsters can go willy nilly and have their jollys for free. And if you thought the welfare bastard children problem was bad before,, just wait.

It's ok guys Ron is just mad that other people are having sex. The fact that his sentence insanely contradicts itself is just frosting.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 18, 2013 - 12:12pm PT
Has anyone been able to get on to any of the exchanges yet? Me either. Seems that even with unlimited funding and over 3 years, the government is having problems getting a working web site running.

I saw that Delaware is celebrating it's first sign up. Someone named Janice. So hope and change is coming....slowly.


"Delaware Celebrates: First Person Finally Enrolls in Obamacare
9:00 AM, Oct 16, 2013 • By DANIEL HALPER



Delaware has finally signed up someone for Obamacare. This has caused officials in that state to celebrate, according to the Associated Press.

"Delaware officials are celebrating the state's first health insurance exchange enrollee," the AP writes.

"Department of Health and Social Service officials have declared 59-year-old Janice Baker of Selbyville the first confirmed resident to enroll in the marketplace. It opened Oct. 1 as part of the roll-out of the Affordable Care Act."


It ain't happening in my state yet. Just tried to get on again, for the 10th time. Nope.



Tarheel

Trad climber
San Rafael, CA
Oct 18, 2013 - 10:22pm PT
Some countries have universal health care systems that rely almost entirely on the private market (Swiss). Some are single payer systems (France). Different types of systems are currently providing healthcare at half or better the % of GDP than we do in the US, with better outcomes, and while enjoying strong public support.

It upsets me when I hear people say things like "healthcare is not a right". What's important is that we have many examples of countries which provide high quality universal health care at far lower costs than the US. Some systems are more private and some are more public. And they are continually improving their systems as time goes by and they gain knowledge. You're not making a serious attempt to solve the long term debt problem if you are not actively working to reduce the cost of health care.

The peanut gallery complains about those European socialists and how over-taxed they are. I have a number of foreign friends. We all have professional careers; none of us are in the economic elite. We do economic comparisons. They may pay more in taxes. However much less comes out of their pay check for health care insurance and in the end things seem to be more or less on parity. We have cheaper food and gas. Our "stuff" (houses, cars) are bigger. They typically had free college tuition and never have to worry about losing everything since they got sick. I saw some Canadian women get a gold medal at the Olympics. All I could think of is how lucky they were: they would never worry about going bankrupt because they couldn't afford decent health care.

These days I keep hearing that we have to "Reform Medicare". I think what this means is that we need to just forget trying to reduce the cost of healthcare and instead free the government from the economic risk by letting the poor and middle class just deal with the catastrophe out of their own pockets as best they can. One form of this is Paul Ryan's medicare voucher plan. The debate has shifted so far right that unless there are major changes in our political system something like this may be the "best" thing our government will be able to accomplish.

For some reason we don't hear so much as when the ACA was first being planned about how the cost of health care is "growing at a dangerous and unsustainable rate". It's like we gave up on that. In the 1970's it was an incidental part of your budget--now it can be like paying another mortgage--and if things go bad it can mean bankruptcy. If you have a job that provides health care, look at how much your company is paying for your benefits which otherwise might be in your take home. During the development of the ACA, we had a political climate (republicans and blue dog democrats) that made it impossible to achieve radical changes such as a public option type system. What was achieved was probably the best that could have been achieved given the political players present. Obama would have had a number of non nefarious reasons not to back the public option such as political pragmatism or the fear of making large disruptive changes in a system where it is really hard to anticipate all the consequences. To progressives Obama seems frustratingly timid at times but to the far right he is some kind of monster that will destroy the country.

Now looking back, it seems obvious that many of the legislators involved in that ACA process where not good faith negotiators (were not serious about creating a well functioning efficient system). Most of the obstruction came from Republicans and the Blue Dog Democrats. Most of the Blue Dogs lost their offices after that. Unfortunately there are still plenty of angry people out there with their ten kids on Medicade (or whatever) who hate the government and think the government should have nothing to do with healthcare. So those Republicans or worse are still there obstructing.

What began as a sincere effort at compromise by the Democrats is now derided by the right as "Obamacare". By in large, the right just obstructs and makes things worse. As far as I can tell their agenda is to make a feint to reduce the budget by "reforming" medicare while keeping taxes low and military spending high. Despite their claims, they can't really care about cutting the debt since the math doesn't add up unless they also plan to remove most of the population from the health care system entirely. Since the right is also obstructing economic stimulation measures employment will remain high which tends to worsen the debt situation as well. They also spend a lot of time thinking about voter suppression to keep their majority in the house. Democrats who really are serious to make things better are working with a bad faith opposition that just obstructs and plays political games to increase their power.

I used to love to read the Atlantic Magazine. I remember roughly 20 years ago reading about a long-term plan of the right-wing Heritage Foundation which was described by cynics as "bankrupt the treasury so badly that we would be forced to ditch Medicare etc.". Meanwhile "Project For The New Century" (the neoconservatives) was established in the spring of 1997 and funded largely by the energy and arms industries. In their statement of principles they outline a fourfold agenda:
--Increase the military budget at the expense of domestic social programs
--Toppling of regimes resistant to our corporate interests
--Forcing democracy at the barrel of a gun in regions that have no history of the democratic process
--Replacing the UN’s role of preserving and extending international order

(This all can be read in their own words at www.newamericancentury.org)

Something akin to the Heritage plan has actually played out nicely: Bush tax cuts to drain the treasury. Increased economic instability caused by overly-lax regulation of Wall Street and corporations which (duh) tend to externalize costs. These externalized costs such as pollution ultimately must be paid by the public in some form or other (cancer is largely caused by air pollution). An attack on 911 (According to Project For The New Century document, Rebuilding America's Defenses, their stated goals would never be realized “absent some catastrophic catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”. ) which the Bush administration could not have done less to prevent. This was what the neocons needed to start the Bush wars. Lied about the intelligence. Had domino theory hubris. The subprime mortgage crisis crashed the economy and led to the $700B Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (signed by Bush, commonly referred to as a bailout of the U.S financial system). An overwhelming majority of the banks affected saw the bailout program as a no-strings-attached windfall that could be used to pay down debt, acquire other businesses or invest for the future. Then we have the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 signed by Obama which amounted to $831B but was far too weak ($288B of it was tax relief). The Bush tax cuts, wars, bailout, and stimulus account for nearly all of the debt, especially if you factor in the greatly reduced treasury revenues caused by an economy with high unemployment. But high unemployment is advantageous since desperate workers will work harder for less pay. The right was criticized for trying to block efforts to stimulate the economy, hoping poor economy will be blamed on "liberal policies". Damaging education was also important as were corruption of the economic system. Fox News and Clear Channel propaganda networks did their part to keep the base fired up and angry. And the worse things get, the more they get riled up and vote for the right wing candidates who are implementing the overall strategy. The ultimate goal of Heritage plan was to so bankrupt the treasury that politicians could throw up their hands and say "we just can't afford this anymore, and things are so dire, the national debt is so great that we have to take extreme measures". I think that's where the tea party comes in nicely and just on time!
Climberdude

Trad climber
Fresno, CA
Oct 18, 2013 - 10:58pm PT
Ok, this is not entirely climbing related, but if I get hurt while climbing and need insurance, it is climbing related.

While I am not a big fan of the recent health care changes, I think it is the step in the right direction toward a single payer plan. I have so many friends and relatives by marriage who are citizens of Northern European countries. Although they think that US is great, there is no way in hell that they are going to give up their citizenship to become a US citizen because they will loose their free healthcare privilages. What the rest of the world understands is a necessity, by the ^&$%ing Koch brothers (dont's get me started) think is wasted money.

Don't believe the freaking BS that you hear regarding Canada, Norway, and other countries about the waits. These are just people who had private insurance which actually slowed down their access. The right way to go is single payer plan, but it is not going to happen overnight.

I recently got to compare very closesly the entire taxation of Canadian citizens versus American citizens. Guess what - Canadian citizens are overall taxed less but have far superior public service, which includes healthcare.
Climberdude

Trad climber
Fresno, CA
Oct 18, 2013 - 11:24pm PT
Corporate taxes in Canada are much lower, but perhaps the individual taxes are higher. Taken together, which is what I am considering, Canada is lower than the US.
Climberdude

Trad climber
Fresno, CA
Oct 18, 2013 - 11:31pm PT
Riley,

You must have a lot of Teabilly "friends"!
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 21, 2013 - 11:28am PT
Consumer Reports weighs in:

Consumer Reports: ‘Stay Away From HealthCare.gov’
By Alec Torres
October 21, 2013 9:56 AM


Consumer Reports, which publishes reviews of consumer products and services, advised its readers to avoid the federal healthcare exchange “for at least another month if you can.” “Hopefully that will be long enough for its software vendors to clean up the mess they’ve made,” the magazine said, having tested the site themselves over the course of the past three weeks.

Noting that only 271,000 of the 9.47 million people who tried signing up in the first week were managed to create an account, Consumer Reports then provided a few tips to those attempting to slog through the application process. From attempting successive logins because “error messages … may not always match reality” to checking your inbox frequently because if you miss an email you’ll be timed out of the site and forced to start from square one, none of the suggestions guaranteed success.

The magazine has also released a string of scathing reviews. On October 1, the day the Obamacare exchanges went online, the magazine told people to be patient: “Don’t worry if you can’t sign up today or even within the next couple of weeks.” A week into enrollment, they urged again to “wait a couple weeks and hope that the site irons out its many problems” because the HealthCare.gov is “barely operational.”

As the editors continued to review the website over the next few days, they only had one positive statement: “On the plus side,” they noted, “consumers coming to HealthCare.gov are no longer stopped cold by an error message or a screen saying they’ve been put in a waiting line.”

Now three weeks into the exchanges, having offered reviews and advice, Consumer Reports said that “If all [these suggestions] are too much to absorb, follow our previous advice: Stay away from Healthcare.gov,” at least for the time being."
phylp

Trad climber
Millbrae, CA
Oct 21, 2013 - 11:43am PT
Because my individual policy is being cancelled by Aetna as they are getting out of business in California, I tried to sign up for coverage through Covered California. After a frustrating week of getting stuck inside the signup program I gave up and went directly to a new provider through einsurance.com. It took me 5 minutes. The previous application I did for private insurance took me several days since they required information going back ten years. So this aspect of the law is a huge improvement.

It is going to cost me more money for the private coverage (not sure how much since I could never get that far into the app) than through the state exchange but at least I know I have coverage starting January 1. Since we have until March to sign up through the state exchange, I'll try again later after all the bugs are reported to have been worked out of the system.

couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 23, 2013 - 11:42am PT
Delaware has someone signed up, took her 7 hours of trying via phone as the .gov computers were not working so she couldn't get the web site to work. Bet her ear hurts now from being glued to the phone for 7 hours, but at least her ear has health coverage. Oregon has yet to get one signed up yet. Can't access the web site as of 2 days ago either, despite what this article says.

"By Shelby Sebens
Published October 23, 2013


It’s not only the national Affordable Care Act insurance exchange that’s experiencing a host of problems. Oregon, despite setting up its own state exchange for Obamacare insurance, has yet to enroll anyone through its online website for health insurance. Maybe the state bit off more than it could chew. The online exchange, Cover Oregon, launched Oct. 1. Oregonians can browse for health insurance, but they can’t enroll online although it appears many want to. Since opening earlier this month, the website has received 430,000 visits and 3.7 million page views."

SCseagoat

Trad climber
Santa Cruz
Oct 23, 2013 - 09:33pm PT
mandatory insurance"

Do you drive a car?

Susan
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Oct 23, 2013 - 09:54pm PT
Our United healthcare/Golden Rule high deductible plan of 20 plus years was cancelled ( they pulled out of Alaska altogether) due to changes of ACA, according to their letter in June of 2012. We signed up with Premera/ Blue Cross with an even higher deductible ( 10,000 from 7500) than Golden Rule and anything they judged to be "preconditions" not fully covered for a year from the policy date, price slightly less. A week ago we received a letter from Premera/Blue Cross indicating our premium will rise approximately 50% as of 1-1-2014. This is typical of the self employed in the individual market in AK.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 23, 2013 - 10:00pm PT
No!

You always talk to long.

It happens when they finally get thru and discover what the premiums and deductibles are.

[Click to View YouTube Video]
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 23, 2013 - 10:33pm PT
the gov't pays you

Just what you want isn't it.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Oct 23, 2013 - 11:11pm PT
I hope they have mandatory prostate checks...
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 23, 2013 - 11:21pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]

Cept it's gonna be her!

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Oct 24, 2013 - 12:18am PT
^^^^is that.......SATAN ( Church lady voice)

Well I have managed to avoid putting the family on Obummercare. I did get the great fortune of re signing with my current provider( originally they said they were effectively canceling the policy) for about $300 more per month, increased deductible, smaller network of DR's, increased co pays and increased % of what I owe after deductible has been fulfilled. They did throw in some worthless dental insurance for my kids though ???

Overall, less bene's, greater expense but woowhoo, I still have insurance for my family. What a Frickin mess.

Yep, this is great.

Guangzhou

Trad climber
Asia, Indonesia, East Java
Oct 24, 2013 - 02:22am PT
You can let your European friends know that they don't have to give up European citizenship when they become Americans.

I personally love America. I know Healthcare suck in what I consider to be the greatest country. Because of Healthcare, when my wife and I talk about our retirement, we look towards France more than America.

Southern France or Lake Tahoe are top of my list. Sierras would win, but healthcare could force me to climb in Verdon instead.
I do remember reading somewhere that because they are paid, Europeans get medical check-ups more often. Article supported that this saved medical expenses. Makes sense to me. Just wonder why more insurance companies don't require and pay annual checks.


Eman
A dual citizen

ruppell

climber
Oct 24, 2013 - 09:44am PT
The cost of insurance for my wife and I just DOUBLED. Congrats Obama you just made me a Republican.
Degaine

climber
Oct 27, 2013 - 06:07am PT
Guangzhou wrote:
I do remember reading somewhere that because they are paid, Europeans get medical check-ups more often. Article supported that this saved medical expenses. Makes sense to me. Just wonder why more insurance companies don't require and pay annual checks.

FYI – there is no single European healthcare system, each country has its own system. The French, for example, do not get paid to get regular checkups. France has the number 1 healthcare system on the planet (all criteria combined).

Also, %GDP is not nearly as good an indicator as per capita healthcare spending. The US spends twice as much per capita as France and Germany - US = $8,000 per capita, compared to FR/GER = $4,000 per capita (rounded off figures for simplicity) – and yet the US does not cover its entire population and has worse outcomes in most categories.

As you write, regular checkups are part of the equation. These allow catching something in its early stages to avoid an ER visit or hospitalization, whereas in the USA, the uninsured often wait until they need urgent care before heading to the ER to see a doctor.

However, a visit to the GP in France costs 23 € (about $30) where as a visit to your GP in the US costs between $110-$130 at least. Depending on the insurance I’ve had over the years (changes with jobs), I’ve had $30 co-pays.

An ultrasound in France costs 75 €, the average bill in the USA is $450. Do you see where I’m going with this?

Add to that the propensity in the USA to use high cost imaging modalities such as MRI or CT when only 3 out of 10 patients actually need it, well, yet another piece of the explanation puzzle as to why healthcare costs so much more in the USA. But that’s not all, since Japan uses a lot of this type of imaging and yet spends only 1/3 of what the USA spends per capita on healthcare.

Take into consideration the points the TIME article made a while ago, and you’ll understand that there often is no rhyme or reason for the cost of a given procedure. The corporation providers and insurances are bilking the American public and will continue to do so as long as mum’s the word.
Degaine

climber
Oct 27, 2013 - 06:10am PT
ruppell wrote:
The cost of insurance for my wife and I just DOUBLED. Congrats Obama you just made me a Republican.

Has nothing to do with the ACA. But keeping thinking that, and please, vote Republican, it's your right.

But please do me a favor and promise not to come back and whine like you just did in the above post when you can't get insurance because of a pre-existing condition, and end up going bankrupt paying for care.
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Oct 27, 2013 - 11:37am PT
The cost of insurance for my wife and I just DOUBLED. Congrats Obama you just made me a Republican.

LOl!
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 27, 2013 - 12:18pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2013 - 03:09pm PT
So many folks complaining about the new rules and regs.....it's hard to relate. Here's one version, titled:
"Yay! We Get a Six-Week Extension on Paying Our Obamacare Fines!"

Read the full meal deal here:
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/10/yay-we-get-six-week-extension-on-paying.html


apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Oct 27, 2013 - 05:05pm PT
Fret not...Single Payer is on it's way!

(Where we should have been in the first place)
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Oct 27, 2013 - 09:33pm PT
I'm confused how people are reporting greatly increased rates (even though that seems to happen all the time, even before Obamacare, when one provision of the law limits Insurance Industry profits

From

http://thehealthcareblog.com/blog/2012/02/04/does-obamacare-limit-profits-for-health-insurance-companies-in-your-state/

"The ACA requires health insurers in the individual and small group market to spend 80 percent of their premiums (after subtracting taxes and regulatory fees) on medical costs."

Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Oct 27, 2013 - 09:43pm PT
I'm confused how people are reporting greatly increased rates (even though that seems to happen all the time, even before Obamacare, when one provision of the law limits Insurance Industry profits

no reason for confusion, Karl

They are lying, flat our lying

extremely they even got a username and password established to even get through, apply,
and have heard back with a definitive quote yet

I can state with verifiable accuracy that my own person monthly payment went down $40 a month
and incredibly my annual deducatible was cut in half from $2500 to $1250, all directly because
as Karl pointed out, the ACA required that at least 80% of premium dollars be spent, gasp, on
healthcare or refunded, which was what happened in my case.

By the way, what IS the republican healthcare plan to insure 30 million more anyway?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 27, 2013 - 10:06pm PT
Thge increased costs of the Unaffordable Healthcare Tax are easy to understand when;

A 55 year old woman has to pay for maternity coverage

A 20 year old man has to pay for prostate exams

A healthy young person can't get limited catastrophic coverage INSURANCE!

[Click to View YouTube Video]
\

Half a million Californians are loosing their coverage.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/362263/500000-californians-lose-health-policies-wesley-j-smith


stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Oct 27, 2013 - 10:55pm PT
Thge increased costs of the Unaffordable Healthcare Tax are easy to understand when;

A 55 year old woman has to pay for maternity coverage

A 20 year old man has to pay for prostate exams
TGT

Those are part of the mandatory package of preventative care that plans are required to offer. No one is going to make the 22 year old get a prostate exam. Or the 55 year old women get preggers and go to an OB.
But the marginal cost of having everyone pay for prevention is pretty small.
The cost of not doing preventative care and covering prostate cancer or a bad pregnancy, or any number of otehr things is very high.
Would you really rather we didn't try to prevent this stuff?
Sean Garecht

Trad climber
Reno, NV
Oct 28, 2013 - 02:02pm PT
40yr old male in Nevada. Have blue cross blue shield. Got the letter in the mail that I was dropped. Insurance went from $106 to $378. Just another $3,264 out of my pocket. Not happy.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Oct 28, 2013 - 02:23pm PT
sounds like blue cross decided that now that you are 40 you are higher risk and raised your
premium

and THAT is exactly what just one of the problems is with the current healthcare system

let's hope you can find a cheaper policy when the exchanges get running better
Dropline

Mountain climber
Somewhere Up There
Oct 28, 2013 - 02:53pm PT
As a small biz owner our experience with health care insurance premium rates has been blech as usual. To keep out current policy with Anthem we will have to pay 9.31% more next year. When we get quotes on the exchanges for various plans, the benefits are fewer and the premiums are higher.

It cracks me up when the Obamacare hucksters say "you can get insurance for about what your cable bill is each month, or your phone bill". BS. With our Anthem plan a healthy 27 year old male will cost $283 a month to insure next year. For fewer benefits, higher deductibles, etc in the exchange for the same employee it's $450.

I'm a bit (a lot) older so I'm about $1,100 a month with either Anthem or on the exchange. Obama won over support in the biz community by promising rates would be held in check. Each year since it's gone up again at 9-13%.

Generally I favor fairly free markets because I think that's the best way to motivate people. In this case though I am in favor of a single payer system. The big winners in this game, hospitals, drug companies, insurance companies, doctors, and lawyers are all way too powerful for ordinary people to ever get a fair shake.

That's why, as a percentage of GDP, as a country we spend double what many other developed countries do on health care.

Health care costs and health care insurance will break a lot of small businesses if these expenses are not reigned in.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Oct 28, 2013 - 03:03pm PT
It cracks me up when the Obamacare hucksters say "you can get insurance for about what your cable bill is each month, or your phone bill"

prove it

links?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Oct 28, 2013 - 03:10pm PT
Norton writes:

"prove it
links?"




Just one.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/22/remarks-president-congressional-black-caucus-foundation-phoenix-awards-d

"So just think about that. Knowing you can offer your family the security of health care –- that’s priceless. And now you can do it for less than your cell phone bill. That’s what change looks like."

 President Barack Obama

Dropline

Mountain climber
Somewhere Up There
Oct 28, 2013 - 03:25pm PT
Norton, it's hard to cite things you see and hear on the tube. Tube as in TV. But both Obama and some admin rep said words very close to what I quoted, both on television. It made my ears perk up because we're making decisions now at work about health care coverages and costs for 2014.

I think they should scrap the whole thing and go to single payer.

mucci

Trad climber
The pitch of Bagalaar above you
Oct 28, 2013 - 06:17pm PT
Dropped by my individual plan.

Raised my premiums by $210 per month.

Maybe I should just quit my job, and become a titsucker.

Here comes the boommotherfukcers.
NutAgain!

Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
Oct 28, 2013 - 06:42pm PT
Is there an example anywhere in the world where free market capitalism results in affordable and high quality healthcare for most of the population?

A "free market" implies a buyer and a seller free from the need to do business with each other, free to make alternative choices. If you are sick or dying, or your family members are, then practically speaking you can't walk away from the deal. You'll pay whatever they say it costs to keep your loved one alive.

That is EXACTLY why discussion of free market theories for healthcare should be categorically rejected. Use standard diagnostic codes, with standardized methods of mapping reported symptoms and test results to those diagnoses, and with standard care regimens and defined costs for those regimens, and skip the parasitic insurance companies squeezing a profit out of it. The only useful service one can identify that the insurance company performs is to ferret out frivolous claims and use bulk purchasing power to negotiate down prices with care providers. If the government set the prices for the services, and the government enforced compliance/investigated fraud/etc. Then there is no need for insurance providers.

That seems so much cleaner than a government mandate for insurance while still providing a "free market" choice of options, where there is implicit collusion to keep prices high because the market is as captive as ever. Sometimes compromise is a beeyotch.

I'm hoping the present healthcare landscape is part of the larger juggernaut toward more of a socialized medicine program. It's just a painful intermediate step mandated by many lawmakers dragging their feet on change that will kill the cash cow of health insurance.
Hoser

climber
vancouver
Oct 28, 2013 - 07:17pm PT
^^^ Yup

n canada I don't remember there being much of a difference between the costs. If I was working, or if I wasn't working, it was mostly the same. Health care was there for everyone in a equal way. There was not any deductable.

No deductible

If I dont work or make less than 20g a year its straight up free

If I do work then its 100% covered by my job, plus dental, scripts are 90-100% covered

If I work for myself, my monthly cost is about $67 for full coverage
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Oct 28, 2013 - 07:34pm PT
I think they should scrap the whole thing and go to single payer.

That's the best solution, so Republicans will oppose that most fiercely.

Curt
Sean Garecht

Trad climber
Reno, NV
Oct 28, 2013 - 07:56pm PT
No Norton.

That is not why I was dropped. I was dropped because my current insurance doesn't meet the required Obamacare standards. I already got the 40 year old bump up last year when I turned 40.

I received 3 letters in the mail from Blue Cross stating that things were going to be changing with the upcoming implementation of Obama Care. And they did change, increased prices, and me and millions of other people are now paying considerably moor.

You are quit snarky and quick to dismiss any idea that maybe this Obama Care sucks. I'm not saying that insurance as it was was great, but the powers that be took a hatchet job to the whole industry when a scalpel was needed.


On another note...

Whats up Ron Anderson...You and your boys put up some awesome routes in the Carson Tahoe zone.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 28, 2013 - 08:59pm PT
The liar in chief.

[Click to View YouTube Video]

Even NBC now reports the truth.

our sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC NEWS that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

None of this should come as a shock to the Obama administration. The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date — the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example — the policy would not be grandfathered.

Buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to keep their policy. And because many policies will have been changed since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.”

That means the administration knew that more than 40 to 67 percent of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.

Yet President Obama, who had promised in 2009, “if you like your health plan, you will be able to keep your health plan,” was still saying in 2012, “If [you] already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.”

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/28/21213547-obama-admin-knew-millions-could-not-keep-their-health-insurance?lite
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Oct 28, 2013 - 09:26pm PT
By the way, what exactly is the healthcare plan that the candidate YOU voted for put forth?

Romneycare. Obamacare is the plan the Republicans wanted. Why are they against it now?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 28, 2013 - 09:35pm PT
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Oct 28, 2013 - 10:19pm PT
Yes , part of the blame can be placed on the Repubs for wanting Romney care yet they point the finger at Obama..? I think the Republicans original plan was to give tax credits to the poor so they could afford health care but that plan was so cynical and unrealistic that it never got off the ground..Remember romney's gaff about the 47% leeching off the system...then he turns around and throws out his feeble health care plan...brilliant..
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 28, 2013 - 10:57pm PT
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Oct 28, 2013 - 11:01pm PT
Obamacare is the result of a bait and switch to buy votes. It worked.

Now we get to watch the wonderfully efficient government try to implement an IT project that is said to be one of the largest and most complicated ever.

Cronies will get rich.

Obamacare will collapse and many will be without health care. Basically the opposite of what was promised will occur.

Writing has been on the wall for quite some time but any criticism is dismissed as partisan.


Go climb but don't hurt yourself in January if you are relying on Obamacare.

If you want to buy a plan in the open market, take that money that you plan to spend on Xmas gifts or that next climbing trip and give it to the insurance companies or the government. That will totally help our economy. Also don't get hurt or sick in early 2014 if you are relying on Obamacare. If you do, you better find religion and pray.



We are F'd.

johntp

Trad climber
socal
Oct 28, 2013 - 11:11pm PT
ObamaCare is just another one of the Liar in Chief's ways of wealth redistribution.

Roger that. My health care plan premium is going up 44%. Heaven forbid I actually get sick or need hospitalization. The deductibles are out the roof.

A turd is a turd and Obama is shoving it down our throats. "Affordable" my ass.

peladob

Mountain climber
Mason City, Iowa
Oct 28, 2013 - 11:32pm PT
How bout this little gem...

This is an exerpt from the NBC news blog...

President Obama repeatedly assured Americans that after the Affordable Care Act became law, people who liked their health insurance would be able to keep it. But millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under Obamacare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years.

Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC NEWS that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

None of this should come as a shock to the Obama administration. The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date -- the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example -- the policy would not be grandfathered.

Buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to keep their policy. And because many policies will have been changed since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.”

That means the administration knew that more than 40 to 67 percent of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.


Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Oct 29, 2013 - 12:16am PT
ObamaCare is just another one of the Liar in Chief's ways of wealth redistribution. He is clearly distributing all of ours to China.

what part of 'render unto Caeser' did Christ get wrong?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Oct 29, 2013 - 12:17am PT
Impeachment time YET?

go ahead Ron, what's holding you back?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Oct 29, 2013 - 12:30am PT
Yep this is about abortion.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Oct 29, 2013 - 12:34am PT
If this is such a great deal, why is congress opted out and have their own health plan?

Bunch of smarmy f-wads, all of them.

Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 29, 2013 - 01:05am PT
My ex-wife, in San Diego, was just dropped by her individual plan (Aetna). She told me that they were pulling out of California. She's kind of pissed and scared right now.
My own plan through my employer in Alaska (Blue Cross) will not change so far because it meets the requirements. Not sure how it will be affected when the employer mandate kicks in, next year I think.

I hope this somehow works out. Lots of partisan finger pointing, but right now I think anyone seeking the truth has to admit that the ACA so far is a disaster. If you've lost Jon Stewart or Saturday Night Live on an issue, you've lost the country on that issue. Now NBC is hammering it.

The question is, what is the fix, and how does it happen technically and politically?
I work in telecommunications, but I am not a SW programmer or expert. I have only read that the technical fix will be a nightmare if possible at all. Too many legacy SW systems have to work together seamlessly.
Because ACA was passed on a strictly partisan vote to start with, the politics will make any fix a partisan pissing match. Live and learn.
If so many lives weren't riding on it, it would be just another Washington DC clown show.
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Oct 29, 2013 - 01:09am PT
The demand Obama wants for these insurance companies is unsustainable.....
peladob

Mountain climber
Mason City, Iowa
Oct 29, 2013 - 01:52am PT
It's going to crash. A single payer system will be adopted. It's about control.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Oct 29, 2013 - 01:58am PT
It's going to crash. A single payer system will be adopted.

Well, we can hope.

Curt
Degaine

climber
Oct 29, 2013 - 06:22am PT
Larry Nelson wrote:
The question is, what is the fix,

A single payer system. Medicare (or Medicaid) for all, if that makes the concept simpler for Americans to understand.
Degaine

climber
Oct 29, 2013 - 06:25am PT
Ron Anderson wrote:
Impeachment time YET?


An on what exact charges would you like to impeach (read "indict") him on?

Remember, this was a joint effort on Congress passing the law and Obama signing it.

On a side note, I don't remember you calling for Bush's impeachment after he blatantly lied regarding WMD. Since you seem to divide the US into two teams, is it because he was playing for yours?
Degaine

climber
Oct 29, 2013 - 06:36am PT
Cragman wrote:
ObamaCare is just another one of the Liar in Chief's ways of wealth redistribution. He is clearly distributing all of ours to China.

It's surprising to see you write something so callous and partisan after seeing you show such compassion and selflessness regarding Matthew Greene.

I'll return in kind, with regard to healthcare and your statement, you don't know what the f*** you're talking about.

The eventual single payer system that will come out of this mess like a phoenix from the flames will insure both the health of your fellow Americans and the health of the now staggering American economy.

Why do you think Detroit moved its factories across the border into Canada?
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 29, 2013 - 09:54am PT
Degaine wrote
A single payer system. Medicare (or Medicaid) for all, if that makes the concept simpler for Americans to understand.


Sure, that's what you would like, but how do you get there?

One, it would probably be the largest social policy legislation in US history during the worst recession of our lives, basically medicare for all. Simpler for users yes, but how will it fund?

Two, current politics have poisoned the art of compromise (look at the comments here). Gonna have to have both parties agree if it's gonna be a success. Bi-partisan, just like all other social policy legislation ever passed in our history.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Oct 29, 2013 - 10:45am PT
Sure, that's what you would like, but how do you get there?


Phased implementation.

1. Expand both medicaid and medicare towards each other.

-increase those covered by medicaid
-allow people to buy into Medicare at ages below 65. Drop the age by 10 years, every 5 years.

2. Change the VA system into Medicare, with better coverage for doctors, drugs. Eliminate the VA, the largest and most expensive healthcare system in the US.

3. When all are covered, eliminate medical part of work comp, and medpay for car insurance. Boo-Hoo for the attorneys.
peladob

Mountain climber
Mason City, Iowa
Oct 29, 2013 - 10:53am PT
Where will the docs come from?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Oct 29, 2013 - 11:42am PT
Plenty of docs.

All the VA docs.

All the docs wasting their time with BS Work Comp and auto Medpay cases.

All the midlevels being trained.

All the new med school slots

Plenty.
Degaine

climber
Oct 29, 2013 - 04:17pm PT
Larry Nelson wrote:
One, it would probably be the largest social policy legislation in US history during the worst recession of our lives, basically medicare for all. Simpler for users yes, but how will it fund?

Real quick:

*For funding, all the money being poured into private insurance would go into the universal system. Adding 30 million people to the risk pool would also lower the per person costs.

*Medicare reimbursement rates are much lower than what private insurance companies are able to negotiate. Don't worry, provider establishments and doctors still make lots of money even when they care for Medicare patients almost exclusively. This will also lower the per person cost.

*Fix drug costs. Don't worry, big pharma is still making money hand over fist in Europe, no reason that would not continue here. In addition, contrary to what they would have you believe, big pharma does very little research when compared to 20 or 30 years ago. The business model now is to let biotech startups sink or swim with expensive research and clinical trials using venture capital, and then to buy up only viable companies/drugs. In any case, Medicare could be using its 500 pound gorilla weight now to reduce drug costs.

*Provide little to no reimbursement for non-essential care like dental (teeth cleaning and such), cosmetic surgery, or for things like private rooms, and then allow people to purchase private supplemental insurance to cover those things.

That's off the top of my head, and yes that works well in other countries, and docs still make a great living.

Of course and as use state, not sure when the political will to implement this type of system will show up.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Oct 29, 2013 - 04:29pm PT
Right now it certainly feels like I will be partly funding it through greatly increased premiums.

Truly a massive tax increase in my world of running a small business.


The partisan bullSh**ers can spray on. Unfortunately, it is not going to fix this mess.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 29, 2013 - 08:21pm PT
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 29, 2013 - 10:31pm PT
jghedge wrote;
Best article yet on current state of the ACA:



It's good to have a healthy dose of scientific skepticism when it comes to complicated political solutions that politicians exempt themselves from.

This healthcare is especially complicated to my modest intellect, but to buy into everything one party says seems kind of religious.
LuckyPink

climber
the last bivy
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:07am PT
the affordable health act is about a social movement, that's right.
It's about who is going to drive your health, who will make decisions about your care. Is it the deregulated industrial model of the profit building, cost saving, service trimming top heavy corporation? Or is it about who (literally) is going to transfer you out of your bed into the wheelchair to get you to the bathroom? Or who is going to decide the price of your 4 different cardiac medications when you are retired/disabled/injured and not able to work? All you guys are dead center in the wave of new patients coming into large health needs. Who do you want to decide things for you? A doctor or a corporate accountant? Do you trust the 680% mark up on the cost of providing health care that your HMO wants you to fund? It's good for business. Is it good for you?
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 05:12am PT
jghedge wrote:
Politicians aren't poor. Why, therefore, do they need ObamaCare? They have coverage that exceeds what ObamaCare offers.
People who can afford to drive a Lexus should drive a Chevy Geo because...why?


7 of the 10 wealthiest counties in the US are in the Washington DC metropolitan area.
http://www.wjla.com/pictures/2012/09/top-10-richest-counties-in-u-s---7-in-d-c-area/-10-montgomery-county-md-25979-1804.html
Washington DC is a culture of corruption, an Imperial City like the Hunger Games.
So, let them eat cake. Thanks for making my point.


"I remember when 'liberal' meant being generous with your own money."--Will Rogers.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:08am PT
Riley Wyna wrote:
But Obama has reduced the budget deficit..


Yes he has reduced the budget deficit... from the 4 highest deficits in US history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Total_Deficits_vs._National_Debt_Increases_2001-2010.png
The National debt, AKA the accumulation of all annual deficits, is far more outrageous than when candidate Obama decried it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._National_Debt_-_Dollars_and_Relative_to_GDP.png


Is this a good time to add the biggest entitlement program in our history?
I know healthcare has been an increasingly expensive mess and due to the extremely complicated nature of it I don't have the smarts, the time or the inclination to research it all...much like congress when they voted for ACA.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 04:11pm PT
jghedge wrote;
Again, why should people sign up for ObamaCare when they don't have to?


Excellent question. My ex-wife was just dropped from Aetna (she said they are pulling out of California)and she is feeling scared and pissed. She was happy with what she had and she is not poor. Will she be forced to sign up for ACA, or to pay far higher premiums somewhere else?

I guess you could blame it on the insurance. But why all of a sudden are they pulling out of California? I'm not smart enough to figure out all the regulations ACA is imposing on the healthcare industry, but I see results and how it impacts many. It is not good.

Anytime Congress exempts themselves from a policy they proclaim is great for the unwashed, I am skeptical of their motives and honesty.
You are free to have faith in their motives and honesty.



JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 30, 2013 - 04:39pm PT
Yes, let's shift the debate from the Affordable [sic] Care Act to Sarah Palin. I guess I'd try that too if I had to defend a party and President who chose to spend all of their political capital on the ACA. That act works so well that the President has used his non-enumerated powers to suspend it for certain segments of society and exempt those favorably connected from part of the requirements. Meanwhile, most premiums increased as a direct result of this folly.

More damning, the administration knew since 2010 that implementation of the ACA would result in between 40% and 65% of current health plan customers losing their coverage, and being forced into more expensive plans. Despite this, the President continued to say until a few weeks ago "If you like your coverage, you can keep it."

At least you have the Tea Party ready to divert attention from this fiasco.

John
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Oct 30, 2013 - 04:48pm PT
Yes, let's shift the debate from the Affordable [sic] Care Act to Sarah Palin. I guess I'd try that too if I had to defend a party and President who chose to spend all of their political capital on the ACA...

It wasn't the president or his party who just erased all of their political capital by shutting down the federal government over the ACA. That would be the Republican party--currently less popular that hemorrhoids and root canals.

Curt
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Oct 30, 2013 - 05:25pm PT
You know exactly why some policies have gone up in price - it's because insurers are now actually required to provide an adequate level of coverage. The inexpensive policies that everyone "lost" were just ripoffs. People just thought they had insurance because they were paying the premiums...

Well, it's anti-American and socialist to protect people from being ripped off. You know, because it's bad for business. How dare Obama and his jackbooted thugs...

Curt
doughnutnational

Gym climber
its nice here in the spring
Oct 30, 2013 - 05:29pm PT
Is there anyone out there who did not their premiums rise alot almost every year even before Obama Care? The problem as mentioned is trying to change the delivery method for health insurance while keeping obscene profits intact for those who provide no health care.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 05:34pm PT
jghedge wrote:
And this assertion is given the full 3-Pinocchio, Flat-Out Lie rating by the Post:

I stand corrected. A one year waiver for certain groups. As I have mentioned, I have a life beyond watching the news and I don't spend a lot of time trying to figure out a very complicated issue. Kudos to you for knowing so much.

So as far as my other point: The presidents statement, "If you like your coverage, you can keep it" evidently does not apply to my ex-wife's plan. I hope that the "non-profit" in the exchange is cheaper than her "for profit" plan that she liked, but I'm not placing any bets based on what politicians say. All she wanted was catastrophic coverage so she wouldn't lose her house, but she may now have to pay for services she doesn't think she needs. As I said, she is pissed. She is also non-political.

I still remain skeptical of the wonderfulness of it all, but I admire your faith and passion in totally buying into it. I hope it works out. It's just not looking good so far.
Hoser

climber
vancouver
Oct 30, 2013 - 05:39pm PT
All she wanted was catastrophic coverage

With that type of medical coverage, what happens when/if you get cancer ? If the old coverage did not cover cancer or similar who pays for the care if you do get one of these tpyes of diseases?

JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 30, 2013 - 05:59pm PT
Since you asked, Dave, here's a post from a now-deleted thread that I made in 2009 which contains what I think we should have done:

"[Jul 29, 2009 - 03:15pm PT]

The effect of malpractice litigation on health care costs goes far beyond the costs of premiums. While it is beyond serious dispute that laws such as California's MICRA laws result in lower malpractice premiums, they do nothing to affect the "legal defense" practice of medicine.

I know a great many health care providers of all varieties. My wife is a nurse. Our best man is a doctor. My main climbing partner is married to a nurse practitioner. Virtually every health care worker I know claims that they need to perform procedures, prescribe medication, or run tests that the patient probably would choose to forgo, if the patient were making the payments directly, but which the professional cannot forgo without fear of being sued.

At least in California, if a doctor gets sued for malpractice, he or she cannot settle the case without it being recorded as a blot on their record. This forces them to spend untold amounts of time and agony defending claims that are usually spurious. A great many of those suits allege that the doc failed to do everything possible to treat the patient. This provides a powerful incentive to maximize, not optimize health care.

As I stated much earlier in this thread, and which no one has refuted, the main reason we spend more on medical care is that we get more medical care.

There are numerous problems with the current healthcare system that I believe government involvement could make better. Since the Dems on this thread are crying for a solution, let me offer these:

1. For coverage of uninsured patients, something in the nature of the VA would be a good option. Particularly as the population of veterans decreases as the generations subject to the draft die out, we should integrate that system into a general system available to those who want it -- but there should be some cost. Otherwise, there is no incentive to use it wisely.

2. There is no reason why health coverage should be dependent on employment. The tie between health care coverage and employment has three historic roots:

(a) Henry Ford wanted his workers to stay healthy, and thought it was worth his money to include it as a benefit;

(b) Health benefits did not count as wages or salaries in World War II. It was thus a way for businesses to obtain workers by raising their return from employment without running afoul of wage controls; and

(c) Health benefits paid by employers are not taxed to employees.

The disadvantage, of course, is that health benefits become an impediment to changing employment, and compound the economic difficulty of losing or leaving a job. I suggest that we eliminate the employee's tax break on employer-paid health care, and replace it with a deduction for medical expenses, including medical insurance -- without any requirement that these expenditures exceed a certain percentage of income. This will provide an incentive to have your own insurance, rather than be on the dole with my VA For All plan, above. In addition, it will provide some connection between the consumer of health care and the cost of same.

3. We should do something to restore health insurance to its role as insurance. It currently covers several things (birth and birth control, to cite two contradictory examples) that are not traditionally insurable risks. I rather suspect maintenance-type health care would be cheaper if we paid for it the way we pay for car repair.

4. We need tort reform that respects freedom of contract. A doctor should not feel compelled to provide the very best treatment if it costs 100 times as much as the next best treatment, and is .001% better. Virtually all health care recipients have sufficient intelligence to make those sorts of decisions themselves.

5. We should have used some of that pork-barrel money (disguised as "stimulus" money) to build and staff a lot of new med schools.

This is just an outline, but I think it's far better than giving the government control over 18% of American GDP.

OK. I've got my blindfold on, and they've given me my cigarette. Fire away!"

John
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 08:16pm PT
Dave Kos wrote:
If we had a functional congress, they could introduce legislation that would fix these problems and make the system even better.

Dave,
I think that the reason this issue is so contentious is that it was passed on a straight party line vote using a sneaky parliamentary procedure to bypass the super majority normally required.

All major social legislation ever passed has had strong bi-partisan support and was then accepted by the vast majority of citizens. You may despise the other party, but you have to live with them.
Gridlock usually occurs without compromise. Democracy is messy.

Democrats (and unfortunately the rest of us) are reaping the "fruits" of their own hyper partisanship, and I'm no f&%$#@g republican.
Pass it before you know what's in it? How is that intelligent?


I like the solutions that JEleazarian offered up. As for now, we are into the ACA. I hope it works out, but I remain skeptical for now.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 30, 2013 - 08:24pm PT
TWO MILLION AMERICANS WILL LOSE THEIR POLICIES AND HAVE TO GET A NEW ONE!!!!!1111

In other words, less than 1% of the population will have fewer choices in their coverage options. And for many of that 1%, the choice they wanted may have actually been substandard.
\
(It's more like 8-10% of the insured population)

That's only because employer group plans were unconstitutionally and unilaterally exempted by Barry for another year in defiance of the law as written.

A year from now the rest of us get f*#ked!


Unless of course you are a member of the ruling political class and are therefore exempt.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Oct 30, 2013 - 08:46pm PT
Oh just stop it..

all this emphasis on "tort reform" as a real smart "solution" to the massive problems in America's healthcare system is....laughably partisan and hugely, hugely irrelevant to fixing the problems

"partisan" because JohnE, being someone who votes Republican, has it in his head that doctors' personal income is so touchingly limited by the amount of medical malpractice they pay,
but more importantly John's hidden agenda is his contention that Lawyers who represent patients who have a grievance with their doctor or surgeon are supported in those efforts because they contribute money to Democratic politicos

this angers John, apparently because giving money to politicians who you support is, i don't know, wrong or sleazy or something, never mind John's own strong support for the righteousness of the Supreme Court's decision of allowing full freedom of "speech" in the Citizens United decision


let us be clear, limiting awards to patients for successful lawsuits is chicken feed, period

tell us John, what is your party's "plan" to expand healthcare to tens of millions without it?

tell us how you will eliminate denying healthcare for almost 50% who DO have childhood Asthma or any of the other many many "pre existing conditions"

tell us sbout your party's plan to even try to rein in the rapidly rising premiums costs,
and all without expanding the pools by adding many more healthy payers

your opposition to the ACA is purely partisan, just like Cragmans, and Andersons, etc etc

not racist opposition because you would oppose it if even Hillary were President

you oppose because at the very core of "conservatism" is fear, fear of changing the status quo

John Duffield

Mountain climber
New York
Oct 30, 2013 - 09:34pm PT

He is an embarrassment to our nation, and will go down in history as one of the most destructive administrations ever known.


Not so sure of this. The deficit is down to the lowest since before 2008.

In the long run, blowing a ton on a corrupt website procural, won't be as important.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 31, 2013 - 01:16am PT
but more importantly John's hidden agenda is his contention that Lawyers who represent patients who have a grievance with their doctor or surgeon are supported in those efforts because they contribute money to Democratic politicos

No. I simply think contract, rather than tort, law forms a better basis for rational health care.

Buzzer .,
You got caught in some right wing propaganda lie their brother

We all knew what the President said, and continued to say for the last five years: If you like your health plan, you can keep it. They was a straight up lie. No amount of spin can change that.

John
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Oct 31, 2013 - 08:11am PT
Don't fret Boehner , Cruz and lynch mob are working on a better plan to save you money on health insurance...Your happy meal coupons are redeemable at all blue shield death panels...
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Oct 31, 2013 - 01:00pm PT
It's good to have a healthy dose of scientific skepticism when it comes to complicated political solutions that politicians exempt themselves from.

Larry, I assume you are not a complete dunce. Perhaps you can cite that provision that exempts politicians?

Perhaps it is the same section that exempts them from wearing motorcycle helmets? Or having to ride in child carseats? Or from laws against sleeping under bridges?

yep, I think it is EXACTLY those sections.....
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Oct 31, 2013 - 01:29pm PT
Obama = Glitch
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Oct 31, 2013 - 02:04pm PT
Tarzan writes:

"I don't have insurance and have not forever. I guess I'll have to kneel to the taxcollector and pay the fine."



Maybe not.

The way I understand it, the IRS can only collect on the fine if they owe you a refund. There's no line on your income tax form requiring either proof of Obamacare participation or $95 in the red column.

Set up your tax withholding so instead of getting a refund you owe money at the end of the year, and you'll duck the Obama tax-fine-penalty.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 31, 2013 - 03:37pm PT
"We all knew what the President said, and continued to say for the last five years: If you like your health plan, you can keep it. They was a straight up lie. No amount of spin can change that."


The quintessential response to this:

In other words, "we lied."

John
stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Oct 31, 2013 - 03:51pm PT
I agree, the "you can keep your plan" messaging was poor. But is the fact that it is not exactly true really meaningful?

Any given year a pretty fair percentage of people have to change their plans simply because employers/insurance companies change the plans. So a lot of people are already seeing this. And almost everybody has been seeing price increases as well. So it's not as if the ACA is suddenly causing increases in a system that had been stable or going down.

The website thing is a problem...that should have been much more well-executed. As to whether the rest of it is a problem, I'd argue that it is too early to tell. It was an effort to do something to try to fix a broken system. You threw out a decent list earlier in this thread John...it would be great to see a few elected GOP folks actually propose changes instead of just trying to shoot down the ACA.

Beyond that, one only has to look at this site to see how broken things are. On almost any given day, there's a thread on the front page appealing for help with covering someone's medical costs. I don't mind helping folks out, and I've contributed to a few of these. It shows we're a good community. But it shouldn't have to be anywhere near as common as it seems to be.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 31, 2013 - 03:56pm PT
What do you mean by "not exactly true," Steve? The true statement would be, Under the ACA, if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance unless the ACA won't let you keep your insurance."

In other words, we make no promises.

John
stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Oct 31, 2013 - 04:07pm PT
By not exactly true, I mean that clearly in many cases people are having to switch. But many of those people would actually have to switch anyway, the way things have been in the insurance market in recent years.
And in many cases the switch that people are having to make is to plans that are actually better. They cover preventative stuff and have lower copays and deductibles. Probably not the case all the time. But again, are the number of cases where this is completely not true really meaningful?
Hoser

climber
vancouver
Oct 31, 2013 - 04:25pm PT
you can't get over the fact that people should no more be allowed to have inadquate health insurance

That is the part people dont get, same with the guy who said all his wife wanted was catastrophic insurance.

Thats not how insurance works, the payments of the many pay for the losses of the few. If we all just did the bare minimum it wouldnt work, in any type of insurance.

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Oct 31, 2013 - 04:37pm PT
In other words, you can't get over the fact that people should no more be allowed to have inadquate health insurance than they should be allowed to drive around in cars with no headlights, bad brakes, no smog cert etc. You certainly can keep your car, just like you're being allowed to keep the same health coverage- as long as they both meet standards that society decides are adequate.


My private insurance policy is being terminated. I will now pay more for less. Straight up MASSIVE tax increase on the middle/ lower middle class that operate small business. No denying that. Oh yeah, my policy is cancelled because it does not contain coverage for things I will never use at this point in my life ie maternity coverage.

Obamacare is just another mis guided idealistic pie in the sky social policy to attract voters
that will end in classic inefficient government style...failure.






Salamanizer

Trad climber
The land of Fruits & Nuts!
Oct 31, 2013 - 04:48pm PT
Bullshit hedge, not an accurate analogy at all.
I had good insurance, it was $150 dollars a month. It had all the coverage I wanted. I can keep an identical plan for $1200 a month. Since I cannot afford that I need to file for Obama Care which is going to cost $700 a month for a bunch of coverage I don't want or need. Obama Care forces me to buy a Ferrari when all I want and can afford is a nice midsize commuter.

It's only affordable or free if you make no money, pay no taxes or contribute anything to society. But if you have a job and make money, prepare to pay. Socialism at its best.

Strait up lie, but what do you expect from the most corrupt, close doored, scandal ridden president in American history?
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 31, 2013 - 04:54pm PT
forget discussing the ACA with people like JohnE and others

they oppose it, period, end of story

Yes, I do, for all of the reasons I've stated over the past five years.

I do, however, have quite a bit of trouble getting over the cavalier attitude so many on this forum display toward the lies the ACA's proponents made in support of the law, and particularly that you can keep your insurance if you like it. I guess, to them, it just wasn't news that those statements were known to be misleading and false when made.

I'm also bemused by the statement about how insurance works. The statement that insurance for catastrophes only cannot work defies hundreds, if not thousands of years of insurance law. (For those who question my use of "thousands" in the previous sentence, markets for maritime insurance of cargo existed in the Roman Empire, and probably predate it.)

"Insurance" consists of pooling of risks, against which everyone in the pool agrees to be insured. The idea that insuring only catastrophic health care costs won't work because the customers need to be in the pool for everyone is rather like saying that flood insurance won't work unless people who live where there is no danger of flooding need to pay for flood insurance so those who live where there is a flood risk can afford the insurance. Oops! Federal flood insurance, subsidized by taxpayers, actually has that basis, but I digress. . .

John
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 31, 2013 - 05:03pm PT
By the way, if I don't control pop-ups or drop-downs, every time I click onto this thread, I get a drop-down ad for health care coverage.

This has nothing to do with this site or cmac, by the way. About the only one worse is the drop-down for finding a bankruptcy lawyer every time I access the website for the bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California (but, fortunately, not for any other bankruptcy court website -- yet). That one's particularly annoying because the features I need there require me to turn down my pop-up controls. Grrr.

John
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Oct 31, 2013 - 05:35pm PT
Problem is the young and healthy are not going to sign up when they see what they are going to pay. Also, employers will offer subsidized healthcare payments only to the top brass creating more that choose not to buy insurance.

Financial liability is going to hit the middle class square in the discretionary income pocket. This will cause our economy to rebound LOLOLOL

Young punks are not going to give up their meager hard earned wages to subsidize the boomer geezers.


Obamacare is great in theory. Implementation and future funding will be a disaster.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Oct 31, 2013 - 05:46pm PT
Time will tell Norton.

Obamacare will be just another notch on the bedpost of the selfish generation that has and will continue loading future generations with debt and liability.

No matter, you will be gone and will have exploited the system for all it is worth.

JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 31, 2013 - 06:13pm PT
It does appear that the current Obamacare implementation, like the health insurance business in general, does not treat insurance purely as a catastrophic risk mitigation but rather includes a "prepaid health care" component.

That is exactly my point. I was criticized earlier because my argument suggested that not everyone needed to buy prepaid health care. The response was that I was wrong because everyone needed to buy it to share the risk of being unable to pay. That's an argument for an insurance model, not a mandated prepaid healthcare model.

John
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 31, 2013 - 06:38pm PT
What's "extreme"about this?

113TH CONGRESS
1ST
SESSION
S.ll
To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to ensure that
individuals can keep their health insurance coverage.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
llllllllll
llllllllll
introduced the following bill; which was read twice
and referred to the Committee on
llllllllll
A BILL
To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
to ensure that individuals can keep their health insurance
coverage.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
3
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep it Act’’.
5
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.
7
(a) I
GENERAL
.—Part 2 of subtitle C of title I of
8
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42
9

Whole text as pdf here

http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/docs/If%20You%20Like%20Your%20Plan%20Text%20%281%29.pdf

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 31, 2013 - 06:44pm PT
http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/30/a-fatal-conceit-how-obamacare-explains-the-liberal-worldview/
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Oct 31, 2013 - 07:23pm PT
But we probably also agree that this flaw can be remedied without dismantling the entire program, shutting down the federal government, and/or impeaching the president.

So why does the Republican party insist upon these extreme alternatives?
We do agree, Dave, and the shutdown played out almost exactly as I said it would, except that the Obama administration has been sufficiently opaque and incompetent to give the Tea Partiers credence among those who should know better.

Then again, if the Republicans really cared about governance back in 2004 when they had both houses of Congress plus the presidency (Yes, I know the Dems say that's not enough, but I digress again), they would have tackled a comprehensive overhaul of the health-care system. Instead, they tried to be Democrats-lite, and passed a prescription drug benefit that was unfunded and undermined Medicare's solvency. If the Democrats had offered a better alternative than John Kerry, I would probably have voted Democrat in 2004.

To me, the Republican actions then, together with DeLay's nefarious tactics, showed little difference from what the Democrats did, but with less heart and less brains -- a bad combination. Once the Democrats took over, they simply ignored the Republicans, as mentioned by others, and we ended up with a bill to which a very large proportion of the population is opposed. Selling it by lying about the effect on policies has now come home to roost as well. How do centrists get a voice these days?

John
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Oct 31, 2013 - 07:42pm PT
Do not panic. Everything is under control.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Transmen and Transwomen and people of uncertain gender identities, some of you may be alarmed by recent reports of malfunctioning health care websites and policy cancellations.

Do not be alarmed. We know what we are doing.

Health care plans are not being cancelled. Opportunities are being transitioned. Some people are being moved from bad health care plans to good health care plans with higher deductibles and higher premiums that will provide transmen with maternity care and people of uncertain gender identities with drug counseling and mental health treatment.

This is a good thing. Warning. This is a good thing.

You are being transitioned. Why do you resist?

Forget your old health plan. It was placed in the trunk of a Prius at 3 AM this morning, taken to a frozen lake outside an organic poultry plant in Minnesota and shot twice in the head. It was a bad plan. It has transitioned to no longer being a plan. We have a better plan for you.

Go to Healthcare.gov and… correction, do not go there. Forget that you were told to go there or not to go there. Forget that it even existed. Forget that you read this.

Healthcare.gov is working. Do not visit Healthcare.gov to confirm that it is working. If you wish to transition to your opportunity, why not apply by phone or mail or carrier pigeon?

And don’t be alarmed. You are being given a great opportunity to transition to being a better person.

Your old health plan selfishly paid for your health care. Your new health plan will pay for everyone’s healthcare. Your premiums reflect the number of people who need mental health counseling, drug counseling and sex change operations in your area. This is your opportunity to give back.

Only the very rich, and you, have had their opportunities transitioned. If anyone tries to tell you otherwise, go to Healthcare.gov and report them immediately.

Correction, do not go to Healthcare.gov. The site is down. Tweet to Jim Messina. Correction, Jim Messina has transitioned his opportunity to become a transwoman on his new health plan and is unavailable to take your denunciation.

Write your denunciation on recycled rice paper and mail it to Healthcare.gov 935382 Federal Way, Washington D.C. Expect a response and prison sentence in 6 to 8 months.

Do not be alarmed. If you resist, you will be transitioned.

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2013/10/your-opportunity-is-being-transitioned.html
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 31, 2013 - 07:51pm PT
Dave Kos wrote:
the fact that you quoted the "pass it before you know what's in it" propaganda point means that you are already watching Fox News. That line, taken out of context, is a complete misrepresentation.

Fox News? I only have Netflix in my house, and only watch that for 4 hours a week. You might not know what I watch, but at least the president's home boys do.
The quote I used may have been taken out of context, but in my defense and considering other things I have heard Pelosi say, it is very easy to believe. In addition, that propaganda quote pales next to the president's mendacious assertions. My mistake on a quote, but I'll hold on to my healthy skepticism of ACA due to anecdotal but true stories from several friends who are affected negatively.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Oct 31, 2013 - 07:53pm PT
Ken M wrote:
Larry, I assume you are not a complete dunce. Perhaps you can cite that provision that exempts politicians?

Hey Ken,
As I replied to jghedge: "I stand corrected. A one year waiver for certain groups. As I have mentioned, I have a life beyond watching the news and I don't spend a lot of time trying to figure out a very complicated issue. Kudos to you for knowing so much".

I will add that even though many who know me may disagree, your assumption is mostly correct.
stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Oct 31, 2013 - 11:36pm PT
Yes, many of these policies do have preventative medicine inclusions that weren't in people's previous catastrophic coverage. That's a good thing if you're trying to reduce health care costs across the board in this country.
It's a lot cheaper for all of us to pay pennies so that people can be covered for pregnancies, mammography, colonoscopies, etc. All of those things can result in huge costs without the preventative side. Seems to me there has been at least one individual on this site that died from colon cancer that would probably have been treatable if detected earlier (at least that is what he said).

At this point, you're 100% correct John. I don't give a flying flip if Obama wasn't being truthful about the plan thing. He was trying to get more people covered, more preventative medicine in place, and other things to reduce costs. I'm willing to forgive a fair amount for those good goals. Especially when the GOP isn't offering up squat. And I've spent the last 15 years working in healthcare, so I have a pretty good idea about what I'm talking about.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Oct 31, 2013 - 11:53pm PT
How do centrists get a voice these days?

John

Join the Democratic party. There is no longer any place in the Republican tent for centrists.

Curt
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 1, 2013 - 01:15am PT

John
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 1, 2013 - 02:55am PT
Why do I have to pay and these guys are exempt? Isn't this a all for one and one for all type thing?


Because they are self-insured, and they ALREADY pay to insure their employees to the same degree that is required by the ACA.

Ideally, all companies would be in this category. But some give inadequate insurance, and so are not exempt.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 1, 2013 - 03:00am PT
One thing that no one seems to have noticed: there are many insurance companies that are raising their rates in a way that is not rationally related to the ACA.

Some are cancelling some policies, requiring people to purchase a new policy at higher prices.

This should result in vast increases in profits.

But there is a catch. The law requires that 85% of the premium be spent on medical care. If less it, it must be refunded.

However, that repayment won't take place for a year. Effectivly, it is a loan of money for no interest!

And, if the ins co's manage to get the ACA repealed.....they keep the money!

Follow the money.......
raw

Mountain climber
Malibu
Nov 1, 2013 - 12:04pm PT
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2013/10/30/obamas-pledge-that-no-one-will-take-away-your-health-plan/

4 Pinocchios, for those who count on that scale....
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 1, 2013 - 01:07pm PT
A law sold as the Affordable anything Act fails if the price increases for anybody.

The whole thing was built on a foundation of bullsh#t.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 1, 2013 - 01:10pm PT
A lot of people are saying they can't afford the mandated price increases.
Salamanizer

Trad climber
The land of Fruits & Nuts!
Nov 1, 2013 - 04:12pm PT
Even if it increases for some, that SOME can "AFFORD" it...

What complete and total bullsh#t. How can someone be so ignorant to tell me what "I" can afford?
700 dollars for bullshit obamacare a month is affordable?
That is a quarter of my total income. I have about 2000 dollars a month to pay for mortgage and bills. Now I have a700 dollar healthcare bill to pay and you say I can "afford" that?

So in your mind I should have to sell my house, reduce my bills by living at the poverty level so that I can afford some healthcare I neither need or want?

Well I'll just go ahead and say what everyone in my age bracket from the ages of 27 to 35 is going to tell ya... Go F*#k Yourself!!! I ain't paying it.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 1, 2013 - 04:39pm PT
There's no way anyone could know at this point if the new policy is a net negative for anyone. It hasn't even gone into effect.

Got a wake up call for you. I work for a Fortune 500 company. Our health care providers held a benefit conference the other day. Our premiums will go up 44%. The deductibles will sky rocket.

This is a turd that was never read and passed by a congress that is already opted out of it.

Salamanizer

Trad climber
The land of Fruits & Nuts!
Nov 1, 2013 - 04:49pm PT
I don't drink that trash nor will I pay for it which is part of the reason why I can afford to live in a moderate middle class neighborhood in my area and live in the bottom bracket of middle class. I've fought my way and busted my ass, all the while making good decisions that have allowed me to get here. Sorry you missed the boat. But you should have put down the climbing rope and picked up a shovel a little more often.

...but what I can't afford is to go out and buy a sporty car and shell out the $700 a month payment on top of all that. Which is why I don't have one. It would be an irresponsible thing to do. It would put me over my budget and deep into the red which is what obamacare is trying to do.
So all the ACA does for me is put healthcare out of my reach and turn me from someone who was happily insured, into someone who no longer has health insurance. Good job dumbasses!!!

Obamacare = Set to FAIL...

Edited to add:
That you may have difficulty affording to make your house payment cannot be blamed on "Obamacare"...

It was your choice to purchase the place that is costing you so much...

What a completely asinine statement. Yes! I chose to buy the house I did, but what I did not choose was to purchase healthcare at a 700% higher rate than I currently have, by having Obamacare shoved down my throat.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 1, 2013 - 04:58pm PT
Although I have posted my own ideas about what a good health care policy change would be since at least 2009, certain posters continue to allege I am against healthcare in some way. I don't think additional posts by me will add anything on that count at the moment.

Some, however, recognizing that I really do care about health care and what our policy should be, have alleged that the conservative groups, rather than one individual on ST, have no plan. Not true.

I am not a particular fan of the Heritage Foundation, and consider them culpable in the shutdown fiasco, but they at least have also published their health care plan:

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/10/after-repeal-of-obamacare-moving-to-patient-centered-market-based-health-care?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=&utm_content=&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

It remains to be seen who, if anyone will read it or respond to it with substantive argument on this forum.

John

Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 1, 2013 - 05:35pm PT
I am not a particular fan of the Heritage Foundation, and consider them culpable in the shutdown fiasco, but they at least have also published their health care plan...

Uh, the Affordable Care Act is a Heritage Foundation healthcare plan.

Curt
mucci

Trad climber
The pitch of Bagalaar above you
Nov 1, 2013 - 05:38pm PT
$700.00 per month for coverage that would cover prescriptions as well???...

Hmmm...




Hahha good luck with that!

So many are







































Gonna DIE!!!
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 1, 2013 - 05:40pm PT
I agree, Curt, which is yet another reason why I don't see how Heritage can take the position on the shutdown they took with a straight face.

John
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 1, 2013 - 06:24pm PT
Affordable Care Act is a Heritage Foundation healthcare plan. Curt

Curt,
I have read where Stuart Butler of the Heritage Foundation wrote a 4 page document on healthcare but I haven't seen it. Maybe a link to what you're referring to, it could be informative.
The ACA document is about 35,000 pages long. Explains why most people, myself included, don't know squat about it. At least we're slowly finding out.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 1, 2013 - 06:37pm PT
Slowly finding out it's really the,

Unaffordable Healthcare Tax
CrackAddict

Trad climber
Canoga Park, CA
Nov 1, 2013 - 07:17pm PT
Jay Leno had the best line:

"More than 700 fake ObamaCare websites have been created..It's simple to identify the phony sites though because they are easy to log on to"

6 Signups on the first day?? This has to be the most stunning failure in the history of the "Progressive movement". If Obama would have come out on October 1st and just said they had completely forgot to create a Healthcare exchange, and they need another 3 years, they might have saved face somewhat.
Hoser

climber
vancouver
Nov 1, 2013 - 07:27pm PT
I can't believe how you pinkos can keep carrying water for this guy.

I cant believe there is even one person who actually wants to keep anything remotely similar to the third world health care system you used to have.

CrackAddict

Trad climber
Canoga Park, CA
Nov 1, 2013 - 07:40pm PT
I doubt there is a fix.
A corrupt for-profit health care system just does not work.
When I rolled into work today at one of the six large hospitals for a city of 100000 I couldn't find parking. Maybe a thousand cars at a hospital?? Why? I have been asking myself the wtf question for years. This is a place of illness, why the hell are all these people here?

Funny how other sector of the economy that is not coddled and subsidized by Government works very efficiently, even though it is all "for profit". Without Government subsidies, cronyism, regulations that keep us from buying cheaper drugs and services (like Medicare Part D), Healthcare would be a much more efficient market, in which profit seeking executives would have to lower prices in competition. If you want to see how it would look, simply look at the services that aren't covered by insurance or subsidies, such as Lasik. The technology gets better every year, and the price comes down. THAT is a "for-profit" system in a nutshell.

Ahhhh the evils of profit! Every job I have ever had has been because someone wanted to make profit. In an efficient market, free of stifling regulation and cronyism, profit comes from adding value- that means that to get it, you have to provide a service that makes someone even more money than they are paying you. This is where wealth actually comes from - not from Ben Bernanke's printing press.
CrackAddict

Trad climber
Canoga Park, CA
Nov 1, 2013 - 07:47pm PT
I cant believe there is even one person who actually wants to keep anything remotely similar to the third world health care system you used to have.

Welcome to Obamacare, 4th World Healthcare for the 21st Century!

We "used to have" a pretty good healthcare system when I was a kid. What happened to it? Government, that is what. Look at this chart of Government spending on Healthcare vs. GDP:


Government spending has skyrocketed as they have taken over Health care, which correlates strongly with the amount of dysfunction.

Personally, I think having socialized medicine would be much better that what is happening now, as Government could at least set rates. Throwing money at the private sector distorts the market, and creates dysfunction. This is exactly the same path that Education has followed also.
CrackAddict

Trad climber
Canoga Park, CA
Nov 1, 2013 - 07:55pm PT
People stopped dying when they were 65.

Life expectancies have barely changed since the 60s, and most of it is attributable to lower infant mortality.

I have heard from a nurse that Canada does not treat people over 70 for certain things like heart attacks? Not sure if it is true, but since 2/3 of the Health Care spending in the U.S. is for "end of life", it seems like it would definitely cut costs.
WBraun

climber
Nov 1, 2013 - 08:00pm PT
Human being number one needs is oxygen.

Next is food.

Next is health care.

Without those you can't live.

Thus the material body is the source of all misery.

Why you people so miserable .....?
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 1, 2013 - 08:01pm PT
Curt,
I have read where Stuart Butler of the Heritage Foundation wrote a 4 page document on healthcare but I haven't seen it. Maybe a link to what you're referring to, it could be informative.

I'm referring to this:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/27/conservative-origins-of-obamacare/?_r=0

The design for the ACA was one of conservative, Republican origin.

Curt
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 1, 2013 - 08:08pm PT
The design for the ACA was one of conservative, Republican origin.

all the more reason to oppose it then
Hoser

climber
vancouver
Nov 1, 2013 - 08:09pm PT
I have heard from a nurse that Canada does not treat people over 70 for certain things like heart attacks?

Thats reasonably amusing, but the only place I know of where they ask you for your credentials before sending the ambulance is the USA.

johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 1, 2013 - 09:29pm PT
Obama and the she bitch have trust upon us a health care plane they NEVER READ. And they are opted out of.

Drink the kool aid.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 1, 2013 - 09:39pm PT
Face the music. Our gover goobooer's don't care about the future of the population they are supposed the represent. Doesn't matter whether they are dems or pubs, they just want to fleece us like sutpid lambs.

Werner is right.....
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 1, 2013 - 09:41pm PT
Ezekiel Emanuel (Rahm's Bro) is he philosophical author of the Unaffordable Healthcare Act and reflects "progressive" thinking all the way back to the eugenicists of the turn of the last century.



His theory;

the Complete lives system.

http://bme.ccny.cuny.edu/faculty/mbikson/Courses/BMESeniorDesign/EthicsOfHealthRationing.pdf


Anyone not of "instrumental Value" particularly those under 14 or over 40 are dead weight and not socially productive and economic priorities should outweigh all others.

Are those that pursue potentially injurious and completely non productive pursuits like climbing or base jumping also candidates for the euthanasia needle, or the amputators saw?

Welcome to the Brave New World!

[Click to View YouTube Video]
tornado

climber
lawrence kansas
Nov 1, 2013 - 09:52pm PT
can we call all canadians "frost dicks" from here on out? awesome.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 1, 2013 - 10:00pm PT
can we call all canadians "frost dicks" from here on out? awesome.

Yeah, they are the one's laughing. This is serious shee.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 1, 2013 - 10:05pm PT
May I ask this question? Why is it that Americans don't have the freedom to choose their own health insurance? I just don't get it. Why must the liberal nanny state make decisions for us? We can make them ourselves, thank you very much. It's like choosing a car, buying a home or investing in a stock. We can handle it.

..............

No, this is federal coercion at its worst. And that's why the public is turning against it. It's not freedom.

Of course, there are other structural problems to Obamacare that are both unfair and unaffordable. Mainly, younger healthy people are not going to subsidize older sicker folks. We should take care of the latter with transparent government subsidies, and not by trying to redistribute resources (again) from the young to the old.

Or then there's the Medicaid entitlement. It's already out of control and close to bankruptcy. But in the early days of Obamacare, Medicaid sign-ups are exploding, all while sign-ups for private plans on the new exchanges are minuscule.

Between the president's broken promises, the millions of policy cancellations, the continued website breakdowns and the unaffordable, unfair con game between the healthy young and the sicker old, this Obamacare monster is well on its way to collapsing of its own weight.

But here's the bigger point: All this is the inevitable result of massive central-planning exercises to control the economy. That's not freedom.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101164217
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 1, 2013 - 10:10pm PT
"If you like your plan you can keep it"

BS. I lost my plan and will pay much more in the future for less coverage. Obama flat out lied.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 1, 2013 - 10:26pm PT
"If you like your plan you can keep it"

BS. I lost my plan and will pay much more in the future for less coverage. Obama flat out lied.

Oh please...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/01/1252375/-Consumer-Reports-destroys-rate-shock-horror-story?Detail=facebook

Curt
dave729

Trad climber
Western America
Nov 1, 2013 - 10:34pm PT
The truth shall set you free

Obama: Always The Last One To Know

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney Confirmed Secretary Sebelius’ Claims That The Administration “Did Not Know” The Significance Of The Glitches Until After The Rollout Began
http://www.gop.com/news/research/last-one-to-know/


Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 1, 2013 - 11:58pm PT
Curt wrote:
The design for the ACA was one of conservative, Republican origin.

So I read Krugman's column and went to the site he linked. I guess I don't understand why not even one of even the most moderate republicans voted for ACA. What were the republican demands that were rejected by democrats?

This reminds me of the "fix" for Social Security.
Back in the 80's, Daniel Patrick Moynihan proposed partial privatization of SS to keep it solvent. The republicans rejected it because it was a democrat idea.
After the 2000 election, George W Bush proposed partial privatization of SS to keep it solvent. The democrats rejected it because it was a republican idea.

My instincts tell me that both parties suck.
As the great philosopher Rodney King once said: "Can't we all just get along?"
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 2, 2013 - 12:03am PT
Oh please...

It is true. Suck Obama's dick as much as you want.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 2, 2013 - 01:28am PT
jghedge wrote:
You obviously don't follow politics too much

The way some of us prioritize our lives, we would see that as a feature, not a bug.
I'm just looking for the truth. Too many here are blindly shouting "Hurray for my team".
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 2, 2013 - 01:31am PT
jghedge wrote:
JUNK HEALTH INSURANCE is either being upgraded to meet current standards, or is being cancelled.

My ex-wife was making a rational decision with her catastrophic type plan when she decided not to pool her money with others for the day-to-day expenses incurred before anything big happens. She decided not to subsidize other people's routine health care. She had insurance to cover her if something really expensive were to come up.

Now those who "know better than her", of what is in her own best interests, are deciding for her.
Busybodies.
Wonderful.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 2, 2013 - 03:46am PT
It is true. Suck Obama's dick as much as you want.

Unfortunately, I'm at a loss to counter such a profoundly intellectual proposition. Do you have anything remotely constructive to add?

Curt
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 2, 2013 - 08:26am PT
jghedge wrote:
There has to be gov't cost controls on medical goods and services -

No doubt the healthcare system has been dysfunctional.
Should the government impose cost controls on medical schools? (That may self correct with online courses)
Taxes on lifestyle choices that may impact the system? (Climbing risks?)
New laws to restrict lifestyle choices? (Top rope only on this route)
Tort reform? Cost control malpractice insurance?
As the wish list grows, the army needed to regulate and oversee it grows.
Cost controls on the government overseers of healthcare? (Weren't middle men part of the cost problem before?)

I don't have answers, just a lot of questions. I have seen a safety culture grow in the corporate world to the point of being ridiculous, but also reducing injuries. (A pumpkin carving with kids the other day would have been shut down in the corporate world with adults doing it without cut gloves, non-cutting cutting tools, safety glasses, steel toed shoes, ergonomic chairs and tables, etc).

Riley Wyna and JEleazarian, as two examples, have made excellent and compelling points from opposite sides of the issue and I thank them for their civil contributions. Partisan hoorahs have only illustrated what's wrong in Washington DC.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 2, 2013 - 10:43am PT
We have not yet been reduced to savagery, but our incompetence increases in large groups to such a staggering extent that it often seems not to be worth the trouble. Individual geniuses can occasionally carry large groups on their shoulders, micromanaging them, terrorizing them and motivating them, the way that tribal chieftains do, but without that singular personality the whole thing collapses.

The United States government is the ultimate giant unworkable mess. It is a living cargo cult where everyone marches around following routines that are supposed to yield great prosperity, but never do. The processes themselves are broken and make no sense, but the cargo culturers of the government cannot and will not hear that. They know that the government will magically make everything work.

Because government is progress. Government is modernity. Government is magic.

The cargo culters on the islands, who once witnessed the might and power of the American military during WW2 make American flags and uniforms, they build airstrips and wooden control towers, and wait for the planes to land and make them rich. They don't understand why these things should work, but they do them anyway because that is how they remember it happening.

Our own cargo culters invoke FDR and JFK, they talk about the New Deal and the Great Society, they make grand promises and roll out big programs, and then they wait for it all to work. They don't understand themselves how or why it would work. But government is magic and the appearance of a thing is just as good as a real deal.

Build a website and it will work. Pass a law and they will come. Get a degree and you're competent.

There is no need to know how to do a thing. You don't need engineers or competent men. All you need to do is remember the great dreams of the past, listen to a few inspirational JFK speeches and then carve a computer out of wood and wait for free health care to arrive.

In cargo cult America, the food is free, the cell phones are free and the money can be printed forever because government is magic.

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/government-is-magic.html
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 4, 2013 - 09:51am PT

Update from here: my state doesn't have the first person signed up yet. The governor has announced that he has chosen to get a bunch of bureaucrats hired to print up and process written applications. The first of 7,000 apps should just be arriving now they say.

That's change. Here's to hope.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 5, 2013 - 09:43pm PT
Now the President is getting called out for lying again - his recent televised speech on health care. Don't know why he couldn't have just told the truth, we'd understand and wait. Wouldn't we? It's true, the folks taking the calls have to use the computer and it's screwed up.

http://reason.com/archives/2013/11/05/obama-relies-on-false-hope-to-sell-obama

"Obama Relies on False Hope to Sell Obamacare
Even the statement that consumers can apply for insurance without using HealthCare.gov was deceptive.

When the October launch of Obamacare’s online insurance portals went disastrously awry, the Obama administration had a handy communications strategy ready: Distract people with false hope.


On Oct. 21, as the online federal exchange system at the heart of President Obama’s health law entered its third week of widespread failures, the president gave a televised speech in which he admitted that there were “kinks in the system,” but also insisted that the exchange problems could be worked around, because the online insurance portals weren’t the only way to enroll in coverage.

“While the website will ultimately be the easiest way to buy insurance through the marketplace, it isn't the only way,” he said. “I want to emphasize this … you can still buy the same quality affordable insurance plans available on the marketplace the old-fashioned way, offline—either over the phone or in person.” The application process, Obama said, would only take about 25 minutes for an individual.

As workarounds go, it was appealing enough. It was also basically useless. The 25-minute application process he touted didn’t actually provide way to avoid the problems of the exchanges. That’s because the paper applications would eventually have to be submitted into the online enrollment system. And if the system didn’t work, then neither would the supposed workarounds.

This was not exactly a secret to the administration officials managing the Obamacare rollout. They were well aware that paper applications filled out with the help of navigators or call center workers were still dependent on the functionality of the online system. Yet the president went on television to promote the phone and paper processes anyway, reading out the toll-free call-in number like a late-night TV pitchman. Kathleen Sebelius used a similar line in Phoenix a few days later.

The reasoning behind the decision to make workarounds a focus of the president’s message can perhaps be found in newly leaked meeting notes from the Obamacare “war room.” Notes from a meeting held the morning of Oct. 11 show that when questions arose about paper applications, the discussion turned to their symbolic impact. “The paper applications allow people to feel like they are moving forward in the process and provides another option,” the leaked document says. But that additional option provided no substantive benefit. “At the end of the day, we are all stuck in the same queue.”

Similar thinking seems to have informed the decision by some navigators—individuals paid to assist with enrollment in coverage through the law—to encourage individuals to fill out paper applications. "Navigators are seeing people very frustrated and walking away,” notes from the Oct. 15 meeting say, “so they are turning to paper applications to protect their reputations as people in the communities who can help, even though paper applications will not have a quicker result necessarily."

The motivation here was twofold: to try to keep people from being discouraged, and to protect their own reputations as purveyors of help. But let’s be honest: The hope they offered wasn’t real. It was a deception designed to hide the fact that they had nothing to offer.

Six days later, when President Obama stood on the White House lawn and made the same pitch to the entire nation, that was still true. Indeed, it’s been true throughout the administration’s health law sales pitches.

The president’s promises that individuals could keep health plans and doctors were false, and his senior advisers knew it, but decided to mislead people anyway because it made for a better sales pitch. The administration’s repeated assurances that the exchange system was on schedule and on track to work were either intentionally incompetent or deliberately misleading. Obama promised the exchanges would work fine despite not having run complete system tests; multiple senior administration officials claimed they didn't have enrollment data, even though it's clear that Obamacare's overseers had early numbers in hand. On health care, the administration has never had much to offer except distraction, deception, and false hope designed to bolster its own reputation and hide the empty promises it could not keep.

With this record of evasions and incompetence, it is impossible to trust anything the administration says about the health law and its implementation. The only questions that remain are how bad it becomes, for how long, and what deceptions remain to be revealed. What, in other words, are we being given false hope about now?"

johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 5, 2013 - 09:58pm PT
It is true. Suck Obama's dick as much as you want.

Curt, yeah, that is a bit over the top and I am now on his NSA radar.

I don't have the time to look into the details, but shouldn't our goober representatives have done their homework before pushing this through?

I am at this point neither dem or pub. They all suck, suck, suck, suck!

I'm all for a national health insurance plan. I hate to see what jello and others are going through and am willing to pony up within reason. But Obama's plan is a turd. He just won't admit it and keeps spinning the BS.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 6, 2013 - 11:04am PT


Well, in Oregon, there are about 140,000 less people who do not have healthcare than before the law went into effect. They got their cancellation notices but nothing available to change too.

Here's NPR's take on via Hot Air: http://hotair.com/archives/2013/11/05/npr-oregons-exchange-might-actually-be-doing-worse-than-the-federal-site/

Says the Oregonians bungled it worse than the Feds. I'm fully covered from before, but I feel for the folks gonna have to pay out of pocket for any major hospital visits.

By anyones yardstick, having 140,000 with less folks with insurance makes it worse than a "bad rollout with glitches" it makes it disaster. Why were people who had insurance cancelled before they could sign up on the .gov site?
peladob

Mountain climber
Mason City, Iowa
Nov 6, 2013 - 11:26am PT
and the media seems to be doing BHO's damage control.

objectivity is out of style, i guess, if you are a 'news' agency.
Hoser

climber
vancouver
Nov 6, 2013 - 12:55pm PT
I dont know about that.... even Fox news has pieces that agree with the rest of the sane world.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/11/05/insurance-cancelled-dont-blame-obama-or-aca-blame-america-insurance-companies/
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 6, 2013 - 01:40pm PT
I'm all for a national health insurance plan. I hate to see what jello and others are going through and am willing to pony up within reason. But Obama's plan is a turd. He just won't admit it and keeps spinning the BS.

I honestly think it's way too soon to tell. The healthcare.gov website is certainly a disaster, but that doesn't mean the underlying product is bad. Obama probably shouldn't have said "you can keep your plan if you like it" but I also think that's being overblown by his critics. As others have noted, most of the plans being cancelled were "scam" type plans, collecting premiums and not providing adequate minimum coverage to policy holders.

Curt
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 6, 2013 - 01:47pm PT
Curt, that ISNT being overblown.. Obama said that in EVERY SPEECH he gave on the ACA.

Again, it's been well documented that the vast majority of policies being cancelled were scams. I'm not sure why anybody would have a problem with that.

Curt
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 6, 2013 - 02:07pm PT
We used to fire presidents for such things back when we had some ballz..

Inconvenient Fact= No president to date has been removed from office via the impeachment process.
Degaine

climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 02:23pm PT
This puts it nicely:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-november-5-2013/affordable-horror-story
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 6, 2013 - 02:37pm PT

I thought you we're going to pay for your sex change out of pocket?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 6, 2013 - 02:56pm PT

Nov 6, 2013 - 11:07am PT
We used to fire presidents for such things back when we had some ballz..

Inconvenient Fact= No president to date has been removed from office via the impeachment process.


Weve been through THAT before Wade. MANY have been through the impeachment process and some left over that very "this or that" offer.

Congressmen have recently been recalled in COLO too.

How many more lies will it take for some of you??? Yes repubs lie,, but you can NOT deny the fact that obama does it on a regular basis.. You ALL heard him say RED LINE in his speech.. Today he tells us "I DIDNT SAY RED LINE" Really????

Inconvenient Fact= No president to date has been removed from office via the impeachment process. (BTW- this is a documented, proven fact. unlike your claims that the president lies 'on a regular basis.') Have a good Day Ron.



Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 6, 2013 - 03:00pm PT
Inconvenient Fact= No president to date has been removed from office via the impeachment process. Have a good Day Ron.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 03:21pm PT
Whatever is wrong with our healthcare system, at least we're not this bad
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VENEZUELA_SICK_HEALTH_CARE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-11-06-00-10-00
//
The country's 1999 constitution guarantees free universal health care to Venezuelans, who sit on the world's largest proven oil reserves. President Nicolas Maduro's government insists it's complying. Yet of the country's 100 fully functioning public hospitals, nine in 10 have just 7 percent of the supplies they need, Natera said.

The other nearly 200 public hospitals that existed when Chavez took office were largely replaced by a system of walk-in clinics run by Cuban doctors that have won praise for delivering preventative care to the neediest but do not treat serious illnesses.

The woes are not restricted to the public system.

Venezuela's 400 private hospitals and clinics are overburdened and strapped for supplies, 95 percent of which must be imported, said Dr. Carlos Rosales, president of the association that represents them.

The private system has just 8,000 of the country's more than 50,000 hospital beds but treats 53 percent of the country's patients, including the 10 million public employees with health insurance. Rosales said insurers, many state-owned, are four to six months behind in payments and it is nearly impossible to meet payrolls and pay suppliers.

Worse, government price caps set in July for common procedures are impossible to meet, Rosales said. For example, dialysis treatment was set at 200 bolivars ($30 at the official exchange rate and less than $4 on the black market) for a procedure that costs 5,000 bolivars to administer.//

Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 6, 2013 - 03:51pm PT
Nixon bailed like the chickenshat crook that he was.

No president etc....

Have a good day, Ron.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 6, 2013 - 04:01pm PT
Interesting post, Larry. I expect future posters to ignore it, sad to say.

John
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 6, 2013 - 04:23pm PT
what is Chavez's problem with just selling enough on the world market to solve those problems?

anyone know?

He's dead?

Curt
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Nov 6, 2013 - 05:39pm PT
Even Ralph Nader lambasted ObamaCare today. That says something.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 6, 2013 - 06:57pm PT
Obama is a lying sack. Period.

[Click to View YouTube Video]
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Nov 6, 2013 - 07:26pm PT
I don't know how true this is but Nader said the Canadian legislation totalled
13 pages while the ACA was 2000 with another 2000 worth of regulations.
And they wonder why they can't get it straight?
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 07:59pm PT
Norton wrote:
What is (was) Chavez's problem with just selling enough on the world market to solve those problems?

Maybe the problem isn't as simple as money.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 6, 2013 - 08:08pm PT
and the Supreme court even admitted that they didn't read all 2,700 pages!
...comparing reading it to cruel and unusual punishment!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/28/scalia-affordable-care-act-cruel-and-unusual_n_1386195.html
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 08:21pm PT
I've heard that free breast and prostrate exams are available through TSA at all airports. Now other agencies are getting into the healthcare business.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131105/05401425129/cops-subject-man-to-rectal-searches-enemas-colonoscopy-futile-effort-to-find-drugs-they-swear-he-was-hiding.shtml
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 6, 2013 - 08:30pm PT
jghedge, are you so lazy that you could only be bothered to read the headline? or is it a comprehension problem?
You are the "moran"...

From the SECOND paragraph of the article...

"What happened to the Eighth Amendment? You really want us to go through these 2,700 pages? And do you really expect the Court to do that? Or do you expect us to -- to give this function to our law clerks? Is this not totally unrealistic? That we are going to go through this enormous bill item by item and decide each one?" Scalia asked Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler during Wednesday's health care reform hearings.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 6, 2013 - 08:39pm PT
So it is a comprehension problem.
Good luck with that.
Not gonna waste my time explaining plural forms of personal pronouns.
Moron.
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Nov 6, 2013 - 08:45pm PT
So how come you guys are ignoring the fact that this country's greatest
champion of 'the little guy', Ralph Nader, thinks the ACA is a pile of crap
as it is written? Is he off his rocker, does he not get it? Come on, tell
Ralph he isn't for the little guy any more.
storer

Trad climber
Golden, Colorado
Nov 6, 2013 - 09:05pm PT
Look, I'm on Medicare and so should you be. Did you ever ask yourself why you aren't?

Why isn't your wrath directed to me who has Medicare? Give me one good reason why you don't have it?

You get hit by a rock some dummy above knocks off and then you will understand the picture, quickly enough.

Many of us more informed people wanted a single payer system, like Medicare, but we're struggling to even get this which is a big improvement over the unregulated, rip-off insurance market we had before even though it will still still make the insurance companies rich as before.

I look at this as a baby step to national healthcare, to bad we have to go this slow but the obstructionists (Republicans, Tea Party, anarchists, etc.) are a POA and it PO's me mightily.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 6, 2013 - 09:24pm PT
Talked to my ex-insignifcant other and her monthly bill went down 75 dollars from what she paid before the ACA...She said the Cover California program wasn't that hard to navigate...? However , she said Blue Shilled keeps bumping their policy up 10% every year...So what's with all the whailing and gnashing of teeth...?
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 6, 2013 - 09:48pm PT
no more will this happen to people

As long as you can pay the premiums and deductibles, assuming you work in the private sector. If you are a public "servant", no worries; there is a magic cash resource; taxpayers.


Why is congress and the executive branch excluded and have their own health and retirement plans which we pay for? Pretty much every government employee has their health care and pension fully funded for life at nearly zero cost to them; the taxpayers foot the bill.

Let them eat cake seems to be the plan forward. The gooberment no longer looks to serve the population, but looks to force the population to serve them. Until the government sector applies the same rules to themselves as they mandate to the private sector, it is a cash grab and pure BS.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 09:49pm PT
Dave Kos wrote:
and the ACA is a huge compromise.

What was the ACA vote in the Senate and in the House?
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Nov 6, 2013 - 10:04pm PT
Gubmit workers do not get their health care paid for life, and it's my experience that it was on par - if not a bit worse - than benefits I've received elsewhere. I do admit, it was far better than the 8 years or so of my life when I had no health insurance.

Government healthcare info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Employees_Health_Benefits_Program

Congressional member healthcare info:
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/health-care-for-members-of-congress/

Congress not exempted:
http://www.rgj.com/article/20131001/NEWS1801/131001004/

As far as retirement plans - it operates like the private sector except that the gubmit workers can invest (i.e., put in their own money) in plans such as the H Plan, L Plan, etc. It's like blind investing!

Here is some info:
http://www.opm.gov/retirement-services/fers-information/

For more, go to the TSP site linked there. Unless I was being given different treatment than all other workers, the benefits I received were slightly below par with private sector benefits.

Just my experience.

Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 6, 2013 - 10:06pm PT
What was the ACA vote in the Senate and in the House?

60-39 and 219-212.

Why?

Curt
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 6, 2013 - 10:14pm PT
Gubmit workers do not get their health care paid for life, and it's my experience that it was on par - if not a bit worse - than benefits I've received elsewhere. I do admit, it was far better than the 8 years or so of my life when I had no health insurance.

In Cali they do.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 6, 2013 - 10:23pm PT
[quote]Because they work for an employer that provides health benefits. The fact that the employer is the gov't is irrelevant. ObamaCare benefits are for poor people, like Food Stamps are, not for people with good jobs, like gov't workers.
/quote]


no, it is not irrelevant. the difference is my employer needs to make a profit and is passing the cost of this BS to employees. the gooberment just raises taxes and sucks us dry rather than passing the cost to their employees. meanwhile I am also being required to fund "poor people" Do you really think all this money is magically produced?

Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Nov 6, 2013 - 10:24pm PT
Ah - I'm speaking of federal gubmit workers. I should have been more specific. Thanks for that clarification.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 6, 2013 - 10:53pm PT
Look, I'm not against a federal health care plan; I'm for it. I just think this is a cluster and is a veiled form of wealth redistribution which in the end will only benefit the government money grab and will have no true benefit to society.

I've busted my butt to make a living and be financially self sufficient. I was never able to spend 5 weeks in the alps or tramping around asia. Instead I worked my ass off and have saved all the money I can.

Now it is being taken away from me to fund a boatload of people that never looked at the big picture.

edit: What I'm saying is that there needs to be a level of personal responsibility. I have no problem with chipping in to help people out. But I don't see why the gooberment should have the ability to pick my pocket for idiots that have not taken responsibility for their actions.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 10:59pm PT
jghedge wrote:
It takes 2 to compromise, right?


Curt wrote
60-39 and 219-212.
Why?

jhgedge,
That's my point, there was no compromise.

Curt,
Because by definitions I know of, there was no compromise.

an agreement or settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/compromise
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 11:11pm PT
jghedge wrote:
Other countries literally pay you to go to the doctor and dentist.



Other countries, with healthcare systems riding on the coat tails of a strong, successful and ethical free market system, literally pay you to go to the doctor and dentist.
Fixed it for ya...see one example of other countries here:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VENEZUELA_SICK_HEALTH_CARE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-11-06-00-10-00
WBraun

climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 11:16pm PT
Hedge -- "Do you think congress and the executive branch should be on Food Stamps as well?"

Yes, they should all be fired and made to work digging ditches in lion cloths.

These arrogant fat asses need to be humbled.

They're irresponsible.

It's time for a REAL change .....
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 11:21pm PT
jghedge wrote:
It's called "democracy". You're free to move somewhere where there isn't any. Plenty of choices.

Back in the day, right wingers used to say "America, love it or leave it".
To paraphrase on old baseball player: Just like deja vu all over again.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 6, 2013 - 11:26pm PT
Digging ditches would suit the fatt asses right but making them wear lion cloths is cruel and unusual punishment...
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 6, 2013 - 11:34pm PT
Yes, they should all be fired and made to work digging ditches in lion cloths.

These arrogant fat asses need to be humbled.

They're irresponsible.

It's time for a REAL change .....

Werner, well stated. They are truly irresponsible and should be held accountable. Instead the dumb shee voters keep voting in the incumbents.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 11:34pm PT
jghedge wrote:
Yes of course - Venezuela - because citing any actual comparably developed democracy would disprove your point.

Thanks for making my point by doing that.

I'm not trying to make the point you think I am. I am not passing judgement on any healthcare systems in Canada or Europe because I know nothing about them. The point I was making is the underlying funding, whatever type of healthcare system there is. Another point I will make is that a successful capitalist society requires ethics.
You made a blanket statement about "other countries". I was just being persnickety with the sweeping generalization you made and reposted the link on Venezuela. It is a story worth pondering. You never know what lessons can be learned.
I do respect your faith and passion that the ACA will be successful. I don't share that faith, but I hope for the best.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 6, 2013 - 11:48pm PT
jghedge wrote:
Were they citing your opposition to democracy as a reason for leaving?

I've never been opposed to demcracy. I think everyone in this country is entitled to all the rights summed up in this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CzteDucRHo
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 6, 2013 - 11:59pm PT
What I actually do have faith in is that the insurance companies won't be around long enough to find out. they won't be needed. The MediCare model will be made available to all.

Can you send me what you are smoking?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 12:06am PT
He is back on the crack again


Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 7, 2013 - 12:12am PT
Norton wrote:
yes, this is democacy

LOL, yes democracy is messy and every group has a whole Bell Curve of humanity.
As one of my favorite philosophers once said: "Can't we all just get along"?
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 7, 2013 - 12:22am PT
hedge-do you pay your own bills or rely upon me to pay them?
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 7, 2013 - 12:31am PT
Agreed insurance is shared risk. But do those that don't pay get covered as my premiums and deductibles shoot through the roof? It is about personal responsibility.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 7, 2013 - 12:37am PT
Agreed insurance is shared risk. But do those that don't pay get covered as my premiums and deductibles shoot through the roof? It is about personal responsibility.

You're describing what we currently have--and what the ACA is attempting to fix.

Curt
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 7, 2013 - 12:44am PT
Ok, I'll bow of this after his post. I had an insurance plan that the administration stated I could keep. That plan has been canceled and to renew my under the Affordable health plan, my premiums are up 44%. My deductibles are up around 200%.


Guangzhou

Trad climber
Asia, Indonesia, East Java
Nov 7, 2013 - 01:02am PT
Well, looks like this law has hit me below the belt too. As an expat, I recieve insurance from my employer. The insurance company is American and all of us on the coverage are Americans, but....

Looks like I either buy personal insurance, or I pay a penalty.

Thanks OBAMACARE

I am a U.S. citizen residing outside of the U.S. on a Global Medical Insurance Plan. Does the individual mandate apply to me?

U.S. citizens who live abroad for a calendar year (or at least 330 days within a 12 month period) are treated as having “minimum essential coverage” for the year (or period) and, therefore, are not required to purchase PPACA coverage. These are individuals who qualify for an exclusion from income under section 911 of the IRS Code. See the IRS foreign earned income exclusion test for further information on this exclusion. They need take no further action to comply with the individual mandate.

Please note that IMG’s Global Medical Insurance Plan does not meet the definition of “minimum essential coverage” under PPACA. GMI is not intended to provide U.S. citizens residing in the U.S. with health insurance. While your GMI plan for worldwide coverage will not be affected by PPACA, you should review the information below to see if you are exempt from the requirements of PPACA or not, and whether you will have to pay a tax penalty or not.

Under PPACA, all U.S. citizens, nationals and resident aliens will be required to purchase minimum essential coverage (PPACA compliant coverage), unless they are exempt. Exempt U.S. citizens include U.S. citizens who reside outside of the U.S. The exemption applies to:

A U.S. citizen who has a tax home (your main place of work or employment, or if you don’t have a main place of work or employment, your main residence) in a foreign country, and has been a bona fide resident of a foreign country or countries for an uninterrupted period that includes an entire taxable year; or is present in a foreign country or countries during at least 330 full days in a twelve month period.

See details under the IRS foreign earned income exclusion test.

Even if a person was required to purchase minimum essential coverage and did not, she/he would only be required to pay a tax penalty for not purchasing PPACA coverage (if she/he files a U.S. tax return). In many cases, this tax is far less than the premiums that a person would pay for obtaining PPACA coverage.

What will my tax be if I am required to have PPACA coverage, but do not purchase it?

Tax Calculations:
Taxes begin in 2014 and rise in years following. In each year, the tax consists of the higher of a dollar amount or a percentage of household income. For a given household, the tax applies to each individual, up to a maximum of three. Following is the schedule of taxes:

2014: The higher of $95 per person (up to 3 people, or $285) OR 1.0% of taxable income.

2015: The higher of $325 per person (up to 3 people, or $975) OR 2.0% of taxable income.

2016: The higher of $695 per person (up to 3 people, or $2,085) OR 2.5% of taxable income.

After 2016: The same as 2016, but adjusted annually for cost-of-living increases.

I am an individual residing outside of my home country and covered under an employer group plan. Does PPACA apply to me?

On March 8, 2013, the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Treasury issued a Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) announcing that, for expatriate plans, compliance with most PPACA provisions is being delayed until January 1, 2016. The relief from compliance applies for plan years 2014 and 2015 on plans that meet the following definition:

“Insured group health plans with plan years ending on or before December 31, 2015, in which enrollment is limited to individuals residing outside of their home country for at least six months of the plan year and any covered dependents.”
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 7, 2013 - 05:24am PT
jghedge wrote:
Yet you object to majority rule on the grounds that it doesn't offer enough compromise.

What would you suggest to allow more compromise and still retain majority rule?


You either don't state my position properly or don't understand definitions the same as I do.

Compromise: It is up to the individuals or groups involved in any issue to freely pursue compromise or not. If a majority refuses to compromise on major legislation and passes it on a pure party line vote, can that majority really be surprised when the opposition uses all means legal to block or overturn said legislation?
One point I'll make is that all major social legislation in this country was passed on a bi-partisan basis. That is why all of those programs are successfully accepted by very wide majorities. Still, the small minorities who disagree with those widely accepted programs are free to protest in any legal way possible.

Majority rule: I believe in majority rule, to the point that 51% vote to pee in the Wheaties of the other 49%. The old "Two foxes and a hen voting on what's for dinner". It seems that you don't know, remember, or conveniently forget, the origin of the Bill of Rights.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority

I am not stating this is a Bill of Rights issue. My only point is that no compromise was accomplished before passage by simple majority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_majority

Ain't democracy a mess? (you could call it a representative republic, but then the dirty R word is the root).
Seems you just can't always get what you want. (I should write a song about that).
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:07am PT
KEEP bellyaching about Obama and nothing is going to change..Try directing your anger where it belongs...The insurance companies and your republicans for not coming up with a plan to make health care affordable...
Charlie D.

Trad climber
Western Slope, Tahoe Sierra
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:23am PT
^^^The republicans did come up with a plan and it's now being implemented nationally. They were the conceptual architects of the ACA which first was implemented in Massachusetts.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:27am PT
ACA is a full on train wreck that ran into a school bus of kids at the RR crossing. Unfortunately a bunch of the kids on the bus now have no insurance because their policies have been canceled and now their working class parents could not afford an Obamacare policy.



ACA was a campaign strategy to elect a politician. Just another underfunded and poorly implemented government program. It will fail because the idealistic younger generations ( as well as the working class) will refuse or more likely be unable to pay massive premiums required to subsidize the huge and largely unhealthy boomer generation.



Single payer will not happen in our life time. The healthcare situation will go from bad to worse. Pray for a healthy life and a quick and untimely death as it is the only way anyone that is not "rich" will avoid the clusterf**k we have voted for.










johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:30am PT
And again, Obama doesn't control the insurance companies,

WTF? This is his plan; should he not be held accountable?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:39am PT
WTF? This is his plan; should he not be held accountable?

he should get in line behind the pack of treasonous war criminals that proceeded him.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:58am PT
Wade Icey wrote:
he should get in line behind the pack of treasonous war criminals that proceeded him.

Because this thread is about the Iraq War? Or because the buck stops somewhere far from the president or the party that passed the ACA legislation?
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:09am PT
Dave Kos wrote:
Compromise in the world of Larry Nelson

Dave,
I think I am on the same page as the Oxford dictionary. Maybe write to them to correct their definition.
an agreement or settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/compromise


Where did the republicans agree or settle to what was passed? The way I read the definition of compromise is that both sides agree to a settlement. You must read it differently.
Cheers,
Larry

Dave,
I will also add that I would never sell a $200,000 house for $100,000. I might drop my price depending on market conditions or how desperate I am to sell. I am free to disagree with your price, just as you are free to disagree with mine. The deal, or compromise in your analogy, happens when both sides agree.
I will agree for you to buy my bridge, though you probably unfairly don't want to compromise.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:19am PT
Because this thread is about the Iraq War? Or because the buck stops somewhere far from the president or the party that passed the ACA legislation?

No, Because none of you folks calling for accountability made a sound when lies, treason, torture and the murder of innocents was the mode du jour. Where did the the buck stop then? Who has been held accountable?

Now, however flawed. there is plan afoot to improve the health care of millions and to drag the US forward-Obama must be held accountable.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:22am PT
I am looking forward to the new and slightly more affordable version 2.0........Hillarycare. She might have a chance of making it work lol
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:35am PT
Wade Icey wrote:
Obama must be held accountable

I think history will hold Bush and the congress that voted for the Iraq War accountable.
When it comes to the current president you seem to balk at him being accountable for the down side of ACA. Should we hold him accountable for his success's but "socialize" his mistakes? Wall St sure liked that deal.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:36am PT
Dave Kos wrote:
I've agreed, why can't you?

Dave,
If I don't agree, we have no deal, no compromise. But I will respectfully agree to disagree with your definition of compromise.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:50am PT
Why should we expect compromise? We have elected a bunch of self serving politicians/ attorneys ( pond scum) that have experience in getting elected and not much else other than being out of touch with reality and what happens in the real day to day world.
As a result, we should expect a plethora of laws and increased infringement of our personal freedoms that will be financed by the hard working middle class.



Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:56am PT
Dave Kos wrote:
You are right, we don't have compromise. Because you refuse to compromise.

Dave,
I can only assume you haven't dealt much in buying or selling a house.
To paraphrase:
"I offered you $100,000 for your $200,000 house. You refuse to compromise"
Yes, and I would be a fool to compromise on your terms.
Like I say, want to buy my bridge? I will agree to a price. What's not to like?

guyman

Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:23am PT
Why should we expect compromise? We have elected a bunch of self serving politicians/ attorneys ( pond scum) that have experience in getting elected and not much else other than being out of touch with reality and what happens in the real day to day world.
As a result, we should expect a plethora of laws and increased infringement of our personal freedoms that will be financed by the hard working middle class.

+11111

Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:25am PT
jghedge wrote:
"Because making up my own definitions is less embarrassing than admitting to being wrong."

I have been corrected on this thread and humbly acknowleged my mistakes.
I have linked the Oxford dictionary definition of the word compromise twice. I am seeking the truth.
I'm not interested in a partisan pissing match.

Intractable partisanship is what is wrong with the Imperial city of Washington DC, where at least 7 of the 10 wealthiest counties in America surround it. Both parties are to blame. Both parties are corrupt.

Believe what you want to believe. Almost seems religious to me. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 01:21pm PT
Glad to see Obama is taking care of the ones that feed him


http://nypost.com/2013/11/07/rule-lets-unions-avoid-obamacare-tax/
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 01:32pm PT
No I am commending him for taking care of the ones that fill his coffers.

PS It is OK to engage is shady political behavior if it is for the common good lol

Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 7, 2013 - 01:54pm PT
Unfortunately, this is how Republicans compromise


Curt



JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 7, 2013 - 02:32pm PT
It's how the Democrats compromised, too, in the Affordable [sic] Care Act. The Democrats compromised among themselves concerning things like a public option. The corporations that paid for the Obama election and that of the Democratic Congress didn't want a public option, and enough Democratic legislators were sufficiently concerned to oppose including one. There was no compromise made to gain Republican votes.

It's still how they "compromise." The ACA has problems. Have the Democrats made any concrete proposals to fix them, or even made an offer to do so? The only "fixes" have been the executive branch's enforcement abatement -- a concept frightening in its implications for separation of powers.

While I acknowledge -- and remain firmly opposed to -- the Tea Party's demand for inflexibility, they may end up looking like political geniuses yet if the ACA rollout continues in its disastrous ways and the Democrats take no responsibility for the problems. They already face a dilemma; if they take legislative action to fix problems, they open themselves up to the criticism that they, rather than the Republicans, insisted on keeping the government partially shut down solely to protect an Act they knew was deeply flawed.

How about we quit the partisan game playing, admit the problems, and just maybe do something about fixing them?

John
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 7, 2013 - 03:16pm PT
Can you name a single Republicans that even hinted that they would vote in favor of ACA if certain changes were made?

Yes. Olympia Snowe after the public option was off the table. I'm sure there would have been many others if the Democratic leadership made the slightest effort to enact legislation with bipartisan support, but I'll ask you the complementary question. What Democrat hinted that he or she was willing to consider changes to acquire Republican votes?

John
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 7, 2013 - 04:28pm PT
What Democrat hinted that he or she was willing to consider changes to acquire Republican votes?


Almost all of them.

They didn't just hint. They compromised right out of the gate.

That's why the ACA is modeled after the Republican/Romneycare plan and not single payer.

The Democrats made a HUGE compromise from the beginning.

I think you understand this John. You are abusing the false equivalence argument.

BINGO !!

Curt
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 04:47pm PT
The problem with Obamacare is that the government will now completely F'UP what was a well intentioned idea.

Implementation is going well....right?

I am so excited for this Obamacare.

I should expect reasonable care for free almost free if I don't work(subsidies). If I do work and make a very modest middle class income, I have to pay more than I pay in rent/mortgage to the government for insurance that really only covers me for catastrophic events because the massive deductible.

This is awesome !

Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 7, 2013 - 05:04pm PT
The problem with Obamacare is that the government will now completely F'UP what was a well intentioned idea.

Implementation is going well....right?

I am so excited for this Obamacare.

I should expect reasonable care for free almost free if I don't work(subsidies). If I do work and make a very modest middle class income, I have to pay more than I pay in rent/mortgage to the government for insurance that really only covers me for catastrophic events because the massive deductible.

This is awesome !

I know. It's a horribly flawed idea, concocted by the Heritage Foundation and first implemented by Mitt Romney. We should scrap it immediately and follow the lead of every other industrialized country in the world, by putting a single-payer healthcare system in place.

Curt
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 05:22pm PT
Good luck with that.
Looking forward to the smooth roll out and great care for a reasonable price.





Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 7, 2013 - 05:26pm PT
Good luck with that.

Correct. Because of Republicans.

Curt
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 05:38pm PT
^^^ That is the problem with this whole Obamacare thing. Republicans, Democrats blah blah blah.

Obamacare is failing because of ( insert political party name)

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 7, 2013 - 06:53pm PT
Remember, Not a single Republican voted for the Unaffordable Heath Care Tax in either house and Dingy Harry, and Nancy had to "diem" it passed because they didn't have enough votes to pass it under regular order.


On another sour note,



http://capitolcityproject.com/delaware-spends-4-million-on-obamacare-enrollment-signs-up-four-people/
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:09pm PT
http://obamacaresignups.net/
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:28pm PT
I'm with neither party, so this response is not "partisan." I will merely float two data points first hand:

1) One of my company's partners used to purchase his own insurance. Low deductible and low copay, it was still cheap (barely over $100 per month) because of his age, health, and habits. That policy recently went away, and now he must purchase something on the "exchange" (or pay an ever increasing fine to get nothing). He's looked on the exchange, and even the "gold" plan is nothing CLOSE to as good as what he was buying on his own. And his cost for the privilege of very inferior insurance is (wait for it....): double the price per month.

2) My company completely pays for the health insurance of all of its employees. I mean 100% of the cost of our small group plan, and we buy great insurance through Anthem. Again, low deductible and low copay. Our small group rate is affordable, and we consider 100%-paid coverage one of the "thanks yous" we can give to our employees. Sometime in 2014 either Anthem is planning to drop these small group policies or increase the price by 40%-60%. So, we're in limbo, and either option takes us out of our previous game. Either way, health care is going to cost our employees SIGNIFICANTLY more! I mean a LOT more, because we simply will not be able to afford to 100% pay for this "new" coverage. So, like in (1), our employees are going to GET significantly less and pay significantly more.

Already my company pays ridiculous taxes, and this new "tax" hurts exactly whom? Well, the very employees that Ocare was promised to help. And the "keep your plan" bovine defecation is literally just that: Pure, steaming, loose, and runny. Oh, and very, very stinky as well.

Now, I know the response already: Well, Ocare was put in place to provide coverage for millions of uninsured Americans, because SOMETHING just MUST be done in a "humane" society.

So, let me ask a few questions about all this "humane" business....

1) Is it "humane" to allow people that obviously and absolutely CANNOT afford it to keep on breeding and breeding and breeding? I mean, if supposedly I have some responsibility (being "humane" and all) to pay for all the kids that are popped out (that the parents KNOW they can't afford), then along with that "responsibility" I get some rights! One of those rights that logically follows from this "responsibility" is: I get to choose who gets to have kids. Right? And, if not, please explain how I am forced to be in a situation of unlimited exposure to risk with exactly zero power to mitigate against or control that risk! How EXACTLY in principle is this any different from you putting a gun to my head and FORCING me to play 1/6 Russian Roulette, then 1/3, then 1/2, and so on.

2) Is it "humane" to intentionally screw over huge segments of society in order to benefit others? I mean, why is the fact that poor people can "only" go to the ER (for free) somehow so "inhumane," when by "fixing" that "problem," you are doubling (or more) the costs to the people that have been paying and paying ALL ALONG?

3) DO we REALLY want to become just another European socialist democracy?

ALL I know for SURE is that in my sphere Ocare is proving to be a DISASTER of literally EPIC proportions, and it will completely change our business model! And THAT was not supposed to be the result to SMALL businesses nor their employees.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:47pm PT
This is all about "thinning the herd".

60 Trillion in future unfunded liabilities.

Dead people can't collect medicare or social security.


There's nothing new about this.

Progressives have been trying to off the "unusefull" since their beginnings at the turn of the last century with Margret Sanger and the eugenics movement.

Just back then they weren't old, just the wrong color or class.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 09:47pm PT
If your competitor finds a way to cut costs, you do too, or he puts you out of business.

That is such a bad and irrelevant analogy, especially when cast in the context of political philosophy, that I'm speechless and simply won't respond to it.

The basic questions I asked remain, and Norton's question is, I think, really pressing!
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:03pm PT
This is all about "thinning the herd".

60 Trillion in future unfunded liabilities.

Dead people can't collect medicare or social security.


There's nothing new about this.

Progressives have been trying to off the "unusefull" since their beginnings at the turn of the last century with Margret Sanger and the eugenics movement.

Uh oh, he's onto us. We want to provide healthcare to poor people in order to kill them off.

Curt
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:06pm PT
Do we REALLY want to become just another European socialist democracy?

Oh f*#k no. Why would we want to emulate countries with the best healthcare, highest standards of living and the most satisfied populations?

Curt
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:16pm PT
Why would we want to emulate countries with the best healthcare, highest standards of living and the most satisfied populations?

If you can even ask the question, and ask it that way, then there's no "answer" for you that you are going to "get."

And even if I agreed with your socialistic views, is Ocare or anything like it really "the way" we're gonna get there?

Answer: Well, yes or no, depending upon whether or not you see Ocare as the necessary step to a single-payer system or just an epic blunder along the way.

But, I guess we DID have to pass it to see what it all meant. And what we see it all meant is that for a larger group of Americans that were slated to be benefited by the law, the law is a disaster. Even the O-man himself is apologizing for the rat's nest of unintended consequences. And we don't even know the half of it yet!
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:24pm PT
If you can even ask the question, and ask it that way, then there's no "answer" for you that you are going to "get."

And even if I agreed with your socialistic views, is Ocare or anything like it really "the way" we're gonna get there?

Your post asked if we wanted to become a "socialist democracy" but the USA already is one. The definition of socialism is taxing and spending those revenues for the common good--you know, for things like roads, the military, schools, etc. Why conservatives get their panties in such a huge bunch over treating medical care the same way is beyond me.

Agreed that Obamacare is not the best solution, but there is absolutely no way we could have moved directly to a single-payer system.

Curt
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:30pm PT
Actually, Hitler was a Fascist not a Socialist. And not all slippery-slope arguments are fallacious, just like not all generalizations are hasty ones.

Our country was founded on a particular political philosophy, and it was fundamentally libertarian rather than communitarian. The "gimme!" sea change that has been taking place at an ever-increasing pace IS fueling a fundamental shift in political philosophy in this nation, and it's not "scare tactics" when essentially half of the people in this nation want NO part of this shift!

And when the proportion of communitarians in this nation reaches the majority enough to actually make the sorts of changes that Ocare represent, then, my friend, it is NOT "scare tactics" to say that the Founders would have called that "majority faction," denounced it, and called it grounds for revolution.

We are on opposite sides of the pressing question: WHAT sort of nation are we? I, at least, have the Founders on my side. The burden of proof is on YOU to show why your communitarianism/socialism is superior to what the Founders set up. And "taking from the 'rich' to give to the 'poor'" in ANY sense would have been roundly denounced by our Founders (and I can cite passages, if you wish).

So, prove that we NEED the sort of sea change you advocate; and prove that the likes of Ocare laws are approaches that are good ways to get us there.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:34pm PT
The definition of socialism is taxing and spending those revenues for the common good--you know, for things like roads, the military, schools, etc.

In political philosophical circles, your definition is non-standard. And even our Constitution was written to severely limit the powers of the FEDERAL government (you are seemingly conflating all sorts of layers of governments in this nation) to engage in even the sorts of "public works" projects you define as socialistic PRECISELY because our Founders (federalist AND anti-federalist) wanted NO part of a FEDERAL government with the power to tax AS wealth-redistribution. And this wealth-redistribution at the FEDERAL level just is "socialism" on a scale and by an entity that our Founders utterly rejected.
michelle0607

climber
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:34pm PT
Madbolter--- Amen.

I am mostly a lurker here, but I wanted to put some real-world numbers to a similar situation.

I am a mid-thirties single mom with a child with special education needs. I worked my butt off in college, ended up with a hefty six figure student loan bill, and eventually landed a great job (too high paying to get subsidies )

My current individual+1 plan through BC/BS will be not be renewed. It is $290 per month, ~$5,000 deductible and pays 80% of hospital/medical after that. It does not cover maternity (I don't have a uterus) or mental health (if needed is covered by my ex as part of a court judgement).

The cheapest plan I can get on Obamacare is $593 per month, $12,000 deductible and pays 60% hospital/medical after that. It also pays for maternity and mental health-- services I will never need to pay for.

In my situation, this increase in premium means that I can either
a) stop paying for my son's educational therapy (not covered by any insurance anywhere) and turn off the electric or
b) default on some of my student loans or
c) pay the fine and go uninsured.

I simply can't dream up $300 extra money every month, let alone save for the higher deductible.

The "Affordable" part is a joke.







madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:44pm PT
but did they even talk about, much less pass, their own version of healthcare?

You ask this question as if (from our current perspective) that SHOULD have been some top priority back in 00-06. But why should it have been?

Under a certain political model (namely, the one our Founders envisioned), the FEDS were never, ever supposed to inject themselves into our individual lives like is now commonplace. So, it makes sense that ADDING to federal invasiveness (like Ocare now CLEARLY does) would be the last thing the Repubs would have on their agenda.

It seems to me that you question itself begs the question.

Perhaps the fact that millions of Americans were uninsured was simply NO PROBLEM that our Founders had any intention that the FEDS would ever do anything about. (Again, happy to cite some passages, if desired; you know, been there and done that).

You envision a political philosophy sea change from how this country was designed. Fine, and you are almost at the needed number of people to help you accomplish it. Thus, more and more, you'll have the force of "the people" behind you.

But our Founders recognized a CLEAR moral distinction in a democracy between what you CAN do and what you have a moral right to do, because they held certain principles of individuality and liberty as "inalienable." When ANY majority violates those basic moral principles, it becomes a faction, and that minority is then not only right but duty-bound to revolt.

Asked: "If government can do this, then what can government not do?" And answered: "Government CAN do this."

Tell my employees that what they are facing with Ocare is just "scare tactics" that they should brush off and just lock-step follow along into genuine socialism where the nanny state always knows best how to care for you.

No, what you'll see instead is tens and tens of millions of Americans that are starting to wake up to the FACT that there were very good reasons why our Founders didn't want the Feds engaged with individuals at this level!
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 10:50pm PT
The cheapest plan I can get on Obamacare is $593 per month, $12,000 deductible and pays 60% hospital/medical after that. It also pays for maternity and mental health-- services I will never need to pay for.

Literally TENS of millions of Americans are waking up to facts just like yours. "Affordable" in Obamaspeak really means: "wealth" redistribution, as though the shrinking middle-class was really "wealthy" in the first place!

Look, seriously, businesses like mine are literally being TAXED out of existence! Here I was, literally trying to do not just the "good" thing for my employees... not just the "right" thing; I was trying to do the NOBLE thing.

But even THAT is just not good enough for this federal government! We just aren't PAYING ENOUGH yet!!!

I guess that Spain and Greece are just "scare tactics."
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:06pm PT
Curt writes:

"The definition of socialism is taxing and spending those revenues for the common good--you know, for things like roads, the military, schools, etc."





Going by your definition, every country on the f*#king planet that has a road or a school is socialist.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:08pm PT
Both those programs have defined gov't engagement in private life for generations.

Yup, and both barely made it past Supreme Court review, just as Ocare barely made it. All have been slides into socialism, and BOTH parties are indeed socialistic, which is why I want no part of either of them.

The line I drew was between libertarianism and communitarianism, but you keep talking party politics, when BOTH parties have indeed been on the wrong side of the divide for generations.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:10pm PT
um,
the constitution was written to SEVERELY expand the power of the federal government

Right! Regarding a VERY narrow subset of powers that were clearly defined. But the "interstate commerce" clause has been writ larger and larger for generations, and that IS a slide into more and more socialism that our Founders NEVER intended. And this latest ruling that forcing people to buy a product that they don't even want is a "tax" is the most ridiculous and convoluted "logic" to come out of the Supreme Court in a long, long time!
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:12pm PT
Had Obamacare been launched 90 days prior to the last election with all the current "glitches", Romney would in the White House as I type.

Word!

And what we're really starting to see now (finally) is that these "consequences" are not "glitches" but are fundamental implications of Ocare. Now even the DEMS want to delay implementation (wait, wasn't THAT what the REPUBS were fighting for during the shutdown?).

Glitches. Yeah, right.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:15pm PT
seriously, ever think of anything other than yourself?

Seriously, you are asking me this question?

As I said, MY company pays 100% of health-insurance costs for ALL of its employees. How many companies do that?

And that's money that I and my partners could instead be putting into our pockets!

And, if you'll read what I actually wrote about this, you'll see that MY concern is that my employees are about to get SCREWED by Ocare. I'm not moaning because I'm "selfish!" I'm PISSED because I'm not even being ALLOWED to treat my employees RIGHT anymore!

That's "selfish?" LOL
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:18pm PT
Will you accept SS and Medicare when you reach 65?

"Accept"...?

Are you serious?

I was FORCED to pay into it my whole life, and I will NEVER get back out of it what I've paid into it!

You BET I'll EXTRACT as much of what is MINE out of it as I possibly can.

My issue is that I was FORCED to buy into this lemon of a "retirement plan" in the first place!

What a joke! Are you people really serious?

This crap is outlandish enough that I'm tempted to think you're just trolling.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:23pm PT
So if everyone's insurance rates are going up, where is all this extra money going?

Well, the 50 million "poor" that just couldn't "afford" health insurance (but just kept on poppin' out more and more kids) "need" coverage.

And you can bet that the insurance companies are (even as we speak, literally) figuring out how to make a profit in this new "climate," and they WILL, and nothing about the law constrains their ability to make a profit (of whatever they please).

On and on....
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:24pm PT
Well, I've said my piece. I've gotta run.

Again, the "lurkers" are making up their minds which perspective makes sense and coheres with reality.

The next year is going to be interesting indeed!
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 7, 2013 - 11:59pm PT
What do people who don't want to work pay ???
Nada ...

Some f*#ked up sh#t

Why do I feel that some folks will suddenly be making /declaring less next year?

Well, just raise the rates(tax) on the working class. Honestly that is the only way the Norton/Hedge circle jerk will work?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 12:20am PT
Giving the US Govt the right to have a monopoly in the health care arena is freighting.

Also, DEATH PANEL is going to be the new name of my hardcore garage band.

I have a feeling those two words will used more frequently.

Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 8, 2013 - 04:55am PT
Snowmassguy wrote:
DEATH PANEL is going to be the new name of my hardcore garage band.

You bastard, that was going to be the new name of my garage band.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 8, 2013 - 07:56am PT
As The Chief has noted above, the sorryfest season is beginning.


**
By Ron Fournier
November 7, 2013

I'm sorry, too, Mr. President.

I'm sorry you couldn't finesse a single Republican vote for health insurance reform in 2010.

I'm sorry Republicans decided to re-litigate the law rather than help implement it, offering no serious alternative of their own for the nearly 50 million uninsured Americans.

I'm sorry you campaigned for reelection on the famous false promise: "If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan. Period."

I'm sorry your aides debated whether to tell the full truth (that people could keep their insurance only if it hadn't changed and if it met your standards) and decided instead to institutionalize the lie.

I'm sorry that when Americans recognized the deception you tried to reinvent history: "What we said was you can keep it if it hasn't changed since the law passed." No, no, no, no, no—that's not what you guys said.

I'm sorry you didn't trust Americans with the truth.

I'm sorry that the Democratic Party's decades-old chase toward universal health care is now at risk because your law—your legacy, sir—is off to such a miserable start. The online networks don't work and the people you need bought into the system, particularly young Americans, can't access the market and now may never trust it ... or you.

"I am sorry that they are finding themselves in this situation based on assurances they got from me," you told NBC News. "We've got to work hard to make sure that they know we hear them and we are going to do everything we can to deal with folks who find themselves in a tough position as a consequence of this."

Then, work hard, Mr. President, and tell your administration to do the same. Tell them, please, to stop blaming Republicans, insurance companies, and the media—to stop making excuses and shading the truth. You must lead by example (the NBC interview was full of excuses) and create a system of universal health care that is worthy of your promise.

"Ultimately," you told NBC, "the buck stops with me." You're right, sir. Please don't make us sorry about that.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/i-m-sorry-too-mr-president-20131107


Maybe he can fix it with a few more speeches and campaign rallies. Perhaps releasing some sealed divorce records. These methods always worked before.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 8, 2013 - 08:15am PT
Cancelled insurance? Post it here:
http://mycancellation.com/
doughnutnational

Gym climber
its nice here in the spring
Nov 8, 2013 - 09:13am PT
I ask (again) are there people out there who had not seen constant increases in their health insurance costs prior to the ACA? I've had the same job for the last 12 years and my insurance costs have risen almost every year during that time.
michelle0607

climber
Nov 8, 2013 - 09:31am PT
doughnutnational,

Good question

I have seen plan increases 4 out of 5 years. On a percentage basis, the premiums have gone up 2%, 3%, 3%, 0% and 8% with no change in deductible or percentage paid after deductible.

I am probably healthier than most and significantly healthier than most in my "deep south" state.


Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 8, 2013 - 09:48am PT
Did your premiums ever double or triple on you?

That's happening right now to a bunch of people. They have every right to be pissed, especially since they were promised the exact opposite by Obama.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 8, 2013 - 09:48am PT
Funny that Insurance costs have been increasing every year while most Americans wages remain stagnant...It's not really a free market system when healthy people end up paying as much as the people who don't take care of themselves..Again , it's the old too big to fail government bail-out for American corporations...get rid of the Insurance leeches and socialize medicine...
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 8, 2013 - 11:27am PT
Who says their insurance was "junk" ?

Apparently they liked it - liked it enough to pay for it every month.

That was the only qualifier Obama laid out; "if you like" your policy.

Obama didn't say one damn thing about "junk insurance", but did say some variation of "if you like it, you can keep it" dozens of times.
doughnutnational

Gym climber
its nice here in the spring
Nov 8, 2013 - 11:31am PT
In the past 6 years my share of my premiums has more than tripled. (My employers share is capped at $7000)
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Nov 8, 2013 - 11:32am PT
Wyna speaks the truth on this subject. I witnessed my mother, mother in law and various acquaintances put on this for profit treadmill although their medical situations were hopeless. The average working stiff is going to take it in the shorts with obamacare and the middle class will suffer further shrinkage
Obamacare was never anout medical care, it is about consolidation and control while further enriching a narrow segment of the population that is cooperative with big government goals at the expense of the masses.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 8, 2013 - 11:37am PT
Does ACA discriminate against marriage?

Given that consensus is forming on both the right and the left that the marriage gap— in which the wealthy elite have stable marriages while the working class don’t—is a major cause of growing income inequality, now seems like exactly the wrong time to incentive the single life.

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/11/08/is-obamacare-the-newest-threat-to-your-marriage/
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 11:38am PT
My cancelled insurance was not JUNK at all. It was a better policy than I will have in January.
Basically, it is the same policy with a much greater monthly premium, maternity coverage and deductibles that are 2-3X greater than my old policy. My old policy did not have MATERNITY coverage. I am not having any more children yet I get to pay for maternity....sweet.


My policy cost went up big time with now huge deductibles. I will now pay a fortune for catastrophic accident coverage.

My new policy is unaffordable. i make just enough to not qualify for subsidies so it appears the lower middle class gets to subsidize the poor. I will now pay more per month for insurance than I do for my home mortgage.

If times get tough, insurance will be the first expense to get dropped. Obamacare will fail because it is unaffordable for the working class.


Trust me, I am not alone in the predicament.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 8, 2013 - 11:47am PT
jghedge wrote
Then why'd McCauliffe, a staunch ACA supporter, just win the governorship of a southern conservative state, defeating a wingnut who swore to oppose it?

Are you trying to convince those of us on the fence? You'll have to look past party talking points to find the whole truth.
Here is a link with another perspective. Myself? I don't know anything about Virginia except that they call small hills mountains.

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/11/07/in-wake-of-narrow-cuccinelli-loss-democrats-panic/

apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 8, 2013 - 12:08pm PT
"In the past 6 years my share of my premiums has more than tripled. (My employers share is capped at $7000)"

Imagine if health insurance wasn't coupled to employment, and people had to foot the entire cost?

The retarded coupling of health insurance & employment, and the ridiculous increases in healthcare costs would have been addressed years ago, and we'd be in the logical place we should be: a single payer system.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 8, 2013 - 12:27pm PT
jghedge wrote
How desperate and stupid you'd have to be to believe that, I can't imagine. The reality is the exact opposite - as it always is in Wingnut Fantasy World.

Mr Hedge,
You should Google who Walter Russell Mead is, before you begin your inevitable and persistent ad hominems. I assure you, he is far more respected in issues of social policy than you or I. He also voted for Obama.

This may explain much of your lack of civility.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

PS: Try decaf.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 8, 2013 - 12:53pm PT
My cancelled insurance was not JUNK at all. It was a better policy than I will have in January.
Basically, it is the same policy with a much greater monthly premium, maternity coverage and deductibles that are 2-3X greater than my old policy. My old policy did not have MATERNITY coverage. I am not having any more children yet I get to pay for maternity....sweet.

My policy cost went up big time with now huge deductibles. I will now pay a fortune for catastrophic accident coverage.

My new policy is unaffordable. i make just enough to not qualify for subsidies so it appears the lower middle class gets to subsidize the poor. I will now pay more per month for insurance than I do for my home mortgage.

If times get tough, insurance will be the first expense to get dropped. Obamacare will fail because it is unaffordable for the working class.

Trust me, I am not alone in the predicament.

Perhaps your "predicament" is similar to Deborah Cavallaro's?


http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-debunked-20131030,0,6010994.story#axzz2k4rwHAqa

Curt
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:01pm PT


Perhaps your "predicament" is similar to Deborah Cavallaro's?
Nope, not even close. Haning started my own business a few years ago, I have become very familiar with the REALITY of insurance today. It was not great before Obamacare but is much worse today. Worse meaning....unaffordable for someone like me that has a family of 4 and is in good health.



Unfortunately, the REALITY that Obamacare is going to prove to be unaffordable to the folks that are expected to fund it.

Those that are self employed or employed by a small business are going to be impacted immediately.

Employers will shift more if not all the financial burden to its employees in the next couple years. Young folks will decide to remain uninsured instead of paying the huge premiums.

Middle class( and below) folks will not pay for insurance when faced with the dilemma of paying for rent or insurance. Obamacare is going to be dramatically underfunded.

The idea that health care is an intrinsic right is a good one but I just do not see this working out and time soon.

Some say .....Single payer. Great, then make it happen.

I don't see it happening in my life time but maybe? I see two classes of health care. One class for the rich who can basically pay cash for the services of the best and brightest doctors and a second system for the masses. Get in line, take a number and hopefully the 3rd tier med school grad can treat you in time before you die from your illness.


Hope I am wrong but the above senario is probable.

Hoser

climber
vancouver
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:03pm PT
Obama didn't say one damn thing about "junk insurance", but did say some variation of "if you like it, you can keep it" dozens of times.

Thats because he was talking to adults with a brain, who needs to say if you were getting f*#ked I will allow you to keep getting f*#ked

what the hell is a matter with you? You want an option to remain f*#ked?

I will now pay more per month for insurance than I do for my home mortgage.

Your house probably costs less than a catastrophic health issue, why dont you vote in a government that will bring in a single payer system instead of trying to go backwards.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:07pm PT
Your house probably costs less than a catastrophic health issue, why dont you vote in a government that will bring in a single payer system instead of trying to go backwards

Maybe, depends how fast you die.

My reality is my house will be paid off in a few years. Maybe then I can afford insurance.
As I will be older, I will likely need more medical care and can buy insurance then and pass the buck to the younger generation that can subsidize me.

Oh wait, they wont be buying the unaffordable insurance so who is going to subsidize my old sick ass lol



Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:10pm PT
If you're too stupid to shop around for better, cheaper coverage, that's your problem, not the governments.

I have/had GOOD insurance.

We are keeping the insurance because Obamacare excludes the hospital that is the nearest to our home.

I get to keep the same insurance but with dramatically increased deductibles and a significant increase in monthly payments.

I shopped around, cant find anything better unless we want a MASSIVE deductible ( $12k)


JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:13pm PT
Your house probably costs less than a catastrophic health issue, why dont you vote in a government that will bring in a single payer system instead of trying to go backwards.

Now there's a classic free lunch.

John
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:20pm PT
OK. That does it! Every time I click on this thread, I get an ad for health insurance. This thread is obviously part of a vast conspiracy to rip us off one way or the other, so I'm done here.

John
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:28pm PT
I am curious why so many are annoyed that maternity is included in policies. I don't and won't ever need it either. But I will also never need prostate cancer care, or testicular cancer care, etc. Why no outrage about that?
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:41pm PT
Short answer, crimpie, is that maternity generally depends on the actions of the insured and therefore is not a classic insurable risk. To my knowledge, no one voluntarily contracts ovarian or testicular cancer.

I realize this answer is politically incorrect, but it is economically and, heretofore legally, a distinction vital in insurance contracting.

John
Crimpergirl

Sport climber
Boulder, Colorado!
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:45pm PT
So JE - does that mean we shouldn't cover climbing accidents too as they are based on the actor's actions?
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:46pm PT
Crimpie won't need Viagra, either, but you or I could get it through our insurance coverage even if we don't really need it.

Not sayin'....jess sayin'...
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:47pm PT

"We are keeping the insurance because Obamacare excludes the hospital that is the nearest to our home."


Why does the hospital have to be close to your home? Paying more justifies not having to drive further? And isn't that a choice you're making, not the gov't?


So when we need ER services, I( or my children) want to spend an extra hour in the car bleeding out or be directed to the hospital closest to my house that will probably just charge me huge $$$$ because I am out of network.


So Hedge, did you sign up for Obamacare or do you have other insurance. Just curious?




apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 8, 2013 - 01:51pm PT
Teenagers who eat too much ice cream exacerbate their acne...yet insurance will cover their medications.

Smokers who smoke too much will likely have a heart attack, and their insurance will cover them anyway.

These actions...and so many others, including pregnancy...require acts of the part of the individual.

Why wouldn't a socially-promoting & basic human right of pregnancy not be expected to be part of basic healthcare coverage?

JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 8, 2013 - 02:03pm PT
Crimpie, it certainly means that we would not cover climbing, motorcycling, ultralight aircraft, etc., for the same rate we cover those who choose not to engage in those activities. In fact, most all life insurance policies require that you pay extra for a variety of choices, not only recreational, but, e.g., choosing to smoke. Europeans require that the rescued climber pay for the rescue, thus creating the market for rescue insurance.

In general, when we allow people to engage in costly activities and insure against the costs of those activities for free, we create what economists call a "moral hazard." This has nothing to do with morality in its conventional sense. Rather, it creates a subsidy for engaging in costly activity. It is similar to requiring all of us to subsidize flood insurance for those who choose to live in a flood plain.

As many have pointed out, what we call "health insurance" has an insurance component -- namely indemnity from unanticipated outcomes from which we are all at risk, regardless of our actions -- but it also includes what amounts to routine maintenance. Maternity involves a combination of both factors. In this day and age, most children represent a voluntary action by people who desire to have children. The "normal" cost of maternity is something everyone having children will pay. There's also, though,, the additional costs that result from complications. Those additional costs are a true insurable risk. The former are not.

Ironically, the opponents of the ACA often oppose legal abortion as well. If there were no legal abortion, unplanned pregnancy would then be a classic insurable risk, so maybe Dave Berry was right when he titled his book Children and Other Hazards of Sex.

Does that help?

John
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 8, 2013 - 02:08pm PT
and once again, Crimpie absolutely blasts it out of the park

I am curious why so many are annoyed that maternity is included in policies. I don't and won't ever need it either. But I will also never need prostate cancer care, or testicular cancer care, etc. Why no outrage about that?
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Nov 8, 2013 - 02:09pm PT
they're complaints about the extortionate cost of health care in this country,

When Medicare was enacted health care consumed 3% of the GNP; now it is 8% and rising rapidly.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 02:17pm PT
Seems that those that are not impacted by Obamacare LOOOOOOOVVVEEE IT

Don't worry. Your policy will change in the not too distant future and it will cost you more $$$

Just a matter of time.

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 02:29pm PT
I'll ask it again: For those that claim everyone's rates are going to go up, where is all the money going?


I guess we will find out over time.

Seems like it is going to subsidize policies for those that cant afford a policy.

Problem is it is putting the financial burden of folks like me that make just enough to support my family but not enough to qualify for subsidies? As a contract employee, it might just be worth to take a few months off to qualify for subsidies and declare a lower income. More family time and others can pay for my subsidy lol



My rates are going up big time and appear to be locked for 1 year. Betting that they go up again next year. As a family we are going to need to make sacrifices next year to afford insurance. What happens the following year when we see another large rate increase and cant afford it without. Like I said in a previous post...I believe the choice between insurance and rent/mortgage payment is going to be a reality of prices still rise.


I see organizations that I do contract work for getting ready to pass the buck to their employees. Both through part time work as well as increased $$ burden being passed to the employee.

If you have a comfy policy through your employer, expect to pay more.







Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 02:30pm PT
My union dues are $920 a year. Some DAYS I make double that. IN A DAY.


It all makes sense now. He is an elitist.

JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 8, 2013 - 02:34pm PT
I'll ask it again: For those that claim everyone's rates are going to go up, where is all the money going?

For coverage many neither want nor need. Dave, there's really no good economic reason why we price catastrophic health coverage differently from our pricing of life insurance, or even car insurance. Even under California's somewhat irrational law, my choices still affect my rate because that rate factors in:

1. How much I drive;
2. My driving record;
3. The expense of repairing my car (for collision); and
4. How much coverage I want.

Once I pay off my car, I will no longer need or want collision insurance, and I should hot be required to pay for it. The "we're all one big group and we should share all our health care costs" model ignores both freedom of choice and reality. Why should I pay for health care costs incurred by someone who chooses to smoke, for example? (In California the answer is, in part, I don't because of the heavy tobacco taxes, but that's a different story).

The fact remains that a traditional insurable risk is one over which the insured has no control, not one arising from intentional acts. That's why, for example, it's illegal in most situations for insurance to cover punitive damages. Our health care coverage is not entirely insurance, and we need to recognize and account for the difference.

John
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 02:48pm PT
We should all be poor, ignorant and vote repub

You are batting 0 for 3 if you are referring to me.

You do know your Union Plan will get the axe sooner rather than later.

Have fun with that Hedgesnob
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Nov 8, 2013 - 02:53pm PT
Hedge, you're right, I missed a digit. You should see my check book - kind of like the gubmint's.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 03:05pm PT
Once I pay off my car, I will no longer need or want collision insurance, and I should hot be required to pay for it. The "we're all one big group and we should share all our health care costs" model ignores both freedom of choice and reality. Why should I pay for health care costs incurred by someone who chooses to smoke, for example?

+1

This is why Obamacare will fail. It is not economically feasible for the middle class to finance all the mental health care that Hedge gets/ needs

So Hedge, I am sure your Kaiser plan will decrease in price with additional bene's on January 1?



JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 8, 2013 - 03:13pm PT
Dave, That's one of the reasons why I have argued for years that we need to separate health care expenses from employment. Failure to do so leads to irrational pricing and inefficient delivery of services.

John
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 03:15pm PT

yes, much like Social Security and Medicare have "failed"

do you ever, ever get tired of yourself?

No never tired of myself because I speak the truth unlike the propaganda that you and your buddy Hedge spew all day long.

I am really looking at getting some social security money back when I become eligible. Yeah right !
Social Security once did work, not anymore. It is failing miserably.



Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 8, 2013 - 03:24pm PT
More great news for Obamacare and the middle class.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/165776/uninsured-americans-ignoring-health-exchange-sites.aspx
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 8, 2013 - 03:29pm PT
"we need to separate health care expenses from employment"

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 8, 2013 - 05:37pm PT
Don't worry. Your policy will change in the not too distant future and it will cost you more $$$

It's pretty much impossible to disagree with that, but insurance companies have always changed policies and increased prices every year. That isn't something caused by Obamacare. I should add that cost containment is not a major part of Obamacare, but is something that definitely needs to be addressed.

Curt
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 8, 2013 - 06:47pm PT
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 8, 2013 - 07:14pm PT
Winners don't need unions
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 8, 2013 - 07:42pm PT
Someone else screwed by Obamacare...

...oh, wait...nevermind.

Conservative groups are highlighting the case of an Arizona man with leukemia whose insurance plan was canceled because it didn’t comply with the Affordable Care Act. A news report quoted the man as saying he would need to pay $26,000 to keep the same doctor. It turns out, he was able to get a new plan, which has his doctor in its network, for a lower premium and a lower out-of-pocket maximum than his old plan.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/11/the-rest-of-the-story-on-arizona-anecdote/

Curt
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 8, 2013 - 11:39pm PT
The Chief...Union thievery..? 1 guy working and 12 guys standing around watching..? I didn't know the Mammoth Airport workers were unionized...? Did you hurt your back carrying Rusty's golf clubs..?
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 9, 2013 - 08:13am PT
jghedge wrote:
Try reality

Kind of ironic coming from a man who makes his living in Hollywood.

Obama interview here:
That is, many have pointed out that his campaign website was really good, so why didn't that mean that he'd be good at setting up a health insurance website? The answer is that the government is bad because the government is hampered by... government!

http://althouse.blogspot.com.br/2013/11/obama-admits-government-is-far-less.html
doughnutnational

Gym climber
its nice here in the spring
Nov 9, 2013 - 08:57am PT
I think the passing of friday night has caused some of you to lose sight of the most important question that needs to be answered in this thread: Who drinks less cragman or riley?
climbski2

Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
Nov 9, 2013 - 09:28am PT
if our special forces were in the business of protecting americans from real terrorisms which actually affects their lives...

they would be abducting and insurance and banking company managers and executives; delivering them to blacksites were cia contractors would wall and waterboard them

Good Point.

And DAMN those film industry union members.. the producers are going broke! Making just 100M profit on a film is just pathetic these days. We need to cut the boom operators pay in half right now!!! They don't have the right to sit on thier ass at all.. they need to get to work.. grab a broom or something.. go scrub a toilet when not filming. We arn't paying you to sit on your ass while Brad Pitt gets his hair fixed! But get your ass back here fast and be ready to go if we need ya.
climbski2

Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
Nov 9, 2013 - 10:30am PT
Even if that is true .. Producer is making damn good money selling something for which he hired union workers. I'm guessing he is getting more than just a pile of sh#t out of those union workers.

I guess the Union could write the contract such that the union worker only gets paid based on time they are actually doing the work they were hired for. Course you might then have to pay $200/hour. Infact that would be about right based on my experience working for myself.

My rule of thumb is to bid for a target of about $100/hour. But I'm not in a seasonal or rare project based industry. If I were I'd have to bid/work with down season or dead months in mind too.

If the specialized job you need someone to do does not pay enough to live decently then you won't get anyone to do that job. Regardless if it's a job that only takes 1 hour a day to do 20 days a year. The specialized skilled worked must keep a roof over their head and eat the rest of the time you dont need their work.

If you make enough off their work in between their sitting on the shitter typing political drivel on a website (which clearly the producer is) then the amount of pay is justified.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Nov 9, 2013 - 10:43am PT
The ACA cut funding for unreimbursed care at critical access hospitals because those uninsured patients would be covered by Medicaid. Unfortunately, the supreme court decided that Republicans could choose to not cover those people and so now those hospitals are getting screwed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/09/health/cuts-in-hospital-subsidies-threaten-safety-net-care.html?hp&_r=0

Now, in a perverse twist, many of the poor people who rely on safety-net hospitals like Memorial will be doubly unlucky. A government subsidy, little known outside health policy circles but critical to the hospitals’ survival, is being sharply reduced under the new health law.

The subsidy, which for years has helped defray the cost of uncompensated and undercompensated care, was cut substantially on the assumption that the hospitals would replace much of the lost income with payments for patients newly covered by Medicaid or private insurance. But now the hospitals in states like Georgia will get neither the new Medicaid patients nor most of the old subsidies, which many say are crucial to the mission of care for the poor.

“We were so thrilled when the law passed, but it has backfired,” said Lindsay Caulfield, senior vice president for planning and marketing at Grady Health in Atlanta, the largest safety-net hospital in Georgia.

It is now facing the loss of nearly half of its roughly $100 million in annual subsidies known as disproportionate share hospital payments.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 9, 2013 - 10:54am PT
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 9, 2013 - 01:00pm PT

932,000 left the workforce last month.

Third worst month in history.

Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 9, 2013 - 03:15pm PT
I should add that cost containment is not a major part of Obamacare

actually, the ACA is already bending the overall cost of healthcare

not downwards but slowing the the accelerating increase going on for decades now

Thanks. I do realize that. What I meant to point out is that we still need to address the fact that we collectively pay twice as much in the USA as people in other industrialized western democracies do for their healthcare.

Curt
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 11, 2013 - 02:15pm PT
Good news has arrived!

The health care laws have boosted employment. Oregon hired 400 people to process handwritten applications.

Still don't have anyone signed up yet. http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2013/11/11/oregon-health-care-exchange-has-yet-to-enroll-a-single-person/

and there are the 140,000 people who had their choice of insurance they had purchased cancelled by gov. fiat with no alternative.....they're still screwed of course.


11/11/2013 newz:
"SALEM, Ore. (AP) — With a reputation as a pacesetter in health care, Oregon laid out bold plans for complying with the federal overhaul.

The state wouldn’t just create a health insurance exchange, a complicated undertaking in its own right. Oregon officials set out to build one of the biggest and best in the nation — a model that other states would want to copy.

But more than a month after Cover Oregon’s online enrollment was supposed to launch, reality is lagging far behind Gov. John Kitzhaber’s grand ideas. The online system still doesn’t work, and the exchange has yet to enroll a single person in health insurance."
but they only spent a bit more than $300,000,000 ($300 million, yes) to get the site up so you can't blame them for not spending to achieve their goals.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 12, 2013 - 06:41am PT
Short blog post by the head of Harvard's economic dept.

Monday, November 11, 2013
Is community rating fair?
A large part of the motivation of the Affordable Care Act is to provide insurance to those with pre-existing conditions. Under the law, insurance is offered to everyone at a price based on overall community risk, not the risk estimated by the insurance company based on a person's particular characteristics. That has been deemed "fair" by advocates of the law.

I wonder whether advocates of this view are concerned with other insurance markets. Teenage drivers pay a lot more for auto insurance. The old pay a lot more for life insurance. Life insurance companies require health screening before granting a policy. Is this a problem, or the natural and desirable functioning of markets?

In the law, having children has been deemed a pre-existing condition, although it is not quite described as such. Everyone is now expected to buy insurance to pay for pregnancy and maternity care, even those who never intend to have children. The goal is to spread the risk of childbirth among the larger community.

But having children is more a choice than a random act of nature. People who drive a new Porsche pay more for car insurance than those who drive an old Chevy. We consider that fair because which car you drive is a choice. Why isn't having children viewed in the same way?

I don't know the answer to these questions. But it does seem that fairness in health insurance pricing is being viewed very differently than fairness in pricing other types of insurance. I wonder why.

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com.br/2013/11/is-community-rating-fair.html

Those are some very interesting questions. Does anyone have any answers posed in the above blog post?
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Nov 12, 2013 - 09:35am PT
Couchmaster posted
and there are the 140,000 people who had their choice of insurance they had purchased cancelled by gov. fiat with no alternative.....they're still screwed of course.

Um...no they aren't? They just haven't been able to sign up through the exchange yet.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 12, 2013 - 10:11am PT

apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 12, 2013 - 10:24am PT
"Passing a law that TRIES to solve one problem, while inflicting pain, grief and MORE problems on millions of others is off the chart pathetic."


Ergo, not passing a law...or creating any kind of legislation to try and solve the #1 economic dilemma for US citizens...but instead starting wars that cost thousands of lives and cost trillion$....

that must be really pathetic.


TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 12, 2013 - 10:30am PT
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 13, 2013 - 02:49am PT
Another point which bothers me greatly. If the gov't screwed up the website this badly, how will they handle the actual health care and/or insurance issues?

the gov't will not be handling the actual health care or insurance (other than medicaid)

Those systems have been set up and running for a number of decades, and utilize the latest in computers and software. Everything is already vetted and used.

Be reassured on this point.
Degaine

climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 03:38am PT
Larry,

The Harvard professor does not ask an interesting question. Posting the failings of 3rd world country's healthcare system (Venezuela) has no relevancy either.

Your example of Venezuela a few pages back is especially ironic given that you won't recognize the overwhelming success of the systems in countries like France, Germany, Japan, Norway, etc., etc. Are those systems without fault? Of course not, but the healthcare systems in those countries are far superior to what the US has to offer.

The real question the Harvard professor should be asking, a question he and most others (economists and journalists alike, whatever their political leanings) refuse to touch: why does healthcare in the US cost 2 to 3 times per capita than in countries like France, Germany, or even Japan?

That is a much more relevant question, and a better economic question, than any the Harvard professor asks (or any questions you've asked throughout this thread).

As most on the left in here have clearly stated, the ACA is a poor consolation prize to true healthcare reform and a single payer system, but it is a first step in the right direction.

Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 05:20am PT
Degaine wrote:

why does healthcare in the US cost 2 to 3 times per capita than in countries like France, Germany, or even Japan?

the ACA is a poor consolation prize to true healthcare reform and a single payer system, but it is a first step in the right direction.

Your question is excellent and I am only on this non-climbing forum thread to view the opinions of a general group that I respect. I don't have the answers, but I do throw out skeptical perspectives that I think are healthy in seeking the truth. I do know that ACA has negatively affected too many of my personal friends and acquaintances.

On the second statement, if the country wants single payer, then why not just put it up for vote? Maybe single payer is the way to go, maybe not. Why do you think single payer has to sneak in trojan horse style?

The best part of ACA is that it has exposed even more politicians in DC as mendacious meddlers. Too many choose not to see that in their own side and blindly defend or attack on a partisan basis.
Degaine

climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 06:30am PT
Larry wrote:
Your question is excellent and I am only on this non-climbing forum thread to view the opinions of a general group that I respect. I don't have the answers, but I do throw out skeptical perspectives that I think are healthy in seeking the truth.


Hi Larry, thanks for your reply. I have no problem with skeptical, but the perspectives you throw out - yours or those of individuals like the Harvard professor - are woefully ignorant and uniformed. They are not skepticism but foregone conclusions based on dogma that are desperately searching for some form of confirmation that they're right.

If you're truly interested in understanding then stop with the Republican/right wing talking points bullsh#t.

Larry wrote:
I do know that ACA has negatively affected too many of my personal friends and acquaintances.

And I bet that I know just as many people that the ACA has helped. Does my anecdotal evidence get to cancel out your anecdotal evidence, or will you just dismiss it?


Larry wrote:
On the second statement, if the country wants single payer, then why not just put it up for vote? Maybe single payer is the way to go, maybe not. Why do you think single payer has to sneak in trojan horse style?

In retrospect, given that almost no Republicans voted for the ACA, the Democrats might as well have voted for single payer. They should have also framed single payer as "Medicare for all". Medicare works, everybody nows what it is, it would have certainly received broad public support.

That written, given the 2008 Democrat primaries, I don't think that Obama is actually interested in a single payer system. Hillary was, but even before winning the nomination, Obama's plan was weak sauce when compared to Hillary's plan. Those of us writing that the ACA is a step in the right direction towards single payer have never stated (or at least I haven't) that this was Obama's intention. I honestly don't think it ever was. He may have hoped to at least include a public option in his plan, but even that he took off the table before the Republicans ever asked.

If you're actually interested in understanding healthcare and trying to figure out what works, then pull your head out of your rear and stop using right wing talking points to try to discredit Obama and the ACA, and actually look in to the data (economic, health, etc.) of the many universal healthcare coverage systems out there. Then look at the US system until know. If you keep an open mind you'll be unpleasantly surprised at how bad the American public is being and has been bilked (or hoodwinked, or taken for a ride, etc.) for decades by insurance companies and healthcare providers.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 13, 2013 - 07:45am PT
Imagine how advanced American society would be if the voting public were more educated and not misinformed...? Too many Americans take the bait and go along with the special interest propoganda campaigns and vote against their best interest...
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 09:03am PT
Degaine wrote:
perspectives you throw out - yours or those of individuals like the Harvard professor - are woefully ignorant and uniformed.

Well, I plead ignorance, but that esteemed Harvard professor knows more about how incentives work in economics than most. He also posed the "perspectives" as questions to ponder, not statements of fact.


Economics, or any social policy (including ACA or single payer), is not hard science. No counterfactuals can be disproven. It is good to be cautioulsy skeptical of anyone who is cocksure of future success's in any new social policy. In fact the more dogmatic they are, the more skeptical we should be of their assertions. The Dunning-Krufer effect explains a portion of that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect


To inject some much needed humor, I offer this quote:
Former British Prime Minister Lord Salisbury is said to have remarked to Her Majesty Queen Victoria, "Change, change, why do we need more change? Aren't things bad enough already?"

madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:50am PT
I despise Obamacare on literally countless levels. But I won't belabor that point, having said my piece on that up-thread.

Conversely, I would be 100% in favor of a single-payer system... provided that the funding for it came entirely in the form of new taxes... and those taxes should be levied at the cash register modeled upon something like a "vice tax."

For example, cigarettes, alcohol, red meat, ice cream, whole milk and cream, full-fat anything, etc., etc., all should have taxes added to the base purchase price relative to the known health-risks these things represent.

After all, if we're all going to be literally in the same health-care boat, then those people "weighting" the boat toward tipping it over are the ones that should most pay. And so, on a taxation system like this, well, if you want to pop out half-a-dozen kids and then turn them into fat little rolly-pollies, no problem. But YOU get to pay the taxes on all the soda, potato chips, ice cream, stacks of red meat, and so forth that I see such families checking out with in the supermarket lines. And no food-stamp program should pay the TAX part of such purchases. Base price only.

You cannot (in harmony with the ideals that make America different from European socialist democracies) have a single-payer system without ensuring that those who most "weight" the boat also are forced to assume personal responsibility (read: pay the price) for their lifestyle choices.

This present "wealth-redistribution" approach, whereby I am forced to buy a "product" that I don't want and at price/value ratios that has been jacked by government intrusion is entirely the wrong approach.

I am totally serious! You would find me completely on board with a single-payer system IF the revenue to fund it came directly from lifestyle choices. And the beauty of this approach is that it would indirectly motivate healthier lifestyle choices....

Emphasis on CHOICES in the land of the FREE and the home of the brave.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:51am PT
In retrospect, given that almost no Republicans voted for the ACA, the Democrats might as well have voted for single payer. They should have also framed single payer as "Medicare for all". Medicare works, everybody nows what it is, it would have certainly received broad public support.

That would have been impossible. In fact, to get the necessary votes in the Senate, the public option that existed in the ACA had to be deleted.

Curt
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:02pm PT
What does it tell you, Curt, when single-payer can't even get the undivided support of Democrats in Congress?

Obamacare passed with zero Republican votes.
Srbphoto

climber
Kennewick wa
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:19pm PT
For example, cigarettes, alcohol, red meat, ice cream, whole milk and cream, full-fat anything, etc., etc., all should have taxes added to the base purchase price relative to the known health-risks these things represent.

What happens when your ox gets gored?

For example, exercising. A lot of people have to go the Dr because of exercise.

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:21pm PT
There are too many rolling and coming catastrophes caused by ObamaCare to keep track of. Just wait until the employer market is hit late next year. But within a few weeks, a humanitarian crisis is about to hit millions who could find themselves without health insurance. Millions who had their insurance policies cancelled are now unable to re-insure themselves on the broken ObamaCare websites. In liberal Massachusetts alone, only 1% of those cancellations have re-enrolled.
The Boston Herald reports that ObamaCare and the president's broken promise have already cost 150,000 Bay Staters their health insurance plans. But of those 150,0000, only 549 are in the Massachusetts Health Connector to be re-enrolled on time. Even that small number are not officially enrolled.
Overall, only 47,781 total accounts have been created and a paltry 16,282 applications have been completed.
What you likely have here is a toxic mix of people who either can't access the state site due to the technical problems, or those who have decided not to re-enroll. There is still 32 days to sign up in time, but it is obvious many are in no hurry.
Most of the people in the White House, including the president, have never had any real experience outside of government or academia, so they probably didn’t know that betrayal and frustration combined with rate shock is no way to attract customers.
For those who are already ill or might get ill early next year, this is no laughing matter. How many of the millions who had their policies cancelled have scheduled surgery or chemotherapy in early January. And how many of those, through no fault of their own, won't be covered because they can't access the ObamaCare site or afford the ObamaCare-approved plan?
On top of that, if a large portion of the millions who had their insurance cancelled simply refuse to re-enroll, you can bet that those refusing will be the young and healthy needed to keep ObamaCare financially viable. The result of an insurance pool filled with the sick and elderly would be skyrocketing premiums; which means more healthy people drop out, which mean prices go even higher.
That is called the death spiral.
It is becoming more and more likely that by this time next year, ObamaCare could result in an increase in the number of Americans who are uninsured.


We are Fu**ed
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:35pm PT
... IF the revenue to fund it came directly from lifestyle choices.

I'm all in favor of everybody paying to some extent just for "normal" purchases. We all engage in "lifestyle choices" that affect our need for health-care. NP!

I'm just emphasizing a "vice tax" to ensure that the subset of purchases that are known to be health-endangering should be taxed more heavily.

Really, the sole principle I care about in funding priorities is that people should be responsible (pay the price) for their lifestyle choices. So, yeah, single-payer system WITH funding tied to lifestyle choices: there are all sorts of models by which that can be made to work in harmony with American founding principles.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:44pm PT
and what was/is the Republican healthcare plan?

I guess we will find out as this is clearly a MASSIVE failure.

Once again, we see partisan politics working to the detriment of the American people.

Democrat, Republican blah blah blah




Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:58pm PT
What does it tell you, Curt, when single-payer can't even get the undivided support of Democrats in Congress?

It tells me that Joe Lieberman is beholden to the insurance industry in Hartford.

Curt
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:58pm PT
Whatever happened to the purpose of government being the securing of our liberty?

Now, its "everyone's ox SHOULD get gored".

Time has long passed to start scaling back the power of the government.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:01pm PT
Norton, in all fairness, as I recall the days when the bill was being formulated and subsequently passed, it was done in closed-door sessions wherein the GOP was specifically excluded. Over and over, I heard that info reported directly from on the scene interviews. I don't believe their input was wanted or permitted. Now those were more "naive" times with a less experienced president (than now is the case) wherein I believe he felt that "might ruled" i.e. "might makes right." As a result of what transpired subsequently, he may have mellowed somewhat and come to a greater realization that there is a need for both parties to work together. The Dems were pretty heady in those days with the notion that they were in charge and "others need not apply" so to speak.

Working together sounds great until your opposition won't even support their own ideas. It's been said before, but let's be really clear about this: Obama assumed that the ACA would get some Republican support because it was based on their own plan--first envisioned by the very conservative Heritage Foundation and first enacted on a statewide basis by a Republican governor.

Curt
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:04pm PT
the millions who had their policies cancelled


anybody have personal experience with this? Vs. 'millions' of anecdotal talking points?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:11pm PT
anybody have personal experience with this? Vs. 'millions' of anecdotal talking points?

As I posted up-thread. Yes.

It's ironic that now even the Dems are starting to realize that this mess wasn't ready for prime time and are advocating the exact same delay in roll-out as the Rebumblicans pressed for in the shut-down.

Republicrats. Dembumblicans. Same thing. Same joke.

Except that tens of millions are not laughing.

Shiloh, you and I could in a couple of days hammer out a better plan than ANYTHING Congress has dreamed up. And it would be a fair and principled compromise that would appeal to the VAST majority of Americans (rather than this present 50.5/49.5 split we presently see). I like how you think and appreciate your refinements to the single-payer idea.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:18pm PT
even Medicare is a 12 month policy, for Christ's sakes

So, let me be sure I'm understanding what you're floating....

The widespread cancellations of small-group and personal plans, followed by NO comparable plans being made available at ANY cost, is comparable to the annual "cancellation" of Medicare?

Am I reading you right? Is this REALLY your comparison?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:42pm PT
But now when someone gets a particular policy canceled and replaced by another one that offers more coverage and better value, I'm supposed conclude that our president is Satan himself.

Tens of millions are finding that they can NOT get their existing policy "replaced by another one that offers more coverage and better value." But, I guess that this fact is just "anecdotes" that are really no "evidence" of a problem at all.

Perhaps you'll take as "evidence" that the President himself is embattled and apologizing for this FACT, because the Dems are running scared of serious backlash at this point.

It is now widely known and demonstrable FACT that what you are saying is simply false. Rather than to pretend that tens of millions are not being screwed by this debacle, you could legitimately continue discussion by at least having the intellectual honesty to acknowledge facts as facts.

You COULD legitimately argue that tens of millions were getting screwed prior to Obamacare, and I would instantly agree. You COULD argue that the President could hardly have been expected to foresee all the side-effects that would emerge from this law, and I would instantly agree (after all, they had to "pass it to know what it really says"). I could agree on all sorts of points.

But we would have to first agree to agree on the FACTS. You get nowhere by denying the facts. And it is FACT that tens of millions are having their policies CANCELED with NO comparable-valued policies available anywhere.

Not "more coverage." Not "better value." Nope! Simply not the case, and I've seen it first-hand, as I posted up-thread. And when the President himself is apologizing for the very FACT that you now deny, well, that indicates that you are not taking the facts very seriously.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:48pm PT
J.Shiloh and madbolter1 are making some excellent points.

Single payer may be a way to go, but funding it is where the rubber meets the road.
I like vice tax ideas, but everyone will have to have some minimal skin in the game.
I know there are many advocates of Canadian, French and other healthcare systems and I have heard many good things about them. There are also the anecdotal stories of someone coming to America from those countries to have procedures done. Clearly no one system is perfect.

I may be wrong, but I have also read that in Europe they use VAT (consumption tax) to fund their programs. Without researching it, does anyone know if that is true?
VAT's are somewhat regressive tax systems that hit the poor the hardest.
(Inflation is the most insidious regressive "tax"...watch out for that soon).


As far as our current partisan stalemate in the corrupt Imperial city of DC, someone once wrote:
The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then they get elected and prove it.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:53pm PT
it is FACT that tens of millions are having their policies CANCELED with NO comparable-valued policies available anywhere.

source?
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:56pm PT
"A group of Occupy Wall Street activists has bought almost $15m of Americans' personal debt over the last year as part of the Rolling Jubilee project to help people pay off their outstanding credit.

Rolling Jubilee, set up by Occupy's Strike Debt group following the street protests that swept the world in 2011, launched on 15 November 2012. The group purchases personal debt cheaply from banks before "abolishing" it, freeing individuals from their bills.

By purchasing the debt at knockdown prices the group has managed to free $14,734,569.87 of personal debt, mainly medical debt, spending only $400,000.

"We thought that the ratio would be about 20 to 1," said Andrew Ross, a member of Strike Debt and professor of social and cultural analysis at New York University. He said the team initially envisaged raising $50,000, which would have enabled it to buy $1m in debt.

"In fact we've been able to buy debt a lot more cheaply than that."

The group is able to buy debt so cheaply due to the nature of the "secondary debt market". If individuals consistently fail to pay bills from credit cards, loans, or medical insurance the bank or lender that issued the funds will eventually cut its losses by selling that debt to a third party. These sales occur for a fraction of the debt’s true values – typically for five cents on the dollar – and debt-buying companies then attempt to recoup the debt from the individual debtor and thus make a profit."

....

""Our purpose in doing this, aside from helping some people along the way – there's certainly many, many people who are very thankful that their debts are abolished – our primary purpose was to spread information about the workings of this secondary debt market."

The group has focussed on buying medical debt, and has acquired the $14.7m in three separate purchases, most recently purchasing the value of $13.5m on medical debt owed by 2,693 people across 45 states and Puerto Rico, Rolling Jubilee said in a press release.

“No one should have to go into debt or bankruptcy because they get sick,” said Laura Hanna, an organiser with the group. Hanna said 62% of all personal bankruptcies have medical debt as a contributing factor."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/12/occupy-wall-street-activists-15m-personal-debt
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 02:08pm PT
I may be wrong, but I have also read that in Europe they use VAT (consumption tax) to fund their programs. Without researching it, does anyone know if that is true?

In England the National Health Service is primarily funded through an income-type tax--not sure about other countries

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Insurance

Curt

Srbphoto

climber
Kennewick wa
Nov 13, 2013 - 02:15pm PT
In Canada, they originally taxed beer but it brought in too much money so I believe they changed it to an income tax.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 02:30pm PT
Even if the number were thirty million (and you've provided no evidence that it is), that's still less than 10% of the US population.

What percent of the population had NO insurance before ACA?

Now you're making a totally different argument from your earlier ones. This one is just Norton's et al, and it is back to the side of this discussion that I said I wouldn't debate anymore. I've said my piece on this, as it is really about the difference between political philosophies. I am libertarian and believe in people's freedom to choose AND to pay their own price for their choices. Obamacare is at the opposite end of the spectrum of solutions from the MANY other possibilities that would be based upon CHOICE, as Shiloh and I have been noting.

I'm not going to debate you about the obvious facts. That's a fool's errand. And I'm not going to debate political philosophy any more. On this thread, it's a waste of my time.

ALL I will say at this point is that your argument amounts to saying: "MANY were getting screwed before, and we don't even KNOW how many people (but it's a large enough number that even the President is back-peddling, and the Dems are now sounding like the Rebumblicans of a month ago) are getting screwed by the current approach. So, somebody is going to get screwed no matter what we do or don't do. Thus, it's FAR better to intentionally and ACTIVELY screw people by DOING something than it is to unintentionally screw people by doing nothing."

But there are FAR better alternatives than DOING Obamacare or doing nothing. That is ALL I intend to argue going forward.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 02:48pm PT
House Democrats delivered a fix-it-or-else ultimatum Wednesday to President Obama, giving his administration until Friday to find an affordable solution for the millions of Americans losing their health plans under ObamaCare -- or risk some Democrats backing a Republican solution.

The ultimatum from President Obama's own party is another sign of the unrest within the Democratic caucus about the cancellation notices. The end-of-the-week deadline is significant, because House Republicans are planning to call a vote Friday on a bill that would extend current policies for another year.

It's unclear whether Democrats would go so far as to support that bill if the administration does not offer a Plan B.


Yep Norton, implementation is smoooooooth
Degaine

climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 03:03pm PT
Larry Neslon wrote:
Well, I plead ignorance, but that esteemed Harvard professor knows more about how incentives work in economics than most. He also posed the "perspectives" as questions to ponder, not statements of fact.


Economics, or any social policy (including ACA or single payer), is not hard science. No counterfactuals can be disproven. It is good to be cautioulsy skeptical of anyone who is cocksure of future success's in any new social policy. In fact the more dogmatic they are, the more skeptical we should be of their assertions. The Dunning-Krufer effect explains a portion of that.


Hi Larry,

You’re the one who seems cocksure in that you are asking the right questions and that you are appropriately skeptical.

I’m not cocksure, but I have studied the subject extensively and in a professional capacity. I have no doubt regarding the Harvard professor’s knowledge and expertise in economics, and although the questions he asks might seem pertinent to you, they are off-topic with regard to healthcare and healthcare economics.

To start, the relationship between stakeholders in healthcare (patient, provider, insurance) is not the same as with auto insurance or life insurance. The incentive game is not the same.

I highly recommend that you read the Time article, it’ll be a good start for you. Reading WHO documents that provide overviews of most systems will also help to inform you on the topic.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 03:11pm PT
Madbolter1 nails it.....too many in this crowd are willing to go down with Obama's ship, even when plain facts are causing Democrat leaders to run away from the excrement that is Obamacare.

Republicans side with Ted Cruz, shut down the government over Obamacare, and then you accuse anyone else of "going down with the ship?" Hysterical.

Curt
Degaine

climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 03:25pm PT
Larry wrote:
I know there are many advocates of Canadian, French and other healthcare systems and I have heard many good things about them. There are also the anecdotal stories of someone coming to America from those countries to have procedures done. Clearly no one system is perfect.

Anecdotes are just that, anecdotes. We're talking about judging a system in its entirety on such things as:
*Access to care
*Outcomes and the overall health of the population
*Cost of care

As I asked earlier, do my anecdotes get to cancel out yours?
Degaine

climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 03:31pm PT
An entire healthcare system cannot be funded by the "vice tax" that Madbolter brings up, and since Larry wrote the following:
I may be wrong, but I have also read that in Europe they use VAT (consumption tax) to fund their programs. Without researching it, does anyone know if that is true?

I'll write a quick reply.

Let's use the country with the number 1 healthcare system on the planet, France:

a) Everyone pays into the system=> Employees and employers as a percentage of an employee's salary. It can't be any other way. Everyone is in the risk pool and everyone shares in the cost.

b) However, in the spirit of Madbolter's "vice tax" certain products are taxed more heavily than others and this tax goes directly to the healthcare system. This is the case for cigarettes. There is a pretty direct correlation between smoking and lung cancer, it's easy to calculate the cost of lung cancer to the system, and so the VAT on cigarettes was raised to pay for this cost.

c)For activities like climbing, skiing, etc., belonging to an alpine club or a ski club one pays between 20 € to 30 € per year for insurance to cover those activities.

d) The system only covers dental and eyes for emergencies. Otherwise regular dental work, glasses, contacts, etc. are paid either out of pocket or via supplemental health insurance, which is private.

Larry, I'll let you do the rest of the research on your own, you've LEB'd me enough for one day.
Degaine

climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 03:34pm PT
Ron Anderson wrote:
I dont believe a president would get up on natl tv to APOLOGIZE over anecdotal evidence.

Ron, you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills. PM me if you want the contact info for a couple of tutors I know.
Degaine

climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 03:37pm PT
Sketch wrote:
There's a bunch of posters defending Obama tooth and nail. They seem like mindless zealots.

A bunch, that synonymous to a lot. For this type of thread me a lot = 10 or more. Could you cite the names within the hoard of mindless zealots of which you speak?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 13, 2013 - 03:48pm PT
Calling a liar on his lies is not "attacking".
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 04:10pm PT
Another one of those fellas who never actually says what politicians or policies he supports.

How is this relevant? Please explain?

Edit: Kos is raycess
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 04:19pm PT
Let's hear your alternative to Obamacare. What should be done?


Here is my plan:

“If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.”
guyman

Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
Nov 13, 2013 - 04:21pm PT
Let's hear your alternative to Obamacare. What should be done?

I'd say going back and repealing the whole stinking turd of an idea, would be a first step.

Only a fool would say or think that we (the usa population)had a great system before ACA.
Now only a FOOL would defend the act.

Is it to early to say: "I told you so"

HermitMaster

Social climber
my abode
Nov 13, 2013 - 04:37pm PT
“I personally believe, even if it takes a change in the law the president should honor the commitment that the federal government made to those people and let them keep what they got,”
-Pres. Bill Clinton

There is a lesson here for everybody:

When you find yourself being schooled in ethics and good moral character by Bill Clinton ... you can be assured that you have really screwed up....
HermitMaster

Social climber
my abode
Nov 13, 2013 - 04:49pm PT
Government has always forced people to do things. Sometimes very costly things.

It's kinda' twisted, but for some I guess that's a good enough reason for millions of people to be kicked off and lose their health insurance...
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 04:49pm PT
That's why I give Obama credit. Even if his plan is a bad plan, it's way better than no plan.

This mentality is why we are in this mess. Blind faith in politicians and a political ideology is dangerous.





stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Nov 13, 2013 - 04:53pm PT
I work in healthcare IT. At a fairly high level. Folks I work with are actively engaged in trying to fix the website. The website thing has been a debacle. No one would argue that.

The ACA itself has some pieces that almost everyone would agree are good. Some of the programs that move to outcome and risk based payments. I think almost everyone would also be supportive of trying to promote preventative medicine as opposed to expensive treatment.

The rub is in all the other other stuff. The insurance part, which is the most well known part, may not work for a variety of reasons. It was a compromise. Many Dems would rather have had single-payer. Many GOP would rather have had nothing. What we ended up with probably satisfied neither group, but that is the nature of our type of govt. If the website thing continues to flounder, it may doom the ACA as a whole. Which would be kind of a shame, as our system has problems, and every failure makes it harder to do anything to fix it.
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 13, 2013 - 04:53pm PT
Ever hear of the draft?

The only thing Republicans know about the draft is that they avoided it.

Tom Coburn's Patient's Choice Act

Hmmm...http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/?p=Healthcare

The health care system in America is broken. Costs are rising at an unacceptable rate—more than doubling over the last 10 years, which is nearly four times the rate of wage growth. Too many patients feel trapped by health care decisions dictated by insurers and HMOs. Too many doctors are torn between practicing medicine and practicing insurance. And some 47 million Americans worry what will happen to them or their children if they get sick.

As a physician, I am keenly aware that our country needs health care reform. I support comprehensive reform which would enable every American to enjoy health coverage, lower costs, increase patient choice, improve access and quality, and protect the patient-physician relationship.

Universal access to high quality health care is possible, and Americans are justified to expect it. We have the best doctors in the world…the best scientists in the world… the best hospitals in the world. Now America needs to build the best health care in the world. We need to empower patients, and reduce the power of government and insurance bureaucrats. Every American should be able to get the care they need.

Sounds good!

We will move closest to this goal when we promote the same innovation and competition in health care that we see in every other American industry...

Oh, oh.

...This proposal is a clear market-based reform that seeks to strengthen the relationship between the patient and the doctor.

Market-based? How's that been working out for us so far?

Among other items:
The Patients’ Choice Act transforms Medicaid by building upon the innovations we have seen in a number of states. My plan would integrates low-income families with dependent children into higher quality private plans through a tax credit and direct financial assistance.

So, we take a low cost government program, and turn it over to the insurance industry. I wonder how that will work out?
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 13, 2013 - 04:57pm PT
One of my ironic hopes for the ACA is that its glaring faults may actually force the GOP to tackle the problems with our current health care system, rather than merely point out the imperfections in the ACA. I've posted my own preference many times, but I'm not a politician. I've also posted links to options offered by other conservatives. I wish my party would get behind something more than its apparent nihilism on the health care system.

John
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 05:07pm PT
Wait for it......







Bill Clinton : Health Care Czar

or


BillaryCare 2016

The party that steps forward to fix this mess will win the White House in 2016.

Will the Democrats turn on Obama and develop a workable plan or will the Repubs step to
the plate with a plan that can actually work for the betterment of the American people?

Love that the future of my family's healthcare in the hands of such competent people LOL



Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 13, 2013 - 05:13pm PT
HOW IS THAT DEFENDABLE????????

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 05:23pm PT
These people are not competent?

Name someone who is.

Just one name.

Why is it so hard?


YO MAMA!
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 05:53pm PT
I certainly wanted Obamacare to fail.

A government that FORCES the people to buy something, then penalizes them if they don't?

That's not America.

Right, so we should collect roughly 8% additional federal income tax from everyone and fund a single-payer healthcare system from that. You know, like every other modern western democracy does. Except you would no doubt call that socialism--and also not American.

Curt
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 06:07pm PT
Right, so we should collect roughly 8% additional federal income tax from everyone....

I'm curious why you would favor an income tax to fund it. I mean, doesn't increasing income taxes slow economic growth (in general)? Why not prefer some sort of consumption/activity tax, so that people are given choices about how their lifestyle will "contribute" to the costs/payments inherent in the system?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 06:16pm PT
^^+1
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 13, 2013 - 06:30pm PT

How about we fund it with the 100's of billions of dollars we give to both foreign and domestic "aid" packages that are bankrupting us....and causing our citizens to suffer.

that's a pretty good idea..you mean like, the Defense budget, Corporate welfare, Farm Subsidies?



Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 13, 2013 - 06:40pm PT
The dogs aren't eating the dog food.

106,000 signed up for Obamacare in the first month.

At that rate - assuming the country does not increase in population any - it'll take 240 years to sign up everybody.

The country isn't even 240 years old yet.
Hoser

climber
vancouver
Nov 13, 2013 - 06:41pm PT
How about we create a law that will allow EVERYONE in the world access to the walls of El Cap via a grand series of escalators.

Sure, it will ruin the experience for us climbers...a token few....but then, EVERYONE will be able to go up that big wall and see it for themselves!


This mindset brought to you by Dave Kos, et al.

So your mentality is that if you cant pay your way then you should die a slow painful and humiliating death?

But the kicker is that it doesnt work out that way, you end up paying anyways...The American way hahahahahaha what is this the wild west...its 2013 if you hadnt noticed

The only reason why you can introduce yourself as an American without apologizing first is because of Obama


Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 07:10pm PT

The only reason why you can introduce yourself as an American without apologizing first is because of Obama


LOL Stereotype much?

I thought South park did a good job summarizing what it means to be Canadian.

"We must blame them and cause a fuss
Before somebody thinks of blaming us!"

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 13, 2013 - 08:06pm PT
You have to pass the bill so you can see what's in it!

Nancy Pelosi






That's what we call a stool sample.


Unknown M.D.


Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 13, 2013 - 08:08pm PT
Oregon signed up zero for Obamacare last month.

They're looking to double those numbers this month.
guyman

Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
Nov 13, 2013 - 08:25pm PT
The Supreme Court says otherwise.

Ever hear of the draft?

Government has always forced people to do things. Sometimes very costly things.

But you are clearly a "fair weather" American. Loyal only when being an American suits your whim.
Quote Here

Mr. Koss... Please don't try and say just cause the SUPREME COURT says its OK...that will not make it RIGHT.

Or are you conveniently forgetting our nations history, where the supreme court got it wrong?

Dred Scott, remember that one?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 13, 2013 - 08:27pm PT

Another Unaffordable Healthcare Tax add you paid for.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 09:27pm PT
The Supreme Court says Obamacare is a tax. And taxes are legal, and very much American.

Well, really, the most important thing to come out of that decision was....

"If government can do this, then what can government not do?"

Answer (ironically, by the Bush appointee): "Yes, government can do anything."

And that, my friends, means tyranny.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 13, 2013 - 09:33pm PT
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 09:34pm PT
Are you comparing universal healthcare to slavery?

Well, if you put it that way, then: yes.

All "wealth redistribution" (when stripped of all the euphemisms) just IS taking from the "rich" and giving to the "poor."

And it all amounts to less and less responsibility for lifestyle choices. This sort of "leveling of the playing field" is exactly what this nation was designed to NOT do (read Federalist 10). It does mean making the "rich" slaves to the "poor" to one extent or another.

Is it okay for ME to walk into your house and say, "Wow, nice TV you've got there. But you don't 'need' a 60-inch, when most people can't even afford a 42-inch. So, we're going to yard-sale that puppy, and with the proceeds, we're going to get you a 42-inch and subsidize the 'poor' person to help them afford that 42-inch that is beyond them at present."?

No, in that context (which you'll claim is a bad analogy, because a TV is not a 'need' like health care is) it is obvious that what I'm doing is theft plain and simple.

But, wait, why does government get to CALL health care a 'need,' when in fact the 'poor' that we're subsidizing with Obamacare COULD afford health insurance if they made other lifestyle choices? Tell me EXACTLY what demographic Obamacare is 'saving,' and I'll show you a demographic with other, better alternatives... and that without making slaves of the ever-diminishing middle class.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 13, 2013 - 09:43pm PT
Rights can NOT require the transaction of one's labor for the benefit of another.

That can only be accomplished by a voluntary transaction (trade).

Or, the imposition of Tyranny (slavery)
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 13, 2013 - 09:46pm PT
Madbolter...I agree...Let the poor die if they can't afford health insurance...
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 13, 2013 - 09:49pm PT
Cancellations are running 1000 to 1 to signups.

(and no one has actually bought a policy yet)

How's that providing more coverage for anyone?

rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 13, 2013 - 09:53pm PT
TGT...You sound like you are gleeful that Americans can't afford health insurance...? That's really sad..
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 09:58pm PT
#32 billion in Foreign economic assistance. So we borrow money and give it to other countries.
Personally, I think we are going to see the most severe recession in the history of the US in the years to come unless we at least attempt to get our debt under control.

Personal wealth is going to take a huge hit. The government is going to run out of people with decent incomes to tax.

Only the rich are going to have access to good health care.

Yep....I am pessimistic.



In fiscal year 2011, the U.S. government allocated the following amounts for aid:
Total economic and military assistance: $49.5 billion
Total military assistance: $17.8 billion
Total economic assistance: $31.7 billion
of which, USAID assistance: $14.1 billion

Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 13, 2013 - 10:08pm PT
I certainly wanted Obamacare to fail.

A government that FORCES the people to buy something, then penalizes them if they don't?

That's not America.

like auto insurance?


First he takes your guns now he wants your cash.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 10:25pm PT
Madbolter...I agree...Let the poor die if they can't afford health insurance...

Oh, right, I forget, EVERYBODY has the RIGHT to live beyond their means, prioritize things other than their basic necessities, and just keep poppin' out more and more kids... and the ONLY "humane" thing "we" can do is just pay and pay and pay...

and pay...




















and pay!

Nope, count me out.

It's not right, and TGT is absolutely correct: it is the enslavement of the middle class, and it is tyranny.

And "government can do anything," so we've been told, and that, my friends, is the basis of revolution.

Oh, and there are many different types of revolutions....
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Nov 13, 2013 - 10:29pm PT
And it all amounts to less and less responsibility for lifestyle choices. This sort of "leveling of the playing field" is exactly what this nation was designed to NOT do (read Federalist 10).

You mean this part:
By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.

The idea of putting the aggregate interests of the community on par with personal rights, how very un-American?

or this part:
The apportionment of taxes on the various descriptions of property is an act which seems to require the most exact impartiality; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the rules of justice. Every shilling with which they overburden the inferior number, is a shilling saved to their own pockets.

Yes, he does decry leaders who might support an "equal division of property", but you are crying wolf if you think Obamacare is going to redistribute the nation's wealth to equality.

If you are going to challenge us to read them, pick a better one for your argument, but this one was a very interesting read, prescient of the more serious ills of the nation right now.

TE



Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 13, 2013 - 10:37pm PT
it is the enslavement of the middle class, and it is tyranny.

No, it's capitalism.
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 13, 2013 - 10:41pm PT
Wow.
All "wealth redistribution" (when stripped of all the euphemisms) just IS taking from the "rich" and giving to the "poor.

All?

What about the wealth redistribution that takes from the poor and gives to the rich. You know, the redistribution that's going on here and now.

Didn't Jesus same something about that?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 13, 2013 - 10:43pm PT
You're not talking about taking cash from the poor, are you?

The poor are poor because they don't have any cash.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 13, 2013 - 10:48pm PT
This isn't about taking from the rich.

All of Barry's crony capitalist contributors aren't effected by this at all!

This is all about destroying the middle class and producing a society of gentrified political elites that rule a dependent and subservient class of obedient worker bees.

(Plenty of RINOS on board with that as well.)

madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 10:54pm PT
If you are going to challenge us to read them, pick a better one for your argument....

Well, since you read it, you should have come across Hamilton's remedy for majority faction (which is what we now have in this nation). Of course, that's an actual argument, that you have to follow along with, instead of just quickie, out-of-context quotes that literally ignore what Hamilton was arguing in the whole article.

I don't have it in front of me, but I'll quote sections later tonight. The gist is that the only remedy for majority faction is the diversification of interests, and he says that ensuring the disparities among interests is the highest priority of government.

So, the highest priority of government is NOT to ensure that everybody has the same "basic" things. It is to ensure that people naturally end up very, very diverse in their capacities, holdings, wealth, and thereby interests. It is the exactly opposite of "leveling the playing field" as that is meant today.

Oh, crap, here I find myself trying to talk in principled terms again to people that just don't give a rip about principles of government. Waste of my time around here.
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:02pm PT
The poor are poor because they don't have any cash.

The poor are poor because of the capitalist system. We have a term in this country: the working poor. It disgusts me.

While poverty is often associated with joblessness, a significant proportion of the poor in the US and Canada, but also Italy, Spain, and Ireland are actually employed. The wages the working poor receive are insufficient to provide basic necessities and lead to people making choices between having food on the table or having a table. Largely because they are earning such low wages, the working poor face numerous obstacles that make it difficult for many of them to find and keep a job, save up money, and maintain a sense of self-worth.

Somebody, please!, defend the idea that someone who works for a living should be poor. Unfortunately, there is absolutely no respect for the work ethic in this country.

We want a system in which the worker shall get what he produces and the capitalist shall produce what he gets.
Eugene V. Debs
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:10pm PT
Oh, crap, here I find myself trying to talk in principled terms again to people that just don't give a rip about principles of government. Waste of my time around here.

There are a thousand lurkers for every poster.


Help the tyrants expose themselves when you can.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:21pm PT
This is all about destroying the middle class and producing a society of gentrified political elites that rule a dependent and subservient class of obedient worker bees.

Spot on! The rich will not be impacted AT ALL by Obamacare. The working class will foot the bill while many will choose to simply not work( or under report income) and take advantage of the subsidies.

A larger percentage of middle class income now will go to healthcare expenses.

johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:25pm PT
No, it's capitalism.

No, it is redistribution of wealth AND capitalism. They all suck.

edit:

This is all about destroying the middle class and producing a society of gentrified political elites that rule a dependent and subservient class of obedient worker bees.

Exactly!!
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:30pm PT
The rich will not be impacted AT ALL by Obamacare.

then why are they so afraid of it?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:30pm PT
Somebody, please!, defend the idea that someone who works for a living should be poor.

It's easy. You just don't "like" the answer because it "feels" harsh to you.

Some people work hard but just lack the intelligence to do a job that is as valuable as another job. Others work hard and have the basic intelligence, but they lack the risk-mentality needed to be an entrepreneur. Thus, their "hard work" is really "safe work" relatively speaking to an entrepreneur who risks everything to ultimately create jobs (and real wealth). Some "work hard" but in undisciplined fashion. In my teaching career, I've met MANY like this. There are "harder" disciplines than others, and many, many students take the easier disciplines. They "work hard" and get good grades. Then they go out into the workforce with their degree in, say, history, and they would be prepared to "work hard," but can't find a job. So, they "work hard" driving a cab. But in fact, all of their "hard work" was misdirected and undisciplined.

And the litany goes on and on and on. Is is somehow the responsibility of "society" to "correct" all these failings and problems?

Our founders said a resounding NO, and I echo it. There IS no "level playing field" to be had, and government's FIRST priority to ensure that there is not. ALL that is supposed to be "level" is the preservation of a very small set of basic rights. Beyond that, people choose their values, priorities, and efforts. And private parties may well choose to offer charity to those whom nature has not granted an excess of "smarts."

It is NOT for government to engage in this process!
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:36pm PT
This is about reducing the bourgeoisie (middle class) to dependent subservience.

The political class will feel no pain.

The poor will see no relief.


johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:42pm PT
Why are the politicians and most government unions not required to be a part of this plan? Instead they are excluded and keep "platinum plans" that the middle class (whatever that is) pay for?

Dem, Repub, this is all BS and party doesn't matter. Let them eat cake while we take them to the cleaners. This seems like a feudal government looking to line their pockets at the cost of the people they are supposed to serve.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:50pm PT
Term Limits

edit: Shilo, roger that. Congress currently has a 9% approval rating, but the nation keep voting the bastards in for term after term after term...

"Bend me over but you keep telling me all the good you will do for me next year, so I'll vote for you again".

2nd edit: if I had a 9% approval rating at work I would be fired.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:59pm PT
I am not quite willing to turn my back on these folks when it comes to basic health care...

We are talking two different things here. And let me start by saying that, as I've posted, I would fully support a properly-designed single-payer system... not deriving from the principles I have cited, but because I'm willing to compromise on something like this, because I realize that many, many people (like you) so strongly believe that "we" just must do something. NP, let's do "something," but lets distribute the costs FAR more intelligently than any plan (including Obumblecare) has so far contemplated.

I was talking about the principles upon which this country was supposed to run. We're WAY too far down the road now to return fully to those principles. I get that. So, I'm pragmatic enough to try to find solutions that least violate the principles, while also providing an intelligent and real solution!

And it wasn't just "church groups" and such that were supposed to be the charity-providers. There is a HUGE difference between what a state or local government decides to implement to "help" its "poor" (as that is defined more or less locally) and what is foisted off on us at the national level. One reason is that I can fairly easily move from town to town or state to state. But I cannot easily (and our founders said: should never HAVE to) move from nation to nation to escape policies that are terribly odious.

Even friends and families can help, not to mention all sorts of community projects. But there's less and less money to do that now. At this point, when I'm asked, "Would you like to donate to the blah, blah, blah fund?" or to "help such and such a group?" my response is the same: "I gave and gave and GAVE at the office!" And, oh, does my office GIVE!

Anyway, I stand by my principles, but I'm willing to find compromises.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:08am PT
deleted. getting to far OT.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:19am PT
The fact is however healthcare should be a basic right just like education, public roads, etc.

It's funny how much we agree, yet it's a fairly pragmatically-based "agreement," because we clearly differ pretty greatly on the underlying political philosophy.

I've posted this elsewhere, but even the "rights" talk has gone wildly astray since FDR was President (he was the real turning point on this front). Prior to FDR, "rights" were talked about in "negative" terms (I satisfy your negative rights by doing nothing). Since FDR, "rights" have been more and more sweepingly considered in "positive" terms (to satisfy your positive rights, I have to DO something, pay something, expend something).

So, you talk about "basic rights" and the cite a bunch of things that are all positive rather than negative rights.

In "founders" terms, your NEGATIVE right to life does NOT imply that I have ANY responsibility to ensure that you live (and certainly not to any particular standard)!

Anyway, I'm again getting dragged into a discussion I said I wouldn't on this thread. Gag: political philosophy!
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:28am PT
Bravo to Madbolter and J Shiloh for bringing intelligent discussion to this thread, instead of the common political "hacktivism". Healthcare is a right ,and everyone has the right and responsibity to pursue the best possible care for themselves and their family. No amount of goverance , coercion, or redistribution can substitute for personal healthcare achieved through freewill. There will always be winners and losers, let' s just hope we all don't become the losers to a giant government artistocracy.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:35am PT
I, too, have really appreciated Shiloh's contributions very much. IMHO, he has almost single-handedly elevated the level of discussion.

Well, I'm off to beddie-bye. Gotta get my beauty (and healthy) sleep.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 14, 2013 - 08:52am PT
It's looking like the House may pass legislation permitting people to keep their insurance plans. The Senate may also pass a version. In his lead from behind style, the president will probably not veto.
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/190146-reid-calls-special-obamacare-meeting

So last month my ex-wife was told by her insurance provider that they were pulling out of California. I would think that it might be wise for her to wait and see if she even needs to enroll in a new plan. How many other people will now delay enrolling due to legislative uncertainty?

Democrats are scrambling to cover their re-election chances in the wake of the ACA debacle. How ironic that had arrogant Democrats gone along with dim witted Republicans on delaying ACA before the government shutdown, the Democrats would look much better now.

"I only lied because it was the easiest way to get what I wanted."
Bart Simpson
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 14, 2013 - 10:05am PT
Some people work hard but just lack the intelligence to do a job that is as valuable as another job.

Again, this is lack of respect for the work ethic.

Riddle me this, madbolter. Who does more to keep us healthy and disease free: the garbage mnan or the physiscian?

I still fail to see why anyone, even a ditch digger, has to live in poverty while doing a full day's work, while another small class wallows in riches for doing nothing.

I am opposing a social order in which it is possible for one man who does absolutely nothing that is useful to amass a fortune of hundreds of millions of dollars, while millions of men and women who work all the days of their lives secure barely enough for a wretched existence. -- Eugene Debs Convict No. 9653
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:13pm PT
But the same conditions that are causing the cancellation of individual policies will eventually result in the cancellation of millions of employment-based policies as well. The only reason that hasn’t happened yet is that the employer mandate was postponed for a year, so employer plans don’t yet have to be ACA-compliant. But they will. Even the Congressional Budget Office estimates that as many as 20 million workers will lose their current employer-sponsored plans. Combine that with those losing individual plans, and more than 30 million Americans cannot keep their current insurance.

Kos, your employer based health plan will be next.

Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:16pm PT
Kos, your employer based health plan will be next.

Looking forward to that day--when it will be Medicare based single-payer for everyone.

Curt
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:35pm PT
Wealth CONFISCATED from one and given to another!

You miss the point. The feds were constitutionally granted the power to tax to support the NARROW and specific functions stated in the enumerated powers clause. Nothing like wealth redistribution was contemplated by the enumerated powers. I have NO problem with taxation to support a strong national defense, etc. Just keep taxation supporting ONLY those enumerated powers (without the interstate commerce clause writ larger and larger!), and I'm a happy camper.

Whatever happened to Christian values?

It's called: individual liberty, which implies free will. Christianity is not about coercion. Christianity values free and willing giving, which is the only sort that has moral value. Coerced extraction to take the fruit of one person's labors and give that to another (especially one who more often than not is not WORTHY of any charity), and that is THEFT, plain and simple. I seem to remember a core Christian value: Thou shalt not steal.

Oh, right. It's okay if it's the government doing it under the auspices of majority faction. Yeah, right.

Again, now I just way, "I gave at the office." (Not really true, as I didn't GIVE; it was extracted from me against my will as pure and simple theft.)

And you really should stop conflating what is legitimate at the state and local level with what is legitimate at the federal level!
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:37pm PT
Looking forward to that day--when it will be Medicare based single-payer for everyone.


Perfectly idealistic. Medicare is broke. How do you fairly fund Single Payer?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:37pm PT
Thou shalt not steal ( unless a majority of Congress approves the theft, then God's on board too )
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:46pm PT
Great post, Shiloh. "Kill the organism...."

So, seriously, how do we now get from "here" to "there?" I mean, we're a deeply divided nation, and we're governed by idiots that are a clear reflection of the apathetic, gimme voters that keep putting them back in office again and again.

It's like "powerless sniveling" feels better to the voters than actually making the substantial changes necessary to give these buffoons a serious heads-up.

I'd like to see every, single incumbent (of any party) voted out of office at each cycle, until we have a clean slate in Washington. Then, hand the newcomers a clear list of priorities.

Ahhh, but there's the rub. We all have vastly different priorities and really can't agree about which ones are most important. And the (bare) majority agrees on only one thing (even though they are not clear what "it" means): Don't you dare cut my entitlements in any way; in fact, see if you can give me more.

Long and short: We're totally hamstrung, and decisions are finger-to-the-wind and completely unprincipled.

A systematic, step-wise path from "here" to "there?" Uh huh... who is going to lead it? Certainly not our Obumbler in Chief, his cronies, or even the Rebumblecrats.

Sigh
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:53pm PT
Since madbolter won't answer my question, I will. The garbage man does more for the overall health of society than the physician.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 14, 2013 - 12:59pm PT
Perfectly idealistic. Medicare is broke. How do you fairly fund Single Payer?

I already posted a link to how this is done in England, as one example. I'm sure other alternatives could be considered as well.

Curt
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Nov 14, 2013 - 01:07pm PT
The feds were constitutionally granted the power to tax to support the NARROW and specific functions stated in the enumerated powers clause.

And you accuse ME of selective excerpts? (I'm guilty as charged but only in response to your usual sweeping generalizations of some document or other as unequivocally supporting you chosen stance.

So another selective excerpt from some obscure document:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Note please, that the general welfare comes higher in the list than individual freedoms.
Another selective excerpt which just happens to completely contradict your claim above.

The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.

I don't believe healthcare is a fundamental right either, but a very very good idea, that surely promotes the general welfare, which is one of the explicitly stated purposes of the Federal government.

TE



madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 01:22pm PT
Next time you are in DC, take a drive through the parking lot at the pentagon.

Tell me, were all those Land Rovers and BMWs purchased with stolen money?

Because every dime of it was extracted from the "fruit" of someone else's labor.

LOL.... You are making it too easy for me, Dave. Sorry, but you are MAKING my case for me here. Please continue.

(Oh, and another point about federal inefficiency to do a thing that is much better handled by smaller, more efficient entities: the Obumbler website has so far cost half-a-billion dollars (and climbing) to develop. Any number of private companies (including mine) could have produced that site (and it would just work) for under a million bucks.)

Let the feds have at it, and ALL you'll hear is the giant (the biggest the world has ever known) sucking sound: the sound of BILLIONS being sucked out of your pockets and then instantly wasted (just as Dave has noted). But, not to worry: They also have the biggest (the biggest the world has ever known) printing press with which to print more "money," make you slave and bleed to get some of it, and then repeat that same, sick process all over again.

Some economist said: "Government is the only entity that can take two valuable commodities, such as paper and ink, and by their mere combination render the product worthless."

...promote the general welfare....

Your problem, TE, is that you jump on excerpts without understanding the principles or verbiage you are quoting.

I'm not going to do your work for you: Do some research about what "general welfare" meant to the founders. What you will NOT find is "welfare" as in the nanny state we now have. Oh, and to help you out a bit, what you're looking for is the fact that "general welfare" was defined IN TERMS OF the most fundamental principles that legitimize government in the first place; and that will be cast in terms of the protection and promotion of individual (negative) liberties.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 01:24pm PT
Gotta hand it to Ron Paul - He singlehandedly wiped out the collective work of every high school civics teacher from the past fifty years.

The last fifty years of (bumbling, confused) high school civics teaching is a large part of why we're in our present mess.

Again, you just help me and help me make my case.

Please, please continue!
dirtbag

climber
Nov 14, 2013 - 01:34pm PT
Christ,

Yes the tax system is base on coercion.


So f*#king what?

You want to live in a real life ayn rand masturbatory fantasyland? Go to Somalia. No pesky social contract there.
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 14, 2013 - 01:36pm PT
It looks like my wish from yesterday might actually have some traction. In today's Wall Street Journal Opinion pages there was both an editorial and a column on fixing, rather than gutting, the ACA. I will continue to hope, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that the Republicans will take this opportunity to do more than say "I told you so."

Two other comments:

(1) Congressional approval ratings mean nothing, because we don't elect Congress. We elect two Senators and one Representative. The relevant statistic measures the approval of the members by their respective electorates. I have yet to see such a poll's results.

(2) Medicare, despite Norton's protestations, is actuarily insolvent. It is not "broke" because it has sufficient funds to pay its current debts as they come due. Neither is it "bankrupt," because the Bankruptcy Code has no provision allowing any federal program to file for bankruptcy protection.

Rather, Medicare is like a homeowner with an interest-only mortgage, and a balloon payment coming due in a few years. The homeowner has the funds to pay the interest strokes, but not the balloon payment. If we conclude that since Medicare is neither broke nor bankrupt we need do nothing to fix it, we are like the homeowner ignoring the balloon payment. With relatively minor fixes, however, we can deal with the balloon payment coming up.

Thus, Medicare's issues aren't so much its solvency as they are governmental prudence. While that obviously has implications on turning over 18% of our GDP to the government, I would hesitate to draw too many conclusions about affordability from Medicare's experience.

John
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 02:49pm PT
Yes the tax system is base on coercion.... No pesky social contract there.

Nobody is denying that there can be legitimate coercion. But the "social contract" you refer to quite explicitly limited exactly what coercion was going to be allowed. Mostly due to perversions of the interstate commerce clause, we are now light-years away from the "social contract" that was "agreed to."
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 03:30pm PT
"Read the Federalist Papers" is code for "the Constitution says whatever I want it to say."

What an punt.

ARGUE for a particular interpretation and see if yours coheres with the texts and with rationality.

Have you read the part about paper money? You might look at the history of that one and see whether it's possible to coherently fit the "Federal Reserve" (talk about a double-speak name!) into those principles.

Or, you could just punt.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 03:36pm PT
Look it up, read a book, do your research!

While you're frothing at the mouth, Dave, could you pause long enough to answer a few simple questions about what "research" your particular perspective is based upon?

* Have you actually read the Federalist Papers through, cover to cover? Any annotations or cross-references to anything else?

* Have you actually read the Anti-Federalist Papers through, cover to cover? Annotations? Cross-references?

* Have you ever taught a university level seminar (even just one) on political philosophy or political science?

* Is your educational background in any way involved in political philosophy or political science?

* Have you ever written a single, formal paper on the subject of politics, political philosophy, or political science?

Well, you get the point. "Do your research" is pretty lame, when I can demonstrate that I actually have, and I seriously doubt if you can follow suit.

But I could well be way off regarding your background. Enlighten me!

Care to ante up? Or shall the frothing continue?
guyman

Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
Nov 14, 2013 - 03:43pm PT
Mad and J.Shiloh ..... thank you for you clear thinking.

Climbs to a new hi in ST history.....

And to GARY.... why can't you see that a person who gets about 30 seconds of training to run the french fry system at Jack in the Box is not worth as much pay per hour as a person who spends 40 hours in training, and gets the skills to drive a truck?

I bet you work for the gov... and have never been a boss, with your own $$$$$ in the enterprise. If you ever had you would know just how stupid you sound. No offence intended.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 03:46pm PT
Thank you, guyman.

Dave: lol.
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Nov 14, 2013 - 03:51pm PT
Guyman, we's gots us doctors on SuperTopo and it ain't doin' us a lick o'
gud. We definitely needs us a full time garbage man, don't you agree?
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 14, 2013 - 04:53pm PT
And to GARY.... why can't you see that a person who gets about 30 seconds of training to run the french fry system at Jack in the Box is not worth as much pay per hour as a person who spends 40 hours in training, and gets the skills to drive a truck?

And the person who works at Jack in the Box deserves starvation wages so the CEO can make $5,305,780 in 2011?
http://www.forbes.com/profile/linda-lang/

Have you ever worked? Would you know work if it bit you in the butt? No offense intended.

Reilly:
Guyman, we's gots us doctors on SuperTopo and it ain't doin' us a lick o'
gud. We definitely needs us a full time garbage man, don't you agree?

You know what I meant, you're not stupid.
guyman

Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
Nov 14, 2013 - 05:08pm PT
Gary... yes I have been bitten in the ass before....

What one gets paid is pretty much what one is worth.

If a CEO is getting to much... well that is up to the share holders who employ the CEO.


EDIT: I wold kill to get paid what my local Garbage Man gets.... seariously
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 14, 2013 - 05:47pm PT
I've seen their commercials. The Jack in the Box CEO does have some unique qualifications.

Good one, Dave!

John
rincon

Trad climber
SoCal
Nov 14, 2013 - 06:09pm PT
What one gets paid is pretty much what one is worth.

If only that were true!
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 06:11pm PT
Yup, "our" Obumbler in Chief... barely elected by an almost perfectly divided country.

Change? Anybody see any loose change around here? I heard that somewhere around here was a big pile of change....
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 14, 2013 - 06:25pm PT
Instead, we get Obama's grand gesture. Pathetic.

Yep!

My policy is still canceled. Why would the insurance company reissue a superior policy for less money???

Is Obama making it law that the insurance companies need to honor the rates and policies that they currently offer on 2013?

Don't think so. He is only saying that the insurance companies COULD offer current policies and I do not predict "greedy" insurance co's will be offering the current 2013 rates as " the cost of insurance" has gone up under Obamacare.


This is a HUGE mess and the public will suffer because of it.




Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 14, 2013 - 06:27pm PT
madbolter1 wrote:
Change? Anybody see any loose change around here? I heard that somewhere around here was a big pile of change....

Yeah, the Department of the Treasury has been working overtime for about 5 years printing change. Have we normalized the word "trillion" yet?
CrackAddict

Trad climber
Canoga Park, CA
Nov 14, 2013 - 06:56pm PT

The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.

I don't believe healthcare is a fundamental right either, but a very very good idea, that surely promotes the general welfare, which is one of the explicitly stated purposes of the Federal government.

TE

"Welfare" is not specified here, and there is a reason healthcare and education are not mentioned in the Constitution - they are to be left to the States, as with all other things unspecified in the Constitution. Do you think Healthcare is what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote this?? Really??? If so, what happened to "Jeffersoncare" or "Washingtoncare"? Were they shot down by a do-nothing congress?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 07:45pm PT
It is both funny and tragic to see such a "true believer" at work. Rather than to do the hard work of intellectual honesty, he invests a tiny shred of that effort... but ALL devoted to finding SOMETHING, anything, that can "establish" that "congress has done this sort of thing from the very beginning."

The mark of the intellectually dishonest is that they LEAP onto anything that MAKES their case but don't actively seek out and even consider the many ways that their case really is not as "obvious" or "slam-dunk" as they themselves just "know" it to be.

Well, it took me all of two minutes to find "the other side of the story."

To whit....

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/297347/founders-loved-mandates-matthew-j-franck

Just a start. I won't waste more time on it. Arguments can rage back and forth. The POINT is that arguments can rage back and forth; so no "side" of this thing is "obvious" nor "slam dunk."
go-B

climber
Hebrews 1:3
Nov 14, 2013 - 07:58pm PT
Sickness followed by death!
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 14, 2013 - 08:02pm PT
Those big government liberals have been at it since the beginning!

And, really, you derive THAT from both sides of the articles? Wow....

Nothing more to say to you on this subject, Dave.
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 14, 2013 - 08:15pm PT
Those big government liberals have been at it since the beginning!

Of course. There certainly weren't any conservatives drawing up the Constitution. They'd all fled to Canada, having fought for the king and all.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 14, 2013 - 08:32pm PT
One photo from today's news conference says it all.

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 14, 2013 - 09:07pm PT
^^^ Was just told his every other day round of golf was nixed from the schedule due to this pesky health care failure thingy
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 14, 2013 - 09:37pm PT
^^^ because he F'd it up.

If a CEO helps develop and implement a sweeping new "plan" in a Fortune 500 company and it FAILS, he is ultimately accountable. Oh wait a minute, no he is not. He can just blame, back stab and fire his minions.

Somehow, I think this is how it will play out with our govt.
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Nov 14, 2013 - 09:43pm PT
Your problem, TE, is that you jump on excerpts without understanding the principles or verbiage you are quoting.

And your problem is that you reference such documents, claiming, but never actually explaining how they support your view. You arrive at a selective summary for your views, neatly omitting key points, for example that Federalist 10 was explicitly more concerned about those factions who would skew the playing field in their own favor, not those who would level the playing field for others.

And, as just pointed out, your interpretation is wrong, as determined by the mechanism enshrined for determining such things.

TE

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 14, 2013 - 10:58pm PT
If a captain has the lifejackets filled with cement, his assurance that “you can keep your lifejacket” is only half the crime. Obama knew the lifejackets wouldn’t work. In 2010 he admitted that 8 to 9 million people in the individual market might “have to change their coverage” because of the law. And that’s just the individual market. Millions more will eventually lose the insurance they like because of Obamacare, according to the administration’s own internal estimates.

The cancellations aren’t a bug, they’re a feature, and the president lied about it over and over again.


Al Jazeera America interviewed one of Colorado’s exchange navigators a month after the debut. When asked how many people she had signed up, she replied, “So far, no one. Thus far everybody has taken a look at the rates and they’ve walked out the door. There’s sticker shock. They just can’t afford it.”

For years we’ve been told that Democrats were more “reality-based,” that “facts have a liberal bias,” in the words of Paul Krugman, and that if they could just have their way, they could fix all of our problems. No one represented this arrogant promise more than Barack Obama himself. But, with an irony so rich it would be made of Corinthian leather if it was a car seat, the only way he could get his signature legislation passed was to baldly and brazenly lie about it, over and over and over again. He created a rhetorical cloud castle where no one would lose his insurance, every family would save thousands of dollars, and millions of the uninsured would suddenly get coverage. Anyone who doubted this was called a fool or a liar, or even a racist. It was, in the parlance of liberalism, a “false choice” to assert that Obamacare couldn’t be a floor wax and a dessert topping.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/363907/obamacare-schadenfreudarama-jonah-goldberg



Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 14, 2013 - 11:12pm PT
but he didnt f*#k up...
aside from implimenting exactly what the gop minority told him to THEN taking the blame for the monkey wrenches THEY dropped into the works...



Yep this is the Republicans fault LOL

Im not a Republican but that is funny. Yes poor innocent Obama did not know..

Hey I have a bridge for sale. You interested. Monthly premiums/payments are AFFORDABLE
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 14, 2013 - 11:51pm PT
rSin, that article is full of lies and errors.

How can you even begin to blame it on the GOP when not one single Republican voted for it in either the House or the Senate? Hmmm?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 14, 2013 - 11:58pm PT
How The President Plans To Fix Obamacare



Responding to his administration’s ongoing struggles with the launch of Obamacare, President Barack Obama announced a proposal today that would enable insurance companies to grant one-year extensions to the health plans of Americans who would otherwise face cancellation. Here are some of Obama’s other plans to fix the troubled rollout of his signature health care law:

Replacing glitchy healthcare.gov website with a convenient in-person enrollment kiosk located in Washington, D.C.
Enrollees allowed to keep preexisting medical conditions
Customers will no longer be automatically opted in to the weekly newsletter “Talkin’ Premiums” when they purchase insurance on the exchange
Allowing enrollees choice of whether to stay with their current doctor or go with well-regarded Minneapolis-area general practitioner Dr. Joel Glochowsky
Losing the semicolon in Chapter V, section 5, clause B
As a preventive measure, each American receives free raw steak to reduce swelling on shiners
Meeting insurance companies halfway by letting them cancel health care plans for only the sickest patients
Obama agrees to preface all future health care updates with statement, “This thing is a hell of a mess”
Eliminates requirement for every enrollee to contract terminal disease
Offering easy-to-follow instructions on how to snap your own neck in the event that you are diagnosed with cancer and lost your insurance
Changing website background to blue
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 14, 2013 - 11:59pm PT
Shack, this was the plan they've wanted for years. Why didn't they vote for it? Because they hate America.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 15, 2013 - 12:01am PT
Don't forget they RAYCESS too!
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 15, 2013 - 12:20am PT
Really Gary? Who is they? Can you show me where Republicans had proposed a complete government take over of health insurance like this before?
and if that is true, why didn't they vote for it now?

Answer: because they knew Obamacare would never work and it is nothing like any of the health insurance reforms that the GOP is in favor of.

The government can't run anything efficiently and you think that now that we've added a whole other layer of bureaucracy, involved the IRS, spend billions on websites, and added stacks of regs and legal hoops to jump through....you think that is going to somehow equal lower costs and better healthcare? Hahahahaha!
For who? Some tiny fraction of society? Meanwhile many more people will be without insurance than before Obamacare.


edit: Ok, Gary, trying to follow your pretzel logic..
so they didn't vote for it now because they hate America right?
So, then why would they ever have had a plan of their own,like Obamacare, if as you say they hate America? Because clearly you think Obamacare is great for America, so why would the evil "they" that hate America be in favor of such a "good for America" health insurance plan?

Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 15, 2013 - 12:39am PT
and it wasn't the insurance companies that dropped these people out of the evilness of their corporate souls...

The law said that insurance plans were grandfathered in as long as the plan didn't change...(that's the part Obama forgot to mention 29+ times)
However, after the Supreme Court ruling was done and they began to write the thousands of pages of regs to actually try to implement the law, they made a rule that said all policies had to have certain changes in the language etc.
so a couple years ago, all insurance companies had to change those policies to conform to the new regs...
As soon as they did that, those policies were no longer allowed to be grandfathered in...because they had changed.
What a load of crap to claim they didn't know that would happen.
Everybody that didn't fall for B.O.'s BS knew it was a lie.

Don't believe me? ask any insurance agent.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 15, 2013 - 12:53am PT
Chew on this...

Republicans Tried To Fix Insurance Cancellation Clause in 2010: Democrats Defeated Them

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/11/94433-republicans-tried-fix-insurance-cancellation-clause-2010-democrats-defeated/

Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 15, 2013 - 01:38am PT
yeah, and meanwhile Obamacare actually penalizes and fines hospitals that provide free health care to those without insurance.
Must be because Democrats hate America.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 15, 2013 - 03:14am PT
Don't believe me? ask any insurance agent.

unlike the President, an insurance agent would never lie.
Degaine

climber
Nov 15, 2013 - 03:53am PT
j.shiloh wrote:
The first question which everyone needs to ask themselves is this: "Is basic healthcare a fundamental human right within our society."

That doesn't have to be the first question.

You could ask, "What makes the most economic sense for the country?" And you'll come up with universal healthcare every time.

Or you could ask, "What system is most cost effective?" Again, the answer you'll come up with every time is universal healthcare.

If the Republicans really were really the party party of "economic and financial savvy and responsibility," they would have put their money where their mouth is long ago and pushed for some form of universal healthcare system (and even price controls on procedures and drugs). It just makes business and economic sense: a healthy workforce, a mobile workforce, a healthcare cost burden per capita cut in half or by two-thirds.

JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
Nov 15, 2013 - 05:30am PT

You could ask, "What makes the most economic sense for the country?" And you'll come up with universal healthcare every time.

No, but you will. That aside, Shiloh asks the right questions, and, of course, offers the correct solutions, since he agrees with me.

;-)

John
Degaine

climber
Nov 15, 2013 - 06:58am PT
Hey John,

Could you for once put ideology aside and just look at the data?
Outcomes
Cost
Benefit
Etc.

You'll see that universal healthcare systems in first world countries win hands down every single time. Japan, France, Germany, Switzerland, the list goes on and on.

Notice, I didn't write single payer, I wrote universal.

I also did not write that j.shiloh was asking the wrong questions. But "what's right" does not seem to be very important to the Republicans in power at a national or state level these days.

Just look at Detroit. The big three moved factories across the bridge into Canada because the healthcare costs were just way too high. Big business moved its business to a country with a universal healthcare system (and in this case a single payer).
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Nov 15, 2013 - 10:02am PT
What a mess.
last four years he's going big!
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 15, 2013 - 10:16am PT
Shack, chew on this:
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act consists of a combination of measures to control healthcare costs, and an expansion of coverage through public and private insurance: broader Medicaid eligibility and Medicare coverage, and subsidized, regulated private insurance. An individual mandate coupled with subsidies for private insurance as a means for universal healthcare was considered the best way to win the support of the Senate because it had been included in prior bipartisan reform proposals. The concept goes back to at least 1989, when the conservative Heritage Foundation proposed an individual mandate as an alternative to single-payer health care. It was championed by many Republican politicians as a market-based approach to healthcare reform on the basis of individual responsibility and avoidance of free rider problems.

You ask why the Republicans did not vote for the healthcare act they championed? I can't figure that out either.

Why did Mitch McConnell introduce a bill to the senate to fix the debt ceiling crisis, and then filibuster his own bill?

Why did Ted Cruz filibuster for 21 hours, and then vote for the very bill he filibustered?

You tell me how and why they think, Shack. I'm interested.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Nov 15, 2013 - 01:36pm PT
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 15, 2013 - 02:00pm PT

This should be fun.



House Passes Bill to Reinstate Insurance Policies
The House voted to give insurers one more year to offer health plans due to be canceled under the new health law, with a clutch of Democrats backing a Republican plan in a rebuff to the White House. The vote came one day after President Obama said that he would let insurers re-enroll consumers for one year in plans that didn't meet the law's minimum standards.

The White House said that Mr. Obama would veto the Upton bill, saying it would allow insurers to sell substandard plans to new customers, omitting coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and charging women more than men.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 15, 2013 - 06:40pm PT
There's nothing "substandard" about most of our plans!

How is it "substandard" to be able to not pay for coverage you don't need?
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Nov 15, 2013 - 06:50pm PT
health care change occured when u were'nt allowed to smoke in the hospitals...1970's emergency featured a stressed character smok'n in the hospital. soo kool!
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 15, 2013 - 08:23pm PT
Anything that places a demand on your labor for the benefit of another is not a right!

It is a transaction!

No one has a "right" to the product of another one's labor!

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 15, 2013 - 08:58pm PT
Marie Antoinette, informed that the peasantry could no longer afford bread, is alleged to have responded, “Let them eat cake.” There is no evidence these words ever passed her lips, but certainly no one ever accused her of saying, “If you like your cake, you can keep your cake,” and then having to walk it back with “What we’re also discovering is that cake is complicated to buy.” That contribution to the annals of monarchical unworldliness had to await the reign of Queen Barry Antoinette, whose powdered wig seems to have slipped over his eyes.

Still, as historian Michael Beschloss pronounced the day after his election, he’s “probably the smartest guy ever to become president.” Naturally, Obama shares this assessment. As he assured us five years ago, “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors.” Well, apart from his signature health-care policy. That’s a mystery to him. “I was not informed directly that the website would not be working,” he told us. The buck stops with something called “the executive branch,” which is apparently nothing to do with him.


http://m.nationalreview.com/article/364093/thus-spake-obama-mark-steyn
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 15, 2013 - 09:04pm PT
"Anything that places a demand on your labor for the benefit of another is not a right!"

That's just plain stoooopid.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 15, 2013 - 09:33pm PT
"....to not acknowledge that he is destroying our nation..."

By doing what? Attempting to fix the most significant domestic economic problem that faces all of us (including yourself)?

Your president's errors resulted in the loss of thousands of lives, plunged this country into a trillion dollar debt, and had the worst economic disaster since the Depression occur on his watch?

What is wrong with you people?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 15, 2013 - 09:43pm PT
The president promised to “fundamentally transform” America. Certainly, other men have succeeded in transforming settled, free societies: Pierre Trudeau did in Canada four decades ago, and so, in post-war Britain, did the less charismatic Clement Attlee. And, if you subscribe to their particular philosophy, their transformations were effected very efficiently. But Obama is an incompetent, so “fundamentally transformed” is a euphemism for “wrecked beyond repair.” As a socialist, he makes a good socialite.

But on he staggers, with a wave of his scepter, delaying this, staying that, exempting the other, according to his regal whim and internal polling. The omniscient beneficent Sovereign will now graciously “allow” us “folks” to keep all those junk plans from bad-apple insurers. Yet even the wisest King cannot reign forever, and what will happen decades down the road were someone less benign — perhaps even (shudder) a Republican — to ascend the throne and wield these mighty powers?

Hey, relax: If you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution. Period. And your existing amendments. Well, most of them — except for the junk ones . . .
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 15, 2013 - 10:03pm PT
Norton, that list you posted is full of bad links, and the list is a total joke.
Most of the "lies" are completely ridiculous..."Liar Romney claims he is a regular guy" HAHAHA!

To bad you can't accept that Romney was right...
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Jonnnyyyzzz

Trad climber
San Diego,CA
Nov 15, 2013 - 11:03pm PT
November 15, 2013 3:30 PM
Thus Spake Obama
The incompetence of our neo-monarchy
By Mark Steyn


It is a condition of my admission to this great land that I am not allowed to foment the overthrow of the United States government. Oh, I signed it airily enough, but you’d be surprised, as the years go by, how often the urge to foment starts to rise in one’s gullet. Fortunately, at least as far as constitutional government goes, the president of the United States is doing a grand job of overthrowing it all by himself.

On Thursday, he passed a new law at a press conference. George III never did that. But, having ordered America’s insurance companies to comply with Obamacare, the president announced that he is now ordering them not to comply with Obamacare. The legislative branch (as it’s still quaintly known) passed a law purporting to grandfather your existing health plan. The regulatory bureaucracy then interpreted the law so as to un-grandfather your health plan. So His Most Excellent Majesty has commanded that your health plan be de-un-grandfathered. That seems likely to work. The insurance industry had three years to prepare for the introduction of Obamacare. Now the King has given them six weeks to de-introduce Obamacare.


“I wonder if he has the legal authority to do this,” mused former Vermont governor Howard Dean. But he’s obviously some kind of right-wing wacko. Later that day, anxious to help him out, Congress offered to “pass” a “law” allowing people to keep their health plans. The same president who had unilaterally commanded that people be allowed to keep their health plans indignantly threatened to veto any such law to that effect: It only counts if he does it — geddit? As his court eunuchs at the Associated Press obligingly put it: “Obama Will Allow Old Plans.” It’s Barry’s world; we just live in it.

The reason for the benign Sovereign’s exercise of the Royal Prerogative is that millions of his subjects — or “folks,” as he prefers to call us, no fewer than 27 times during his press conference — have had their lives upended by Obamacare. Your traditional hard-core statist, surveying the mountain of human wreckage he has wrought, usually says, “Well, you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.” But Obama is the first to order that his omelet be unscrambled and the eggs put back in their original shells. Is this even doable? No. That’s the point. When it doesn’t work, he’ll be able to give another press conference blaming the insurance companies, or the state commissioners, or George W. Bush . . .

The most telling line, the one that encapsulates the gulf between the boundless fantasies of the faculty-lounge utopian and the messiness of reality, was this: “What we’re also discovering is that insurance is complicated to buy.” Gee, thanks for sharing, genius. Maybe you should have thought of that before you governmentalized one-sixth of the economy. By “we,” the president means “I.” Out here in the ruder provinces of his decrepit realm, we “folks” are well aware of how complicated insurance is. What isn’t complicated in the Sultanate of Sclerosis? But, as with so many other things, Obama always gives the vague impression that routine features of humdrum human existence are entirely alien to him. Marie Antoinette, informed that the peasantry could no longer afford bread, is alleged to have responded, “Let them eat cake.” There is no evidence these words ever passed her lips, but certainly no one ever accused her of saying, “If you like your cake, you can keep your cake,” and then having to walk it back with “What we’re also discovering is that cake is complicated to buy.” That contribution to the annals of monarchical unworldliness had to await the reign of Queen Barry Antoinette, whose powdered wig seems to have slipped over his eyes.

Still, as historian Michael Beschloss pronounced the day after his election, he’s “probably the smartest guy ever to become president.” Naturally, Obama shares this assessment. As he assured us five years ago, “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors.” Well, apart from his signature health-care policy. That’s a mystery to him. “I was not informed directly that the website would not be working,” he told us. The buck stops with something called “the executive branch,” which is apparently nothing to do with him. As evidence that he was entirely out of the loop, he offered this:

Had I been I informed, I wouldn’t be going out saying, “Boy, this is going to be great.” You know, I’m accused of a lot of things, but I don’t think I’m stupid enough to go around saying, “This is going to be like shopping on Amazon or Travelocity,” a week before the website opens, if I thought that it wasn’t going to work.

Ooooo-kay. So, if I follow correctly, the smartest president ever is not smart enough to ensure that his website works; he’s not smart enough to inquire of others as to whether his website works; he’s not smart enough to check that his website works before he goes out and tells people what a great website experience they’re in for. But he is smart enough to know that he’s not stupid enough to go around bragging about how well it works if he’d already been informed that it doesn’t work. So he’s smart enough to know that if he’d known what he didn’t know he’d know enough not to let it be known that he knew nothing. The country’s in the very best of hands.

Michael Beschloss is right: This is what it means to be smart in a neo-monarchical America. Obama spake, and it shall be so. And, if it turns out not to be so, why pick on him? He talks a good Royal Proclamation; why get hung up on details?

Until October 1, Obama had never done anything — not run a gas station, or a doughnut stand — other than let himself be wafted onward and upward to the next do-nothing gig. Even in his first term, he didn’t really do: Starting with the 2009 trillion-dollar stimulus, he ran a money-no-object government that was all money and no objects; he spent and spent, and left no trace. Some things he massively expanded (food stamps, Social Security disability) and other things he massively diminished (effective foreign policy), but all were, so to speak, preexisting conditions. Obamacare is the first thing Obama has actually done, and, if you’re the person it’s being done to, it’s not pretty.

The president promised to “fundamentally transform” America. Certainly, other men have succeeded in transforming settled, free societies: Pierre Trudeau did in Canada four decades ago, and so, in post-war Britain, did the less charismatic Clement Attlee. And, if you subscribe to their particular philosophy, their transformations were effected very efficiently. But Obama is an incompetent, so “fundamentally transformed” is a euphemism for “wrecked beyond repair.” As a socialist, he makes a good socialite.

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 15, 2013 - 11:07pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]
dirtbag

climber
Nov 15, 2013 - 11:09pm PT
Freddie Mercury has joined us.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 15, 2013 - 11:17pm PT
“I wonder if he has the legal authority to do this,” mused former Vermont governor Howard Dean. But he’s obviously some kind of right-wing wacko. Later that day, anxious to help him out, Congress offered to “pass” a “law” allowing people to keep their health plans. The same president who had unilaterally commanded that people be allowed to keep their health plans indignantly threatened to veto any such law to that effect: It only counts if he does it — geddit? As his court eunuchs at the Associated Press obligingly put it: “Obama Will Allow Old Plans.” It’s Barry’s world; we just live in it.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 15, 2013 - 11:40pm PT
I just read a bunch of Jhedges's posts and I was left with one question...

What are you like 12 years old? seriously.

You are almost as bad as Dr. F. who is a full blown dyed in the wool Kool-aid drinker. I think the DNC probably emails him daily disinformation.
You guys are so partisan it's like some crazy sports fan. You've chosen your team and no matter how bad they screw up, no matter how many lies they feed you, you will never admit that they are wrong or how bad they suck.

Too bad you can't look objectively at issues.
Unfortunately it will never happen if your sources of information are partisan blogs like you linked to or Wikipedia, which is user edited, contains lots of opinion and should not be trusted as a sole source of facts.

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 15, 2013 - 11:50pm PT
^^^^ I think it is CTE. Too many concussions from banging head on wall???
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 16, 2013 - 12:24am PT
Where do you come up with this crap?
You are so misinformed, I'll bet you probably think Che Guevara was cool.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 16, 2013 - 01:31am PT
"...likely none of the better ideas would have ever passed."

abrams

Sport climber
Nov 16, 2013 - 01:43am PT
what you do when your premiums and co-pay triple

dirtbag

climber
Nov 16, 2013 - 05:51am PT
Nobody likes taxes - most of us feel we pay plenty of them already. But the fact is that without them, we can't have that which is essential to most of us - roads, parks, SS, medicare, police protection.....the list goes on. To anyone who wants universal healthcare, yet another tax is inevitable. One simply can't have unfunded mandates - it is unsustainable. You wanna play, you gotta pay. Can you imagine sitting around a poker table to play a game if no one was willing to put any money down. How long would that last?

Now, unfortunately, here is the sad truth to it all. Around the time this fiasco we call the ACA was coming into fruition - nobody who proposed a new tax would have stood a prayer's chance in hell of getting it through Congress. Not a Dem; not a GOP - in short not no one (excuse, please the double negative). Moreover, it would have would have been political suicide for anyone (including Obama) to propose, it so it did not get done. Instead, however, we conceived some half-assed scheme where everyone would be "mandated" to buy insurance - then we put the IRS in charge of it. Roberts, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, says its a tax. OK so be it. The hitch is that it is not usual form of tax we all know and recognize. It is also one which is very hard to enforce. It is not like SS or medicare where they simply deduct the amount from your wages. Neither is it like the various state and municipal taxes where it is tacked on at the register. Enforcement will be problematic at best and likely much worse.

Now what do you get for this mandated tax? Do you get to walk into a clinic somewhere and get services for say your toothache or your sinusitis. Do you get any antibiotics if you need them? Does anyone set your broken bone? Stitch up your laceration? Lance and drain your abscess? Prescribe meds for your high blood pressure? Hell no. So what do you get? Well, you get a f*#king insurance policy and all the bullshit that goes with it. You get to pay premiums. You get to pay co-pays. You get to meet deductibles. You get to find out the the doxycycline you need for your Lyme Disease is "not covered." Oh well.... You get to find out that the MRI you need for your intractable headaches is denied..........and so on and so forth. Best of all, the "tax" you pay - i.e. your monthly premiums - is helping to fund the corporate profits of the insurance company you elected (on the dysfunctional government website) instead of going directly to yours (and everyone else's) healthcare.

It is and was a crappy idea from the get go. Sad truth - likely none of the better ideas would have ever passed.


Hi Lois.
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 19, 2013 - 03:21pm PT
Even the woman that Obummer mentioned in his Rose Garden speech as finally being able to afford insurance after 15 years...

Well, turns out she can't afford it after all. What a complete joke.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/2013/11/19/obamacare-fan-gets-rude-awakening-she-cant-afford-affordable-care-act-after-all
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 19, 2013 - 03:23pm PT
and he just can't stop himself from lying.

Barry said “In the first month alone, we’ve seen more than 100 million Americans already successfully enroll in the new insurance plans.”

He must have been smoking crack with Rob Ford before the call. LOL!

http://americanoverlook.com/check-your-facts-obama-told-supporters-100-million-enrolled-in-obamacare/106655
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 19, 2013 - 03:27pm PT
Obama's administration LIED about the jobs numbers to get re-elected.
Anyone really surprised?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-18/october-2012-pre-election-jobs-report-was-faked
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 19, 2013 - 03:58pm PT
Obama's administration LIED about the jobs numbers to get re-elected.
Anyone really surprised?

Poor pathetic Republicans. No wonder they're always confused--they don't understand data or numbers.



Data extracted on: November 19, 2013 (3:53:44 PM)

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Series Id: LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over


http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

Curt
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 19, 2013 - 04:16pm PT
"He has set a record for outright loud lies. Ive never seen worse. "


Name the lies.

If you can find them, tell us how in the world they are 'worse' than the previous POTUS.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 19, 2013 - 04:35pm PT
Not really seeing any 'lies' there, Rongo, just politics. You know...the kind of politics that every POTUS engages in, including every one you've ever voted for. To your point, though....

Which one lead to tens of thousands of deaths, destruction of thousands of homes, disability to thousands of lives, and plunged this country into deeeeeeep deficit?

Care to revisit your 'never seen worse' blather?
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 19, 2013 - 05:28pm PT
C'mon, Ron...'never seen worse'.....

Really?
Shack

Big Wall climber
Reno NV
Nov 19, 2013 - 05:33pm PT
Curt, obviously didn't read the article or the multiple reports that have now surfaced about how the numbers were fabricated.
How is that view with your head up your a*#?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 19, 2013 - 05:55pm PT
The wackjobs are gaining ground- now there are at least four who are privy to inside gov doings... Four wing nuts couldn't be Rong..er.

Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 19, 2013 - 06:17pm PT
It just goes on and on too. You know this though you wont admit it.. This last time a public apology was issued because he was BUSTED by the entire public out there. And he lied within that apology.

Ill sign any petition for impeachment .


Wrong, Rong.

A few things: What "high crime or misdemeanor" has the President been convicted of?

You do know that the Constitution, that paper you love to piss upon, does not have a provision for impeachment by petition?
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 21, 2013 - 09:47am PT
Oregon score as of today. 400 new Gov hires. No new signups, -140,000 citizens with gov mandated health coverage cancellations of there chosen insurance, NO coverage for them of any sort, they are UNINSURED due to gov ineptitude.

http://news.yahoo.com/oregon-healthcare-exchange-website-never-worked-no-subscribers-015115508.html

"Oregon healthcare exchange website never worked, has no subscribers
Reuters
By Jonathan Kaminsky 12 hours ago




(Reuters) - Oregon, a state that fully embraced the Affordable Care Act, is enduring one of the rockiest rollouts of President Barack Obama's signature healthcare law, with an inoperative online exchange that has yet to enroll a single subscriber, requiring thousands to apply on paper instead.

Unlike most other states, Oregon set an ambitious course to make its insurance exchange, dubbed Cover Oregon, an "all-in-one" website for every individual seeking health coverage, including those who are eligible for Medicaid.

But instead of serving as a national model, Oregon's experience has emerged as a cautionary tale, inviting comparisons to technical glitches that have plagued other state-run portals and the federal government's website for those states lacking exchanges of their own.

Oregon's online exchange has remained inaccessible to the public, requiring the state to sign up applicants the old-fashioned way, using paper forms. This has made comparison shopping more difficult for consumers and severely slowed the enrollment process.

"Oregonians have questions," state Senate President Peter Courtney, a Democrat, said on Tuesday. "What went wrong with the rollout? How are they going to fix it? When are they going to get it right? Is the website contractor doing everything it can? Our people need to know."

Courtney urged state lawmakers to "ask the hard questions" of officials overseeing the state's healthcare exchange at a pair of legislative hearings on Wednesday.

Appearing at one of those hearings, Cover Oregon Executive Director Rocky King told a joint House-Senate committee that goals set for the state's exchange were overly ambitious given the short time afforded its designers.

"We took a four- or five-year project and tried to condense it into two, two-and-a-half years," King said. "We're not broken, it's just not done."

While he remains "laser focused" on getting the exchange fully functional, his staff is proceeding as if the website will remain offline through the open-enrollment period ending March 31, King said.

FILLING OUT FORMS

In the meantime, the state has resorted to urging would-be subscribers to fill out applications that are between nine and 19 pages long by hand, Cover Oregon spokesman Michael Cox said.

The program also has hired about 400 temporary workers to help process those applications before January 1, when the new plans are due to take effect, Cox said.

As part of that effort, staff members from his office are fanning out to hotel conference rooms and other venues across the state over the next week to help prospective enrollees complete the forms, he said.

Nearly 25,000 individuals and families have so far submitted hard-copy applications, Cox said, with nearly two-thirds of those applicants eligible for Medicaid, a federal-state healthcare plan for the needy.

But none of those applicants has actually been enrolled, with manual processing of the paperwork slowing the process dramatically.

Separately, about 70,000 residents have signed up for Medicaid by responding to letters sent by the state to more than 200,000 people deemed eligible for the program by virtue of their receiving food stamps, Cox said.

By comparison, Oregon's neighbor to the south, California - with a population 10 times larger - enrolled about 31,000 people in an Affordable Care Act plan last month, and added 29,000 in the first 12 days of November.

California has much farther to go, with an estimated 7.3 million adults and children lacking insurance in 2011, compared with 560,000 counted as uninsured that year in Oregon.

Jesse Ellis O'Brien, a healthcare advocate with the Oregon State Public Interest Research Group, which pushed for the exchange, said he is "surprised and frustrated" by its ongoing woes but hopeful that they will be resolved within the next month or two.

King stressed that while people cannot sign up for insurance online, the Cover Oregon website does allow them to browse information on available health plans.

A spokesman for Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber, a Democrat and medical doctor who supported the Affordable Care Act, did not immediately return messages seeking comment.

Greg Leo, chairman of Oregon's Republican Party and an avowed foe of the 2010 healthcare reform law, said its troubled rollout in Oregon underscores his view that patients would be better served by a system managed by the private sector.

"I don't take any joy in this," he said. "This creates a lot of harm for citizens in Oregon and nationally. It's a tragedy, and it further erodes people's confidence in government."

(Editing by Steve Gorman, Doina Chiacu and Sandra Maler)"
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 21, 2013 - 01:16pm PT
Rong, why do you find it necessary to lie? Are your arguments so lame?
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 21, 2013 - 01:20pm PT
here is objective evidence as to what has happened to the cost of medical care, and how the ACA has altered it for all of us


Here is a chart showing how the care in hospitals has improved, in a very real way, by cutting the readmission rate following discharge:

Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 21, 2013 - 01:37pm PT
Hey Ken,, first,, there is not one lie in my post. Secondly,, you posting some SHYT graph in an attempt to dilute facts just doenst cut it.

Facts to a Republican: Something they heard somewhere that they happen to agree with.

Curt
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 21, 2013 - 01:42pm PT
I dunno Rong, boy.

I just took at look at the Nevada site, and it was easy to navigate, and took me seconds to find the rates, which seemed cheap.

A 30 year-old can get a bronze plan for about $200 that gets guaranteed preventive care free, and guarantees protection against bankruptcy.

Sounds like a good deal, and seconds to navigate.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 21, 2013 - 01:53pm PT
Ken,, TRY and COMPLETE the "navigation" and youll find out.

Well, DUH, I can't, because I don't live in NV!

But anyway, that was not what you said.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 21, 2013 - 01:57pm PT
179% increases in premiums bubba.

Havent had insurance for five years now


So... 0 + 179 percent = 0.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 21, 2013 - 03:37pm PT
Dave Kos said:
"How did people shop for insurance before there was a government website? Y'all do understand, that we still buy insurance from ... insurance companies.

Right?

Why are all these folks suddenly so helpless when they don't have government help?"



Clearly not much of a reader eh Dave?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 21, 2013 - 08:06pm PT
First, let's visit the standard Left shrieking points.

1) How many of you know someone who died in Hurricane Katrina? (Just thought I'd get that out of the way.)

2) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who was a valid registered voter and who was denied the chance to vote due to Voter ID laws?

3) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who was unable to afford birth control due to a lack of health insurance?

4) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who was denied the chance to have an abortion, due to state regulations?

5) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who has been laid off due to the Federal budget sequester?

6) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who was furloughed during the brief Federal Government shutdown and then did not get back pay for the time furloughed?

7) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who was unable to find a meaningful job because of Right to Work legislation in the state where they live?

Now for the flip side:

8) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who had their existing health insurance policy cancelled as a result of Obamacare, and who are now looking at options that are more expensive and have higher deductibles? (My own hand goes up.)

9) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who works for a business whose health insurance coverage is either going to be eliminated or become more expensive as a result of Obamacare?

Show of hands, everyone?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 21, 2013 - 08:13pm PT
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 21, 2013 - 08:25pm PT
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Nov 21, 2013 - 10:05pm PT
Now for the flip side:

8) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who had their existing health insurance policy cancelled as a result of Obamacare, and who are now looking at options that are more expensive and have higher deductibles? (My own hand goes up.)

9) How many of you know someone (including yourself) who works for a business whose health insurance coverage is either going to be eliminated or become more expensive as a result of Obamacare?

Show of hands, everyone?

I'll play, back on the left:

10) How many of you know someone who was murdered because they had to wait to get a background check to buy the gun that might have saved their life?

11) How many of you know someone who was murdered, injured or threatened by a person with a gun?

12) How many of you know someone who lost their job due to the recession caused by Bush-era policies?

13) How many of you know someone whose taxes are paying the interest on the debt incurred during, and as a result of Bush-era policies?

14) How many of you know someone who is completely satisfied with their current health insurance?

15) How many of you know someone stuck in a job they hate because buying private insurance was too expensive to try start a small business?

16) How many of you have visited an ER, paid $1500 for an x-ray and script for Ibuprofen, to subsidize the next guy who couldn't afford to go to a doctor?

17) How many of you know someone who was killed or injured in Iraq fighting a war based on lies?

18) How many of you know someone who was killed or injured in Afghanistan fighting a war that could have been over in a fraction of the time if the military hadn't been stuck in Iraq?

Ooops, wrong thread, maybe.

TE



Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 22, 2013 - 12:17am PT
I like that we're being officially encouraged to under-report our income now by these "navigators". I'll be sure to take advantage of that.

Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 22, 2013 - 08:33am PT
jghedge wrote: Which happened today, with the filibuster repeal.

Maybe the repeal is a good thing, I'm not sure. For partisan hacks though, they do know for sure. Well, depending on who is in power:

SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): "As majority leader, I intend to run the Senate with respect for the rules and for the minority rights the rules protect. The Senate was not established to be efficient. Sometimes the rules get in the way of efficiency. The Senate was established to make sure that minorities are protected. Majorities can always protect themselves, but minorities cannot. That is what the Senate is all about. For more than 200 years, the rules of the Senate have protected the American people, and rightfully so. The need to muster 60 votes in order to terminate Senate debate naturally frustrates the majority and oftentimes the minority. I am sure it will frustrate me when I assume the office of majority leader in a few weeks. But I recognize this requirement is a tool that serves the long-term interest of the Senate and the American people and our country."


-Senator Harry Reid, Congressional Record, S.11591, 12/8/06)


Just one more lie, ho hum.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 22, 2013 - 08:48am PT
Concerning ACA:
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/11/20/nyt-obamacare-debacle-could-kill-big-blue/

The seven million people officials initially estimated would sign up for the Obamacare insurance exchanges this year are putting their well-being and that of their families in the hands of government bureaucracies armed with demonstrably inadequate technological expertise.
Thomas Edsall, NY Times
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:46am PT
I don't get it. You live in a house like this at the foot of Copper Mt,
you ski all the live-long weekdays (certainly not weekends!), and you qualify
for Obamacare? WTF?

Oh, yeah, there's a 2010 V50 T5 Volvo and a bit older Saab Aero in the garage.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 22, 2013 - 12:48pm PT

All of these healthcare nuances remind me that my position is similar to what is expressed in this old and familiar quote about whiskey:

In 1952, Armon M. Sweat, Jr., a member of the Texas House of Representatives, was asked about his position on whiskey. What follows is his exact answer (taken from the Political Archives of Texas):

"If you mean whiskey, the devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean that evil drink that topples Christian men and women from the pinnacles of righteous and gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, shame, despair, helplessness, and hopelessness, then, my friend, I am opposed to it with every fiber of my being.

However, if by whiskey you mean the lubricant of conversation, the philosophic juice, the elixir of life, the liquid that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer, the stimulating sip that puts a little spring in the step of an elderly gentleman on a frosty morning; if you mean that drink that enables man to magnify his joy, and to forget life's great tragedies and heartbreaks and sorrow; if you mean that drink the sale of which pours into Texas treasuries untold millions of dollars each year, that provides tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitifully aged and infirm, to build the finest highways, hospitals, universities, and community colleges in this nation, then my friend, I am absolutely, unequivocally in favor of it.

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 22, 2013 - 07:40pm PT
Won't be long till the bodies start piling up.

http://www.kxii.com/news/headlines/Gainesville-family-fights-for-childrens-lives-after-insurance-cancelled-232923131.html
guyman

Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
Nov 22, 2013 - 08:26pm PT
Cragman... you forgot to point out the fact that we will still be in AFGANASTAN well past the PRES's lie about US being gone at the end of 14....

Pretty soon more and more DEMs are going to jump ship.... and claim that "it wasn't my fault...."

To bad some of the most responsible, hard working folks, who paid for healthcare out of their own pockets, are the ones getting shafted first...

Next it will be people like me who get IT at work....

that is when the poo will hit the blades.
happiegrrrl

Trad climber
www.climbaddictdesigns.com
Nov 22, 2013 - 09:21pm PT
According to that tragic news story, it seems it was the incompetence of the insurance agency, in losing their client's paperwork, which resulted in the cancellation. And that their system doesn't have an adequate response when such an internal error occurs.

Or are you suggesting that President Obama hired gnomes to go mess up the insurance company's internal files....?
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 22, 2013 - 09:35pm PT
Obamamama threw out a plan he never read. My health care plan cost has gone out the roof. I can't get my asthma meds because the PCP can't determine if they are covered. This has turned health care into a bureaucratic nightmare. I think it is by design. Now we have a whole new bureaucracy funded by taxpayers that makes the public more dependent on a government that kicks the can down the road.

They fricked it all up and tell us to eat cake, BECAUSE THEY ARE EXCLUDED AND HAVE THEIR OWN PLAN! Which we pay for.
dirtbag

climber
Nov 22, 2013 - 09:55pm PT
Nice to see that our resident Obama-haters have found a cozy place to gather for fellowship on Friday night...


















































































johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 22, 2013 - 09:59pm PT
How so many did not see this coming is beyond me.....but sheep will be sheep.

Did we ever have any input (really, I don't know; was this put to the public)? This BS was passed by congress. We were sold a bill of goods that has no truth in reality. Obama and the dems shoved this down our throats.

edit: I could give a rats ass about Obama. I don't know him and have no reason to hate him. This plan sucks. He pushed it and needs to own up to the reality of this plan.
dirtbag

climber
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:02pm PT
I dunno, I'm not into sheep.

But hey, if you are, knock yourself out. Just please be gentle, they're sweet creatures.

dirtbag

climber
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:03pm PT
Good work. ^^^^^
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:03pm PT
Covered California has signed up 80,000 uninsured and forced 1.1 million out of their plans. That means there are 1,020,000 MORE uninsured people in California now than before this whole thing started.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:21pm PT
hedge, you have no clue. The Obama plan has many ramifications. Sounds sweet as it was sold. The product as delivered sucks.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:22pm PT
Kos....We have a guy getting government health care from the navy criticising The ACA , a health care plan created by the government...Sometimes it's hard to figure where some of these people are coming from..?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:37pm PT
Not much Chiefy.. I haven't been sick....Knock on wood...I try to avoid the medical system as much as i can..I have a cadillac insurance policy and don't like the fact that the docs want to cut a fat hog when they find this out...I belong to a union and find the benefits nice...if you can't beat em...Join em...Chief it means a lot to me if you were injured and were not compensated..I think the whole military complex is a sham because of the way our pussy politicians exploit America's young men and leave them spinning in the wind...
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:52pm PT
Nice try, Desk Boy.

The fact is, the US Military has the most advanced program for treatment of amputees in the world. Much of the advance in the medicine/science in this area have come from the military.

Specifically, the Center for the Intrepid is the most advanced center in the world for this purpose:

http://www.bamc.amedd.army.mil/departments/orthopaedic/cfi/

The capabilities of the CFI include state-of-the-world technologies designed to be used for rehabilitation, research, education, and training. Patients are challenged by state-of-the-art physical therapy and occupational therapy, demanding and challenging sports equipment, and virtual reality systems. They benefit from individualized case management, access to behavioral medicine services, and in-house prosthetic fitting and fabrication. The Computer Assisted Rehabilitation Environment (CAREN) provides virtual reality training, the Motion Analysis Lab allows specialists to detect gait deviations not discernable to the naked eye, the Firearms training simulator reacquaints patients with their weapons systems, and the Flowrider integrates balance, core strength training, and excitement into the rehabilitation process. The CFI is an outpatient facility under the command and control of BAMC and specifically the Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation. The CFI is staffed by active duty Army medical staff, Department of the Army civilians, contract providers, and nine full-time Department of Veteran's Affairs employees. Together they work to maximize the patients' rehabilitative potential and to facilitate reintegration whether or not they remain on active duty or return to civilian life.
Services are presented to patients using an interdisciplinary approach and include physical medicine, case management, behavioral medicine, occupational therapy, physical therapy, wound care, and prosthetic fitting and fabrication. During a typical week, 140-145 different patients are seen and account for between 550-650 patient visits. During the first year of operation, there were over 28,000 patient visits documented at the CFI.

But what do you expect from a guy who expects that his rates will never increase.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:55pm PT
Wonder what the same people who abhor unions think of living off of gov't benefits

Umm, maybe you should rethink that.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:56pm PT
Chief...That Answers that..? Answers what...? You bitch like the rest of us about the rip-off health insurance companies then bitch about the common working man who joins the union so he can make a living wage......Who's side are you on...? The wealthy americans who sent you off to die under the guise of patriotism and now won't reward you for the injuries you sustained or the working stiffs who belong to a union and eek out a living..? Direct your anger at the appropriate people...
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Nov 22, 2013 - 10:58pm PT
What happens Hedge, if on Nov. 5 2014, after a long sleepless night for you, the sunrises on an America with a repub controlled Senate and Congress. How upset will you be? Will we need to alert the authorities of a possible suicide in progress? You need to get a life free of democratic hackery.

The pendulum swings from one extreme to another and the only thing we voters can do is throw the bums out. This ACA is a train wreck of historic proportions, exactly as i predicted on this forum over a year ago. It is only going to get worse on the working peoples pocketbooks.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:01pm PT
Chief...You're off on Hi-way 6 as often as you can get it...? Janies closed a long time ago...
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:06pm PT
working stiffs who belong to a union and eek out a living

Really? Who pays for your benies? Not you, but me and other private sector taxpayers. We have to pay for our health care and retirement and then have to pay for yours as well. Eek out a living my ass. Sucking the teet of the taxpayer is more like it.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:17pm PT
John tp..I pay property taxes up the ying yang...that goes toward my benies...The checkers at von's are unionized and make minimum wage..Could you live off that...? the other alternative is to turn all government work over to the private sector but then you'd have what you have now , the rip-off health insurance companies hosing you or Dick cheney's no- contract corporations gouging you...We sub some of our work out to private contractors and guess what...We usually have to go and fix the f*#k ups the private sector guys leave...sooprise , sooprise...
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:17pm PT
. And aaaalll that's standing in the way of that is old people. Adios, amigo

So once they are gone who will be left to pay your bills? You. How long do you think you can drain the system before it catches up?
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:25pm PT
You think retirees are currently paying anyone else's bills? Hahahahaha

More delusional than I thought.

Good luck in your future.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:25pm PT
Gee thanks!



Like I said, PRIVATE entities.

Which often happens. What do you expect under a Repug administration?

What is amazing is how spectacularly ungrateful you are that it got taken care of. The rest of America does not have access to this facility. Just like you like it.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:27pm PT
John tp...i'm with you on that...Picking a contractor is like picking a doctor , dentist , or mechanic..The bad ones don't get work again...
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:31pm PT
Chief...those are nice trophies...I couldn't afford one of those even though i'm a union worker...I should have joined you in the navy and the rotary club...!
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:34pm PT
Cragman...Don't ask , don't tell...
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:35pm PT
Hey. Maybe I've been too confrontational here. I can be an asshat as much as anyone. Just seems to me things are fricked up. I'm not a repub or dem; just want to see things fixed. I tend to be more libertarian. Don't have any answers, but we as a nation are in difficult times. The congress as a whole seems to have their heads up their asses.

Cheers!
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 22, 2013 - 11:59pm PT
You got to give it to Hedge. Dude manages to dedicate most of his life to spewing the same propaganda day after day.
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Nov 23, 2013 - 12:18am PT
You got to give it to Hedge. Dude manages to dedicate most of his life to spewing the same propaganda day after day.

Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Heh... but I think Hedge is a good canary. When we find him on the bottom of his little cage one morning, we'll know the tide has turned.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 23, 2013 - 01:53am PT
IT is LEB.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 23, 2013 - 01:57am PT
LEB is back.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 23, 2013 - 02:33am PT
One more time: Who the hell are you?

Stupid me, it is LEB. Been sick and dumb.
ruppell

climber
Nov 23, 2013 - 02:36am PT
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 23, 2013 - 12:03pm PT
Even sadder. Private entities contribute to over 90% to Wounded Warriors and their modern Prosthetic's. NOT the government. Now that is pathetic.






I will also take that as an apology for the bullshet desk boy comment.

Thanks.

Except you are not quoting me. ooops, as your Repub allies like to say....
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 23, 2013 - 12:05pm PT
Chiefy...Work...? Nobody mentioned that to me..? WTF..!
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 23, 2013 - 12:58pm PT
You can't read either.. typical/nice.

I vote Democrat.

guess I am the only one who knew that?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 23, 2013 - 01:22pm PT
100,000 Hispanics reach voting age every month

not correct, your source?


FACT:


Pew estimates that 66,000 Latinos turn 18 and over 100,000 elderly (and more conservative) Americans die every month. That means that by 2016, there will be about three million more voting-age Latinos and about five million fewer elderly voters. And that's going to be the case whether we get comprehensive immigration reform or not.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/11/1168990/-The-GOP-s-lose-lose-dilemma-on-immigration
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 23, 2013 - 01:39pm PT
Most will pay the penalty and not get insurance. Watch!

a prediction, or wishful thinking?

the tax is only $95, for the entire year of 2014 and not payable until April of 2015

yes there will some, maybe many, who chose to be deadbeats and not pay a monthly premium,
which only serves to weaken the overall pools

taking personal responsibility is about being an adult, we are all in this together, the sick need
the healthy is how the private health insurance market works

everyone single policy gets "cancelled" on Dec 31 of each year, with a good chance one gets a letter saying no, you cost us some money last year and so we are not going to offer you a policy

and IF we do offer you a policy, you can bet is is going to cost 40% more than last year

and that is exactly why so many of us simply cannot afford healthcare, because the healthy
are not members of the pools

which is why Mitt Romney required the Individual Mandate as governor of Mass.

you remember him, the guy you voted for?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 23, 2013 - 02:09pm PT
Chief,

you are a smart guy, and I know you have read the ACA, all of it as I have

otherwise you would not be commenting of what you would be ignorant of, that is not you

the fact is that too damn many people were buying those $50/month policies and believing they just got a "really good deal" and actually had hospitalization and major medical, when they did NOT

people are lazy, naive, and "trust" and decidedly do not take personal responsibility to actually read their policy and know what is covered and what is not

and those people were way too often wiped out, bankrupt, when their cheapy policies did not pay for hardly anything more than routine doctor visit and prescription drugs with co pays

that all stops now, or at least a year from now

secondly, those people buying the cheapies are exactly those people who don't make much money, are very likely to qualify for the subsidies, and will end up being much better off,
both in the quality of coverage and likely for even the same cheap ass payment, or damn
close too it

period, and you know all this from reading the ACA rather than assuming without knowledge
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 23, 2013 - 04:05pm PT
So, Lois....why'd you choose the avatar 'J.Shiloh', anyway?
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 23, 2013 - 05:47pm PT
jghedge wrote:
Hillary 2016.

If anyone ever qualified as America's ex-wife... Just sayin.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 23, 2013 - 06:13pm PT
C'mon, Lois...why the 'J.Shiloh' avatar?

Interesting choice.
ncrockclimber

climber
The Desert Oven
Nov 23, 2013 - 06:35pm PT
My name is not Lois; it is Gabriel. I can assure you that everything I told you in my post is all quite true.

Bullshit and f*#k you, Lois. You are a f*#king fungus, a plague, a total pain in the ass and one of the most objectionable posters on a site that is filled with as#@&%es (me included). You have been banned multiple times because you are unable to contain yourself; if allowed to stay, you will soon be making 50-plus posts a day and infecting climbing threads with your mindless drivel. Take a hint - Go Away!
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 23, 2013 - 07:06pm PT
that is sad.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 23, 2013 - 08:14pm PT
Oh, Looooooo - isssssss...

Where'd the 'J.Shiloh' thang come from?
Guangzhou

Trad climber
Asia, Indonesia, East Java
Nov 23, 2013 - 08:24pm PT


The Affordable Veterinary Act: If you like your testicles you can keep them! Period.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 23, 2013 - 08:28pm PT
Born in Newark, Ohio, in 1851 as John Joseph Klem, he ran away from home at age 10 after his mother died, to become a Union Army drummer boy.

A popular legend suggests that Clem served as a drummer boy with the Michigan at the Battle of Shiloh. The legend suggests that he came very near to losing his life when a fragment from a shrapnel shell crashed through his drum, knocking him unconscious, and that subsequently his comrades who found and rescued him from the battlefield nicknamed Clem "Johnny Shiloh."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Clem


So you fancy yourself something of a Union Drummer boy, Lois?

Interesting choice. More details, please.
johntp

Trad climber
socal
Nov 23, 2013 - 08:35pm PT
You can only keep your testicles if you pay out the ass for ACA and Obama allows it.

Oh, wait. He does not allow anything; he has people that do that and takes no responsibility for his policies. Give the government your money.
ncrockclimber

climber
The Desert Oven
Nov 23, 2013 - 08:37pm PT
Lois, why do you insist on coming back when the owners of this site have made it clear that you are not welcome? Please, enlighten me.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 23, 2013 - 08:41pm PT

back on the subject at hand.
ncrockclimber

climber
The Desert Oven
Nov 23, 2013 - 09:56pm PT
Lois, why won't you answer my question?
bit'er ol' guy

climber
the past
Nov 23, 2013 - 10:57pm PT
Health care in the country sucks!!!!

$$$$$$$

Blame the insurance companies for the the problems before and after

The Affordable Health Care Act.

The lawerers too.

Greed, greed and more greed!

Bottom line $$$$$$

that's america!

Aren't you proud?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 23, 2013 - 11:08pm PT
You know what you're really bitching about? Adult-Level Responsibility. You think it's unfair that people have to be responsible for themselves and for their kids.

Pretty disingenuous, coming from you. Seems like whenever I talk about people being responsible for their own life choices, you accuse me of being selfish. LOL

YOU talking about "adult-level responsibility" is like O.J. Simpson talking about his hunt for the "real killer." The policies YOU espouse shield people from the consequences of their choices. And neither you nor anybody else can fairly and properly differentiate between the "worthy poor" and those that are suffering the effects of their choices and priorities.

Just yesterday I passed a corner that ALWAYS has "homeless people" standing around begging for spare change (or more). Of special note to me is how MANY of them smoke and have at least a dog with them (virtually all). Yesterday's case was quite different! This was a working-age couple that were vigorously walking around to actively solicit passing cars. And they had not only an 80-pound dog with them but a cat on the woman's shoulders as well. AND (it goes without saying) both were smoking.

Sorry, but you just CANNOT get me all worked up with sympathy for the "health care plight" of such people (and these are just exemplars of millions). And I'm not being "selfish" for insisting on "adult-level responsibility" for able-bodied people that can afford (expensive) cigarettes (that are actually killing them on OUR dime!) as well as both dog AND cat food (expensive, as any pet owner can tell you). Explain to me EXACTLY what "moral responsibility" I have to "protect" this couple from the consequences of THEIR life-choices and priorities.

Multiply this story by millions, throw in a heaping helping of kids, and you have about the furthest thing from "adult-level responsibility" as you can possibly imagine.

And, remember, I grew up surrounded by this very type, so don't even try to float the limp rag that such people are the exceptions. By and large, people are reaping what they've sown. They've squandered opportunities and taken easy paths filled with no impulse control and instant gratification. Watch the first ten minutes of Idiocracy, and you'll see the direction of this nation. And it's about the furthest thing from "adult-level responsibility" imaginable.

Look, Joe, you can spout all your "high-minded," liberal crap; and it just rolls off my shoulders, because I know you cannot do otherwise. You're a product of your times, and you honestly THINK you are being principled. I get all that. And, as I've repeated, I'm all in favor of a properly-funded single-payer system, because I recognize that this country is headed for the toilet... so to me it's critical to find pragmatic "solutions" to at least keep the handle from being pulled!

But what you DON'T get to do without being called on it is to spout off lines like "adult-level responsibility," when you have exactly ZERO commitment to that principle and what it implies. Oh, no! You are FAR too "humane" for that. So, be "humane," but quit making it sound like it's consistent with principled, individual responsibility. THAT you have abandoned.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 23, 2013 - 11:29pm PT
Around 55% of the homeowners of Beverly Hills CA are medical doctors. Average property value (post housing bubble): $2 million

As you keep insisting from others, would you care to support that claim with some hard data (preferably not from some liberal web site)?

Oh, and even IF it were true (which is unlikely), you have not even STARTED to make any case to the effect that people are not entitled to significant rewards for their efforts.

Talk about self-discipline and delayed gratification! Medical doctors endure a CRAZY hard life for a decade, go astronomically into debt, then start to practice and have to be good business people as well to really make it. The relatively few people that pull it off are flat out entitled to their two-million dollar homes if that's how they chose to enjoy their lives.

And don't try to spew that "they make all this money on the backs of poor people." That is such a ridiculous over-simplification of the issues that it's nothing but blatant classism. The insurance companies are the Great Satan in this mess, not the medical doctors. Careful regulation of THAT industry decades ago would have kept us far back from this present brink.

("Libertarian" government does NOT equate to laissez faire government!)
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 24, 2013 - 12:01am PT
I balance self-responsibility with compassion

Compassion implies choice. Forced extraction precludes me from being compassionate, AND it forcibly disallows me from selecting my beneficiaries.

And, nobody has yet addressed the fact that if I'm supposedly responsible for all these unsupported kids, then (by basic moral principle) I have a corresponding right to decide who gets to have kids. NOBODY has a right (positive, negative, or otherwise) to just keep poppin' out kids and then demand that I pay for them.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 24, 2013 - 12:05am PT
Not at the cost of 18% of GDP, they're not. Or is wealth redistribution only OK if it benefits the wealthy?

That statement and question are so laden with presumptions and downright confusion that it would take a book-length reply to systematically dismantle them all.

I'll suffice with this....

* Almost entirely unregulated health insurance companies are the problem with that figure, not the doctors.

* Defend the claim that there's something obviously wrong with that percentage of GDP. And don't just tout European countries as though their lower percentage makes it "obvious" that "something is wrong."

* Defend the claim that a doctor getting paid a LOT, LOT more than a ditch digger is somehow "wealth redistribution."

Let's start with just those points and see if any headway is possible.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 24, 2013 - 12:06am PT
And, I'm still waiting on the hard data sustaining your 55% and two-million-dollar claims.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 24, 2013 - 01:09am PT
Got some control issues there madbolter..?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 24, 2013 - 03:50am PT
"Forced extraction precludes me from being compassionate"

must be a Christian.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 24, 2013 - 04:29am PT
Around 55% of the homeowners of Beverly Hills CA are medical doctors.

78.243% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 24, 2013 - 08:11am PT

The truest words ever spoken.

Double-stampie, no erasies!
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 25, 2013 - 12:37am PT
I'm all for radically reducing insurance company profits. Unregulated insurance companies, imho, have been increasingly the bane of sensible health care.

What's sad to me is that, in typical knee-jerk reaction, we jump straight from lack of regulation to ACA and then to single-payer.

The greed of insurance and drug companies is what has made the "capitalist" approach to health care untenable. But "capitalism" was never supposed to mean anything like unrestricted profits, especially when those profits are derived by outright screwing the customers; this is exactly when it is appropriate for government to regulate to protect the public interest.

But, the bell has been rung, and single-payer is coming. At least that will be better for the middle class than ACA is shaping up to be.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 25, 2013 - 01:37pm PT
And it’s going to work.

This article was, sadly, hype. It completely failed to address the fundamental problems that have driven millions of middle-class complaints! What does "work" even mean? If you mean "people can sign up," that's a pretty low bar! This article doesn't touch increased premium costs, co-pays, or radically increased deductibles. This article does nothing to convince me that ACA "is going to work" in the slightest.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 25, 2013 - 02:02pm PT
What does "work" even mean?

It means the Obamacare propaganda machine has found a phrase they can use to create more propaganda bullsh**

See.... Obamacare is just like many of our current presidents policies and initiatives, spin is all that matters. Pubic perception can be altered by positive propaganda.

Does not matter if it works as long as people think it works. Got it?



Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 26, 2013 - 08:19am PT
A good synopsis of a possible post anti-biotic future. If it came to pass it would make all of this political scorekeeping BS laughable, which is maybe why this might not be the best forum to post this link. But f*#k it, this article is sobering.


https://medium.com/p/892b57499e77

Penicillin-resistant staph emerged in 1940, while the drug was still being given to only a few patients. Tetracycline was introduced in 1950, and tetracycline-resistant Shigella emerged in 1959; erythromycin came on the market in 1953, and erythromycin-resistant strep appeared in 1968. As antibiotics became more affordable and their use increased, bacteria developed defenses more quickly. Methicillin arrived in 1960 and methicillin resistance in 1962; levofloxacin in 1996 and the first resistant cases the same year; linezolid in 2000 and resistance to it in 2001; daptomycin in 2003 and the first signs of resistance in 2004.
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Nov 26, 2013 - 10:46am PT
The greed of humans is what has made the "Libertarian" approach to anything untenable. But "Libertarianism" was never supposed to mean anything like unrestricted choice, especially when those choicesare derived by outright screwing the rest of the population; this is exactly when it is appropriate for government to regulate human behaviorto protect the public interest.

Fixed it for you. Extreme -isms of all kind are fundamentally flawed. I call for moderationism in all things.

Pragmatically, any attempt at improvement to the current state is welcome. I don't want to subside anyone else's poor choices either, but that's exactly what I'm doing right now. I don't know that ACA will fix or improve it, but I'm willing to give it a chance.

TE
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 26, 2013 - 11:48am PT
That's actually a pretty reasonable re-casting, TE. I mean, what I wrote is also true, but I'll grant your version as well.

Of course, I'm not a political libertarian either. Philosophical libertarianism only sort of maps onto parts of political libertarianism. And, I'm with you insofar as I don't believe in unrestricted liberty or "freedom of choice." However, without a clear understanding of, and discussion within the context of, negative and positive rights, it's pretty hard to think this stuff through without distortion.
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
Nov 26, 2013 - 12:02pm PT
Who cares what color? If someone is hungry give them food. I'm happy to help pay. Same for health care.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 26, 2013 - 12:12pm PT
If someone is hungry give them food. I'm happy to help pay.

Cool!

Society is (increasingly) gonna hold you to that, as are millions of the middle class that are being literally taxed to death.

You know, if my company could get a tax break, we could actually hire another person. But, I guess it's FAR better to have one more person out of work (and not enjoying the health care package my company provides); and it really doesn't matter anyway, because we've got such generous spirits on the taco stand that will pick up the (ever increasing) slack.
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
Nov 26, 2013 - 12:29pm PT
I do get taxed and bought food for hungry people this weekend and still manage not to be "taxed to death."
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 26, 2013 - 12:50pm PT
literally taxed to death

Actually, yes. It's a process. For example, people that had health coverage that lost it to ACA; then don't have coverage to go to the doctors that were working on their cancer; then can't afford the "affordable" coverage "offered" by the ACA; then are, yes, LITERALLY dying because of the snafu. And that's just one sort of example. When you tax the middle class as is now happening, the implications are many and negative.

ACA IS a tax; that's how it (barely) got past the Supreme Court. So, yes, as we see the implications play out, you are going to hear more and more stories of people LITERALLY taxed to death in the short term, and with implications killing people over the long term.

As much as I hate saying it, I'd take single-payer tomorrow (paid for by sales, luxury, and vice taxes) if it would immediately undo the ACA.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 26, 2013 - 01:58pm PT
So it appears that Norton was indeed deep sea fishing his last claim of "Whitey Tidey" being the worst abusers of "Assistance" in America, outta his ass.


factually true, chief

care to dispute that?
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
Nov 26, 2013 - 02:02pm PT
Regardless of one's views on contraception, the issue before the court is weather a for-profit corporation can exclude itself from the requirements of a federal statute for religious reasons. This is the lunacy Citizen's United has wrought.

And if it were me, I'd be giving my employees all the contraception they want and more. Insuring pregnancies, paying for mandated maternity leave, etc. is far more costly.
happiegrrrl

Trad climber
www.climbaddictdesigns.com
Nov 26, 2013 - 03:57pm PT
- Prison sentences of black men were nearly 20% longer than those of white men for similar crimes in recent years, an analysis by the U.S. Sentencing Commission found.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324432004578304463789858002

 The study, carried out by the Guardian, found black offenders were 44% more likely than white offenders to be sentenced to prison for driving offences, 38% more likely to be imprisoned for public disorder or possession of a weapon and 27% more likely for drugs possession.

Asian offenders were 41% more likely to be sent to prison for drugs offences than their white counterparts and 19% more likely to go to jail for shoplifting.
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/nov/25/ethnic-variations-jail-sentences-study

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 26, 2013 - 04:11pm PT
Speaking of handouts...I bought a Starbucks coffee and doughnut for a homeless women that was begging this AM .

Handed her the coffee/doughnut and she screamed at me/caused a scene that I was an idiot because I failed to add cream and sugar.

Oh well, I tried to be nice. She probably had mental issues or other issues. Im sure Obamacare will solve her problems

Government "handouts" are a problem because they are administered by the inefficient government.

We certainly need healthcare change in the US but the current ACA plan is going to fail....sorry.

Thats ok, just blame the political party that you do not align with and call it good.

Problem solved the stupid American way.






Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 26, 2013 - 10:23pm PT
What I am is consistently correct

When history proves you wrong Hedgy it will be the fault of these wingnuts you constantly reference...correct?

Seriously, I think your name is listed under the definition of "wingnut"

"Wingnut" (sometimes "wing-nut") is used in United States politics as a political slur referring to a person who holds extreme, and often irrational, political views (see Hedge)

Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 26, 2013 - 11:05pm PT
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-obamacare-success-20131125,0,1801769.story
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 27, 2013 - 12:37am PT

But of course, that's perfectly rational, because Obama scares you, therefore whatever you pull out of your ass must be true


FACT: You'll be proven wrong beyond even your ability to deny it, then you'll just move on to the next topic you'll be proven wrong about, then you'll deny that till you can't anymore, then you'll just move on, then you'll be proven wrong again, then you'll deny................................


Yep you are certainly the definition of a wingnut. Rational thought is NEVER your approach.
It really does amaze me that someone can singularly look at viewpoints with singular and partisan approach. Dudes like you are why this country is F'd.


Better hope your future Obamacare policy covers full mental health bene's

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 27, 2013 - 12:57am PT
HAHA Yep, California is the model of government efficiency.

You are funny....or delusional.

Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 27, 2013 - 05:13am PT
jghedge wrote:
we are, in fact, the model for the nation.


Leaving aside the blind partisanship of the above statement that refers to government efficiency, this link illustrates how that statement just might be wrong and shows how California has just delayed $68 Billion of extra debt, but for all the wrong reasons.

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/11/26/rube-goldberg-legal-system-derails-ca-bullet-train/

//
California’s bullet train boondoggle was sucker punched yesterday, as a Sacramento Superior Court judge blocked $68 billion in bond funding. The same case saw a separate ruling allowing the state to spend $3.4 billion in federal cash for the project, while a second case (same judge) rejected the rail authority’s request to issue $8 billion in bonds that voters approved in 2008. The judge ruled the project would need to meet various mandates, compliances and environmental clearances before the funding stream can be allowed to flow.

The convoluted rulings are yet another sign that California’s toxic regulatory and legal environment makes any public works project slow, expensive and Pyrrhic:

“They’re stymied,” said Michael J. Brady, a Redwood City lawyer for the plaintiffs. Brady interpreted the ruling to mean that the project can’t move forward until the state identifies where its funding will come from and obtains environmental clearances on its proposed 290-mile “usable segment” from Merced to the San Fernando Valley.…

Rod Diridon, a former Santa Clara County supervisor and one-time high-speed rail board chairman, said the ruling will likely make the project more expensive and take longer to finish. But he insisted it won’t stop the project.

We’ve long argued that the train is an awful idea, but it looks like it’s starting to fail for all the wrong reasons. It would be good to see some common sense shape a consensus that the project’s exorbitant costs and marginal utility make it not worth the while. But no, the train is being derailed by red tape.

Opponents of the plan won’t find much to cheer in the rulings; they’ll just extend deadlines, complicate the process and drive costs up even higher. One of the reasons America can’t build much these days is that our legal and regulatory systems have gradually morphed into insane Rube Goldberg contraptions. It takes years and even decades, not to mention millions and billions in legal costs and project delay costs, to get anything significant done.

Our legal systems are increasingly so cumbersome, so slow and so expensive that they are a serious drag on productivity and growth. Just as teachers unions oppose reforming public schools that cost too much and do too little, professors and administrators fight to preserve a dysfunctional university system, and a multitude of vested interests drive up costs in the health system, the “legal system lobby” is more interested in the financial health and social power of its members than in the public good.

The next generation of Americans will have to take on the difficult but necessary task of overhauling some of the nation’s basic systems. They were good enough for the 20th century, but they aren’t working well enough now.//
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 27, 2013 - 08:12am PT
Trains are a bad idea..More freeways , over-population , unaffordable gas prices , air pollution , and log-jams are a much better solution...Damn those rules and regulations..
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 09:47am PT
I'm honestly astounded, even given Joe's past posts, that he can read that article as he has. "Model for the nation?" Huh?

What that article actually SAYS is that CA pulled itself back from the brink of disaster BY raising taxes AND cutting social programs (for which there is now "pent up demand"). AND the article flatly states that if these spending programs are reinstated, the 9+billion dollar "surplus" will quickly evaporate and again CA will go plunging as it did before.

So, if Joe is advocating the CA before its basically "austerity measures," then I'm saying: LOOK at what happened to CA, and let's not do likewise as a nation! But if Joe is advocating the CA DURING its "austerity measures," I would say: YES, and look at how CA came back from the brink that its now "pent up" social programs pushed it to. MORE social programs are not HOW you seek solvency!

But liberals can literally quote an article that SAYS that what are now "pent up" social programs ARE the potential snafu for CA remaining solvent; and somehow liberals read that liberalism was the SALVATION of the state.

This one honestly amazed me!
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 27, 2013 - 09:53am PT
Anybody who thinks California government is not better off without those Orange County-style caveman Republicans is living in denial, or just refusing to acknowledge reality. Jerry Brown has pissed off just about everybody, which means he's doing a good job.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 27, 2013 - 10:02am PT
California's biggest problem is over-population...Too many people and a huge black-market economy where taxes are not collected ...When the working poor don't have money they don't buy consumer goods and revert to social programs a drain on the haves...We make our drivers take test to get a license and we should make parents pass a test before they make a baby...Our politicians should be made to pass a stringent US history test so they don't keep repeating the same mistakes...
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 27, 2013 - 10:10am PT
Gary wrote:
Jerry Brown has pissed off just about everybody, which means he's doing a good job.

I agree that Jerry Brown is doing as good a job as is possible given the one party rule of present day Ca. He is unconventional and free thinking, unlike most party partisans.

This hi-speed train could be a good idea at the right time, in the right place, and with a sound financial plan, but this is more likely a political payoff at a bad time fiscally.

Now about those lavish prison guard pensions...Oh wait, a health care forum, yeah!

Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 27, 2013 - 10:28am PT
Back to health care in California

http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com.br/2013/11/trying-to-make-sense-of-covered.html

Monday, November 25, 2013
Trying to Make Sense of the Covered California Numbers
I've read a number of reports in recent days gushing over the progress Covered California is making leading the nation in signing up people for Obamacare.

But, I am having trouble understanding how the numbers should make anyone gush with enthusiasm.

Covered California, the state health insurance exchange, has a goal of enrolling 500,000 to 700,000 subsidy eligible Californians by March 31, 2014.

Covered California just announced that it would proceed with its original plan to cancel 1 million existing individual policies (their estimate)––80% of them by December 31.

The only place a Californian can buy a policy with a subsidy is on the Covered California state exchange.

So, it would certainly seem that the only way those people eligible for a subsidy can continue their coverage and get a subsidy is to sign-up on the California health insurance exchange––80% of them by December 23.

So, if only the canceled policyholders who are subsidy eligible replace their canceled policies Covered California will be well on their way to making their 2014 enrollment goal. Doesn't sound like much of a stretch goal for them.

Besides the 1 million who have lost their policies because of cancellation, Covered California has estimated that 5.3 million Californians are uninsured and eligible to purchase coverage on the state exchange––about half with subsidies.

Covered California is spending $250 million in federal grant money on a two-year "outreach" campaign to get people signed up. Covered California has been awarded a total of $910 million in federal grants to fund its operations and outreach. New York, the second highest state, has received $400 million.

Through mid-November, Covered California has enrolled about 80,000 people. Its director characterized his state's enrollment saying, "We're seeing much larger numbers than we expected."

The Washington Post, in a story headlined "There's a 'November Surge' in Obamacare Enrollments," reported, "California led the bunch [state-run exchanges]; the state's enrollments have grown steadily in November and now account for nearly a full third of all health law sign-ups. The state has had its strongest two weeks of enrollment this month."

So, let's summarize:

California has 5.3 million uninsured eligible to buy in the exchange with half estimated to be subsidy eligible.
California is cancelling another 1 million people of which Covered California has estimated hundreds of thousands will qualify for a subsidy they can only get if they go to Covered California. At least 80% need to act by December 23 to avoid losing their coverage.
The state is spending $250 million in federal money to get people signed up––dramatically more than any other state.
The Covered California goal is to sign-up 500,000 to 700,000 subsidy eligible people by March 31.

Why should we be so impressed with Covered California because they have signed-up 80,000 people so far? Or, even that their goal is to sign-up 500,000 to 700,000 of the state's 6.3 million people––half subsidy eligible––who are uninsured or having their insurance canceled?

Looking at these numbers, if they don't have well more than 500,000 people signed up by December 31, I would have to think the number of uninsured in California would have grown.

Am I missing something here?
Posted by ROBERT LASZEWSKI at 12:09 AM
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:12am PT
Hedge works in a world of make-believe.

Spoken with authority, One man's make believe is another's Theology.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:25am PT
So whether it's healthcare or tax reform or government spending we will have to rid our government of loons like you who will not compromise and find common grounds to ensure what's being done is being done in the best interest of the people of this country.

Congress, For instance?


madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:36am PT
Well, the last spree of Joe-posts has banished my amazement regarding the previous article. Okay, I'm ready for anything now.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:55am PT
Except reality, apparently.

Ahh... ROFL. That was a GOOD one! Touche', and I am humbled and totally put in my place. I bow to your quick wit, which really serves the purpose of convincing me of the validity of your arguments.

Or, we could talk about the fact that CA survived BY radically ratcheting back its social programs and that bringing them back WILL pitch CA off the cliff yet again. We could talk about CA's radical debt and that a "budget surplus" does NOT equate to being out of debt. We could talk about actual policies and their effects. Or, we could just play the drive-by shooting game some more.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:56am PT
And deranged wingnuts can literally believe that made-up quotes and imaginary statistics are factual, because anything resembling reality refutes their failed ideology!


This Hedge statement pretty much describes him perfectly. Hedge = wingnut that constantly fabricates imaginary statistics to support his failed wingnut ideology.

Too funny.

mucci

Trad climber
The pitch of Bagalaar above you
Nov 27, 2013 - 12:20pm PT
I sure as f*#k don't welcome it.

$400 increase with a 4k increase in my deductible.

Hmmm, keep trudging up the BS hedge

madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 12:25pm PT
Weinberg predicts many people who are losing their policies will come out ahead — even if their premiums go up — because of lower deductibles, full coverage of preventive care and no penalties for pre-existing conditions. What's more, he says, health insurance will almost certainly be cheaper for those who qualify for subsidies. In California, that's an estimated 2.5 million people.

Weinberg can "predict" anything, but that doesn't make it real.

In point of FACT, what millions are finding is that they do NOT "come out ahead," because their deductibles and co-pays increase, and they are forced to buy "coverage" for things irrelevant to them.

And note that Weinberg "predicts" that 2.5 million people will "almost certainly" be cheaper because they will qualify for subsidies. Two points:

1) "Almost certainly" is the best that can be said, which is pretty weak, and even that best case only affects 2.5 million out of about 38 million.

2) The "success" predictions are only remotely reliable regarding the people that will receive subsidies. For the middle class families that were buying their own insurance and will not qualify for subsidies, their net health care costs will "almost certainly" go up, and this is BY DESIGN! Somebody has to pay for all this, and BY DESIGN that is going to be the middle class.

So, "predict" glory all you want, and tout the textbook cases of "success" all you want, but the ACA is designed to be paid for by the middle class; and that will prove to be a vast mistake.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 12:29pm PT
"$400 increase with a 4k increase in my deductible."


Meaning your previous plan was a fraud, and you were essentially paying to be uninsured.

Joe, try to re-read, and this time with comprehension.

His PREVIOUS plan cost less per month and had a LOWER deductible!

What he gets under ACA costs MORE and with a HIGHER deductible. And this correlates with MILLIONS of similar cases around the country. The MIDDLE class had relatively cheap insurance and with low deductibles. NOW, under the ACA, they are FORCED to purchase plans that ARE the very "fraud" you said of his original policy. They are costly, AND they have high deductibles... essentially paying MORE to be uninsured!
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 27, 2013 - 12:39pm PT
And of course, you know that the coverage isn't actually better now, and they won't be denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions, and they won't be cancelled when they actually do need coverage, and there's no spending caps anymore, because...well, because that's the fantasy you so desperately want to believe, and that your failed ideology tells you to believe in.


It will be funny when the reality hits Hedgy and his Kaiser plans monthly payment doubles and his deductible triples.

It is just around the corner Hedgy. Your Union will only protect you for so long. Enjoy the view from your delusional pedestal as you will come crashing down soon.



mucci

Trad climber
The pitch of Bagalaar above you
Nov 27, 2013 - 12:40pm PT
Hedge,

my coverage was fine.

Saw me through a tough time and always met my needs.

You have no idea what you are talking about. As usual.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 27, 2013 - 03:46pm PT

Facts, Not Fantasy.

Hedge, your whole online world is a fantasy. Fortunately, you are discounted by 98% of the folks here on ST as being 100% non credible.

You stating something as FACT is an immediate announcement that your statement is 100% B.S

Maybe do something with the rest of your life rather than spreading your delusional vitriol.

Go out there and do some charitable work rather than sitting behind your computer spewing hate all day long. Go out there and make a difference in someones life rather than being the bitter old dude sitting behind his computer monitor spewing fiction.

Basically, you are a bully.

Carry on and Happy Thanksgiving!
















Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 27, 2013 - 05:08pm PT
I wonder what Obamacare haters will have to say about this?

http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/11/27/how-print-and-broadcast-media-are-hiding-obamac/197079

Curt
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 05:09pm PT
looks like another master stroke by Obama...

I've suspected this for some time, but now I'm certain: Joe is trolling.

Even the Obumbalator has publicly stated that Obumblecare is anything BUT a "master stroke."

LOL... gotcha Joe.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 06:32pm PT
you're confusing the policy itself....

Correct me if I'm wrong (and you'll correct me even if I'm not wrong), but the Obumbalator in Chief has publicly apologized for (and the Dems have been running scared of) the actual outworkings of the policy itself... namely that the policy ITSELF has resulted in millions losing their existing policies and doctors ("You can keep your policy. Period!" "You can keep your doctor. Period!")

Those issues are not "implementation of the policy." Those issues are the implications of the policy itself, and those ARE what the Obumbalator and his cronies have been apologizing for and backpedaling from.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 27, 2013 - 06:47pm PT
"...those ARE what the Obumbalator and his cronies have been apologizing for and backpedaling from."


Nothing but politics. Yawn.

Change this big is hard and fraught with pitfalls. Navigating the political process alongside it is at least as big a challenge. Granted, this could probably have been planned and executed somewhat more smoothly, but this administration gets some credit for trying.

Would it have been a better way to spend the time & effort on another war? You can bet yer arse that if Repugs were driving this bus, this problem would have received no attention whatsoever (aka 'GOP Status Quo'), and we would be at war with both Libya & Syria.
dirtbag

climber
Nov 27, 2013 - 06:51pm PT
So what do you die hard Obama haters propose as an alternative?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 07:23pm PT
The apology was for telling people they could keep their bad policies, not for changing the law to get rid of them.

Now I know that there's nothing more to talk about. This level of revisionism, and even while the actual apologies are still available for all to see, is just ridiculous.

Nothing more to see here. Move along. Move along. Okay, right, I will move along. Done with this.

Joe = Troll
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 07:36pm PT
He apologized for telling people they could keep their policies when they couldn't

Exactly my point. He apologized for an actual implication of the POLICY ITSELF, which is NOT, as you said, ONLY for the hitches in rolling the mess out. The POLICY has the implication that millions of people are losing their (good) policies, and he DID apologize for THAT VERY THING. And THAT is the very thing you claimed was a non-issue, that the ONLY issues concerned roll-out. But it is NOT the case that the only issues concern roll-out. The POLICY ITSELF has some really horrendous implications, those are more and more being realized, and the Obumbalator and Dems have apologized for THOSE.

You simply can't reasonably float, as you tried to, that the ONLY issues here are roll-out issues.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 27, 2013 - 07:51pm PT
"He apologized for an actual implication of the POLICY ITSELF....he DID apologize for THAT VERY THING.... the Obumbalator and Dems have apologized for THOSE."

You simply can't reasonably float, as you tried to, that the ONLY issues here are roll-out issues."


Man, you are sure hung up on apologies. Who gives a shite?

Yep, there are sure to be more problems that become apparent as the ACA rolls out...and they'll get fixed, because to not do so would be political suicide.

But while you guys hand wring to the bone, the question will always remain....

...and never seems to really get a clear answer....

..but gets dodged while you bitch and complain....


'So what do you die hard Obama haters propose as an alternative?'
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 07:52pm PT
It's everywhere. He said what he said. You simply don't want to accept the fact that the policy itself (not just the roll-out difficulties) have terrible implications for millions of middle class Americans. And there will be backlash from it.

Oh well, this isn't worth any more of my time.

Obumblecare just needs to be replaced by single-payer that is paid for by sales, luxury, and vice taxes. Nothing we're actually going to implement will abide by principles I believe in. But I'll accept anything that really CAN work at this point. Obumblecare will not be the answer, so let's just push off downslope to where this was headed from its inception. Let's just pay for it without more income taxes! That's all I can ask at this point.

I'm out.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 27, 2013 - 07:59pm PT
"Obumblecare just needs to be replaced by single-payer that is paid for by sales, luxury, and vice taxes."


Ironically, on that you'll probably find firm agreement from most of the libs here.

Problem is...that wasn't really a political option, or you can bet yer arse Obama would have taken that road.

The ACA has got issues, but there's the very real possibility that it will be the first step towards the proper solution: a single payer system.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 27, 2013 - 08:26pm PT
So what do you die hard Obama haters propose as an alternative?

and

yes, I too would like to hear about this

point by point

starting with insuring 40 million wihout

dealing with denial and cancelled policies for pre existing conditions of which some 50% of adults have

dealing with your plans for bending the overall healthcare curve through outcome based policies

ok, ready set go!

A single-payer healthcare system would certainly fit the bill. Don't expect any of the Obama haters to suggest this though.

Curt
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 27, 2013 - 09:27pm PT
People can't afford policies at all now.


And the deductibles will insure they join the dependent poverty rolls if they do get sick..

"progressives"

are

perverse!
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 27, 2013 - 09:30pm PT
a single payer, being the GOVERNMENT, will NOT solve the big problems

Really? It does in every other western democracy in the world.

Curt
happiegrrrl

Trad climber
www.climbaddictdesigns.com
Nov 27, 2013 - 09:37pm PT
People can't afford policies at all now.

While I sincerely doubt this is actually true (no offense intended personally to you TGT, but "can't afford" and "will have to review my budget and dislike the notion of having to consider changing current spending habits" are two different things) one might consider that now those people have an idea what so many others who have had to go without health insurance over the years felt like.


apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 27, 2013 - 10:02pm PT
"HIs legacy will not be pretty. "

The ACA could be completely repealed next week and his legacy wouldn't look half as bad as the f*#kwad Shrub (aka the guy you Repugs voted for twice).
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Nov 27, 2013 - 10:29pm PT
Yeah for sure..The Koch brothers have stirred their voting base up and the chickens in the coop are flapping in a frenzy over the latest propaganda coop...
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 27, 2013 - 10:53pm PT
Lame = Lame

And you dipshits voted for it...twice!


A 2006 Siena College poll of 744 professors reported the following results:[13]

"George W. Bush has just finished five years as President. If today were the last day of his presidency, how would you rank him? The responses were: Great: 2%; Near Great: 5%; Average: 11%; Below Average: 24%; Failure: 58%."
"In your judgment, do you think he has a realistic chance of improving his rating?” Two-thirds (67%) responded no; less than a quarter (23%) responded yes; and 10% chose "no opinion or not applicable."

A 2010 Siena poll of 238 Presidential scholars found that former president George W. Bush was ranked 39th out of 43, with poor ratings in handling of the economy, communication, ability to compromise, foreign policy accomplishments, and intelligence. Meanwhile, the current president, Barack Obama was ranked 15th out of 43, with high ratings for imagination, communication ability and intelligence and a low rating for background (family, education and experience).[14][15]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:18pm PT
You guys still think the puppet-in-chief has anything to do with it?

Funny...
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:21pm PT
The cost of the insurance was lower because if you got sick, they took it away from you.

Can you support this claim with ANY objective evidence?

I have personally known FIVE people diagnosed with life-threatening cancer in the recent past (within the last two years). ALL of them reached their (low) deductible very quickly, and ALL of them then proceeded to rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in (fully paid) expenses very, very quickly. Only one was on an HMO (Kaiser); the others were on various PPO plans through major carriers, such as Blue Cross, Humana, etc. In EVERY case, the insurance companies fully supported doctors' decision and just paid the bills.

All are now in remission, and ALL still have their original policies. Not only is your claim NOT true in ANY of these cases of which I have personal knowledge, but the insurance companies didn't even drop these folks AFTER the paying was done.

(As an aside, ALL of these people are terrified now, because they WILL lose these policies and then be faced with costs/deductibles that they just can't afford; AND they will lose the network of doctors that KNOW their cases. So, THESE people really are ones for whom Obumblecare really can mean death if their cancers return.)

Please provide the slightest bit of objective evidence that any significant proportion of insureds are just dropped as soon as they get sick.

You can't because the whole POINT of insurance is that the company is on the hook to pay as agreed ONCE you get sick. If anything, they would be legally allowed to drop people like I'm describing AFTER the paying was done, as contractually agreed. But, as I said, even that was not the case with any of the five people I know of (that even could have fit the profile you imagine).

I hadn't intended to get dragged into this morass again, but your outrageous claim that insurance companies have existed to commit constant and widespread fraud was just too, well, outrageous to not be called as the crap that it is; and nobody else was calling you on it.

You just continue to spout utter crap, and it's such a shotgun blast of crap, that even bunches of us together can't stay on top of what a, well, crap shoot it all is. You are a one-man, well, crap shooter. I'm calling you on this one pellet of it, because I happen to know first-hand that it's, well, CRAP!
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:32pm PT
I didn't vote for Romney.
bergbryce

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:42pm PT
Just spent about 30 minutes on Covered California.

For me, a 35 year old male, making not very much money.... $92/month for a silver plan, and $11/month for a bronze plan. My current low income allows me to qualify for a significant subsidy, which I'll happily accept right now.

The silver plan has a $2250 annual max out of pocket cost, while the bronze plan has a max out of pocket cost of $6550. The bronze plans have higher co-pays and other individual visit costs, not surprisingly. The silver plan is an incredibly good deal and is what I will be selecting.

So that changes my monthly cost from $210 (was $144 but went to $210 when I hit 35) for a not very good catastrophic plan which covered no preventative care and had a $6,000 deductible, to a $92/month and a $2250 max out of pocket cost.
I'll take it, thanks.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:50pm PT
Where do these subsidies come from?

ObamaCare was promised to cost the Treasury nothing.
bergbryce

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Nov 27, 2013 - 11:53pm PT
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=where+do+health+care+subsidies+come+from

or the first hit

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/11/07/243584170/how-the-affordable-care-act-pays-for-insurance-subsidies

On his show last Friday, liberal comedian Bill Maher called the Affordable Care Act a "Robin Hood" plan. "It does take from the rich to make better the poor," he said.

You can certainly make a case for that, says of the American Enterprise Institute. "In a general sense, the rich, of course, subsidize the poor. The rich pay more income taxes," he says. "So, yes, absolutely, that's how subsidies are supposed to work."

So if you're a low-income person getting a tax credit from the U.S. Treasury to subsidize your health care, a big chunk of that credit is coming from taxes paid by the well-off.

The Cost Of Subsidies

But the authors of the Affordable Care Act didn't want the subsidies to become a drain on the Treasury and add to the deficits. So they included provisions designed to offset the cost of the subsidies.

MIT economist Jonathon Gruber, who helped develop the law, says about half the costs are offset by projected savings in Medicare payments to insurers and hospitals. Another quarter is offset by added taxes on medical-device makers and drug companies.

"The other source of revenue is a tax increase on the wealthiest Americans," he says. "Those families with incomes above $250,000 a year will now have to pay more in Medicare payroll taxes."

Those provisions actually make the bill a net positive for the federal budget, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. By the CBO's accounting, Obamacare will produce a surplus. Gruber says the law will "actually lower the deficit by about $100 billion over the next decade and by $1 trillion in the decade after."

However, many Republicans have expressed skepticism about those findings.

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 28, 2013 - 12:05am PT
When the subsidy is several times the potential fine for non-compliance, you would have us believe ObamaCare is dependent on many more times more people opting out than signing up.

The math just isn't on your side, hedge. Try again.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 28, 2013 - 12:18am PT
Bergbryce is being subsidized to the amount of $118 a month. The fine for non-compliance is $95 a year.

That means, if hedge is correct and subsidies really are financed "From penalties on those like you who will refuse to comply", then simple math says at least 14 people have to opt-out and pay the fine just to fund Bergbryce's subsidies.

Can you say "death spiral" ?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 28, 2013 - 12:32am PT
Are you saying we need to spend less money on healthcare?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 28, 2013 - 12:34am PT
Ah heck, let's continue the trend of government bail outs. Obamacare is the next fleecing of the American tax payer. I mean " gov't bail out" that will be financed by the struggling "middle class" that are living pay check to pay check. Hedge's propaganda math does not add up in the real world. Oh wait, Hedge's world is not real.

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 28, 2013 - 12:36am PT
Is that a "yes" on less healthcare spending?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 28, 2013 - 12:41am PT
We have a winner. Stock of Healthcare companies are doing great...wonder why.

This quote sums it up well.

"Customers aren't doing well but the insurers are doing great." Tanner said. "If everybody had to get kicked off the Chevrolet Nova and had to buy a Corvette, it would be good for Chevrolet but not" for car buyers, he said.

I get to spend 15K per year for a healthy family of 4. Glad I can contribute to the profits of a bunch of mega corporations.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 28, 2013 - 12:41am PT
Chaz!

A success story!

Whaddya gonna do with that?


"So that changes my monthly cost from $210 (was $144 but went to $210 when I hit 35) for a not very good catastrophic plan which covered no preventative care and had a $6,000 deductible, to a $92/month and a $2250 max out of pocket cost.
I'll take it, thanks. "


Here....let me help you...

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=covered+california
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 28, 2013 - 12:44am PT
Where's the subsidy come from? Who pays for that?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 28, 2013 - 12:45am PT
You mean, I'm not going to be paying $22k a year?

Gee I had such faith in your ability to predict that my premiums would double and deductible triple


Wasn't that real? What happened?


Scan and post up a copy of your quote hedgy. It is all BS without pics.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 28, 2013 - 01:04am PT
Neither of the links you provided AT ALL sustained the point you were making. YOU claimed that insurance companies were committing widespread (in fact, general) FRAUD. And how? By "dropping people when they get sick."

Neither of your links (nor anything about the real world) support that claim, because the links you provided actually make entirely different points.

One link claimed that 1.7 million people will go medically bankrupt this year, but that article says nothing about how many were insured or what the nature of their insurance might be. The only mention in that article to insurance at all simply stated that people find it difficult to pay for their deductibles, and that has NO relation to your claim about insurance companies committing FRAUD by dropping people once they get sick.

Your other link made the claim that many people going bankrupt due to medical costs were insured. But that article talked so vaguely about the problem that it was impossible to determine what the issue really is. You could GUESS that the article is saying that people are running up against lifetime limits, which many policies do have in place. But, again, that does NOT sustain your claim that insurance companies are committing widespread (indeed, general) FRAUD by dropping people once they get sick.

Worse for your case: Even if we grant that ALL 1.7 million bankruptcies your articles refer to were in fact EXACTLY because insurance companies dropped these people once they got sick (a flagrantly ridiculous proposition that even your "proof" articles don't try to make), you're talking about a 1.7/330 ratio, which doesn't even come CLOSE to sustaining your claim that this "fraud" the insurance companies supposedly use as a business model is widespread, much less general.

In short, your "proof" articles are a JOKE and do NOTHING to sustain your sweeping generalization that the insurance company model is fraudulent because it is based upon dropping people once they get sick. In fact, your "proof" articles make NO mention of that idea at all.

This is my last post to you for the foreseeable future, because I have no more time to "argue" with somebody so completely immune to the facts and how to reasonably interpret them. I only post this to show any reasonable reader that your claims remain entirely unsupported and outrageous. Joe, your credibility is utterly non-existent on this subject.

You have a hobby horse to ride, and it is continually revealed to be a toy, stick pony. Well, yeeee-haw, Joe. Ride it off into the sunset.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 28, 2013 - 03:03am PT
Curt, no other Democracy so emphatically celebrates profit as we do

in addition, the current political dynamics for a pure single payer to be put in effect in the USA
are very different in terms of difficulty and administration than in the other countries

agree to disagree

No. I actually agree with you on that.

Curt
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 28, 2013 - 03:11am PT
"....I have no more time to "argue" with somebody so completely immune to the facts and how to reasonably interpret them."


Couldn't have said it better myself.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 28, 2013 - 05:30am PT
Hedge,
Does your health care plan cover OCD?
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 28, 2013 - 01:44pm PT
Jeebus, Ron...give it a rest, huh?

Go stuff a turkey or something.

And have a nice day.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 28, 2013 - 02:52pm PT
Even as President Obama has issued a constant refrain of how upset he is that his Obamacare website doesn't work and promises that he's on top of the fix, three 20-year-old website designers in San Francisco made a working Obamacare website using Healthcare.gov's own code. They did it in only three days...

Just more lies from Ron.

Fox's Misleading HealthCare.Gov Comparison Disputed By Actual Web Developers

November 18, 2013 1:03 PM EST ››› MICHELLE LEUNG

Fox News misleadingly compared the Affordable Care Act's HealthCare.gov to private website HealthSherpa.com, despite the fact that the programmers previously explained to Fox this was not an "apples to apples comparison."

In response to the troubled rollout of the federal HealthCare.gov, three private programmers recently created HeatlhSherpa.com, a site which shows some health insurance plans available through the new health care law's exchanges, based on a person's zip code, income, and family size. The site does not allow users to purchase insurance, does not verify citizenship, and can only estimate tax breaks and subsidies that users might be eligible for, all functions of the HealthCare.gov website that make purchasing an insurance policy possible.

On the November 18 edition of Fox & Friends, Fox News host Elisabeth Hasselbeck ignored many of these differences in the websites' functionality to claim HealthSherpa.com was a "working healthcare website" and implied it was a preferable alternative to the "failed HealthCare.gov website." Hasselbeck interviewed Michael Wasser, one of the founders of HealthSherpa.com, who explained some of the functional differences between his site and the federal health care website.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/11/18/foxs-misleading-healthcaregov-comparison-disput/196946

Happy Turkey Day.

Curt
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 29, 2013 - 11:29am PT
Welcome to the perverse "progressive" thugocarcy!


Bill Elliot came forward with his story in the beginning of November, when the Obamacare stories were beginning to shift from the website debacle to the personal stories of the many people who were losing their individual plans, and could not afford a new one. Bill Elliot told his story to Megyn Kelly of Fox News, which was, in short, he is a cancer patient who was going to be losing his insurance coverage in the middle of treatment. After initially investigating his insurance options, he made the decision to simply pay the penalty and stop treatment in order not to bankrupt his family.

After hearing that story, C. Steven Tucker, an insurance broker, got in touch with Mr. Elliot. As a result of Mr. Tucker’s work, Bill Elliot was going to be able to keep his old insurance policy, much to his relief. Mr. Tucker talks about the experience on his own blog (emphasis from the original):

http://csteventucker.wordpress.com/2013/11/13/the-truth-about-preexisting-conditions/

So, all is well that ends well, right? A happy ending! An insurance plan reinstated and a man’s life potentially saved!

Well, not so much. For while the good news from Mr. Tucker (who has been faithfully updating his original post with new developments) is that Mr. Elliott is currently in remission, but he is now being audited by the IRS, who want to go all the way back to 2009. And to make sure that no good deed goes unpunished, C. Steven Tucker is ALSO being audited – all the way back to 2003.

That is simply too much of a coincidence to actually be one.


The White House is embarrassed by all these stories. They are constantly trying to find success stories of their own to prop up, but even those have fallen apart as more time has passed, as in the case of Washington state resident Jessica Sanford, who President Obama himself touted at his Rose Garden press conference back in October. So here is a story of a man who would literally die without his health insurance, being interviewed on the “evil” Fox News, making trouble with the facts of his own situation. And he just “randomly” comes up for an audit after being interviewed on national television???

Oh, and let’s not forget Mr. Tucker, who was trying to help. He deprived the administration of being able to ride in and save the day, and kept them from turning their PR nightmare into a fairy tale where the president comes in to make a few phone calls and saves a man’s life. So, punish him for being helpful.

http://victorygirlsblog.com/?p=16006
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 29, 2013 - 11:49am PT
3 20 yr olds, 3 days in their off time and a perfectly working website for the ACA..

shouldn't this be in your "San Francisco' Thread?

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 29, 2013 - 12:16pm PT
They said they could have done it for about $1,000.

Obama spent a million times that much ( a billion dollars ), and can't get it to work.

Don't need to be a scholar to see the contrast.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 29, 2013 - 12:19pm PT
Yeah, I know.

I like to remind people that we're paying for socialism, but we're just not getting it delivered.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 12:23pm PT
I feel that way everytime we wind up going to war with a country.

Or drive on a freeway.

Or call 911 and have the fire department arrive.

Or go to a local park.

Or safely fly on a plane.

Socialism. It's all Socialism, dammit!
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 01:21pm PT
I feel that way everytime we wind up going to war with a country.

Or drive on a freeway.

Or call 911 and have the fire department arrive.

Or go to a local park.

Or safely fly on a plane.

Socialism. It's all Socialism, dammit!

Again, the necessary correction.... What state and local entities agree to do that you call "socialism" is contemplated by the Constitution. When the feds do similar things, particularly redistribution of the fruits of individual labor to other individuals, that is indeed socialism in the worst sense.

The feds were supposed to have limited and constrained powers; with the majority of power residing in the states and the people. That has been turned on its head.

So, you don't get to use local examples of "socialism" as justification for the feds engaging in socialism. Apples and giraffes!
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 29, 2013 - 01:48pm PT
An attractive storefront won't save an enterprise whose products are all crap. It just means more people will be able to see for themselves the crap that it is.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 29, 2013 - 01:52pm PT
Woohoo....free healthcare on Chaz...we never have to work again!
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 01:54pm PT
We the People WILL have social.ism because the people touting selfishness are a tiny minority.

Your examples of "socialism" are not. And I'm not advocating laissez faire economics! I'm all for federal regulation of corporations and "free" enterprise. But THAT is not the same thing as socialism.

And your idea that there is this hard dichotomy between "socialism" and "selfishness" is patently ridiculous.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:00pm PT
Safely flying on a plane & going to war with other countries are 'local examples'? Ummm...no.

The GOP position on the healthcare system problem is so weak...you've got nothing to offer in the way of solutions, except most notably, Romneycare, which received the stamp of approval from the Heritage Foundation, and Obama used as a primary model for the ACA.

The ACA functions under a true, capitalist, free market structure, where insurance companies compete for our business.

If Romney had won...and for some ridiculous reason decided to buck the GOP base and actually address the HR problem...there is no doubt he would have used the structure he created in MA.

Libs would complain that his reforms weren't based on a single payer system, and the GOP would easily politically maneuver the whole mess because they'd be able to show they are actually doing something, and you guys would fall in silent lockstep right behind him, pointing out the fact that progress is being made while still relying on the capitalist, free market system.

The only reason you aren't doing that right now is because the Democrat won the office, and Eye of Sauron (aka Fox News) has poured the koolaid right down your willing gullets.

Get over it. The ACA was your idea.

madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:11pm PT
Safely flying on a plane & going to war with other countries are 'local examples'? Ummm...no.

Agreed. They are examples instead of powers explicitly granted to the feds.

They are also NOT examples of socialism.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:13pm PT
I am for socialized health care.

I am not (for principled reasons). However, as I have said, I AM willing... and that is because I'm pragmatic enough to be in favor of single-payer (properly funded) IF it will extricate us from the morass that is the ACA!
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:18pm PT
Quit splitting hairs...the point is...to your point...the Federal Gov't takes my tax dollars and 'redistributes that wealth' to many functions that don't directly benefit me. Or worse, this happens towards functions that I don't support at all.

Edit: You keep ranting about how you'd support a single payer system if it immediately replaced the ACA. If I dug around the ST HR threads during the time that the ACA was being developed, do you suppose I'd find you commenting on how much you support a SP system? I'm not gonna hold my breath.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:23pm PT
Gov't takes my tax dollars and 'redistributes that wealth' to many functions that don't directly benefit me. Or worse, this happens towards functions that I don't support at all.

It is NOT "splitting hairs." There is a profound difference between government serving FUNCTIONS to protect fundamental rights (such as having a national defense) and government forcibly extracting my money to just hand it over to somebody else serving NO NATIONAL FUNCTION (and thereby violating my fundamental rights). The former was expressly contemplated by the Constitution, while the latter was forbidden (and the interpretation thereof on this point is undeniable in, for example, the Federalist Papers).

The former is NOT socialism, while the latter is. This is no hair-splitting.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:27pm PT
do you suppose I'd find you commenting on how much you support a SP system? I'm not gonna hold my breath.

Of course not. Why would you expect to?

I've been vehemently opposed to the ACA from its inception. Am I somehow inconsistent because I oppose it, but would support something "more socialistic" if it would supplant it?

I honestly thought that the ACA would not withstand Supreme Court review. It BARELY did. Now that it "made it," I'm pragmatic enough to realize that we are WELL down the slippery slope. So I just want to see something at the bottom of that slope that can WORK. The ACA cannot solve the problems it was put in place to solve. So, let's get something in place that can.

We HAVE socialistic health care now; so let's make it WORK, and that means eliminating the "fake private sector" crap that makes the ACA a hybrid monster.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:29pm PT
Yeah, well, invading countries on a pre-emptive premise & no direct evidence of aggression is against the law, too...and you guys didn't have any trouble making that happen, did you?

Do you not see the hypocrisy of the position of your Party on HR? The ACA was a good idea when your POTUS candidate created it, and now it's a bad idea because the Democrat POTUS implemented it.

GET OVER IT. If this is unacceptable to you, no doubt you can find plenty of other countries that operate more irrationally idealistically (i.e. Somalia) to suit your preference.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:35pm PT
"Socialism" is government ownership of the Means of Production.

No, that's basically a textbook definition of communism. Communism and socialism have extremely little, if anything in common.

The word Socialism to most people refers to Hitler's Germany.

God, I hope that's not true. That would imply that "most people" are stupid.

Curt
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:36pm PT
"The ACA cannot solve the problems it was put in place to solve. So, let's get something in place that can."

Show me one Republican politician that has a serious, feasible alternative with which to replace the ACA.

Just one.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:39pm PT
Yeah, well, invading countries on a pre-emptive premise & no direct evidence of aggression is against the law, too...and you guys didn't have any trouble making that happen, did you?

Do you not see the hypocrisy of the position of your Party on HR? The ACA was a good idea when your POTUS candidate created it, and now it's a bad idea because the Democrat POTUS implemented it.

You have me mixed up with somebody else. The Rebumblecrats are not "my party." And I have been very opposed to these wars of aggression going back decades! They ARE against the law, and this lame "war on terror" has further established an imperial presidency that is itself flying in the face of the Constitution.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:40pm PT
Again, the necessary correction.... What state and local entities agree to do that you call "socialism" is contemplated by the Constitution. When the feds do similar things, particularly redistribution of the fruits of individual labor to other individuals, that is indeed socialism in the worst sense.

Fortunately the courts disagree with you--federal income taxes being one excellent example.

Curt
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:48pm PT
Fortunately the courts disagree with you--federal income taxes being one excellent example.

I don't oppose federal income taxes. I oppose a portion of those taxes being used for non-Constitutionally-approved purposes: wealth redistribution. And the fact that the courts have allowed it doesn't make it right.

You conflate legality with morality. Our nation's principles were supposed to have legality map onto morality. When they come apart, morality still trumps legality (we have countless examples, such as slavery). And patriots recognizing morality, when the two come apart, is the basis of legitimate revolution.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:50pm PT
Still waiting...

Show me one Republican politician that has a serious, feasible alternative with which to replace the ACA.

Just one.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:50pm PT
Apogee writes:

"Yeah, well, invading countries on a pre-emptive premise & no direct evidence of aggression is against the law, too..."




What law is that?
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:54pm PT
Oh, yay....the 'devil's advocate for the sole purpose of being a devil's advocate' has returned...truly productive dialogue should ensue from this point forward...

Edit: How about you answer the above question, Chaz?

An actual answer is required, though...answering a question with another question is not answering the question...
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 29, 2013 - 02:57pm PT
I don't oppose federal income taxes. I oppose a portion of those taxes being used for non-Constitutionally-approved purposes: wealth redistribution.

Our income tax system has always been progressive and redistributive by its very nature, so that's a bit of a contradiction.

Curt


apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 03:12pm PT
I love this.

An ACA hater rants on and on about how we are all doomed by the impending ACA, and how critically important that it be replaced immediately by something better...even a single payer system.

When asked to give a single example of a Republican politician (hell, any politician would do) with a feasible, functional alternative....

They disappear.


How do you Haters expect to be taken seriously when you can't support your argument with anything?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 03:29pm PT
Sigh... you've beaten me into submission.

I think it was the "morality is malleable" line that did me in.

Okay, have fun with yourselves. You "win."
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 29, 2013 - 03:31pm PT
Still waiting...

Show me one Republican politician that has a serious, feasible alternative with which to replace the ACA.

Just one.


Mitt Romney, and his very accepted now success in mandating universal healthcare in Mass.

he fought for it, championed it, bragged about it, and yes even endorsed it as good for the entire United States

how a Republican could ever ever vote for Mitt Romney is beyond belief
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 03:39pm PT
"Sigh... you've beaten me into submission."

I thought you had so much more potential, madbolter1. Sigh.

Nope...you're just a loud whiner with no solutions. Just like a petulant child.

Prove me wrong, and back up your oft-repeated assertion with any kind of evidence that there is a genuine interest amongst any Republican to replace the ACA (aka ObamaRomneyCare) with anything.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 03:48pm PT
Prove me wrong, and back up your oft-repeated assertion with any kind of evidence that there is a genuine interest amongst any Republican to replace the ACA (aka ObamaRomneyCare) with anything.

Why should I take up this challenge. I'm not a Rebumblecan. They are a bunch of clueless idiots, which I've said many times on many threads.

Again, you have me mixed up with somebody else.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 29, 2013 - 03:53pm PT
Sigh... you've beaten me into submission.

I think it was the "morality is malleable" line that did me in.

Perhaps "subject to interpretation" is a better way to put it. To individuals or groups of like-minded individuals, morality isn't malleable at all.

Curt
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 03:54pm PT
"Why should I take up this challenge. "

It's not a 'challenge', madbolter.

You have said several times that the ACA should be replaced immediately with some other plan, even a SP system.

I asked you to give a single example of a Republican politician who has floated any kind of alternative...hell, you could even float your own idea...

That's a 'challenge'? Should be a slam-dunk, if you aren't simply ranting out of your arse.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 29, 2013 - 03:55pm PT
Definition so socialism.

But it is upon the law that socialism itself relies. Socialists desire to practice legal plunder, not illegal plunder. Socialists, like all other monopolists, desire to make the law their own weapon. And when once the law is on the side of socialism, how can it be used against socialism? For when plunder is abetted by the law, it does not fear your courts, your gendarmes, and your prisons. Rather, it may call upon them for help.


This question of legal plunder must be settled once and for all, and there are only three ways to settle it:

The few plunder the many.
Everybody plunders everybody.
Nobody plunders anybody.

We must make our choice among limited plunder, universal plunder, and no plunder. The law can follow only one of these three.

Limited legal plunder: This system prevailed when the right to vote was restricted. One would turn back to this system to prevent the invasion of socialism.

Universal legal plunder: We have been threatened with this system since the franchise was made universal. The newly enfranchised majority has decided to formulate law on the same principle of legal plunder that was used by their predecessors when the vote was limited.

No legal plunder: This is the principle of justice, peace, order, stability, harmony, and logic. Until the day of my death, I shall proclaim this principle with all the force of my lungs (which alas! is all too inadequate). [2]

Fredrich Bastiat.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 03:56pm PT
Speaking of ranting petulant children spraying yellow custard outta their arse...
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 29, 2013 - 04:01pm PT
Fredrich Bastiat

Congratulations for citing a Frenchman as delusional as Ayn Rand.

Curt
happiegrrrl

Trad climber
www.climbaddictdesigns.com
Nov 29, 2013 - 04:12pm PT
You know...according that HealthCare Sherpa site, a person my age, living in my zip code, who wants the Platinum coverage(90% of expenses get covered)...

 Making 500K per year can get insurance for $439.90 - $693.53
 Making 250K per year can get insurance for $439.90 - $693.53
 Making 125K per year can get insurance for $439.90 - $693.53
 Making 50K per year can get insurance for $439.90 - $693.53
 Making 35K per year can get insurance for $261.04 - $514.67, and may qualify for subsidies
 Making 25K per year can get insurance for $128.03 - $381.66,, and may qualify for subsidies


Questions to those of you fa-reaking out about high rates....

1) How do these numbers compare to what you are being quoted? If your situation has more than one person, as this is based on - why not go enter the numbers, and let us know how they compare to what you have been told your "new insurance" premium is.

2) For those of you upset over having to "pay for" the poor people.... Something tells me most of you are making more than the 50K, which is where the cost per premium seems to top out. If you think you are being gouged simply for making more money than those living in poverty - how come those making a half million a year(and more) aren't being asked to cover one more penny than the one at $50K?

You know - several years ago I looked into insurance and it was like $300 a month for the lowest quote I could find. No offense intended, but if I was "back in the game" working in NYC, and making 6 figures, I would be EMBARRASSED to be complaining about paying the above premiums.



One final question - Have employers all decided to completely STOP providing health insurance? When I worked for others, all of those places provided insurance. I would assume that if I was working for someone who paid my insurance before the Affordable Healthcare Ac starts, that they would either continue to pay it, or adjust my salary to make up for the benefit removed. What's going on with people who have their work cover insurance?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 29, 2013 - 04:29pm PT
It was going away next October, but El Presidente has decided to extend the small business exemption for a year so it won't effect anyone before the midterms.


Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Nov 29, 2013 - 04:41pm PT
It's not a 'challenge', madbolter.

You have said several times that the ACA should be replaced immediately with some other plan, even a SP system.


yes Madbolter, I too would like to read about your own plan to replace the ACA?
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 04:48pm PT
He's gone, Norton.

Off to tilt at some other whacknut Repuglican non-existent windmill.

Truth?...he can't handle the truth!
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 05:12pm PT
"You challenge others to come up with a better plan, as if this one is FINE until another one is in place."

Cragman, no-one 'challenged' madbolter with anything...he has repeatedly made assertions that the ACA should be replaced with something...anything else...

And I asked him to give an example of a Republican politician...hell, I'd settle for any ideology, or even madbolter's own idea...it's his own assertion, so it should be a slamdunk...

And he can't come up with ANYTHING.

I don't think any of the leftys here have stated that they think the ACA is working perfectly and needs no changes. No...the Repugs just like to characterize it that way.

Edit: And you know as well as any of them that even if the ACA does completely implode, there sure as hell won't be any kind of alternative approach offered by anyone on the Right. It would go right back to status quo...where the GOP wanted to stay all the time.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 05:22pm PT
'Down economy'?

Stock market is at 16k....

Gas is $1/gallon less than last year...

Home values are on the rise...


If this was happening under any other Republican POTUS, you guys would be singing their praises.

Of course...that would probably only happen because we were engaged in a(nother) war (or three)....
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 29, 2013 - 05:24pm PT
That's tantamount to you being willing to eat plate fulls of dog sh#t because no one else is handing you anything else.

As if the pre-Obamacare plate of dog sh#t was better. What complete insanity.

Curt
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 29, 2013 - 05:26pm PT
'Costliest bungle'?

Ask the families of the thousands of Americans who have died or become disabled in Iraq about the definition of 'costly'.

So far, I don't think a single person has died as a result of the ACA...

What defines 'costly', anyway?
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Nov 29, 2013 - 06:59pm PT
TGT, here's a challenge for you. One I think you are brave enough to undertake. After all, I read The Wealth of Nations, so you should also have the same courage of your convictions.

My challenge: Read Socialism Re-examined by Norman Thomas.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 29, 2013 - 09:02pm PT
Cragman, no-one 'challenged' madbolter with anything...he has repeatedly made assertions that the ACA should be replaced with something...anything else...

And I asked him to give an example of a Republican politician...hell, I'd settle for any ideology, or even madbolter's own idea...it's his own assertion, so it should be a slamdunk...

Not gone, just traveling.

I ask again: why should I have to come up with a Rebumblecrat version of anything? I'm no Rebumblecan.

And I have not said "something...anything else." I have said the ACA is a terrible law and a budding disaster, etc. But replace with "anything?" You didn't hear that from me.

However, I HAVE repeatedly posted an alternative. It could quite quickly be implemented too:

Federal single-payer system, supported entirely by a sales tax (with VERY few exempt items), with an emphasis on luxury and "vice" (unhealthy) items. There are a number of ways to DO single-payer, and I'm not particularly picky on those. But the insurance companies (and drug companies) are primarily to blame for the cost of healthcare, and I'd be fine with putting the insurance companies entirely out of business, while radically regulating drug company profits. Nobody should be making $1 on a 1-cent pill. There is simply nothing close to that sort of overhead in making drugs. So, we need a panel to review drug company practices and profits to ensure the profits are reasonable and not a function of gouging to citizenry.

And, as I've repeatedly said, I am not an advocate of laissez faire economics. Part of the fed's JOB is to regulate.

"Can't come up with anything?" That's pretty amazing for you to claim, given that I've said this same thing again and again.
philo

Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Nov 29, 2013 - 09:05pm PT
This from Jeff Lowe's FB page today.


Jeff Lowe
WooHoo!! Connie Self, my hospice social worker and I just completed my application for Obamacare via connectforhealthco.com. Took a few hours and a couple quick phone calls to them - but it really went quite smoothly. It did take a small village of 3 - hehehe! I sure am grateful to have insurance at this time of my life. Thank you Barack Obama



But then on the other hand we have TeaGeeTea and his pansy assed cut and paste non sequitur non sense.

I'll let you decide who to believe.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 29, 2013 - 10:00pm PT
"Jeff Lowe
WooHoo!! Connie Self, my hospice social worker and I just completed my application for Obamacare"




That is right in line with what's being reported; The old, sick, and those with other medical problems needing treatment are the ones signing up.

The young and healthy are staying away, because it's not a good investment for them.

Can you say "death spiral" ?
happiegrrrl

Trad climber
www.climbaddictdesigns.com
Nov 29, 2013 - 10:39pm PT
I will be signing up. I do intend to wait until spring, when I will have a better idea on what my income level for the year will be. And I have no intention of running off to the doctor when I do get health coverage either.

Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 30, 2013 - 01:11am PT
This will go down as THE costliest bungle in the history of our nation. That will be Obama's legacy, and why he is our worst POTUS ever.

it's all about the cash

except when it's not


costliest bungle...

Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 30, 2013 - 01:20am PT
The young and healthy are staying away, because it's not a good investment for them.

Car insurance may not be a good investment either--depending on how you drive and luck. Does that mean you should also consider purchasing car insurance strictly as an "investment?"

Curt
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 30, 2013 - 01:39am PT
Car insurance isn't mandatory. My Grandmother doesn't have to purchase car insurance. She's completely exempt. There's no fine for just not having car insurance.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 30, 2013 - 01:47am PT
Why do you think, genius? Use your head. ( it probably still won't come to you, obvious as it is, no matter how hard you use your head )
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Nov 30, 2013 - 02:02am PT
Car insurance isn't mandatory. My Grandmother doesn't have to purchase car insurance. She's completely exempt. There's no fine for just not having car insurance.

Because she is a effing illegal, of course. They are also exempted from the ACA.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 30, 2013 - 02:05am PT
That makes me an Anchor Baby!
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 30, 2013 - 02:26am PT
Conservative? Me? I'm more liberal than you are! But you can't see it, because reading comprehension isn't your strong subject. Far from it, you dunce!

Go sit in the corner with your cone-shaped hat, dunce. Come back when you can read right.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 30, 2013 - 03:15am PT
Cragman, I'll see your partisan opinion piece and raise you a college survey:

A 2006 Siena College poll of 744 professors reported the following results:[13]

"George W. Bush has just finished five years as President. If today were the last day of his presidency, how would you rank him? The responses were: Great: 2%; Near Great: 5%; Average: 11%; Below Average: 24%; Failure: 58%."
"In your judgment, do you think he has a realistic chance of improving his rating?” Two-thirds (67%) responded no; less than a quarter (23%) responded yes; and 10% chose "no opinion or not applicable."

A 2010 Siena poll of 238 Presidential scholars found that former president George W. Bush was ranked 39th out of 43, with poor ratings in handling of the economy, communication, ability to compromise, foreign policy accomplishments, and intelligence. Meanwhile, the current president, Barack Obama was ranked 15th out of 43, with high ratings for imagination, communication ability and intelligence and a low rating for background (family, education and experience).[14][15]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States
happiegrrrl

Trad climber
www.climbaddictdesigns.com
Nov 30, 2013 - 02:57pm PT
Car insurance isn't mandatory. My Grandmother doesn't have to purchase car insurance. She's completely exempt. There's no fine for just not having car insurance.

I am assuming the reason is that she doesn't have a vehicle registered in her name.
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr18.htm

And someone went off on the "illegal immigrant tangent? My God,Werner is right about how damned stupid we are.

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 30, 2013 - 07:42pm PT
What makes you think I voted for Romney?

Please advise.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Nov 30, 2013 - 07:53pm PT
'Jay Gee'

Seriously?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 1, 2013 - 10:17am PT
http://nypost.com/2013/12/01/baby-not-covered-under-obamacare-family-plan/
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 4, 2013 - 12:07pm PT
More hypocrisy from our great leaders

While millions of Americans struggle with the pitfalls of Obamacare and are frustrated by bungled government health care exchanges, Obamacare co-architect and cheerleader Harry Reid has exempted many of his staff from buying insurance through the exchanges.
In September, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Reid told reporters, "Let's stop these really juvenile political games -- the one dealing with health care for Senators and House members and our staff. We are going to be part of exchanges, that's what the law says and we'll be part of that."
According to Reid spokesman Adam Jentleson, under the Affordable Care Act a Senator can allow that their committee and leadership staffers keep their attractive federal employee insurance plans. Reid has exercised that option. Jentleson said, “We are just following the law."
Republicans will be targeting Reid for his hypocrisy, with one Republican senate aide remarking, "I'm sure that regular Americans who just lost their insurance will feel comforted to know that Senator Reid's staff gets to keep their government plan.”
Reid is alone among top congressional leaders to grant such privilege to his staff. Congressional aides for GOP House Speaker John Boehner, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell all encouraged their staff to get their insurance from the exchanges.
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Dec 4, 2013 - 12:45pm PT
rSin, setting aside the fact that your quotes are out of context, those quotes themselves refer only to travel, not the act of owning or operating a vehicle. You, me, your granny, and everybody else we know has the right to travel by automobile wherever they wish without license, registration or insurance, but the driver of the vehicle does not.

TE

SteveW

Trad climber
The state of confusion
Dec 4, 2013 - 01:14pm PT

I was just notified by my dental insurance company--they're probably cancelling my policy and will have to upgrade me to carry pediatric
dental insurance too--hmmm. I've no kids. . .

Okay, there are some dumb things about the ACA. . .
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 4, 2013 - 01:26pm PT
If you really believe what you say, maybe you should work to elect more Republicans, Dr F.

You really think the Republicans could do a good job at this?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Dec 4, 2013 - 01:51pm PT
I was just notified by my dental insurance company--they're probably cancelling my policy and will have to upgrade me to carry pediatric
dental insurance too--hmmm. I've no kids. . .

Okay, there are some dumb things about the ACA. . .


Hi Steve, I have the ACA in front of me, all 2700 pages, of which I have read twice now.

Please direct to the page, section, of the ACA mandates dental care, or coverage, or anything?

thanks in advance, I must have missed that entire section in my readings..................
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Dec 4, 2013 - 02:08pm PT
While millions of Americans struggle with the pitfalls of Obamacare and are frustrated by bungled government health care exchanges, Obamacare co-architect and cheerleader Harry Reid has exempted many of his staff from buying insurance through the exchanges.

I did like reid early 2000's but after a while he's turned into a grumpy man!


this country is f*#ked once the interest rates goes up
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Dec 4, 2013 - 02:24pm PT
this country is f*#ked once the interest rates goes up

Good thing they won't then.

Curt
philo

Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Dec 4, 2013 - 02:34pm PT
And is Nevada's economy Harry Reid's fault?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Dec 4, 2013 - 02:41pm PT
The NRA should not give politicians money because they support the NRA

it was wrong of the NRA to contribute to Harry Reid's political campaign because he arranged
for a new shooting range to be built in Nevada


just another example of money buying our politicians,.....nothing is sacred anymore
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Dec 4, 2013 - 02:45pm PT
actually Ron

Harry Reid does not work for Nevada

he is employed and his salary is paid by the Federal government

he is charged by our Constitution as a US Senator to represent all of America

in addition to that, people like it when he brings in pork and spending to Nevada

Senators don't create jobs, private people do, like you being self employed and doing better
and maybe hiring a helper some day

see how it works now?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 4, 2013 - 02:48pm PT
Reid sure is doing a piss-poor job of representing the majority of Americans who don't like Obamacare.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Dec 4, 2013 - 02:53pm PT
No, Chaz...the great majority of Americans like the impacts of the ACA- they like the fact that they can keep their child on their own policy until they are 25 y/o; they like the fact that they can't be turned down for coverage; they like the fact that insurance companies can't boot you out when you make a claim...

What they don't like is that the website didn't work worth a feck....and now that's pretty much fixed, too.

The ACA is here for good...get used to it.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 4, 2013 - 03:01pm PT
Pick your poll, Apogee.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

Obamacare scores - at BEST - 41 to 59 ( the 59 being against Obamacare ).

I can't find one poll anywhere that shows a majority of Americans in favor of Obamacare.

If Reid were anything but a partisan hack, he'd be working for the 57.1% ( average of seven polls ) who are against Obamacare.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 4, 2013 - 03:10pm PT
Wonder why Hillary is SILENT these days?

Being associated with ACA a is a political negative these days and it is only going to get worse as more folks figure out what ACA really means for them.

Hollywood idiots have gone silent too.

The only certainty is the great majority of folks with middle class incomes will pay WAY MORE for health care and the healthcare conglomerates will be MORE profitable.

Stocks of health care co's are going pretty darn good these days...wonder why?






Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 4, 2013 - 03:13pm PT
Why should they?

Us Taxpayers only provide the politicians about a trillion dollars a year.

Insurance company lobbyists fly politicians out to Branson MO on their private jets and give them bass boats for voting like Reid.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Dec 4, 2013 - 03:25pm PT
There are shiteloads of polls asking about overall general impressions of the ACA...and they are indeed generally in opposition. The bottom line is that there are a lot of people polled whose views won't be changed one way or the other, but there are quite a few whi don't really know about the actual provisions of the ACA at all. This is a clear failure of the way it's been politically implemented.

Not that it will matter one bit to you, but here you go:

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 4, 2013 - 04:13pm PT
That, and nobody likes to be lied to, especially by the President.

And people don't like having to find new doctors.

They don't like having to pay more - for less service.

Nobody likes to have insurance plans they liked and were perfectly happy with being cancelled.

I don't know anybody who wants to go to the government - hat in hand - and beg for subsidies.

The Democrats ( most of them ) like it. That's it. The rest of the country can spot a turd when they see it.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 4, 2013 - 04:16pm PT
A5scott

Trad climber
Chicago
Dec 4, 2013 - 04:27pm PT
I've read bits here and there of this thread... i'm not sure the ACA was the best way to fix things, but how do folks feel about a no bid contract for the website construction awarded to a foreign firm that the Canadian government fired from the same job because they sucked at it. One of Michelle Obama's princeton classmates was an executive in the firm that got the contract. it's going to cost near 1 Billion dollars after all the fixes. Currently, there isn't much security built into the site and it can't handle anywhere near the throughput of amazon or other like sites.

is there some reason that somebody in silicon valley couldn't have built a way better site for a fraction of the cost? Keep some jobs stateside?

scott
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Dec 4, 2013 - 05:02pm PT
nobody likes to be lied to, especially by the President.

apparently, some do...

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 4, 2013 - 05:38pm PT
've worked on Amtrak projects, Fannie Mae, SEC, ... let's not even go into the DoD stuff. Clusterf*#k is par for the course. And it's not just federal, stuff done by the states is just as bad.

Will the administration and fulfillment of ACA be any different and if so why?

apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Dec 4, 2013 - 06:03pm PT
"But not everything works perfectly on day one. Of course, as expected, children and partisan tools throw a tantrum when things aren't perfect."

Yep. That about nails it.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Dec 4, 2013 - 06:23pm PT
Who to support Dave? NO ONE IN THE MIX OF WASHINGTON CURRENTLY!!!!!!!!!

President Hillary Clinton. Get used to the sound of it.

Curt
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Dec 4, 2013 - 06:27pm PT
"It's common decency, basic sportsmanship. "

Yer wasting your breath, Dave. Rongo doesn't understand such things as 'basic sportsmanship'.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 4, 2013 - 06:39pm PT
"But not everything works perfectly on day one. Of course, as expected, children and partisan tools throw a tantrum when things aren't perfect.


I thought ACA implementation would be a smooooth as butter if it was not for those darn Republicans messing it all up.

Yep, ACA sucks because of the Republicans.

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:21pm PT
^^^^ Some of your friends said it earlier in this thread.

More good news!!!!



THE WALL STREET JOURNAL News Alert
Drug-Cost Surprises Lurk Inside New Health Plans
Americans with chronic illnesses—who are expected to be among the biggest beneficiaries of the health law—face widely varying out-of-pocket drug costs that could be obscured on the new insurance exchanges.

Under the law, patients can’t be denied coverage due to existing conditions or charged higher rates than healthier peers. The law also sets an annual out-of-pocket maximum of up to $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families, after which insurers pay the full tab.

But depending on the coverage they select, some patients on expensive drug regimens could reach that level fast.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:26pm PT
oh f*#k it...

[Click to View YouTube Video]

rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:28pm PT
And the Republicans solution to making health care affordable was...?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:30pm PT
Do you really think the Republicans can do a good job of this? Really?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:31pm PT
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:42pm PT
Pass the bill so you can see what is in it. Sounds like a solid plan to me.


Really who cares Repub or Dem. Find something that is workable. Use common sense. Oh wait, that is not the American political way.

Lets just jam a shi**y so called health care fix down the throats of the American people and see what happens. So what if it will screw millions of Americans. It can help millions of other Americans so lets force it on the American tax paying public.



Oh yeah, let's also totally F'up the roll out by outsourcing the IT functions to Canada.


Only good thing so far is that you are mking BANK if you are an insurance co exec or were smart enough to dump your savings into healthcare stocks before the run up.

Sweeeeeet

President Barack Obama and the Obamacare debacle may be highly unpopular with Americans, but the healthcare industry that donated a staggering $22,471,562 to Obama's 2008 campaign is posting record profits amid the fallout.
So far in 2013, the S&P healthcare sector index has gained 37.5%, making it the S&P 500's best-performing sector, reports Reuters.
"Healthcare is the place to be. It's a hot area," said U.S. Global Investors Inc. top trader Michael Matousek. "People want stocks in healthcare, industrials and consumer discretionary. That's where tactical investors have been focused, and that's where the money has been flowing."
Cato health policy analyst Michael Tanner told CNBC that what is bad for citizens has been a boon for insurance companies.
"Customers aren't doing well but the insurers are doing great," said Tanner. "Insurers by and large are getting new customers."
Some healthcare companies are enjoying record gains. Aetna, Cigna, UnitedHealth, and Gilead have recently been trading near 52-week highs. According to CNBC, Gilead is up almost 200% since Obamacare was enacted. Amgen is up over 90%. Biogen has been an even bigger winner, posting gains of over 300%.




Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:53pm PT
Maybe not socialism but clear cronyism and general corruption that permeates our government starting with our savior Obama.

Obama likes to pick the financial winners in our country. So does Putin.




i'm gumby dammit

Sport climber
da ow
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:54pm PT
Stocks of health care co's are going pretty darn good these days...wonder why?

all stocks are doing pretty well these days.
i'm gumby dammit

Sport climber
da ow
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:58pm PT
Nobody likes to have insurance plans they liked and were perfectly happy with being cancelled.
Absolutely.
I found this op-ed from Fox News interesting
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 4, 2013 - 11:59pm PT
"Obama likes to pick the financial winners in our country. So does Putin."



He's been picking more losers than winners lately.
philo

Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Dec 5, 2013 - 12:58am PT
He's been picking more losers than winners lately


^^^^ Prove it.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 6, 2013 - 05:25pm PT



The cut off for individuals signing up for next year has come and gone for this state. Yet they still don't have the web site up and working yet. They said they would take paper applications and then hired 400 people to process them, and have not announced any sign ups ...that I've seen. They had radio spots going on multiple stations, but they were crooning about it, and basically wasting shitloads of money as it was some jackass playing the guitar and singing "Cover Orrreeegon" over and over and it wasn't informative, interesting or topical. Furthermore, they couldn't sign you up while they were doing all of this wailing away on the radio. Total waste of money. I'm sure that there are some signups by now, CNN is reporting 219 applications are being processed, which is less than one per new Government hire. Pretty weak.

Our company received a notice from Kaiser that we "now" can extend our current plan for a full year due to recent changes which to me is disturbing as no one had told us we couldn't extend before or that anything was remiss. Furthermore, we have a damned good health care plan. I was of the mind earlier that the company mandates were delayed for a year, but as we had less than 50 employees we were exempt from the bullshit anyway.

Evidently not. Still don't know whats up. I pay for a bunch of other folks to have healthcare too, and I've charged them to find out what's up: as of yet, none of us knows jack or squat so we'll continue to muddle on in ignorance.






Some CNN info here germane to our situation: http://www.cnbc.com/id/101242913

"Oregon Obamacare site flounders as feds make progress

Published: Tuesday, 3 Dec 2013 | 1:35 PM ET
By: Dan Mangan |



And you thought HealthCare.gov had problems.

Oregon's state-run Obamacare exchange still isn't working more than two months after its scheduled launch, and the state on Monday said a paltry 219 people have filed paper applications for private health insurance so far.

Making matters worse, the official in charge of Oregon's disastrous health exchange website is now taking a medical leave amid harsh criticism of his job performance.

Cover Oregon, like all Obamacare exchanges, was supposed to begin operations Oct. 1. But a series of serious technical glitches prevented it from enrolling people online in individual health insurance.

This means Oregon is at the back of the Obamacare enrollment pack among the 15 exchanges run by states and the District of Columbia. And even its claim about the 219 paper applications contains a major caveat: Not all of these forms have been forwarded to insurers yet.

Under the Affordable Care Act's additional goal of covering more people under Medicaid by expanding its eligibility criteria in some states, another 3,200 or so people in Oregon have enrolled in Medicaid. But these numbers still put Oregon's enrollment far short of what many had expected.

Meanwhile, federal officials on Tuesday were crowing that their HealthCare.gov site had handled a huge number of visitors on Monday, the first business day of operation after officials said a major software and hardware repair effort had led to dramatically improved performance on the site.


The official Twitter feed for HealthCare.gov on Tuesday morning tweeted, "1 million visits to http://HC.gov yesterday. Site stable, faster for users." That is 200,000 more visitors than the capacity goal publicly set by Jeff Zients, the management expert tapped to fix the site.

Joanne Peters, spokeswoman for the federal Health and Human Services Department, followed up with a tweet of her own, saying that the 1 million visitor volume showed "high demand for quality, affordable health care."

So far on Tuesday, the site was showing continued progress, with officials sending another tweet that there were 380,000 visits by noon, with no need for a new queuing tool. That tool is designed to deal with high traffic volumes. On Monday, traffic at that point of the day had reached 375,000, and the queuing tool was deployed.
Source: Cover Oregon

December is a critical month for Obamacare because people must select a plan through the government-run health exchanges by Dec. 23 in order to have insurance kick in by Jan. 1.

So far, about 330,000 people have enrolled in coverage through either HealthCare.gov, which services residents of 36 states, or through the state-run exchanges. That is significantly below the 1.2 million people that federal officials had originally projected would have exchange-purchased insurance by the end of November.


HealthCare.gov's many technical problems, which were exposed right after its launch, have dramatically hampered enrollment on the federal site. Sources have said that just 125,000 or so people enrolled via the federal site by the end of last month.

Back in Oregon all eyes are on Dec. 16, the date when Cover Oregon hoped to be able to accept online enrollments for individuals.

Rocky King, the embattled director of Cover Oregon, said he didn't know if Cover Oregon would meet the target.

On Monday, King was granted up to 12 weeks of medical leave by Cover Oregon's board of directors. He said he has had health problems for years, but his leave comes after media in Oregon uncovered emails showing that there were numerous red flags earlier this year that the website would not be ready for launch.

"I'd always planned in the last year to take some time as soon as we really got through the launch on October 1," King told reporters. "Unfortunately, it didn't launch the way we wanted."

SteveW

Trad climber
The state of confusion
Dec 6, 2013 - 06:06pm PT

Norton
I don't know where it is stated in the ACA that dental insurance
is addressed--but I received this notice from my dental insurer,
and I quote "Because your plan is not ACA-compliant, you will be transferred
on your renewal date to one that most closely matches your current plan."

I cover myself since I am a retiree, and it is individual insurance--where in an individual policy does it state something about dependents. . .

I don't think the ACA went far enough, on a personal level--Obama should have pushed for Medicare for all. . .
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 6, 2013 - 08:40pm PT
There's a problem with that!

http://washingtonexaminer.com/doctors-boycotting-californias-obamacare-exchange/article/2540272

Few doctors are willing to work for what "Uncovered Kalifornia" will pay.
guyman

Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
Dec 6, 2013 - 08:53pm PT
When the Insurance Companies are close to going broke in a few years, cause of all the COSTS incured.... the BIGGEST BAILOUT in US history is going to fall squarly on us... The tax payers.... well the RICH ones, you know $60,000/year folks.


ACA = the biggest bucket of sh*t ever.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Dec 6, 2013 - 09:03pm PT
I don't know where it is stated in the ACA that dental insurance

it isn't, they are lying to you

6. Are dental or vision insurance plans affected by the new law?
Unfortunately, there is no dental coverage as part of Obamacare, unless you qualify for Medicaid. Some are pushing for the inclusion of vision in the new health exchanges, but it is not currently part of the plan
.http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/29/2682291/#dental

and Steve, Medicare would likely be way to expensive as a universal American coverage

and that is why Medicaid is the preferred expansion for some 30 million low income
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 6, 2013 - 09:30pm PT
Four months ago, 6-year-old Ellie Porter was diagnosed with a rare form of cancer. While she’s been fighting for her life, her father has been fighting against ObamaCare because his family’s plan was canceled because it didn’t comply with the Affordable Care Act’s standards.

Dr. Paul Porter, Ellie’s father, joined Fox and Friends this morning. Porter says that the family was “very happy” with their insurance coverage and that Ellie’s care was being covered.

When he received word that his policy was being canceled, Porter reveals that he was frustrated and scared. “It’s just adding something for us that we didn’t need at this current time.”

The family’s current policy costs $364.13 a month while an ObamaCare-compliant policy would run them $783.75.

Ellie starts another round of chemotherapy today.

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/12/05/6-year-old-girl%E2%80%99s-cancer-fight-complicated-health-plan-cancellation
A5scott

Trad climber
Chicago
Dec 6, 2013 - 11:30pm PT
So it's true, the white house turned down IBM's offer to build the website for free, choosing to spend nearly 1 billion overseas.

scott
Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
Dec 6, 2013 - 11:40pm PT

Oh dear, cragman was right ... profits, growth, investors, capital .... IT'S SOCIALISM!!!!!11111

dave, dont be a effin idiot.

when the government FORCES you to buy something then you call it what you will. socialism, perhaps not, but something altogether worse.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 6, 2013 - 11:40pm PT
Our family primary care doctor called this week with a pre recorded message stating that " because of ACA he will no longer be available to care for our family unless we join his concierge service"

So his service costs $1800 for an individual or $3500 to the family. 1700 of his patients have already signed up and 300 more spaces are available and " going fast"

He will see us until December 31 and then we are on our own.

So our family gets to pay a sh**load more each month for a premiums, greatly increased deductibles and now I need to pay an annual fee just for the right to see a good, well established primary care RD.




Sweet. Thanks Obamacare.



Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
Dec 6, 2013 - 11:52pm PT
thats not the point.

frankly we really should socialize it and not force citizens to line insurance ceo wallets
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 7, 2013 - 12:13am PT
Why are people getting their panties in such a bunch over having to buy something that anyone with common sense would buy anyway?


Because insurance is now proving to be unaffordable for those that are not "rich", are self employed and make enough to not qualify for subsidies.



i'm gumby dammit

Sport climber
da ow
Dec 7, 2013 - 03:45am PT
Our family primary care doctor called this week with a pre recorded message stating that " because of ACA he will no longer be available to care for our family unless we join his concierge service"

So his service costs $1800 for an individual or $3500 to the family. 1700 of his patients have already signed up and 300 more spaces are available and " going fast"

He will see us until December 31 and then we are on our own.

So our family gets to pay a sh**load more each month for a premiums, greatly increased deductibles and now I need to pay an annual fee just for the right to see a good, well established primary care RD.




Sweet. Thanks Obamacare.
i don't believe you
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Dec 7, 2013 - 12:29pm PT
Daphne

Trad climber
Northern California
Dec 7, 2013 - 12:37pm PT
Our family primary care doctor called this week with a pre recorded message stating that " because of ACA he will no longer be available to care for our family unless we join his concierge service"

So his service costs $1800 for an individual or $3500 to the family. 1700 of his patients have already signed up and 300 more spaces are available and " going fast"

He will see us until December 31 and then we are on our own.

So our family gets to pay a sh**load more each month for a premiums, greatly increased deductibles and now I need to pay an annual fee just for the right to see a good, well established primary care RD.




Sweet. Thanks Obamacare.

Doctors have been making the shift to "boutique" service for several years now. No doubt this doctor had been contemplating it for a while.

I have been a Blue Cross member for years now and they have paid my doctor and hospital very little. I haven't complained, because I am a self-employed person and medical costs are insane compared to what I bring home.

But, I do understand why doctors don't even want to participate in the system. I get reimbursed for my services (I'm a psychotherapist) at a third of the rate that is my full fee. Like doctors, I've paid thousands of dollars for continuing skill development and I consider myself to be very much worth my full fee.

I can only take a limited number of insurance clients because insurance reimburses at so low a rate. This has been the case for years, and has nothing to do with ACA. Because insurance companies are "for profit" systems, the service providers must take what the companies determine. Or we can opt out of providing. It is a terrible system. ACA says that mental health coverage is now mandatory.

One other thing, I may have a full fee that I charge and I certainly market to improve the chances that I get full-fee referrals, but I also offer a sliding scale and pro-bono appointments (very very low fee). I would rather slide my scale to the amount the insurance company reimburses me than deal with the immense hassle of insurance billing. You cannot believe how much time I spend dealing with the billing aspect of insurance.

What is it about this forum that I will spend time typing all this out, thereby being late for my dance class? Argh! I am gone.


rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Dec 7, 2013 - 12:50pm PT
Daphne..I know a contractor in June Lake with issues and would probably do a labor trade for counseling..? How bout a new house..?
Roger Brown

climber
Oceano, California
Dec 7, 2013 - 01:37pm PT
Correct me if I am wrong or if this has already been said. I am a bit older than most of you, but if I remember right, Medicare at one time had this huge surplus. Like really huge. Our leaders at that time decided that all that money could be put to a better use if it was put into the general fund. Well they got thier balanced budget that year and the result is history. Oh yea, Medicare is not free when you hit 65. Medicare only pays 80% and they take 100.00 a month out of your Social Security check for that. So, I pay that 100.00 plus 158.00 for the supplemental to cover that other 20%. Been working since that first job in 1960 and still working a couple jobs a year. Don't get me wrong, I ain't complaining for me. I live a pretty good life and I still have my health. Many of our seniors are just getting by, and I don't think things will be better for them any time soon. Remember, they are the ones that fought the wars and raised the next generation. You would think that their country would treat them a little better.
How many billions a year do we spend on forign aid?
Roger Brown
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 7, 2013 - 01:45pm PT
gosh, you make it sound like YOUR the poor..

Will be soon if we have any health issues that require us to pay the deductible. Still responsible for 30% of expenses beyond the deductible.

We are one major illness or injury away from being poor. No different and likely closer to poor under ACA as a greater % of our pre tax income is going to health care expenses. Savings...whats that? Much rather give our savings to a giant health care company.



Maybe we can aspire to be eligible for subsidies.....wait I want to be poor?



Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Dec 7, 2013 - 02:04pm PT
Our family primary care doctor called this week with a pre recorded message stating that " because of ACA he will no longer be available to care for our family unless we join his concierge service"

I'd go and find a doctor who went into medicine for some reason other than money only.

Curt
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 7, 2013 - 02:52pm PT
^^^^ That is become a challenge. Primary care is a not an area that the young bright DR's are choosing to pursue after spending big bucks on Med School.



It is a shame but a truth.

ncrockclimber

climber
The Desert Oven
Dec 7, 2013 - 03:20pm PT
I'd go and find a doctor who went into medicine for some reason other than money only.

Curt

Unfortunately, it is getting very difficult to find that kind of doctor.
SteveW

Trad climber
The state of confusion
Dec 7, 2013 - 03:22pm PT

Roger
I agree totally, but I think we waste more on the military than we
do in foreign aid. Since a lot of the foreign aid is attached to
contracts for US businesses. . .

Again, Medicare for all would have been the real deal. We waste so much
money on health care administration, not actually patient care.
I'm going to be getting Medicare myself in a few years, so I'm
holding out. . . .
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 7, 2013 - 06:57pm PT
One more result of the"unaffordable Healthcare Tax".


The University of Minnesota had to make its healthcare plans worse in order to avoid Obamacare-related penalties.

The Affordable Care Act levels an excise tax on high-value health coverage plans, and UM would have to pay $48 million with its existing plans. Instead, the university is lowering the quality of its coverage.

“The Office of Human Resources announced in a July email that it was making changes to the UPlan, the employee healthcare program, including adding a deductible and increasing copays for primary and specialty care,” according to the Minnesota Daily. “The email said the cost increases were necessary to help the University avoid a $48 million excise tax in 2018.”

UM employees weren’t pleased with that deal, noted Campus Reform. But after UM offered a three percent salary increase, the union reluctantly agreed.

“This isn’t the deal the table committee wanted; it is better than what the University management committee had been proposing and better than what most other employee groups received,” said the union in a statement.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/07/thanks-obama-university-must-destroy-health-plans-to-stay-compliant/
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 8, 2013 - 10:15pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]

the "Unaffordable Healthcare Tax" will also put the premier research hospitals out of reach except for the anointed elites.


http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/994951f8-5e71-11e3-8621-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2mwabklq6


rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Dec 8, 2013 - 10:35pm PT
TGT ..what good are those tax payer supported research hospitals if nobody can afford them..?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 9, 2013 - 12:06pm PT
Emanuel did more harm to his cause than good there.

He effectively said that the only way you can keep a doctor you like ( President Obama's promise ) is if you pay more money.

Under the "affordable" care act, it'll cost more for the same thing.

It sounded good at the university, though.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 9, 2013 - 08:55pm PT

No more volunteer FD.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2520979/Obamacare-mandates-set-shutter-THOUSANDS-volunteer-departments.html
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 11, 2013 - 12:11pm PT
Todayz Oregon news. $300 million wasted on non-health things so far.



Headline is:
"Oregon signs up just 44 people for Obamacare despite spending $300 million"
By PHILIP KLEIN | DECEMBER 11, 2013 AT 9:04 AM

The state is still spending money to run ads for the non-existant web site.





full article.

"Oregon, once touted as a model for President Obama's health care law, signed up just 44 people for insurance through November, despite spending more than $300 million on its state-based exchange. Oregon, once touted as a model for President Obama's health care law, signed up just 44 people...

Oregon, once touted as a model for President Obama's health care law, signed up just 44 people for insurance through November, despite spending more than $300 million on its state-based exchange.

The state’s exchange had the fewest sign-ups in the nation, according to a new report today by the Department of Health and Human Services.

The weak number of sign-ups undercuts two major defenses of Obamacare from its supporters.

One defense was that state-based exchanges were performing a lot better than the federal healthcare.gov website servicing 36 states. But Oregon's website problems have forced the state to rely on paper applications to

Another defense of the Obama administration has attributed the troubled rollout of Obamacare to the obstruction of Republican governors who wanted to see the law fail as well as a lack of funding.

But Oregon is a Democratic state that embraced Obamacare early and enthusiastically. Its outreach effort, which included a folk-style music video featuring a singer playing an acoustic guitar against a colorful and scenic backdrop, had been praised among the law's supporters.

And the more than $300 million in federal grant money the state received to build and promote its exchange topped all but two other states - the much more populous New York and California."

from:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/oregon-signs-up-just-44-people-for-obamacare-despite-spending-300-million/article/2540529

I'm pretty sure that it is higher than that, I mean they hired 400 people to process application as the web site doesn't work.
slabbo

Trad climber
fort garland, colo
Dec 11, 2013 - 05:04pm PT
I got enrolled,signed up..whatever you want to call it finally. What the hell was i going to do ? Pre-existing meant no more insurance, at any price.

The insurer basically said "we are done with you"

It's still expensive, but better than selling the house for cardio care
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 11, 2013 - 05:58pm PT
BTW, the story I linked above had it wrong. He gets the "close but no cigar for you" award. The reality, per the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, is different.
"By Nov. 30, the state (Oregon) had received 20,617 applications, but had only fully processed 44 of them, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Of the 15 states that are implementing their own marketplaces, the state with the next lowest enrollment was Hawaii, with 444"
So it was 44 as of Nov. 30, with over 400 new government hires who's only job is to get folks signed up, I'm sure there are more by now.




Regarding this quote. It is against the law to not have health coverage now.
" What the hell was i going to do ?"
Follow the law or break the law are the 2 options you have.
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
Dec 22, 2013 - 07:07pm PT
We went with the same provider, but with a much improved plan. It ended up costing about the same- about $600 per month for a fam of four, no preexisting conditions or anything. Huge pain in the azz for sure. In a generation or two we will join the rest of the civilized world and spend about half as much on better care. Until then....
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Dec 22, 2013 - 07:45pm PT
Well I managed to totally not pay ENOUGH attention and didn't get signed up...

no big deal, you got until March

For those who miss the deadline altogether, don't worry. You can still get coverage starting February 1 if you pick a plan by January 15 and pay by the end of January.
Open enrollment ends March 31. The uninsured must pick a plan by then
http://money.cnn.com/2013/12/22/news/economy/obamacare-deadlines/
ruppell

climber
Dec 22, 2013 - 08:08pm PT
What a sh#t show.

No you don't have to use any website.

No you don't have to upgrade your plan. The feds and insurance companies will do that for you. To make your old plan compliant with the new regs.

No most people with employer health coverage will see little to no premium increase.

Yes, people on their own health care plan will see an average increase of 50 to 300%.


Yes this is total and absolute bullsh#t.

So what's your best plan of action?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 22, 2013 - 08:14pm PT
No most people with employer health coverage will see little to no premium increase.

That's because by decree the Emperor has postponed changes in those policies till after next years elections.

You get screwed in 2015, just like those in the individual markets are now.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 22, 2013 - 08:17pm PT
It was supposed to go down by $2,500. That's what Obama promised.

[Click to View YouTube Video]

He sure was definite about that $2,500 amount.

I doubt he would have been elected if he had told the truth.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Dec 22, 2013 - 08:26pm PT
Someone please explain to me WHY, with today's instant access to information, people actually make the choice to remain uninformed, factually ignorant, when it is SO easy to get the truth?

please explain this to me......
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 22, 2013 - 08:28pm PT
"He said "by as much as $2500 a year", not "by $2500 a year". Repeatedly."


He also said "average". So, to average things out, if your premiums stayed the same, someone else's must've gone down by $5,000. That would make news, don't you think?

At this point, the guy on TV selling Slap-Chops has more credibility.

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 22, 2013 - 08:35pm PT
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 22, 2013 - 08:39pm PT
I understand, My Hyatt. No one likes to admit they were duped.
ruppell

climber
Dec 22, 2013 - 08:43pm PT
Posted before and needs to be posted again. So I'll do it. lol

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 22, 2013 - 09:07pm PT
They caught Locker!

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 22, 2013 - 09:13pm PT
Obviously, if I qualified for subsidies, the cost would have gone down quite a bit.


I do not qualify for subsidies. I expect to make less than 100k next year.

I will now pay $13,800 per year for health insurance with a $3000 individual and $6000 family deductible.

Generic drug coverage only. OK I can candle that as I do not have a unique illness.

I will also pay 30% of the total cost my medical care.

If I have a relatively simple surgery (think ACL), it could easily cost $100K.

So I am responsible to pay the annual premium of $13800 + $3000 deductible + 30% of total cost.

Sweet....nearly $50k or half of my income to get my knee fixed.


Sweet.



Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 22, 2013 - 09:28pm PT
The average out-of-pocket cost of ACL reconstruction is $2,339.43, according to a 2010 survey of ACL surgery patients.


Mr. Hyatt, it is 2013. Out of pocket is the problem. When I had my knee done about 10 years ago, I bet I paid 3-5k or so.

I am estimating the costs based on my NEW insurance plan.

My OLD plan will be cancelled on Dec 31.

Not my choice.

Good luck brother. I will be limping around despite paying nearly 14k in premiums.


Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 22, 2013 - 09:29pm PT
"The average out-of-pocket cost of ACL reconstruction is $2,339.43, according to a 2010 survey of ACL surgery patients."




That was before Obamacare.

That "average" sounds awful similar what Obama was promising would be your discount.

[Click to View YouTube Video]
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 22, 2013 - 09:40pm PT
Mr Hyatt writes:

"I personally know many families who work in my industry who were unable to afford insurance till now. And they're now paying the same % of their income for it as you are."




Are we to believe a smart guy like Obama actually really thought we could cover the previously un-insurable, and it would cost less money? I say he knew he was lying to us when he was lying.

I can understand a bunch of voters being duped into believing something so illogical. That's why I don't believe any of this would ever have been passed without the lies used to sell it.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 22, 2013 - 09:47pm PT
Health care would be better if we spent less money on it?

Maybe education would improve too, if we spent less money on that.

The infrastructure would be better if we didn't spend so much money on it, wouldn't it?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 22, 2013 - 09:50pm PT
I personally know many families who work in my industry who were unable to afford insurance till now. And they're now paying the same % of their income for it as you're complaining about

Therein lies the problem. 50% of ones annual income to perform a routine knee surgery is nor reasonable.

I am better off not carrying insurance, saving my money and trying to negotiate with the surgeon/ hospital.

Either way it is unaffordable( think personal bankruptcy).

Obamacare fixes nothing and makes it worse off for those that managed to get by under the old system.

Classic example of a law pushed through( for ego and political reasons) before it was ready for implementation.

Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Dec 22, 2013 - 09:51pm PT
Having poor people show up at the ER with no insurance is the least cost-efficient method of providing them with health care. Every other comparably developed democracy pays half as much for twice the coverage we do because of this basic, simple fact.

what?

are you serious?

are you telling me that when poor people actually have insurance that doctors and hospitals get paid and paid fast for their services?

Impossible, has to be, somehow, I don't know how,

Now you are getting into actual healthcare policy and away from hating Obama

quit doing that
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 22, 2013 - 09:57pm PT
Will the "poor" benefit from Obamacare?

Will they sign up for Obamacare? Not sure that they have at the rate that was forecasted.

If they do, will the middle class and the folks in their 20/30's be agreeable to subsidize them?

My guess is NO, but we will see.


Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 22, 2013 - 10:01pm PT
Three grand is about what it cost me to get a TPLO done on a Labrador Retriever.

That was about four years ago. Before Obamacare!

Why would anyone take the trouble to be MD when DVM makes the same money?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 22, 2013 - 10:16pm PT
Three grand to fix a torn ACL sounds reasonable to me.

How do you figure "Like I said - health insurance costs too much because health care costs too much", when ACL surgery costs about the same as a boob job?
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 22, 2013 - 10:24pm PT
Normal, routine ACL surgery averages around $3k

So, you are quoting me $3000 for a reconstruction of my knee? You seem to be an expert? You are quoting the "internet" because that is so accurate.

Last time around, the anesthesiologist bill was around 12 or 13K. The bill for the surgery center/facility charge was north of $60K. My insurance refused to cover it and tried to bill me direct. The surgeons fee was a different line item.


I apparently signed for it when I signed to 50 pages of documents when I checked in day of surgery.

Insurance finally cut the 60K check. Really...they sent me a check for 60K in MY NAME and I endorsed it to the insurance co.

If you are offering an ACL reconstruction for 3K, dude I will take you up on it as long as you are qualified. F*** anesthesia or the sterile surgery center , just give me a CREDIT CARD.

The problem with ACA is that it will prove to be unaffordable for those that make 0-$50k beyond the subsidy qualification level.

This is the heart of the tax paying community. Self employment no longer makes sense. I guess, I need to find a corporate job again.....of course Obamacare will eventually hit the employer market, or will it?











Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Dec 22, 2013 - 10:33pm PT
Enrollments through the exchanges are rapidly increasing, now over three million have insurance

pisses you off to see your fellow Americans getting healthcare, eh sparky?




but the important thing is that Rand Paul will be the Republican nominee for President in 2016

because you guys are dumb enough to believe that McCain and Romney lost to the black guy because they were not "conservative enough"

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 22, 2013 - 11:20pm PT
I haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about. $12k for anesthesia for knee surgery? You really expect anyone to believe that? Where are you having this done - Beverly Hills? In a room paneled with gold leaf?

I could care less what a non sensical blow hard like yourself thinks, it is reality. Front range of Colorado...cheaper than mountain town home.


Stay healthy bro...if not you will be in for a big surprise.

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 23, 2013 - 12:07am PT
Complains about paying more for health care for no discernible reason, and is subsequently taken advantage of by providers that don't charge competitive rates...then blames it on...who else...Obama

Never once blamed it on Obama. Blame it on a flawed ACA.

Good luck hedge....I mean Hyatt.

Hyatts first ST post on Dec 12....hmmmm

Multiple post on threads that Hedgy was active on. JH.....Nice...

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 23, 2013 - 12:09am PT
"Good luck hedge....I mean Hyatt."



Good eye.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 23, 2013 - 12:17am PT
Crickets...chirp chirp
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 23, 2013 - 12:39am PT
Well it is a law that is growing in unpopularity.

I see it self destructing at the detriment of the American populace....for the benefit of what?

Maybe certain politicians egos got a big bump there for awhile.

Honeymoon is over....unfortunately. Improved healthcare is a noble goal.

Screwing the American people while improving the profitability of health care giants and special interests should get our leaders some sort of award?

Don't you think so Hedge?



madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Dec 23, 2013 - 02:02am PT
We're pretty close - a few more election cycles, and they're gone.

Definitely Hedge. He's floated this same line, cast the exact same way, in virtually every polithread. Won't be long now before he stops sounding even remotely "nice" and kicks back into his typical foul-mouthed, abusive tirades. The phrase "fvcking idiot" is soon to appear.

Fixing things always always, always...always proves more expensive than allowing them to continue to be dysfunctional. Adults, as a rule, accept this, and fix them.

Not true, and obviously not true. I'll cite just one single example, and in my field there are countless.

If my company allows a computer system to remain dysfunctional, it costs the customer more (and us FAR more) in the short to medium term; and it costs a LOT more to lose a customer (the medium to long-term result) over that dysfunction than to solve the problem! The more severe the dysfunction (and Hedge claims that the pre-Obumblecare health care system was very, very severely dysfunctional), the more the dysfunction/fixing cost disparity increases (with continued dysfunction costing more).

I'm sure there are countless examples in industry (autos, for example) and other IT fields. Just see how much fixing the cause of the oil pressure light coming on (adding oil to correct its level) compares to the cost of ignoring that light.

So, this thread can continue to argue the long-term merits of Obumblecare (and, I'm sure, will), and I'm not speaking to that (at present, fruitless) debate. Time will tell the whole truth on that front.

I'm just calling the lie on Hedge's claim about the costs of fixing versus continued dysfunction. "Always, always... always" is yet another obviously false Hedge claim.

At least now he's FINALLY starting to admit that the significantly increased costs are real. Couldn't get that out of him a couple of months ago! Of course, now he's acting like this was just to be expected all along. It wasn't, and there is already significant backlash. There will be more.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Dec 23, 2013 - 02:21pm PT
Hahahahaha - you're a lying, pathetic piece of sh#t.

Hahahahaha -- Just one post later, and the truth is revealed. Oh, well, the next wave of banning is on the horizon.

It's whack-a-mole....
guyman

Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
Dec 23, 2013 - 03:26pm PT
once we get rid of the repub party


Hyatt... please don't hold your breath.

Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Dec 23, 2013 - 09:32pm PT
Despite my possibly deserved reputation this is a serious question. It seems
like for yonks we've been told that there are 40 million uninsured Americans.
If so then why have only 1 million signed up for the ACA? The other 39 million
prefer being uninsured?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Dec 23, 2013 - 10:01pm PT
Reilly, it's actually more goofy than even the sign-up numbers (whatever their validity might be) indicate. A number of credible articles (including from otherwise left-leaning sources, such as the NY Times and this one I'm citing from the Washington Post) report that the vast majority of "sign-ups" are really just applying for the expanded Medicaid programs:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/31/in-first-month-the-vast-majority-of-obamacare-sign-ups-are-in-medicaid/

What's worse is that many states did not buy into the federal "urging" to expand Medicaid, which means that many of the "sign-ups" have not actually ended up with any coverage out of the process, because they have simply fallen into the Medicaid gap.

So, the figures touted by the Obumble administration of "successful sign-ups" are really completely disingenuous, as this administration surely knows what is now widely reported: Most of the people using the sign-up process are not actually ending up with new Obumblecare insurance.

It is now becoming clearer by the day that Obumblecare is not solving anything for tens of millions of the "poor" previously uninsured; it is only screwing over millions of the middle class that were previously satisfied with both their coverage and the cost of it. There will be backlash.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Dec 23, 2013 - 10:29pm PT
That's what happens when you have a good idea and everybody else is opposed to it, but you compromise.

I'm honestly curious what you mean by this statement.

1) Obumblecare was passed by a Democrat majority; not a single Repub voted for it. So, there was no cross-aisle "compromise."

2) Who can the "everyone else" be that were "opposed to it"? See point (1) above.

3) The Repubs caught a lot of hell for the government shutdown; yet the irony is that the "compromise" they ultimate sought, namely to extend deadlines and put off the mandates for a year, are now the exact "compromises" that many Democrats are calling for, despite the fact that they vehemently opposed these "compromises" during the shutdown, and despite the fact that the Obumblator in Chief flatly stated that he would not "compromise" in the slightest, and despite the fact that he himself is now (by fiat) enacting these "compromises" in the face of public (rather than Republican) pressure.

Far be it from me to defend the Rebumblicans! I'm just baffled about what your statement can even mean. There have been no "compromises" throughout this process over a three year period, and I cannot imagine who the "everybody else" can be. The Obumblator and his Dem cronies got EXACTLY what they wanted because they constituted the MAJORITY of the government.

Notice I'm not even debating the claim that this was "good idea."
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 23, 2013 - 11:02pm PT
It's true.

What we see now is The Democrat Way. Pure and un-filtered.

Do you think The Republican Way would be any better?

Perhaps this isn't a job for The Government.

Did you ever consider that? That not every perceived problem has a political solution?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 23, 2013 - 11:06pm PT
Hi jghedge!

Welcome back.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 23, 2013 - 11:14pm PT
Just because other countries can do it doesn't mean it can be done here.

The Democrats are your best hope for government-managed healthcare, and when left to their own devices, they gave us Obamacare.

Do you think the Republicans could do better? Or maybe a mix of the two? I certainly don't.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 23, 2013 - 11:34pm PT
Moosedrool writes:

"Seriously, look into the other countries' health care programs."

Mr Kos writes:

"If by "this" you mean healthcare, it's a job that government does well in most of the developed world."


Just because something can be done in other countries, it doesn't mean we can do it here. Especially if the government is involved.

We used to be the country that could do things other countries couldn't. Like man-on-the-moon, fight the Nazis and Imperial Japanese simultaneously ( and win ), etc.

But not anymore. We can't even collect our own trash on the Space Station without Russia doing most of the work.

The Democrats, when given the chance to pass whatever they wanted, gave us Obamacare. Do you think the Republicans would do better?

That's all we got: Democrats and Republicans - as far as the government goes. Healthcare, apparently, is something we don't want either of them messing with.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Dec 23, 2013 - 11:45pm PT
Thank you for the explanation, moosedrool. I think I understand your point now. Appreciated!
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 23, 2013 - 11:45pm PT
Obamacare passed both houses with all democrat votes. Not one Republican had to be compromised with to pass it.

The Democrats could have enacted anything, and they gave us Obamacare!
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 23, 2013 - 11:49pm PT
Mr Kos writes:

"Gee Chaz, that's awfully defeatist."




Defeatist, my ass!

Looking to the government to fix your world seems to be more of a defeatist move to me. The government is the always the support of last resort. Think Food Stamps, Welfare, Housing Projects, Public Defender, Public Toilet, etc.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 23, 2013 - 11:51pm PT
Moosedrool writes:

"I am bit foggy on the history, but wasn't it a Democrat that got us to the moon?"




You mean Nixon?

Nixon was President during all of our moon landings.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Dec 24, 2013 - 12:47am PT
Debating wingnut fools is like shooting fish in a barrel

Hedgy promoting the use of firearms....WTF dood

Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 25, 2013 - 12:12pm PT
Can you name one other state that bans burning a Yule Log on Christmas?

Are you sure you're a doctor?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Dec 25, 2013 - 12:28pm PT
Here you go, F. Read up.

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?id=8358883

"First-time violators will receive a $100 fine or have the option of reading about and then being tested on the health hazards of wood smoke. Second-time offenders will now receive a $500 ticket, up from $400 last year."

The state where you can't burn a goddamn Yule Log on Christmas. California.

Are sure you're a doctor?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Dec 25, 2013 - 12:46pm PT
Chaz never claimed to be a geography major even though he has that bitchin kite...
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Dec 29, 2013 - 12:10pm PT
Personally, I find bold type, caps, exclamation points and citations from your Facebook page extremely compelling. You could use them to great effect on the Climate whacko page.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Dec 29, 2013 - 12:12pm PT
Sketch...Maybe that low-income family of four should have considered not having 4 kids..? Then they wouldn't be getting gouged by the insurance companies...?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Dec 29, 2013 - 03:23pm PT
The Republicans had a plan...? Yuk , yuk...
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 29, 2013 - 07:38pm PT
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Dec 29, 2013 - 08:07pm PT
http://www.upworthy.com/his-first-4-sentences-are-interesting-the-5th-blew-my-mind-and-made-me-a-little-sick-2?c=ufb3

Run down of the financial situation we are in concerning health care. Well spoken and entertaining
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Dec 29, 2013 - 08:32pm PT
Baba...that was excellent...too bad moronic americans won't see that...
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 2, 2014 - 09:00pm PT
Oregon has the web site up. I browsed it and had the .gov elite not allowed an extension of a year for our old plan, our costs would have gone from $351.00 a month to $666.00 a month with worse coverage. So not only are we already paying more for health care than many other countries per Karl Babas link, but the price you already have to pay is now going even further up due to government mandate. Hmmm.


Not looking forward to next year.

karl, thanks for the link.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jan 2, 2014 - 09:42pm PT
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jan 2, 2014 - 09:53pm PT
The Republicans had a plan...? Yuk , yuk...

I've never understood the "force" of the argument underlying lines like this. Is it supposed to be something along these lines???

"The Republicans had plenty of years to do something about the health care problem and didn't. Therefore it's a great thing that the Democrats finally got a window of time in which they had complete power and so were able to foist off on Americans this increasingly-obvious cluster-coitus of a 'plan' that NOBODY knew 'what was in it' until it was, well, FOISTED off on Americans."

Something like: "It's FAR better to do something, anything, even if it's terrible and worse, than to just keep thinking about 'the problem' (whatever that was) until we can come to a consensus about a genuine solution."

Could it be, just possibly, that the supposedly horrendous lack of health insurance "suffered" by (supposedly) "so many Americans" reflected a matter of their INDIVIDUAL spending priorities (and lifestyle CHOICES) rather than some "vast problem" that WE the People just had to rush in to "correct?"

Perhaps the Republicans did nothing, just perhaps, because they weren't agreed in principle with the notion that the best course of action is always (or even usually) for government to go rushing in.

Perhaps, just perhaps, there should be been even LESS of a rush to "pass this so that we can see what's in it." I mean, even with three years of lead time, the most powerful administration in human history clearly needed more time. (Of course, when pushed to provide the nation with even a year's more lead time, this administration "would not negotiate," preferring instead to do essentially the same things by presidential fiat, which was the whole point to the grand game all along.)

Oh, and has the net effect of Obumblecare yet been demonstrated (or even projected) to have the effect of regulating or reining-in insurance company profits?

But, right... the republicans had no plan. Therefore, clearly, Obumblecare was the way to go.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jan 2, 2014 - 09:56pm PT
Yeah, well, there are things that SHOULD be done in an office and things that should NOT be done by a government.

Edit: Oh, and you clearly missed my point entirely. No surprise, since you're clearly one that will be defending Obumblecare even when EVERY (thinking) person (including some Democrats) is backpedaling from it. Whatever WAS "the answer," Obumblecare was NOT it.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jan 2, 2014 - 10:04pm PT
Well boss, you see I haven't accomplished anything in decades, because, well, uh, we haven't reached a consensus about a genuine solution yet...

Well, boss, you see... we just spent the company into oblivion chasing a non-problem that half of our customers didn't even see as a problem and the other half aren't really our customers, and we "accomplished" that by dreaming up a hair-brained scheme that we "sold" to our real customers by outright lying to them, and that hair-brained scheme turns out to not even address the "real problem" in the first place because, actually, we didn't really understand ANY of this. I'm getting a big bonus for all this, right?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jan 2, 2014 - 10:24pm PT
madbolter...1...Sorry for being cynical but If i remember correctly , one of the republicans plans was a health care savings plan that would allow poverty level Americans to establish a savings account that would go towards paying their medical needs....Poverty level americans don't have bank accounts .... more proof that republican politicians are out of touch with mainstream America...what was the other Republican plan...? Give tax breaks to the poor so they can afford health care...? Neither one of those plans would do sh#t for the poor or lower middle class...What's next...? Just say no to drugs...?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jan 2, 2014 - 11:15pm PT
Poverty level americans don't have bank accounts .... more proof that republican politicians are out of touch with mainstream America...what was the other Republican plan...? Give tax breaks to the poor so they can afford health care...?

I totally agree that Republicans are totally out of touch with mainstream America. So are the Democrats. The problem is in figuring out what "mainstream" is supposed to look (and act) like.

However, until somebody can come up with an answer to the following (based upon a quote from your points above), it's really hard for me to be overly sympathetic (and, remember, I myself grew up in poverty):

"Give tax breaks and free health care to the poor so they can afford to breed more and more and more?"

Or how about:

"Give free health care to the illegal immigrants so they are motivated to come here and can also afford to breed more and more and more?"

At some point the middle class is "humane-ed out" with this sort of thing. It's at that point.

So, the solution is really to understand the underlying nature of poverty and address THAT, rather than bumbling (literally: "we have no idea what this is going to do, so let's try it") approaches to SYMPTOMS that cause as many or more problems than they cure. It's like the man rummaging around in the medicine cabinet who calls out to his wife, "Dear, do you want the antacid that has the heart attack risk or the stroke risk?"

We do NOT yet understand a very, very complicated set of causal relations, so we bumble around "curing" symptoms while slowly killing the patient. And, honestly, the patient isn't going to take much more experimenting!

Now, I'll be the first to say that we can START getting costs under control as a nation BY ratcheting back our military a LOT! But I'm not in favor of then taking those hundreds of billions and just squandering them on yet more bumbling social programs that can't cure the patient!

And at SOME point the social-program advocates ARE going to have to come up with a balanced and accurate approach to figuring the results of individual choices into their "humane" equations. NOT every "poor" person is a person worthy of nationally-mandated help. And we CAN come up with metrics to draw some lines. But a no-lines social program is a no-brains social program; and I'll NEVER be on board with any such thing.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jan 2, 2014 - 11:24pm PT
Madbolter...My quotes are copyrighted...You'll be hearing from my legal counsel....
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jan 2, 2014 - 11:29pm PT
LOL....

Okay, they can come after me. They'll find nothing much of value to get. "I gave at the office."
Degaine

climber
Jan 4, 2014 - 05:28am PT
Karl wrote:
http://www.upworthy.com/his-first-4-sentences-are-interesting-the-5th-blew-my-mind-and-made-me-a-little-sick-2?c=ufb3

Run down of the financial situation we are in concerning health care. Well spoken and entertaining


Thanks for the link, Karl. A pretty decent summary of the situation.

The only mistake I would comment on is using % of GDP as an indicator. A far better indicator is cost per person. The US spends $8,000 per person per year, double that of Germany and France, and almost triple the spending per person in Japan. All of those countries have universal healthcare systems and far better outcomes overall than the US.

The Commonwealth study is worth reading as well and provides a good overview of the differences. An MRI in the US is almost 4 times the cost of one in France, and a CT scan is 3 times the cost of one in France. Americans are getting bilked by the healthcare system!
Degaine

climber
Jan 4, 2014 - 05:40am PT
madbolter1 wrote:
And at SOME point the social-program advocates ARE going to have to come up with a balanced and accurate approach to figuring the results of individual choices into their "humane" equations.

At some point you're just going to have to put your emotions away and realize that a universal healthare system not only makes the most economic sense but will provide much better outcomes.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Jan 6, 2014 - 12:57am PT
Here's another good one like the one I posted above.

http://www.upworthy.com/i-never-knew-american-health-care-was-a-lottery-till-i-saw-what-this-guy-had-to-say

PEace

Karl
slabbo

Trad climber
fort garland, colo
Jan 6, 2014 - 09:44am PT
Me too Locker !! i got some scrips the other day and didn't have to mortgage the house to do it....sucks having multiple "pre existing"

The premium is still pretty hefty, but at least it's useful
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jan 7, 2014 - 08:38pm PT

Yer, better off working as the greeter for Wallmart.


http://washingtonexaminer.com/surprise-walmart-health-plan-cheaper-offers-more-coverage-than-obamacare/article/2541670
zBrown

Ice climber
Brujo de La Playa
Jan 7, 2014 - 10:35pm PT
good one Kos. Best I've seen in months.

Anyway, back on the topic of health care. I was recently informed by Medicare that my tetanus innoculation was not covered by Medicare.

Admittedly, the situation is more complex, since the injection also was meant to prevent two other maladies.

I'll keep all y'all posted.

Mind you, I'm not complaining. Just wondering at the nature of the mental process the rule writers in the gov't go through.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jan 7, 2014 - 10:39pm PT
Tea G Tea is on a first name basis with his Wal Mart greeter...Cut him slack...
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jan 13, 2014 - 11:45pm PT
Associated Press: “Health care enrollment spikes in Utah in December”

Detroit Free Press: “Health insurance enrollment takes off in Michigan, nation for coverage under ACA”

Detroit News: “Feds: Michigan experiences 11-fold increase in health care sign-ups”

MLive: “Obamacare signups in Michigan spike in December; see demographic breakdown”

Sun-Sentinel: “Obamacare enrollment gains traction in Florida”

Stevens Point Journal: “Obamacare enrollment soars in Wisconsin”

Palm Beach Post: “Florida’s Obamacare enrollment surges, as does the nation's”

Albuquerque Business First: “New Mexico’s Healthcare.gov enrollment soars”

Bellingham Herald: “Wash. one of top states in health care enrollment”

WSFA: “More Alabamians signing up for health insurance”

Capital New York: “Strong Obamacare numbers from NY exchange director”

Gannett: “More Hoosiers joined health exchange in December”

Des Moines Register: “7,500 Iowans have signed up for private insurance on healthcare.gov, compared to 757 a month ago”

The Gazette: “Colorado health insurance enrollments continue at steady pace”

WRAL: “North Carolina fifth nationally in enrollment under health law”

Boise State Public Radio: “Idaho’s Health Insurance Exchange Enrollment Increases 1,000 Percent”

WLTX: “Health Insurance Enrollment Spikes in South Carolina”

Billings Gazette: “Montana sign-ups for Obamacare policies surge in December”







Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jan 15, 2014 - 05:01pm PT
christ

it is just relentless stupidity

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Jan 15, 2014 - 05:08pm PT
Most of the early wave of health insurance enrollees are older than 45, records show

Enrollment skewing "older"....uuuhhooohh. Maybe we can borrow more from China to fund this disaster.


Time to enlist Hollywood types to convince the young and generally healthy to subsidize you geezers.

apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Jan 15, 2014 - 05:11pm PT
"christ

it is just relentless stupidity"


(Worth repeating)
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Jan 15, 2014 - 05:29pm PT
Yep, ACA is stupidity at its finest.
dirtbag

climber
Jan 15, 2014 - 06:02pm PT
What's your brilliant solution?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jan 31, 2014 - 04:15pm PT
Coming soon to your job.

[Click to View YouTube Video]
Ksolem

Trad climber
Monrovia, California
Jan 31, 2014 - 04:19pm PT
This is good.

John Stewart grills Nancy Pelosi. I'll wager that she doesn't go back on that show anytime soon. For her that was 8 minutes of hell

Gotta love the way he just laughs derisively at some of her answers, and the audience is right there with him.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jan 31, 2014 - 10:47pm PT
[Click to View YouTube Video]
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jan 31, 2014 - 10:54pm PT
Wow. When you lose Jon Stewart, you've lost North Korea.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jan 31, 2014 - 11:13pm PT
Relentless stupidity is another term for dementia...
froodish

Social climber
Portland, Oregon
Feb 1, 2014 - 12:01am PT
Good piece by Clay Shirky about a phenomenon that's not unique to government...

Healthcare.gov and the Gulf Between Planning and Reality

...The idea that “failure is not an option” is a fantasy version of how non-engineers should motivate engineers. That sentiment was invented by a screenwriter, riffing on an after-the-fact observation about Apollo 13; no one said it at the time. (If you ever say it, wash your mouth out with soap. If anyone ever says it to you, run.) Even NASA’s vaunted moonshot, so often referred to as the best of government innovation, tested with dozens of unmanned missions first, several of which failed outright.

Failure is always an option. Engineers work as hard as they do because they understand the risk of failure. And for anything it might have meant in its screenplay version, here that sentiment means the opposite; the unnamed executives were saying “Addressing the possibility of failure is not an option.”...

http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2013/11/healthcare-gov-and-the-gulf-between-planning-and-reality/
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Feb 1, 2014 - 12:22am PT
There's never enough chap stick to go around when it comes down to our politicians paying lip-service to the constituents or their corporate sponsors...
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Feb 1, 2014 - 02:48am PT
.... then inserts the policy amendments that ensure the goal of the legislation isnt possible

then they vote for it

and scream it up saying "told you it wouldnt work!"

This summary of "events" is shockingly revisionist.

If you care to even TRY to sustain the ridiculous hand-waving and frothing of your post, then please provide a DETAILED explanation of....

1) "Inserts the policy ammendments...." WHAT Republican inserted ANY policy amendments? EXACTLY what amendments were these? Explain!

2) "Ensure the goal of the legislation isn't possible...." EXACTLY how did any Republican ensure this? EXACTLY what amendment(s) ensured this? Explain!

3) "Then they vote for it...." Uhhh... WHAT? Not one Republican voted for Obumblecare, so WHAT in the world are you talking about here??? EXPLAIN!!!

4) "Scream up saying 'told you it wouldn't work!'" And EXACTLY how are the Republicans in ANY way responsible for Obumblecare's problems? EXACTLY what causal chain (in your fantasy-land version of "history") makes the Republicans in the SLIGHTEST bit responsible for any of this? EXPLAIN!!!!!!!

You cannot up-thread complain that the Republicans wanted NOTHING to do with this utter botch of a "reform," and you cannot accuse them of "doing nothing," and then NOW (when Obumblecare is becoming clearly revealed as the botch that it really is) claim that the Republicans are somehow RESPONSIBLE for the (now increasingly obvious) failings of the legislation that they had NOTHING to do with passing.

You DON'T get to have it both ways!

I'm NO Republican! But I find the revisionism that Obumblecare supporters now engage in to be the very "evil" you decried in YOUR post! For better or worse, the Democrats enjoy 100% of the responsibility for Obumblecare. THEY passed it during a window in time in which they could STEAMROLLER over all Republican objection, and they did so with exactly ZERO Republican support!

If Obumblecare had quickly proved to be fabulous, then people like you would be crowing crap like, "See! The Democrats got your back, and the Republicans are USELESS and unable to accomplish sweepingly wonderful reforms like this! WE did this 'for you' over all of their objections!"

But instead, Obumblecare is more and more being revealed as SUCH a botch that even MANY Democrats are now running scared of its electoral implications! And now even people like you are backpedaling and trying to make the REPUBLICANS out to be complicit in its (vast) failings.

Pathetic!

If you are (FINALLY) admitting what a sick botch Obumblecare really is, that's great! THAT portion of reality is (FINALLY) sinking it for you. But you DON'T get to now blame ANYBODY else for its failings than your vaunted Obumblator in Chief and his Bumblecrat cronies and henchmen.

NO revisionism. You get to OWN this botch ALL on your own, with NO Republican involvement in it. You got EXACTLY what you cried out for and wanted: A law that got passed without anybody knowing what was in it, passed "so that we can find out what's in it," in arguably the most flagrantly irresponsible legislative act in human history, and now being "administrated" in the most outrageously irresponsible fashion; and you've got not even ONE Republican on the hook with the entire mess! So you don't get to blame THEM for it now.

OWN it! Don't pass the buck; this is YOUR steaming pile, and the FACT that YOUR party couldn't be bothered to think through the implications of thousands of pages of this morass before unilaterally passing it is on YOU, not on any Republican.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Feb 1, 2014 - 10:33pm PT
Classic non-answer.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Feb 1, 2014 - 10:36pm PT
But if Jon Stewart criticizes Christie, he should be ignored as an useless lib.

(Didn't Kos just say that?)
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 5, 2014 - 12:24pm PT
Do any of you signed up Californians (and you all need to be signed up or have insurance if you do not have it yet, get on it) have experience using your healthcare? This report suggest that it looks like it may be smoke and mirrors.

"February 5, 2014
Can't keep you doctor under Obamacare? Try simply finding a doctor in CA
Rick Moran

Congratulations! You have successfully signed up for a truly excellent plan on the Covered California website!

It's a really, really great plan. Really. Now, good look finding a doctor who will treat you.

Los Angeles Times:

"After overcoming website glitches and long waits to get Obamacare, some patients are now running into frustrating new roadblocks at the doctor's office. A month into the most sweeping changes to healthcare in half a century, people are having trouble finding doctors at all, getting faulty information on which ones are covered and receiving little help from insurers swamped by new business.

Experts have warned for months that the logjam was inevitable. But the extent of the problems is taking by surprise many patients - and even doctors - as frustrations mount. Aliso Viejo resident Danielle Nelson said Anthem Blue Cross promised half a dozen times that her oncologists would be covered under her new policy. She was diagnosed last year with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and discovered a suspicious lump near her jaw in early January. But when she went to her oncologist's office, she promptly encountered a bright orange sign saying that Covered California plans are not accepted.

"I'm a complete fan of the Affordable Care Act, but now I can't sleep at night," Nelson said. "I can't imagine this is how President Obama wanted it to happen."

To hold down premiums under the healthcare law, major insurers have sharply cut the number of doctors and hospitals available to patients in the state's new health insurance market. Now those limited options are becoming clearer, and California officials say they are receiving more consumer complaints about access to medical providers. State lawmakers are also moving swiftly to ease some of the problems that have arisen.

"It's a little early for anyone to know how widespread and deep this problem is," said California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones. "There are a lot of economic incentives for health insurers to narrow their networks, but if they go too far, people won't have access to care. Network adequacy will be a big issue in 2014.""

One patient got coverage after years of being denied due to a pre-existing condition. Unfortunately, when she needed a specialist, she couldn't find one that would take Obamacare plans:

She jumped at the chance in early January to visit a primary-care doctor for long-running numbness in her arm and shoulder as a result of bone spurs on her spine. The doctor referred her to a specialist, and problems ensued. At least four doctors wouldn't accept her health plan - even though the state exchange website and her insurer, Health Net Inc., list them as part of her HMO network.

"It's a phantom network," Berumen said.

We got wind of this problem early on when many California doctors complained that they were listed on the exchanges but weren't accepting patients covered under Obamacare. No one knows how their names were added to the exchanges but it must have been news to them when patients began calling and were told they were out of luck.

It's probably only a matter of time before states start passing laws that all doctors will have to treat any patient with any insurance plan that asks. This will be especially true for new Medicaid patients who are having problems finding a doctor to treat them in the big cities. They are still flocking to emergency rooms and that won't change anytime soon.

The more the people - including doctors - resist, the more coercive becomes the state."
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Feb 6, 2014 - 08:22pm PT
Democrat apologists are now trying to back out of responsibility for this soup sandwich. Sorry apologists, you own it all.
Both parties suck and DC is the corrupt Imperial capital.

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." - Mencken
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Feb 13, 2014 - 02:28pm PT
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/371043/colorado-health-exchange-director-indicted-fraud-theft-jillian-kay-melchior
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 13, 2014 - 03:23pm PT


Interest TGT, but not really germane to the discourse. Did any of you California based Obamacare supporters sign up AND utilize the system yet?






TGT;s link text copy/pasted

" Colorado Health-Exchange Director Indicted for Fraud, Theft
By Jillian Kay Melchior


The director of Colorado’s health exchange has been placed on administrative leave after the state discovered she had been indicted for stealing from a non-profit, the Denver Post reports:

[Christa Ann] McClure, 51, pleaded not guilty Feb. 6 in federal District Court in Montana to eight counts of theft and fraud from a nonprofit housing agency in Billings.

She was indicted Jan. 16 and notified her current Denver employer, the state-sponsored health exchange, on Monday, a few days after the story broke in Montana media, Connect for Health spokesman Ben Davis said in a telephone interview.

Connect for Health performed a criminal background check and checked references before hiring McClure in March, Davis said.

“She was completely clean,” he said. Her position as executive director of Housing Montana of Billings, he said, made her well-qualified for her post as Connect for Health’s director of partner engagement — she was liaison with state and federal partners, such as Medicaid officials. The job pays $130,000 a year.

… McClure, who has not been convicted of any charges, should have informed Connect for Health much earlier of the accusations she was facing, Davis said.

McClure was released pending trial, now scheduled for June. Each of the counts in the indictment against her carry potential penalties of five, 10 or 20 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.

The 12-page indictment alleges that, while serving as executive director of the federally funded Housing Montana, McClure, between 2008 and 2010, paid herself “significant sums” for consulting services, although she was already on the payroll as a full-time employee.

She also made payments to her family and used federal money for personal travel, to pay family bills and to buy consulting services, the indictment alleges.

She also is accused of charging homeowners for a $750 warranty that did not exist, converting a laptop for personal use, inflating the hours she was to be compensated and writing herself a $21,000 check to which she was not entitled.

The indictment did not specify the total amount she allegedly embezzled."

couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 13, 2014 - 03:24pm PT
opps, I take that back TGT. I catch that woman (in our state they hired them without background checks, 400 new hires) now has access to your social security, address, drivers license and all other info. Or she did until they caught her. One more reason to want to keep the .gov out of your life.

Jesus.

Sorry, I get your point it just took a moment to sink in.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Feb 14, 2014 - 09:03pm PT
dirtbag

climber
Feb 20, 2014 - 09:18pm PT
You get to OWN this botch ALL on your own, with NO Republican involvement in it.


Ok, cool. It will be a smashing success.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Feb 20, 2014 - 09:27pm PT
Ok, cool. It will be a smashing success.

it already is

ten million of our fellow Americans are now benefiting from the ACA

including our own Locker, just ask him

HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 20, 2014 - 09:34pm PT
Crag ranted
I'm NO Republican! But I find the revisionism that Obumblecare supporters now engage in to be the very "evil" you decried in YOUR post! For better or worse, the Democrats enjoy 100% of the responsibility for Obumblecare. THEY passed it during a window in time in which they could STEAMROLLER over all Republican objection, and they did so with exactly ZERO Republican support!

You can't get support from people who have only opposition on their agenda. Republicans didn't object to healthcare reform they objected to the existence of Obama.

If Obumblecare had quickly proved to be fabulous, then people like you would be crowing crap like, "See! The Democrats got your back, and the Republicans are USELESS and unable to accomplish sweepingly wonderful reforms like this! WE did this 'for you' over all of their objections!"

The fast acting portions of the law ARE fabulous. In fact Americans believe so overwhelmingly. We like having their kids on their policies until they are 26. We like that people who were locked out of the market now could get in. The rest of the law was slow by design because nobody expected an overhaul to go quickly plus Democrats were scared that if it was too quick they would lose support of the healthcare industry itself.

Maybe you don't get politics, but Dems in safe districts have happily touted the passing of the ACA from the beginning. Republicans have done a much better job selling the "Obamacare is terrible" line and it's a lot harder to explain the details of an incredibly complicated bill that changes an almost incomprehensibly complicated healthcare finance system than it is to do what you're doing right now. Republicans (and some Democrats) were just as mad about Medicaid when it was passed in the 60's but once it was passed people got on board and figured out how to make it work. That's not been the case with the ACA.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Feb 20, 2014 - 09:53pm PT
"Did any of you California based Obamacare supporters sign up AND utilize the system yet?"

Yep...and the Covered California system works a helluva lot better than trying to get ahold of my current insurance provider.

I've sat on hold for between 1-1.5 hours waiting for a representative to answer....half the time the wrong dept. picks it up (necessitating another nasty wait time), or you get disconnected.

By comparison, I've been able to log into the Covered California website pretty easily, and shop around without difficulty...got a representative on the phone within 15 minutes.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Feb 20, 2014 - 09:58pm PT
How was it talking to a felon?

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/california/Covered-California-Hired-Convicted-Felons-to-Enroll-Californians-243087221.html
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 20, 2014 - 10:44pm PT
TGT whined
How was it talking to a felon?

I'm willing to bet you talk to felons on most days and don't even know it. What do you expect felons to do when they finish their sentences, exactly? Those guys got real jobs. Good for them.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Feb 20, 2014 - 10:52pm PT
I don't have to talk much with politicians.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Feb 20, 2014 - 11:58pm PT
Problem is the numbers are not materializing. Proponents of this mess can try to fudge the numbers ( hell they do what they want/ lie when it supports their cause) but this thing is going to implode unless the young and healthy decide to pay big $$ for their health care policy.





Though officials have confidently claimed enrollment in ObamaCare is surging, Vice President Biden suddenly suggested during a stop in Minneapolis the totals might be lower than projected.

"Initially, we talked about by the end of this period having seven million people lined up," he told a group in a coffee shop on Wednesday. "We may not get to seven but we're gonna get to five or six, and that's a hell of a start with people."

That’s quite a difference from the confident predictions last fall, just before the rollout, from Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

"I think success looks like at least 7 million people having signed up by the end of March 2014," she told NBC last September.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office stuck with that estimate for the exchanges until just recently, when it lowered its projection from 7 million to 6 million. But the vice president is the first to mention a number as low as 5 million, suggesting doubts in the administration.

In its report on signups through the end of January, the administration claimed 9.6 million total had gotten health insurance -- 3.3 million in the federal and state exchanges, and another 6.3 million in Medicaid, the health care program for low-income Americans.

But a nonpartisan health care firm says the number of new signups in Medicaid from ObamaCare is much lower than 6.3 million.

"It's about 1.3 to 1.8 million people who are new to the program The rest are part of the regular churn that are in and out," Matthew Eyeles, of the firm Avalere Health, said.

And those in the regular churn -- those who come and go all the time – wouldn’t count as part of ObamaCare because they were already eligible before the health care law.

For those new to Medicaid under the expansion encouraged by ObamaCare, the administration pays 100 percent of the cost for the first three years. But it pays no additional funds for those already eligible, which is often one of the top three items in state budgets:

"The state pays that bill," said former CBO Director Doug Holtz-Eakin. "If it's the expansion, the federal government pays the bill. So it matters a lot whether it's newly eligible or existing eligible who are signing up."

Meanwhile, the vice president might have also irritated other officials by giving the wrong date for the end of enrollment.

"There's a drop-dead date for the first round -- in the beginning of March," he told the coffee-shop gathering.

Actually, open enrollment goes to the end of March, not the beginning.

If the vice president is right on the numbers, though, and only 5 million sign up in private exchanges -- and fewer than 2 million newly eligible enrollees enter Medicaid – then the administration would be hard-pressed to hit half the original projection of 16 million total by next month.


Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Feb 21, 2014 - 12:05am PT
LOL

Probably better to try to do it right the first time. Oh yeah...this is the government.

Inefficiency, cronyism, deceit and straight out lies are OK for now.



Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Feb 21, 2014 - 12:11am PT
Why bother doing it right the first time....just wait until after the next election cycle before admitting that ACA is not sustainable.

couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 21, 2014 - 12:20am PT





That's awesome Apogee, what was your health care experience? ie, hospital visit, office check up, etc? As in - did you actually use the insurance via dr visit or get some tests. Also, what supplier did you utilize? There's some news ones I've never heard of.

From our view so far at work, we all have kaiser and have been damned happy, so naturally, when we find out that the health care is too good to provide our employees under obamacare and it's going to end, and that we will be paying more and getting much much less, it's pretty upsetting.

BTW, my opinion - Blue Cross/Shield sucks. Always has.


Apogee said:
"Yep...and the Covered California system works a helluva lot better than trying to get ahold of my current insurance provider.

I've sat on hold for between 1-1.5 hours waiting for a representative to answer....half the time the wrong dept. picks it up (necessitating another nasty wait time), or you get disconnected.

By comparison, I've been able to log into the Covered California website pretty easily, and shop around without difficulty...got a representative on the phone within 15 minutes."
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Feb 21, 2014 - 12:27am PT
Is it sustainable Kos?

One of your buddies does not thinks so.

George Soros Bet $1.3 Billion The Stock Market Will Fall

George Soros, the billionaire hedge-fund manager who has broken the British pound and some Republican hearts, is betting that the U.S. stock market could break, too.

Soros Fund Management had $1.3 billion wagered at the end of 2013 that the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index would fall, the Bullion Baron blog reported last week, citing the fund's latest regulatory filing. It was Soros' biggest position, making up 11 percent of his fund's holdings.

The filing is a snapshot of Soros' position at the end of the fourth quarter of 2013. He might have raised or lowered that bet since then. He might also be using the position to hedge some other bet. He's certainly not going to tell us. Closing out the bet would have made some sense in the middle of February, after the S&P had fallen more than 5 percent for the year.

But Soros definitely jacked up the bet going into the end of the year, to $1.3 billion from $470 million in the third quarter. And just last month he warned about risks to the global economy, mainly from China.

Soros is maybe most famous, or infamous, these days for being sort of the liberal version of the Koch Brothers -- a wealthy guy pumping millions into progressive candidates and causes.
dirtbag

climber
Feb 21, 2014 - 12:38am PT
Stupid Americans!
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 21, 2014 - 04:44pm PT
Ron bellowed
Well for the 11th time, now spanning 2 months of TRYING,, the NV HEALLH CARE sign up site STILL ISNT WORKING..

OBAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! Oh wait no the State of Nevada set up their own site. I guess you have to go to talk to Republican Governor Brian Sandoval. Also, you might try using less commas than you normally do. Ron level commas will break most web forms.

Called the main office and got someone i could BARELY UNDERSTAND

Judging from your average post I'm going to go ahead and guess that is probably your fault and not theirs.

apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Feb 21, 2014 - 06:13pm PT
"THE EXACT same thing i was told the previous ten damm times ive tried to complete my application which takes a LOT of time to do and then is discarded by the "system" at what ever stage it stuck you at. "


Well, then, five in the arse and two in your head oughta fix it.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 21, 2014 - 07:19pm PT

Have you used the insurance yet Apogee? Or just signed up?

apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Feb 21, 2014 - 07:29pm PT
couch, my current policy is an individual plan I started last summer, after being on a group plan prior to that. Those policies were not the same type of policies, though they were both with Anthem/Blue Cross- the earlier one was far better, simply because it was a group plan. The current plan was intended as a gapfiller until the new laws & system came into effect.

Now that the system is largely in place (for whatever that's worth), I've been shopping for a new policy- getting that information from Blue Cross has been a monumentally frustrating time wasting pain in the arse, but using the Covered California resource has been far smoother.

I'm not under any allusion that any of these plans will do exactly what the insurance company says they will do...those slimebags will dodge out of virtually any significant claim I try to make. This is no fault of the ACA...it's entirely reflective of how stoooopid it is to continue to have a profit-driven, capitalist healthcare insurance system.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Feb 21, 2014 - 10:31pm PT
What good is "coverage" if you can't get

Care?

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/02/19/covered-california-enrollees-complain-about-limited-doctor-choices-nearby/
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 22, 2014 - 09:15am PT
TGT whined
What good is "coverage" if you can't get

Care?

I think this is amazingly delicious. The reason that doctor choice is limited in some places is because the nature of a market based solution is that delivering a lower premium price requires a guaranteed volume to a limited number of providers/hospitals. THIS IS THE MARKET SOLUTION THAT CONSERVATIVES DREAM OF. You can get more doctor choice but it will cost you more money which is exactly how conservatives say the world should work. This is not because of some evil provision in the ACA it's because that's how markets are.

If you're advocating to abandon a market based system, TGT, there are plenty of us who will support you. In reality, of course, you are just copy and pasting whatever negative sounding news you can find about the ACA because that's just the kind of blog reaggregating poster you are.
dirtbag

climber
Feb 22, 2014 - 09:52am PT
I don't know if I posted this before, but my take on the ACA is some behind the scenes smart guys pushed the passage of the ACA, knowing it was crap.


You mean, the Heritage Foundation?
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 22, 2014 - 10:37am PT
Government can't finish anything that it starts just look at all these programs that I forced to stop prematurely.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 22, 2014 - 10:37am PT
Government can't do anything right just look at all these programs that I defunded and interfered with.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 22, 2014 - 10:38am PT
Government can't pass workable legislation just look at all these bills that I blocked.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 22, 2014 - 10:39am PT
Government can't work in a bipartisan fashion just look at all these bills that I refused to cooperate on.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 22, 2014 - 11:37am PT
Apogee said:
"couch, my current policy is an individual plan I started last summer, after being on a group plan prior to that. Those policies were not the same type of policies, though they were both with Anthem/Blue Cross- the earlier one was far better, simply because it was a group plan. The current plan was intended as a gapfiller until the new laws & system came into effect.

Now that the system is largely in place (for whatever that's worth), I've been shopping for a new policy- getting that information from Blue Cross has been a monumentally frustrating time wasting pain in the arse, but using the Covered California resource has been far smoother.

I'm not under any allusion that any of these plans will do exactly what the insurance company says they will do...those slimebags will dodge out of virtually any significant claim I try to make. This is no fault of the ACA...it's entirely reflective of how stoooopid it is to continue to have a profit-driven, capitalist healthcare insurance system."


Thanks for the reply man. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out. For large companies that are covering employees. They don't have to do anything different just yet. My little brother runs a large(er) company. I get some of my info from him. What he said couple months back was that the the ACA wouldn't hit them for a year, but the effect is that as his companies health care was better than the act allowed for, that they would (or could if they so chose) be keeping the plan but the employees would be penalized and have to be ponying up a couple hundred bucks each month. If I was listening correctly, and I often don't, they won't see anything different until 2015.


As far as the last part of your statement goes, there is good and bad on the profit driven healthcare front. I can't disagree with the bad, ie, folks getting "negotiated" out of coverage and thus getting screwed when they need it most. However, profit and competition will drive better care. So at least there is apparent competition built into the new system.

Time will tell how this plays out. My state totally boffed the thing. 140,000 people recieved noticed that the insurance they had chosen was going by-by. Then the state didn't get the web site to sign up (until just last week), so they hired 400 people to process paper applications. Which sounds good but the reality was all but a disaster. Our governor was a former ER room doctor, healthcare as it relates to .gov has been his thing.

So I guess we'll all be hanging on for the ride to see where it leads us.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 22, 2014 - 11:53am PT
Couch said
So I guess we'll all be hanging on for the ride to see where it leads us.


We don't need to be. Everyone responds better to calm, reasoned and honest engagement. We could have fixed a lot of these problems a long time ago but opponents have put all their energy into making the reform sound apocalyptic and then hoping for (or in some cases helping to ensure) disaster. Legislation is malleable. Implementation is flexible. Every major government law/program has required maintenance. Medicare/medicaid did (and still do). It's entirely reasonable to make proposed changes that make this system work better without gutting the core achievements of expanding coverage to as many Americans as possible.


Dave KOS- Even ironic racism is offensive and does nothing to forward your argument. Please do without it.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Feb 22, 2014 - 12:50pm PT
We don't have to pretend anything. Just stop saying it unless you're talking specifically about the word. It just undermines your point, not strengthens it.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Feb 22, 2014 - 12:53pm PT
I'm with HDDJ on that one, Kos. I get your point (and wholly support it), but it doesn't need that kind of punctuation.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Feb 22, 2014 - 01:09pm PT
I honestly doubt it 'permeates' conservative America, but you can damn well bet that those who use it regularly (in a derogatory sense) probably almost universally identify themselves as Republican/Tea Partiers.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Feb 22, 2014 - 01:20pm PT
I don't doubt it

nearly half of (adult) Republicans do not believe Obama was born in the United States

to this day they cannot accept that Hawaii is one of the states

they wake up every morning hating the fact that a white male is not President

every focus is on Obama, the man, the person, the Kenyan, the Muslim

because they lose when they have to defend their own miserable failures

they are only against, but never FOR anything

f*#k em
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Feb 22, 2014 - 02:22pm PT
Not really, Kos...my family is mostly working-class, a few have higher educations, but most are doing pretty traditional blue collar work of one kind or another. However, we are all native to the southwest- no doubt that the *edited* northeast (and south) have very different cultures.


"for the right, it's all about man with Obama and not about the issues."

Oh-so-true, with utter transparency. From a political standpoint, though, that's all it takes to get the troops lined up in jackbooted formation. Nevermind the reality that it's entirely imaginable to have seen Romney's agenda overlap Obama's by at least 85%.
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Feb 22, 2014 - 02:31pm PT
Obama sold a lie to the American people
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 01:25pm PT
Ron- It's almost like the concept of tying health care coverage to employment is an insane, inefficient system that hurts workers. Also, if you honestly think that businesses haven't been using political cover to justify business decisions that benefit them but hurt workers for a long time you're crazy.
Elcapinyoazz

Social climber
Joshua Tree
Mar 2, 2014 - 01:36pm PT
Those of you who voted for Obama...voted for his policies as well...therefore you bear the responsibility of the disaster of his agenda as much as he does.

Uh, jackwagon? Yer boy Romney instituted THE SAME F*#KING PROGRAM in Mass. And it works. It was a system designed by conservatives to preserve free market insurance (because heaven forbid they forgo their god-given right to skim off the top of health care expenditures while looking for every way possible to deny paying for your legitimate health care needs...because those CEOs third mansions and $20M bonuses is certainly more important than providing the service they charged you for).

Capitalism is great for innovation. So please tell me exactly how any insurance company of the last 50 years has innovated anything? Actuarial type tables are the core of the insurance business. Data crunching, something anyone can do with a simple desktop computer and data. There is no innovation. There is no reason to pay rent-seeking scum for providing nothing but being a parasitic middleman scamming and skimming.

You have no alternatives to offer. No solutions. Just bitch and whine.

I have no interest in even attempting to have dialogue with you

As you write point by point rebuttals that don't even say anything, studiously avoiding any relevant content other than bitching and whining. Pathetic. What a f*#king wanker.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 01:43pm PT
Ron..I hope you find meaningful employment...rj
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 01:57pm PT
Kos...Creepy Flo..? I think it's sexy- naughty when she's hiding in the shadows and trying to seduce the young boys into switching to progressive...
dirtbag

climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 01:58pm PT
Go with the Flo?

Yep, I'd do her.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 02:31pm PT
Ron insists
Just relaying reality situations here. NO MORE full time employment = more on the dole.

Real Economists Who Aren't Struggling Taxidermists seem to think you have no idea what you're talking about: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45010-breakout-AppendixC.pdf

In CBO's judgment, there is no compelling evidence that part-time employment has increased as a result of the ACA.

Also, working 2 20 hour jobs is abstractly the same as working 1 40 hour job meaning that even in your part-time dystopia people will still be working the same number of hours. But arguing the differences is just as silly as saying "NO MORE full time employment," not that that will stop you.
dirtbag

climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 02:35pm PT
But...but...the assistant manager selling shotgun shells at Sportsmans Warehouse says otherwise...
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Mar 2, 2014 - 02:43pm PT
The wife was moaning the other day about new changes about to drive health
care costs ever higher. She wasn't sure whether they were due to Obamacare
or Medicare but that is pretty adademic. One of the horrors of modern health
care is 'coding'. If you don't 'code' properly the guvmint ain't gonna pay ya.
She says there were 19,000 possible code combos but in a few months that is
going up to 48,000, give or take a few thousand. You miss dotting
an 'i' or crossing a 't' and you're working on yer nickle. Why the f*#k
does it matter to the guvmint whether it is a broken tibia or a broken fibula?
It's a phukking broken leg! How hard is that to understand?
dirtbag

climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 03:06pm PT
Good point, he should believe the assistant manager selling shotgun shells at Sportsman's Warehouse.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 2, 2014 - 03:09pm PT
Why the f*#k
does it matter to the guvmint whether it is a broken tibia or a broken fibula?
It's a phukking broken leg! How hard is that to understand?

because the actual procedure to set the break is different, hence different billing

you know that Reilly, you are a smart guy
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 2, 2014 - 03:10pm PT
good morning Ron!

any news about the employment in town?
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Mar 2, 2014 - 04:03pm PT
Norton, I believe you are intelligent enough to understand that there is no way
that the guvmint needs 48,000 different codes to determine whether or not
a doctor is to be recompensed for his sevices. It's all about bureaucracy,
pure and simple.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 04:13pm PT
Ekat...I'm not sure that Dave Kos knew Cragman's daughter was African American...I'm sure that he wouldn't have use the N word if he had known this...rj
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 2, 2014 - 04:26pm PT
Hey! I've been away for a couple of days, and I've missed being lumped in with the rest of the 'offensive liberal racists'....I'm ready now!
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 05:29pm PT
Dave KOS was pointing out the racism of the President's opponents in a blunt and crass manner. He was called out for it and acknowledged his error. I don't think ekat's characterization of his post is quite right but she is correct that it wasn't cool. Her outrage (and my criticism) actually strengthens our point that racism gets called out regardless of political affiliation, unlike what TGT's defensive-white-guy comics try to claim.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 05:52pm PT
Sketch screamed
He acknowledged it?

Oh my!

STOP THE PRESSES!!!

It's interesting how you guys excuse racist language, promoting hate, as long as the speaker is on your side.

Your outrage couldn't be more forced. I'm the one who called him out and held him to it. Literally nobody else said anything until ekat. The Republicans thread has Obama as "Primate in Chief" and I'm the only one who said anything about it. Yes, he acknowledged it, unlike any of the subversive racist crap that gets posted on this site all the time and is defended against with the "you guys are the real racists" garbage.

I'm ready to forgive anyone for acknowledging their errors and I look forward to your posts in the Republicans thread regarding the "Primate in Chief" images.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 06:57pm PT
What is your point, exactly? Yes, the next DAY couch posted. Dave was called on the post almost immediately.
dirtbag

climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 07:07pm PT
Oh, ok Dixie.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 2, 2014 - 07:17pm PT
"Barry"?

a nickname his high school friends in Hawaii gave him?

why would someone who did not know him from those days call the President "barry"?

while I was appalled by President Bush's economic and war policies, I never called him "george", I always called him President Bush

because anything less would indicate I did not respect the office itself and the fact that he was democratically elected President, and that deserves my respect
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 08:11pm PT
Sketch...Kos wasn't calling Cragman's daughter a nigger...read the former posts and you will see that...dumb-ass...
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 2, 2014 - 08:23pm PT
Harry,

Ike,

Jack,

LBJ,

Gerry,

Jimmy,

Dick,

Ronnie,


Bush, (in another context, both of them)

What's wrong with Barry?


rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 08:40pm PT
Ekat...next time i see you you're gonna get a big Nortsul...you gibroni....j-werd..
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 2, 2014 - 08:54pm PT
I've always thought it bizarre that Barry has been considered anything other than what he is.


The first "red diaper" president.

His mom was a young leftist that met his Communist father in a Russian language class.

He abandoned them before Bary was old enough to even know who he was.

Then she married an Indonesian communist. That didn't last long either.

Finally she abandoned him to her parents, millionaires and grandpa an old time Stalinist CPUSA member.

While schooled at the most exclusive private prep school on the islands, grandpa decided he needed a male role model.

Who did he pick,

Not a sports coach,

Not a business leader,

but Stalinist firebrand Frank Marshal Davis!

Other than Davis, Barry had no exposure to "black culture" until he left Harvard to go to Chicago where he intermediately fell in with old associates of Davis.

he's more red than black.








apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 2, 2014 - 09:04pm PT
Wow...that is the most non-cut & paste writing I've seen from TGT in a long, long time...WTF?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 09:46pm PT
sketch..then .why were your panties in a bunch...? ekat...i've forgotten how to use klisters now that there are so many varieties and brands but maybe that's a good thing..? rj
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 2, 2014 - 10:06pm PT
sketch simply took a comment out of context, and made it something it wasn't.

You know...pretty standard GOP-kinda politics.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 2, 2014 - 10:34pm PT
"...the little ankle-biter bitches out, with their ignorant ad homs. "


Hypocrisy in eleven words or less, ladies & gentlemen!
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 2, 2014 - 10:37pm PT
Apparently, you were okay with using Dubya for President Obama's predecessor.

apparently, you would be wrong

I have never referred to President Bush as Dubya

but since you said I did, prove it, dumbass
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 10:37pm PT
Sketch...Little ankle biter bitches...? Now you're bashing gays..?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 10:47pm PT
Sketch...I think you missed your turn on calling someone a dumb-ass..?
Elcapinyoazz

Social climber
Joshua Tree
Mar 2, 2014 - 11:02pm PT
Kos, you shouldn't apologize for sh#t.

A little reminder of why the n word went away in favor of dog whistle coded bs in the GOP:

Lee Atwater, GOP strategist & Regan and Bush adviser, on Republicans' image problem with racism:

You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can't say “nigger” — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”
dirtbag

climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 11:02pm PT
Right...due to the ACA.

dirtbag

climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 11:10pm PT
Fact, huh?

So you know they are not hiring full time b/c of the ACA--how?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 11:10pm PT
Ron...Take 2 of those part time jobs and file a sexual harassment suit or since you're part native , a racial discrimination suit..I can give you some pointers...rj
dirtbag

climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 11:18pm PT
Actually part time employment has been rising long before ACA.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 2, 2014 - 11:25pm PT

well here is an idea,

maybe those employers in Mound, Nevada should switch to hiring Illegals instead

that way they don't even have to pay them minimum wage and they can work full time

here is a link to finding some jobs in Mound, Ron
http://www.jobs2careers.com/Jobs/l-Mound-House-NV/
dirtbag

climber
Mar 2, 2014 - 11:26pm PT
BTW Ron,

I'm genuinely sorry you are having trouble finding a job.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 2, 2014 - 11:40pm PT
yes Ron, you are right, I am such a dumb ass, a boob

especially compared to you of course

looking for a job?

actually, I bet I am a lot better at it than you are, BOOB

for example, I spend the past five weeks looking for jobs for both of my little brothers in the Big Brothers program, they are now in their 30s, high school grads only so no special skills,
we have been going door to door asking employers to give them a chance and scouring all the state and country job service web sites

I think I got one of them a job this week at Starbucks, should know tomorrow

never assume what you don't know for sure is true about someone else, boob
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 2, 2014 - 11:51pm PT
Norton, now that's seriously humorous. 5 weeks? I can't say as if there is any reason you are calling Ron names to crow about such. You spent 5 weeks looking for a job and may have one (For your little brother), but you're not sure, at Starbucks.

Uhhh, what exactly are you crowing about?


J. Schmidt said:
" looking for a job? actually, I bet I am a lot better at it than you are, BOOB. for example, I spend the past five weeks looking for jobs for both of my little brothers in the Big Brothers program, they are now in their 30s, high school grads only so no special skills,
we have been going door to door asking employers to give them a chance and scouring all the state and country job service web sites. I think I got one of them a job this week at Starbucks, should know tomorrow. never assume what you don't know for sure is true about someone else, boob "

rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 2, 2014 - 11:56pm PT
I hear Starbucks pays a decent wage plus benny's...Good for your Norton...That being said , I think i'd have a hard time drinking out of a cup that a taxidermist had just filled...? rj
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 3, 2014 - 12:08am PT
Ron...Hey thanks...I don't like getting stiff in public settings...rj
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Mar 3, 2014 - 01:32am PT
So, on Friday we got our insurance renewal packet from Anthem. This is small-group coverage, and my company pays 100% of the premiums for its employees.

We had been assured by our agent that the small group market would not be badly affected by Obumblecare and that neither premiums nor deductibles were likely to rise.

Nope: the plan we've had is no longer available at any cost. The "closest" plan that Anthem "can" now provide raises our premiums by exactly 50.04%, and our annual deductibles are increased by 27%. And the packet denotes a whole pile of "ACA Fees" that we never paid before.

So, from my perspective, it's now official: the "Affordable" Care Act is the UNAFFORDABLE Care Act.

Seriously, how are we supposed to pay for this? Tell our employees? "Oh, sorry, but it's the Obumbalator in Chief that screwed you, not us. So, complain to HIM when we have to start making you pay a LARGE portion of your own health care premiums, which is effectively a HUGE cut in pay, because we don't have it with which to provide it."

Oh, yeah, we could get the really high deductible (I guess, equivalent to the "bronze" POS) plan. But that would still cost more than we had been paying. And, again, what do we tell our employees? "Yeah, we'll keep paying for everything, but you'd better start saving a STACK of money and keep yourself effectively self-insured, because the only Obumblecare that WE can afford means outrageously high deductibles."

I could literally go off on an EPIC rant here. It is HARD to keep it in check! But the reality has struck even our company now, and it is seriously grim!

We WANT to do right by our employees. But Obumblecare has literally left us with NO good options.

I'll be talking with our agent tomorrow to see if there's any other carrier that can do better for us than Anthem. But in Colorado, Anthem IS the major small-group carrier. At the moment we appear to be screwed. I literally do not know how we're going to float this.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 3, 2014 - 02:26am PT
"The "closest" plan that Anthem "can" now provide ..."

Ever try to actually use that policy for a significant claim? If you did, no doubt that Anthem f*#ked you six ways to Tuesday in any way they possibly could have.

If you didn't, then it's pretty hard to say whether that policy that you think was so golden was ever really worth a f*#k in the first place.

Regardless....the ACA concept was a Republican/Romney/Heritage Foundation approved idea, based on free market principles.

And that same 'free market' is f*#king you over, six ways to Tuesday.

That's the capitalist way. Thanks for voting for it!
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Mar 3, 2014 - 02:39am PT
How do we know Obamacare is worth a f*#k ?

Ever made a claim under Obamacare?

We DO know it's a hell of a lot more expensive.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Mar 3, 2014 - 02:50am PT
Ever try to actually use that policy for a significant claim? If you did, no doubt that Anthem f*#ked you six ways to Tuesday in any way they possibly could have.

If you didn't, then it's pretty hard to say whether that policy that you think was so golden was ever really worth a f*#k in the first place.

Actually, we repeatedly have. As one example, I had an emergency room visit last year for which (out of tens of thousands of dollars in charges) I paid EXACTLY the deductible amount. Anthem handled all the billings and charges, paid immediately and without question. And I paid EXACTLY the amount I expected to pay. It utterly worked and was completely hassle-free.

So, yes, the policy I had before was SWEET. And I wanted to keep the policy I had (as do ALL of our employees), just as we were repeatedly promised by the Obumblator.

That policy no longer exists, and nothing even close is affordable. THAT is the problem you need to explain to continue to support Obumblecare!

I'm only citing what I know first hand, although we ALL now know that only a TINY proportion of the supposedly 40 million uninsured are actually signing up for insurance, while MANY millions are losing the coverage they had and wanted to keep. Our cases are just a drop in the ever-filling bucket.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 09:38am PT
madbolter posted
We WANT to do right by our employees. But Obumblecare has literally left us with NO good options.


I'm not sure how many employees you have but this is a complicated issue. For starters, you can't find your old plan because a implicit part of that plan was that if the plan wouldn't cover you either taxpayers, hospitals or other insurance policy holders would. If you're having sticker shock it's because you were being subsidized by the larger system to a much greater extent than you had been.

Secondly, employer based healthcare coverage is really dumb but it is the system that the American people are most comfortable with. Treating each business as a separate pool is absurd and the small business exchanges are not terribly robust yet. There is currently no small business mandate, however, and you are free to ask your employees to look to the exchange for coverage. You might even be able to give them cash to subsidize their policies.

According to the Kaiser Subsidy Calculator http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/ a family of 4 making $50k/year (roughly average American family) will pay a max of $3,365 on average assuming there is no additional assistance from CHIP programs and the like. If your small business plans can't do better than that then there is no reason to try to make it work and you shouldn't feel bad for getting your employees the most affordable option that provides them with adequate health coverage. The exchanges sound scary because they are new and vilified by people who refer to the law as "Obumblecare" but they are actually working and getting millions of people good, subsidized coverage.

pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Mar 3, 2014 - 11:32am PT
Obumblecare

100%
dirtbag

climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 12:14pm PT
Sketch you're a fooking idiot.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 3, 2014 - 01:56pm PT
Yep, I'll pile on.

sketch, you really are a moron.
dirtbag

climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 02:12pm PT


So, he's a plagiarist, too.

Hypocrite much, Dixie?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Mar 3, 2014 - 02:50pm PT
If you're having sticker shock it's because you were being subsidized by the larger system to a much greater extent than you had been.

No, I think what has become clear to the middle class at this point is that we are NOW being forced to subsidize a whole pile of people that we weren't before. And, ironically, they don't seem to want what Obumblecare is pushing.

So, WE pay more anyway, and they don't even care to sign up for it.

Who wins? The insurance companies!
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 3, 2014 - 04:06pm PT
"Who wins? The insurance companies!"

That much I think we can all agree on...I don't have much confidence that any insurance company won't figure out a way to deny a valid claim I might make. And that attitude hasn't changed a bit since the implementation of the ACA.

Funny thing about your experience with Anthem...I've had several insurance companies over the last 10 years, and Anthem by far has been the biggest pain in the ass to deal with. Impossible to get on the phone, inept representatives with conflicting/erroneous information...they have really sucked so far.

By comparison, my experience with Covered California earlier this week was quite good- took about 15 minutes of hold time, but the guy I talked with was knowledgeable, patient, and was the most useful experience I've had thusfar.
kennyt

Trad climber
Oregon
Mar 3, 2014 - 04:45pm PT
This thread is the best troll ever
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Mar 3, 2014 - 05:02pm PT
Funny thing about your experience with Anthem...I've had several insurance companies over the last 10 years, and Anthem by far has been the biggest pain in the ass to deal with. Impossible to get on the phone, inept representatives with conflicting/erroneous information...they have really sucked so far.

That are all blood-suckers, no doubt. We've perhaps been lucky. I just hate being thrown back into the morass of trying to arrange something new now. I don't have spare time or blood pressure (not to mention money) to deal with all this all over again!
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 3, 2014 - 05:15pm PT
I'm soooooo down with that. Though I support the idea of reform, dealing with these changes have been a hassle.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 3, 2014 - 05:47pm PT
My doctor actually just signed up for Obamacare. He has his own practice, and said that it was a little better than the plan that he was currently paying.

I'll never forget what he told me: "Insurance companies are evil."

It was posted on the first page of this thread. They make money through premiums, and their expenses are claims. It isn't hard to see where the profit motive lies. They bring in as much in premiums as possible, and they try to deny as many claims as possible. Capitalism. It works great in other areas of the economy.

It sucks when capitalism runs your healthcare, though. Sort of like the military. We would have a crappy military if we all voted on each weapons system. Can you imagine watching TV ads all of the time trying to spin the citizens into buying this fighter plane over that one?

Healthcare isn't a free market and never has been. You don't shop around for the cheapest healthcare. You shop around for the best doctor, and occasionally put off elective procedures until you have the coin. Most of the time you just pay what they bill. Have any of you had surgery and seen the bills? They are in some gibberish code.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 06:47pm PT
madbolter replied
No, I think what has become clear to the middle class at this point is that we are NOW being forced to subsidize a whole pile of people that we weren't before. And, ironically, they don't seem to want what Obumblecare is pushing.

So, WE pay more anyway, and they don't even care to sign up for it.

Who wins? The insurance companies!


You're forgetting that you never don't pay. Before we were paying in hidden ways through inflated hospital bills, higher insurance premiums, lower wages for healthcare workers and higher taxes. Take a McDonalds health care plan. What they used to offer would cover up to $10,000 of medical benefits (for a cost of $1,600/year to the employee). If that employee got any real illness of had to be admitted to an ICU for literally any reason, that cap would be hit in the first few hours of their care and all the extra costs would need to be absorbed by "the system." Under the ACA, that person actually gets health care coverage that will pay for the majority of the costs associated with acute and chronic illnesses.

You, as an employer buying low cost, moderate benefit health insurance for your employees, are relaying on that same system to absorb whatever costs your plan won't cover. The ACA says that you need to make sure they are adequately covered now and you can't push those extra costs onto everybody else. Why is it your responsibility to get your employees health coverage? I think it's a stupid system, as I've said.

You are correct that insurance companies are big winners here. The ACA actually includes provisions that actually caps health insurer's profit margins to ensure that if they overcharge their members they don't simply get to keep all the money. If you've been paying attention then you'd notice the last couple of years many Americans have gotten rebate checks from their insurance companies...mandated by "Obumblecare."

But listen, if you think a for profit insurance based healthcare finance system based on employer funded/pooled health insurance is an inefficient and insane way to pay for healthcare in our country, you aren't alone, but you won't find any sympathy from Republicans.
slabbo

Trad climber
colo south
Mar 3, 2014 - 06:58pm PT
So..how many people here had NO insurance for whatever reason ? I was a multiple pre existing condition,,can't work, no SS or medicaid..got dumped

What is the alternative to obamacare ? NOW ? maybe hit the retirement savings for $$$$ for an ECHO test ?? That goes pretty quick.

You got a spare $80 K for a new hip ?

HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 07:19pm PT
Sketch pondered
I'm not convinced that free-market healthcare is such a bad thing. For the most part, I've been paying my own healthcare since the early 80s. Twenty-five years ago, my premium was $33/month. $20 co-pay. $250 deductible. $2000 max out of pocket. It wasn't a big deal.

Somewhere along the way, it went in the crapper. I'm not sure if was hospitals or drug companies competing... and driving up costs. Demand for research dollars? I don't know. But there's no good reason that healthcare costs have risen so fast.

Free-market healthcare wasn't so bad 30 years ago. What happened?

I love this post because it spells out all the privileges of being a healthy, single male. I had a similar plan with BCBS for years as a 20-something in the early 00's and man plan crept from like $60/month to over $100 before I finally got "real" employer based insurance for my whole family. As a young, healthy male you and I were basically pure profit for insurance companies who could entice us with cheap premiums and peace of mind, knowing full well that we could be dropped if we ever got actually sick. Anyone who was older, a woman, had a preexisting condition or developed a chronic illness enjoyed none of the perceived benefits of "free market" health insurance as you described it. The "free market" they got meant they paid higher premiums, had coverage for their conditions exempted from their plans or simply couldn't find insurance at all.

It's similar to a white guy in Alabama saying "I don't see what the fuss was all about there were plenty of seats at the front of the bus back in the 60's." And yes I realize that's not a perfect analogy and no I'm not calling you racist.


sketch further queried
Have you had a hip replaced and settled all of your bills through an ACA policy?

You do realize there is no Obamacare call center taking your claim, right? It's the same old crappy insurance company but with more rules about the kinds of plans they can offer mandated under the ACA.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 3, 2014 - 07:30pm PT
Dave beat me to it...but what the hell:


"Twenty-five years ago, my premium was $33/month. $20 co-pay. $250 deductible. $2000 max out of pocket. It wasn't a big deal."

And then you got older.


"But there's no good reason that healthcare costs have risen so fast."

Except that you got older.



"Free-market healthcare wasn't so bad 30 years ago. What happened?"

You guessed it....you got older.
kennyt

Trad climber
Oregon
Mar 3, 2014 - 07:41pm PT
I got a f*#ked diagnosis last May and I'm pretty sure my old policy would have canceled me somehow if not for the new rules thanks to Obamacare. Anthem blue cross has never denied anything and they're into me for about 300k now and at least three more expensive surgeries to go. My families policy went up 200 bucks a month but oh well.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 07:50pm PT
Sorry that you are ill, kenny and I'm glad you are getting good coverage. Your policy also hasn't risen due to your illness (thanks, Obamacare!).
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Mar 3, 2014 - 08:22pm PT
I'm not convinced that free-market healthcare is such a bad thing. For the most part, I've been paying my own healthcare since the early 80s. Twenty-five years ago, my premium was $33/month. $20 co-pay. $250 deductible. $2000 max out of pocket. It wasn't a big deal.

Somewhere along the way, it went in the crapper. I'm not sure if was hospitals or drug companies competing... and driving up costs. Demand for research dollars? I don't know. But there's no good reason that healthcare costs have risen so fast.

Free-market healthcare wasn't so bad 30 years ago. What happened?

I've been buying my own insurance of the past 10 years or so.
Other than the freaking tax code which allows employers to buy their employees health insurance tax free but doesn't provide the self-employed the same benefit, it hasn't been so bad.

Until Obamacare.
Premiums took a big jump last year--went from high-but-sorta-manageable to really freaking high.
Obamacare may be the straw-that-broke-the-camel's back for some of us (those that don't get health care from big daddy government or employer).
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 3, 2014 - 08:35pm PT
VERY IMPORTANT POST

Let it be known that I received an email from Sketch in which he stated that I had not "lied"when I said that I had never called President Bush "Dubya".

Sketch not only stated this but also apologized to me for calling me a liar.

I have to say that damn few people are as stand up as Sketch demonstrated to me.

He and I probably will continue to disagree on some things but I respect him, period.
dirtbag

climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 08:43pm PT
Good on ya Sketch.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 08:44pm PT
Sketch posted
This is not nearly as good the policy from my younger days. Also, the new policy doesn't know about the plate in my hip and other related issues.

I get what you're all saying about getting older. I just think a policy similar to what I had would cost a boatload more to a healthy 20 something.

First of all, under the ACA you can't be charged more for having a preexisting condition. I've said that a couple of times in the last few pages.

Secondly, insurance has gotten more expensive in no small part because health care has gotten more expensive. You can easily read about the reasons for that almost anywhere. The primary reason that people are paying more money under the ACA is because their old policies did not have as much coverage. Another reason is that as insurance companies can't discriminate in their prices against the sick and they can't turn people away they have to increase overall premiums to make up the difference.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Mar 3, 2014 - 08:58pm PT
The now already expensive premiums are going to continue to increase...BIG TIME.

"The administration had hoped that over 38 percent, or 2.7 million, of all enrollees in 2014 would be 18 to 35 years old, based on a Congressional Budget Office estimate that 7 million people would sign up by the end of March.:

"The whole insurance relationship is counting on them signing up," . "Otherwise rates will have to increase."

Personally I hope the Insurance for all approach works but I see it becoming totally unaffordable for the working class/ self employed that do not qualify for subsidies.

In the mean time, I will continue to fork out the $1041 per month for my family of 4.

Good times indeed!

pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Mar 3, 2014 - 09:08pm PT
Just accept the fact Obama sold the american people a lie!

Hope all can get covered!
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 3, 2014 - 09:24pm PT
I'm covered....been covered for many years.....

How about you, Pyro?
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 10:20pm PT
pyro posted
ust accept the fact Obama sold the american people a lie!

Hope all can get covered!

The lie that you allege was a commitment to make your hope a reality. Does that mean you're lying too?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 3, 2014 - 10:20pm PT
Sketch should apologize to Kos for making it sound like Kos was attacking Cragman's family...but i guess one apology a year is more than most can muster..?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 3, 2014 - 10:27pm PT
Can't we all just get along?

Rodney King, right after the police beat the crap out of him
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 3, 2014 - 10:31pm PT
Maybe Sketch was thinking Norton dissed on the ex President by calling him "Shrub", not Dubya?

Norton said:
"Shrub was asked if bothered to consult with his father, the only other President to invade Iraq, prior to his own invasion

His answer: NO

When asked why not, Shrub said he consulted "a higher power",
god, who told him it was ok to invade Iraq. Yes, Shrub's "world view" relied heavily on his having a "direct line to god", and definately influenced his "policies". And 4000 Americans died, and at minimum tens of thousands of
Iraqi civilians, along with millions fleeing Iraq. All because "god" told Shrub it was ok to invade Iraq."

Amen to that.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 3, 2014 - 10:42pm PT
Appealing to a higher power is what many Americans have had to rely on for health care coverage for a long time.



(thread rerail)
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 3, 2014 - 11:41pm PT
Kos..Guess you're going to have to settle for the McDonalds happy meal...
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Mar 4, 2014 - 12:06am PT
For states without cranialrectumitis, this new health care system works out pretty well for us non-1%ers. States like Utah are another story.
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Mar 4, 2014 - 01:03am PT
Apo I'm covered through mass
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 4, 2014 - 01:59am PT
Ummm....you don't mean....'Massachusetts', do you?
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 4, 2014 - 05:55am PT
Haha oh god please mean Massachusetts.
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Mar 4, 2014 - 08:10am PT
Good ole mass! The best state to offer coverage. I'm glad and very thankful
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 5, 2014 - 07:28pm PT
Don't they need congressional approval for this move? I am directly affected as the presidents earlier "I'll let you keep it for another year" thing which was later supported by congress.



"(Newser) – Warding off the specter of election-year health insurance cancellations, the Obama administration today announced a two-year extension for individual policies that don't meet requirements of the new health care law. The decision helps defuse a political problem for Democrats in tough re-election battles this fall, especially for senators who in 2010 stood with President Obama and voted to pass his health overhaul. The extension was part of a major package of regulations that sets ground rules for 2015, the second year of government-subsidized health insurance markets under Obama's law—and the first year that larger employers will face a requirement to provide coverage.

It's not clear how many people will be affected by the two-year extension on policies that were previously subject to cancellation. The administration cites a congressional estimate of 1.5 million, counting individual plans and small-business policies. "It's not likely to affect a large number of people, but it certainly avoids difficult anecdotes about people having their policies canceled," said Larry Levitt of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation, an expert on insurance markets. "I think it's a small and dwindling number of people who are affected." The latest extension builds on an earlier reprieve issued by the White House. Some could renew their plans in 2016, giving them coverage into 2017, reports Politico."

http://www.newser.com/story/183338/people-can-keep-health-plans-2-more-years.html
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 5, 2014 - 08:11pm PT
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Mar 7, 2014 - 05:45pm PT
Riiiiiiiggghhhhhht
Blame Obamacare on the insurance industry canceling 6 million persons' insurance. Including my wife. She was perfectly ready to continue her policy from September through December. Yet they cancelled her and refused to re-instate her. Good thing she didn't get ill or injured between October and Jan 1. Now we're saving $300 per month on her new policy with a different insurer and equivalent coverage.

At least we've still got the best health care delivery in the world.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/07/aasif-mandvi-third-world-healthcare_n_4919304.html?utm_hp_ref=comedy
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 7, 2014 - 05:54pm PT
Now we're saving $300 per month on her policy with equivalent coverage.

excellent! congratulations sir
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Mar 7, 2014 - 05:58pm PT
AND without having to switch from her doctor.
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Mar 7, 2014 - 07:40pm PT
Ron
Unfortunately we had the same problem. My wife got it sorted out with a couple of phone calls to our health clinic and the insurance company. It was the ins co screwup. We had printed the web page confirmation and she took this to the clinic. They covered her until the ins co got it sorted out. Her bills still come to my name. Go figure.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 7, 2014 - 10:24pm PT
sketch,,i'll apologize when i am wrong..
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 11, 2014 - 09:17pm PT


Right on Hightraverse, I happy to hear some positive stuff and that it's heading in the right direction for you and your wife. It's still too soon to see how it shakes out for me, but it looks bad from what I can see so far. (don't have to make any changes as of yet though)

(note the total lack of sarcasm on the positive stuff thing, I was straight up for that, anyone else have good news your way on this subject, lay it down)

Curious: What did you have in the past, and what did you wind up with?





HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 11, 2014 - 10:36pm PT
Sketch queried
Can someone explain something to me?

Based on current news, about 4 million Americans have signed up for new insurance through some aspect of the ACA program. By new insurance, I'm talking about people who were without any insurance before signing up.

Back in 2009, we were regularly told about the 46 million Americans without insurance. My math maybe off, but it looks like more than 90% are still without health insurance.

What's wrong with this picture?

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2013/06/06/the-uninsured-after-implementation-of-the-affordable-care-act-a-demographic-and-geographic-analysis/

The original design of the law still left 10's of millions of people without insurance (which is why liberals were so frustrated with it). Additionally, many millions of the uncovered were supposed to be insured through expanded Medicaid but 21 have refused it outright and 4 are still in the "considering" stage. That's half the states with people falling into that gap. Note that because the ACA was created with the assumption that those people would be covered by Medicaid, they don't qualify for federal subsidies and are completely boned. I don't think even the authors of the paper I linked even thought that many states would refuse coverage.





Ron raged
Went to the urgent care clinic this morning for get something for this flu like crap ive had over a month.. THEY CANNOT find me in the system so i was billed for services and x-rays to the tune of 700.00. Went to the pharmacy AFTER speaking with someone there and when i got there ,, they couldnt accept my ACCOUNT NUMBER of my health coverage - only a "member ID" number which i havent received yet. And the prescrips for two lousy little inhalers ans some antibiotics,,,,,,,,,just under 600.00....All to get rid of the FLU......................

Well, for starters if they gave you antibiotics then you don't have the flu. Second, if you have coverage you will be reimbursed by your insurance for the money they should have paid. Third, did you make sure to ask for generics? You just got a glimpse of the world of health care with poor or no insurance. It sucks.

Also, what happened to your "I negotiate all the prices down because I pay cash and that system works just fine all this insurance stuff is a liberal sham" strategy? You were pretty insistent that that would work for literally everyone.




Putting all my Obamcare victims debunked links here in case some people don't read the other, more histrionic thread.


http://www.salon.com/2013/10/18/inside_the_fox_news_lie_machine_i_fact_checked_sean_hannity_on_obamacare/
http://www.newshounds.us/megyn_kelly_s_phony_obamacare_victim_doesn_t_need_to_die_11082013
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/21239-anatomy-of-an-obamacare-horror-story
http://prospect.org/article/another-phony-obamacare-victim-story
http://www.newshounds.us/greta_van_susteren_outs_her_own_fake_obamacare_victim_sort_of_10302013
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Mar 11, 2014 - 11:46pm PT
Uh Oh, the Unions are starting to break their " silence"

Unite Here, which calls itself "the first international union to endorse Barack Obama for President in 2008," says it supports the intent of the Affordable Care Act, but charges it will transfer a billion dollars in wealth to insurance companies, make the playing field in the market uneven, force employers convert more jobs to part time, and cause pay cuts.

"Ironically, the administration’s own signature healthcare victory poses one of the most immediate challenges to redressing inequality," the report says.

"Yes, the Affordable Care Act will help many more Americans gain some health insurance coverage, a significant step forward for equality. At the same time, without smart fixes, the ACA threatens the middle class with higher premiums, loss of hours, and a shift to part-time work and less comprehensive coverage."

The union called it "ironic" that the White House has made efforts to accommodate businesses, churches, and congressional staff, yet is "now highlighting issues of economic inequality without acting to preserve health plans that have been achieving the goals of the ACA for decades."

"Without a smart fix, the ACA will heighten the inequality that the administration seeks to reduce … We cannot sit idly by as the politicians carve up our health plans while they carve out exceptions for themselves and every special interest feeding at the trough in Washington," the document concludes.

Unite Here's website says it represents 265,000 workers across the United States and Canada in the hotel, gaming, food service, manufacturing, textile, distribution, laundry, and airport industries.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 12, 2014 - 09:53am PT
So you're saying that Obama isn't a shill for the unions?
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 15, 2014 - 08:32am PT
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/richard-burr-canadian-expert-health-care

The Senate Subcommittee on Primary Health and Aging held a hearing Tuesday on "what the U.S. health care system can learn from other countries," where single-payer health care was discussed. And The Los Angeles Times' Michael Hiltzik caught an exchange between Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) and Danielle Martin, a Canadian physician and health policy professor.

Burr came at Martin with a number of questions, pointed questions. But Martin had answers. Hiltzik highlighted some key moments.

"Dr. Martin, in your testimony you note that Canadian doctors exiting the public system for the private sector has had the effect of increasing waiting lists for patients seeking public health care," Burr said. "Why are doctors exiting the public system in Canada?"

"Thank you for your question, senator," Martin said. "If I didn’t express myself in a way to make myself understood, I apologize. There are no doctors exiting the public system in Canada, and in fact we see a net influx of physicians from the United States into the Canadian system over the last number of years."

**Later on, Burr asked Martin: "On average, how many Canadian patients on a waiting list die each year? Do you know?"

"I don’t, sir, but I know that there are 45,000 in America who die waiting because they don’t have insurance at all," Martin said. **



That would be a sweet burn if it wasn't so horrifically sad.
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 7, 2014 - 11:09am PT


I guess this was inevitable, Hitler slags on Obamacare. Video: http://safeshare.tv/w/jyeqLxShwx



dirtbag

climber
Apr 10, 2014 - 08:53pm PT
So it appears that not 7.1 million, but instead 7.5 million people signed up before the deadline. Sounds like an unmitigated failure.
spectreman

Trad climber
Apr 10, 2014 - 09:33pm PT
I thought the goal of obummercare was to insure the 40 million people without insurance. How is 7.5 million sign ups a success when the majority of those people already had insurance to begin with?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Apr 10, 2014 - 09:50pm PT
What do you want for a Trillion dollars, Spectreman?

Jesus!
ruppell

climber
Apr 10, 2014 - 09:59pm PT
dirtbag

climber
Apr 10, 2014 - 10:30pm PT
Please show us where anyone said that the goal of Obamacare was to insure 40 million people.

Yes.

And while you're at it, please show us the Republican plan to insure anyone who isn't already insured.
dirtbag

climber
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:44am PT
^^^^^...crickets...


(lol)
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Apr 11, 2014 - 04:40pm PT
Around 40 Million Americans who currently do not have health insurance are projected to have coverage by 2019.

http://obamacarefacts.com/affordable-care-act-facts.php

Found the above link on the first page of googling and it appears to be at least one source of ACA's goal of 40 million to be insured.

A better question would be what percentage of the 7.5 million new signups had no insurance before passage of ACA.

I always like to remind myself that skepticism is essential to science but poison to political causes.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Apr 11, 2014 - 04:58pm PT
I thought the goal of obummercare was to insure the 40 million people without insurance. How is 7.5 million sign ups a success when the majority of those people already had insurance to begin with?

yes, it was a hoped for "goal"

however, we have 26 states that are run by Republicans who have refused to extend Medicaid under the ACA to their poorest citizens

do you understand now that an additional 20 million Americans are getting screwed because they live in Republican controlled states?

in addition, you can count on the number of insured going much higher as time goes on

think ahead now, what will you be trying to criticize then?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Apr 11, 2014 - 08:43pm PT
And while you're at it, please show us the Republican plan to insure anyone who isn't already insured.

The presumption that drives this question is false.

It's not the government's job to ensure that anybody has health insurance.

It's not the government's job to ensure that "poor" people get their needs met by "rich" people.

It's not the government's job to ensure that ANY positive rights are satisfied.

The "rights" mentioned in the Constitution were all negative rights, and the fundamental shift in perspective (that most now unquestioningly hold) reached the tipping point under FDR, and now "Americans" virtually all believe in positive rights.

So, under the Constitution, the Rumblecans don't have any "duty" to come up with some plan to ensure that people have health insurance.

It not they yab, man!
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:08pm PT
madbolter posted
It's not the government's job to ensure that anybody has health insurance.

Funny cause there are numerous programs and laws that state otherwise.

It's not the government's job to ensure that "poor" people get their needs met by "rich" people.

We could just go straight to the actual class war if that's what you'd like. The one where the poor masses butcher the rich, burn their houses to the ground and throw their children into rivers. The democratic process is designed to prevent that from happening by allowing the not rich to have a voice. Before this we had aristocracy and serfdom which appears to be the system that you would prefer.

It's not the government's job to ensure that ANY positive rights are satisfied.

Yeah that's wrong.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:22pm PT
Funny cause there are numerous programs and laws that state otherwise.

Way to miss the point!

Class war? Okay, bring it. The middle class is still a majority, and we're armed.

People that think you can just take, take, take and that the people you take from will not find some way to stop that crap are living in a dream world. This mess is winding down, the piper is gonna get paid, and things are about to get FAR worse for the "poor" than ever before.

Y'all have just about killed the golden goose.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:37pm PT
The reality is that ACA is underfunded due to the fact that the young healthy folks do not seem to want to sign up for expensive healthcare.

ACA is a huge burden on self employed folks making a very modest income.


Funny thing, I keep seeing bumper stickers that read " I am ready for Hillary".


The smart Dems are distancing themselves from this President and his failed policies faster than Bill can season his stogie with young intern vag.

Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:41pm PT
madbolter, ever been to one of the many county horsespittles around the
country that have been the primary health providers for so long? Yeah, you
wouldn't want to but county governments have been doing so for many decades.
Middle class bleeding heart libs decided that way back. The horse is outta
the barn and he's running hard!
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:43pm PT
snowmassguy posted
The reality is that ACA is underfunded due to the fact that the young healthy folks do not seem to want to sign up for expensive healthcare.

ACA "funding" doesn't depend on young people signing up, private health insurance profits do. And while the mix isn't what they would like there are more than enough healthy folks to make it work and more will sign up as time goes on.

ACA is a huge burden on self employed folks making a very modest income.

As is going bankrupt because you can't afford the hospital bills you just racked up. Last time I checked being self-employed wasn't a "get out of paying for healthcare free" card.

Snowmass continues
The smart Dems are distancing themselves from this President and his failed policies faster than Bill can season his stogie with young intern vag.

Which ones are those?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:49pm PT
The horse is outta the barn and he's running hard!

Yup, no doubt!

I don't think it's fixable at this point, but I do get tired of hearing all the liberal rationalizations for the increasingly and flagrantly dismal failures of liberal public policy.

That said, both parties are infested. There are no negative-rights politicians remaining.

And the notion of genuine, substantive personal responsibility is all but dead in this country.

Oh, btw, had we just taken all the money that's been spent (so far) on Obumblecare and just written checks with it to buy everybody health insurance with the policy of their choice, we'd be way ahead already. This was never about health care. This was about power and further individual dependency upon the government.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:49pm PT
madbolter posted
Class war? Okay, bring it. The middle class is still a majority, and we're armed.

Wait so the middle class are the rich now? Do you even read what you write?

Madbolter posted
Oh, btw, had we just taken all the money that's been spent (so far) on Obumblecare and just written checks with it to buy everybody health insurance with the policy of their choice, we'd be way ahead already.

That's of course completely false but it's also funny cause if we just had single payer healthcare we'd save even more. So if you're advocating for single payer healthcare then welcome to the liberal camp.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:49pm PT
I will call you Hedge-desert.

Yep, this ACA thing is a smashing success. LOL


HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:51pm PT
I will call you Hedge-desert.

And I will call you "he who does not know about what he posts."
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:53pm PT
...and sir, you are not worth the effort to type a reality based response to your nonsense.

Move along, get back to what you do best, sucking from the nipple that is rightfully yours.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:54pm PT
Because Hedgedesert is such a positive force HAHA
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:56pm PT
Well, that sounds like the rebuttal of a well-informed poster.

Because Hedgedesert is such a positive force HAHA

I responded to your points with substantive, verifiable arguments. Not insults or ad hominems. You "can't be bothered to respond" because you have nothing to respond with.

Move along, get back to what you do best, sucking from the nipple that is rightfully yours.


Ahh so poor shaming is your response. Well played, sir. Well played.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Apr 11, 2014 - 09:59pm PT


3.1 million

That's how many young adults can get coverage because of the provision in Obamacare that allows them to stay on their parents' insurance plans until age 26.

105 million
That's how many Americans no longer have lifetime expense caps, whether it's because they have chronic illnesses or because their insurance company set restrictive policies.

7.1 million
Obamacare enrollment reaches 6 million
That's how many Americans with Medicare Part D no longer have to go through the "doughnut hole" coverage gap. This means seniors can save more than $5.7 billion on prescription drugs
.
3.2 million
That's the number of small businesses estimated to be eligible for tax credits for providing health insurance to their 19.3 million employees nationwide, credits worth $15.4 billion in 2011 alone.

4.4 million
That's how many low-income adults will now have access to health insurance thanks to states implementing the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare; an additional 5.8 million poor adults would be included in this count if 25 mostly Republican-led states weren't refusing Medicaid expansion.

50 to 129 million
That's how many people will benefit from the Obamacare provision that eliminates all bars for coverage based on pre-existing conditions. Studies say that anywhere from 19% to 50% of non-elderly Americans have health conditions that could qualify as pre-existing conditions.

49.4 million
That's how many current Medicare enrollees can feel secure knowing that, under Obamacare, existing Medicare benefits can neither be reduced nor taken away.

317 million
    That's how many Americans — i.e., all of us — potentially benefit from the requirement that insurance companies provide flu shots, HIV screenings, prostate exams, mammograms and FDA-approved contraception for free, without a co-pay.
    Plus, we all benefit from new requirements that insurance companies must spend at least 80% of our premium dollars on our health care as opposed to marketing or administration.
    We all benefit from the new requirement that insurance companies publicly justify their actions if they want to raise premiums by 10% or more.
    We all benefit from knowing that our insurance can now never be capped or canceled at the whim of insurance companies.


really pisses you off, doesn't it?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:10pm PT
No, what pisses me off is how distorted the figures you posted really are, Norton, and how false are the premises upon which the whole debate is framed.

I don't have time right now to respond in detail to your figures, but I'll just summarize by saying that "we" are really worse off than before, because the whole mess is costing much more than anybody dreamed, and it will just cost more and more and more. And it has NOT had all the blissful effects you tout.

Even if it had, it's wrong in principle. But I know that most of you guys care only for interpreted consequences rather than fundamental principles and rights. Yeah, we've been around that bush before.

Later.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:16pm PT
I don't have time right now to respond in detail to your figures, but I'll just summarize by saying that "we" are really worse off than before, because the whole mess is costing much more than anybody dreamed, and it will just cost more and more and more. And it has NOT had all the blissful effects you tout.

Again, except that it isn't. "Before" all the costs were hidden in inflated medical bills, higher insurance premiums and increased human suffering. Now the costs are more where we can actually see them. You can't just repeatedly argue that "it's costing us more" or "its unaffordable" when you have no actual numbers to back that up.

Even if it had, it's wrong in principle. But I know that most of you guys care only for interpreted consequences rather than fundamental principles and rights.

So the fundamental principle of "Americans should have access to affordable healthcare" is wrong? The principle that "if you can afford insurance you shouldn't be allowed to dodge paying your share" is wrong? Your answer to a person saying "I have a chronic illness that limits my ability to work and can't afford treatment that would allow me to work" is "well that sucks for you but we can't help you cause principles."
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:18pm PT
So nothing changed, except everything became more expensive.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:20pm PT
no, you have zero credibility when you make unproven assertions

extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs

so get on with it
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 11, 2014 - 10:26pm PT
So nothing changed, except everything became more expensive.

Yeah because health care costs JUST started going up.


Looks like Obamacare was passed back in 1980 or earlier!
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Apr 26, 2014 - 08:53pm PT
Did y'all see today where Oregon said they are pulling the plug on their sign-up
site that didn't manage to sign up one person after they spent $248 MILLION on it?
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 26, 2014 - 09:39pm PT
Yeah because they had Oracle do the contract for it. And nobody signed up because it never went live. None of the governments (including the feds) actually work on these exchanges. There is no "department of computer coding." They all contract out to the lowest bidder based on whatever rules they have for contracting and some of them (like the Feds) have really shitty contracting policies that ensure lumbering dinosaurs get the jobs. Luckily for Oregon, the Federal site now works.

In better news, Medicaid expansion may cost a lot less than the CBO originally though:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-24/medicaid-expansion-s-costs-may-be-less-group-says.html

Unfortunately, this is because about 1 million people that are eligible that they thought would enroll, haven't.

In better better news, the exchange subsidies are projected to cost 8% less:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=302976481

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Affordable Care Act's health insurance subsidies will cost a little less than previously thought, according to a new report released Monday.

The Congressional Budget Office predicts that health insurance subsidies under the so-called "Obamacare" plan will total a little more than $1 trillion over the next 10 years, instead of almost $1.2 trillion initially estimated.

CBO said the 8 percent cut results largely from tighter cost controls by insurance companies offering plans on health care exchanges. Generally speaking, the plans offered on the exchanges pay health care providers less and have tighter management of patients' treatment options, and that means lower premiums and taxpayer subsidies.
slabbo

Trad climber
colo south
Apr 26, 2014 - 09:41pm PT
I'm trying to figure out how I am worse off..? i got cut because of existing conditions and had NO health care (plenty of bills) now i have health care (though pretty $$$$)

What was my option ?
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Apr 26, 2014 - 09:52pm PT
To die quietly by the invisible hand of the free market, obviously.
Messages 1 - 1033 of total 1033 in this topic
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta