Lawmakers/Aides try to get out of Obamacare

[F3SS]

Bob Hope. Oh man, I am getting old. It is very short, maybe a minute but Bob Hope was a fixture in the US for 50+ years.

Lol I said the old 50's dude. Didn't mean for you to check your age. I know bob hope but I never knew that was him. Never paid much attention honestly. I've had that in my YouTube favorites since the beginning. I always thought that was classic.

[Merc14]

I dont buy individual plans star. Thats always been outta the question. Id never be able for afford a realistic family plan on my own in NY. Most likely not even after a drop in prices. They are so far outta reach its crazy. Is that why I cant afford insurance through my job anymore? Cause now I have to pay for individual plans I cant afford?

The plan is to force people like you out of the market and when enough have been forced out of health insurance, because the cost is so outrageously high, most will scream for the government to take over the whole mess. The cost is high because of outrages like covering kids until they are 26 (Kids! WTF, i was a LT in the navy at 26, flying fighters, hardly a kid) and the big one of requiring that insurers cover per-existing conditions. That forces the costs up. Obamacare is supposed to limit the prices charged but that isn't possible. Price control ALWAYS FAILS. Insurance companies will just leave the field as they have been doing in CA.

This is a planned failure and there will be a lot of suffering until the democrats get their way. Why they want this is that once they control your healthcare they will never be out of power. Every election will be about teh opposition taking away your healthcare.

The above is the truth and the two glad-handers here may even believe the BS they pass on (ninja certainly does but he isn't teh sharpest knife in teh drawer, the other one is a shill I believe). Sorry bud, but it is going to get a lot worse and may never get better. The 2012 election may have killed the country as we know it.

[Startraveler]

I dont buy individual plans star. Thats always been outta the question. Id never be able for afford a realistic family plan on my own in NY. Most likely not even after a drop in prices. They are so far outta reach its crazy. Is that why I cant afford insurance through my job anymore? Cause now I have to pay for individual plans I cant afford?

The bulk of the insurance reforms in the ACA are about fixing the individual market (group markets have had consumer protections, including for people with pre-existing conditions, for almost two decades). So whenever you heard the--wrong, as it turned out--predictions of rate shock and big premium jumps next year, those were about the individual market.

The individual market is a "purer" market than the group markets in the sense that people go out and shop for a plan themselves; the new marketplaces are simply more competitive environments, which is being reflected in the premium numbers that are coming out for next year.

In the group market, your employer makes those choices for you. Which means you end up in the unfortunate situation of not even knowing why your personal costs are what they are or why your plan benefits are structured the way they are (and, prior to the new transparency requirements under the ACA, even what your health benefit costs).

That said, the small group market is going to start acting more like the individual market (i.e. it'll be more competitive) in New York next year. Small employers can offer their employees health benefits, while giving them the freedom to shop for coverage of their choosing in a competitive marketplace. That means you can take your employer's contribution and put it toward a plan you like, instead of just accepting a plan chosen by your employer on your behalf. That's an important change and it's a big shift toward putting the consumer in the driver's seat when it comes to making decisions about the plan they want.

How does that apply to your situation? I don't know, as you've never actually offered any details about it (despite asking about it many times).

[Merc14]

What he isn't telling you is that your employer is more than likely going to cease providing your insurance shortly after the employer mandates are put back on (this is the mandate that Obama delayed a year to make sure the democrats get through the 2014 election. The dems know how damaging it will be and wanted one more turn at the trough.) as the astronomical prices increases will make it too expensive.

Check out the 78% increases Indiana is predicting for individual insurance plans, which you will be forced to go on eventually.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20130718/BUSINESS/307180100/State-says-Obamacare-will-force-78-percent-increase-individual-insurance-plan-rates?gcheck=1&nclick_check=1

A couple months ago Startraveler was promising everyone that their insurance rates would go down, regardless. His tune has now changed it appears.

[Startraveler]

A couple months ago Startraveler was promising everyone that their insurance rates would go down, regardless. His tune has now changed it appears.

I'm shocked--shocked!--to find you making things up rather than searching for a valid point to support your position. A position you've obviously dug in to hold, come hell or high water (or counterexample after counterexample), despite have such obvious difficulty defending it.

I've made my views clear in this very thread (two months ago):

Slowing the rate of health care spending growth to match the growth in the economy would be a major victory--health spending would stop gobbling up an ever larger portion of GDP. Slowing it down so much that its growth rate is smaller than that of the economy would slowly shrink the health sector's share of the economy, even as spending continued to grow in real terms.

Expecting the dollar amount we spend on health care to ever start shrinking in real terms is unrealistic. Slower growth is the goal.

And no, that's not a new position. Here I am making the same point over a year ago:

In general, no, premiums aren't going to go down. Politicians like to talk like there's going to be some sort of deflation in the health sector but that's not quite right--generally what they mean is that costs will be lower relative to some existing trend, not relative to what they cost right now. The goal isn't really to shrink it in nominal numbers. The goal is to slow down the growth in health care spending to the point that it's no longer outpacing GDP/income growth.

That said, for some folks who are going to be getting financial assistance in the new marketplaces the law is setting up, their contribution toward insurance premiums could conceivably be lower than it is right now, because that contribution is limited to a certain percentage of their income. That doesn't mean the premium itself is lower.

It's all about growth rates--the real prize is slowing growth rates.

Seeing actual drops in premiums for plans in some states' individual markets has been a welcome surprise, but I would've settled just for slowing growth over the coming decade.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Startraveler

[Merc14]

I'm shocked--shocked!--to find you making things up rather than searching for a valid point to support your position. A position you've obviously dug in to hold, come hell or high water (or counterexample after counterexample), despite have such obvious difficulty defending it.

I've made my views clear in this very thread (two months ago):

And no, that's not a new position. Here I am making the same point over a year ago:

Seeing actual drops in premiums for plans in some states' individual markets has been a welcome surprise, but I would've settled just for slowing growth over the coming decade.

You're basing your opinion on the propaganda that has been spewed out and I am basing my opinions on 5 decades of experience with government failure and the fact that this monstrosity of a law is not tenable in even the short term. I am also using simple economics which democrats are incapable of understanding. So far I would say I am right and you are wrong because the democrats keep delaying the full implementation of ACA to save their asses one more time.

If this law was the panacea you paint they would be pushing to get it moved forward rather than just the opposite. The results to date have been bad and would have been far worse if the provider mandate had been implemented. I heard all this panacea BS before from people like you when Obama was pushing his stimulus package. I that unemployment would blast through 7% and go to 8% or more and stay there forever, I said the economy would tank and not recover until the democrats are forced to leave all three branches of government. I was called all the names you are using and look who was right.

So keep on doling out your crap because reality is not on your side. It must have been a big old slap in the face for you when Barry postponed the employer mandate. I know dumber said it wasn't a big deal but he is always saying stupid things. He really isn't a guy you want on your side as he is wrong 100% of the time.

[ninjadude]

You're basing your opinion on the propaganda that has been spewed out

actually his statements are based on facts in the law, rules created and the ACTUAL results of prices in the new markets.

and I am basing my opinions on 5 decades of experience with government failure

which really says more about you than implementation of the ACA

So far I would say I am right and you are wrong because the democrats keep delaying the full implementation of ACA

No they have delayed one part of it.

If this law was the panacea you paint they would be pushing to get it moved forward

The government is doing exactly that.

The results to date have been bad

actually the results so far have been spectacularly good. Links have been provided previously.

I heard all this panacea BS before from people like you when Obama was pushing his stimulus package. I was called all the names you are using and look who was right.

It has been shown time and again that the stimulus was successful. So no, you were NOT right.

[Yamato]

[Merc14]

actually his statements are based on facts in the law, rules created and the ACTUAL results of prices in the new markets.

which really says more about you than implementation of the ACA

No they have delayed one part of it.

The government is doing exactly that.

actually the results so far have been spectacularly good. Links have been provided previously.

It has been shown time and again that the stimulus was successful. So no, you were NOT right.

Yeah, it's going great, that is why the democrats are panicking. Please put me back on ignore, I don't even read your posts past teh first sanctimonious and stupid line.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Merc14

[Merc14]

Does anyone, other than the two zealots above, believe that teh data base run by HHS will not be abused? Obama and the Democrats have proven that they will use any and every illegal move to stay in power, can you imagine what they will do when their minions have access to the health records of every opponent?

http://rare.us/story...other-database/

Edited July 21, 2013 by Merc14

[Yamato]

Do you believe that any database run by the federal government will not be abused? Why do Bush monstrosities like DHS get a hall pass? Your whole partisan premise that everything wrong with this country points merely to Obama and the Democrats misses half the problem and pardons all of it. Why does every new bureaucracy invented by either party and willfully executed by both not count as abuse?

[+DieChecker]

Health Plan Cost for New Yorkers Set to Fall 50%

I thought this was interesting...

The new premium rates do not affect a majority of New Yorkers, who receive insurance through their employers, only those who must purchase it on their own. Because the cost of individual coverage has soared, only 17,000 New Yorkers currently buy insurance on their own. About 2.6 million are uninsured in New York State.

State officials estimate as many as 615,000 individuals will buy health insurance on their own in the first few years the health law is in effect. In addition to lower premiums, about three-quarters of those people will be eligible for the subsidies available to lower-income individuals.

So even after the Marketplaces are created, only 25% of those eligable are predicted to use the Marketplace. And only 17,000 will have their rates actually drop... in a state of 19.5 million. (Maybe they mean NYC, which is 8.3 million?) That sounds crazy for the amount of effort going into all this.

Hopefully it will prove workable and more people will get involved as time goes by.

Does anyone, other than the two zealots above, believe that teh data base run by HHS will not be abused? Obama and the Democrats have proven that they will use any and every illegal move to stay in power, can you imagine what they will do when their minions have access to the health records of every opponent?

http://rare.us/story...other-database/

One thing is ALWAYS certain. The estimates are always errored toward the Best Result, so the costs are always underestimated and the savings are always overestimated. When if they would aim at the Worse Result they would always do better then planned, but giving out huge costs with low estimated returns is politically just not going to happen, even if they historically always prove more effective then estimated.

I HOPE that Obamacare works, but my gut says the there is going to be Tremendous problems, even without Republican shinanagins.

Edited July 21, 2013 by DieChecker

[Merc14]

Do you believe that any database run by the federal government will not be abused? Why do Bush monstrosities like DHS get a hall pass? Your whole partisan premise that everything wrong with this country points merely to Obama and the Democrats misses half the problem and pardons all of it. Why does every new bureaucracy invented by either party and willfully executed by both not count as abuse?

That is your assumption Yamato, I never made that assertion. Bush tuned into a moderate and let us down. I left the republican party because they are turning into democrats.

You on the other hand, refuse to accept the truth that Obama has gone FAR beyond any other president in his abuse of power. The press ignores it as much as possible and so do people like you but facts are facts and he suppressed the opposition by targeting them with the IRS. That should chill anyone who believes in liberty.

[Merc14]

I thought this was interesting...

So even after the Marketplaces are created, only 25% of those eligable are predicted to use the Marketplace. And only 17,000 will have their rates actually drop... in a state of 19.5 million. (Maybe they mean NYC, which is 8.3 million?) That sounds crazy for the amount of effort going into all this.

Hopefully it will prove workable and more people will get involved as time goes by.

One thing is ALWAYS certain. The estimates are always errored toward the Best Result, so the costs are always underestimated and the savings are always overestimated. When if they would aim at the Worse Result they would always do better then planned, but giving out huge costs with low estimated returns is politically just not going to happen, even if they historically always prove more effective then estimated.

I HOPE that Obamacare works, but my gut says the there is going to be Tremendous problems, even without Republican shinanagins.

Yeah, blame it of the republicans. LMFAO. That is exactly what will happen. By delaying the employer mandate until 2015 the guarantee all the pain will come under republican leadership (assuming the dems lose the senate in 2014). At that point the press will attack the republicans as Obamacare fails and the idiocracy will buy it. You wil be one of them BTW.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Merc14

[Yamato]

That is your assumption Yamato, I never made that assertion. Bush tuned into a moderate and let us down. I left the republican party because they are turning into democrats.

You on the other hand, refuse to accept the truth that Obama has gone FAR beyond any other president in his abuse of power. The press ignores it as much as possible and so do people like you but facts are facts and he suppressed the opposition by targeting them with the IRS. That should chill anyone who believes in liberty.

I don't refuse to accept that truth, you just don't see the extent of the truth. Each new President is worse than the last. Each new President has gone FAR beyond any other President in their abuse of power. Obama isn't bucking the trend, he's continuing it. The press ignores it as much as possible and yeah, yeah yeah. That does chill me, but you not answering my question above shows you don't get it. Whether you made some assertion or not doesn't matter to me. It's when you don't answer the questions that matters to me because it shows that you don't really understand the extent of the problem here. Wrapping it up in partisan drag isn't going to preserve liberty it's going to empower the other party AGAIN to continue the abuse.

Forget about "moderates" and what you allegedly think of republicans next to the purely anti-Obama soapbox you got going on here. Do you believe that any database run by the federal government will not be abused? By ducking that question, you're enabling more of what you're complaining about.

[Merc14]

I don't refuse to accept that truth, you just don't see the extent of the truth. Each new President is worse than the last. Each new President has gone FAR beyond any other President in their abuse of power. Obama isn't bucking the trend, he's continuing it. The press ignores it as much as possible and yeah, yeah yeah. That does chill me, but you not answering my question above shows you don't get it. Whether you made some assertion or not doesn't matter to me. It's when you don't answer the questions that matters to me because it shows that you don't really understand the extent of the problem here. Wrapping it up in partisan drag isn't going to preserve liberty it's going to empower the other party AGAIN to continue the abuse.

Forget about "moderates" and what you allegedly think of republicans next to the purely anti-Obama soapbox you got going on here. Do you believe that any database run by the federal government will not be abused? By ducking that question, you're enabling more of what you're complaining about.

They're all the same argument is a way to excuse yourself for screwing up and voting for Obama. They aren't all the same and the current administration has violated our trust and our rights at a level never before seen even thought about. Bush was excoriated for listening to phone calls that originated overseas from certain countries Compare thaty to what Obama has done through the NSA. Mixon s made y=to be a villian for teh ages but his little escapade ws like a kid shoplifting compared to what this guy did through the IRS. They aren't all heh same.

Another difference is a republican president is under at least a modicum of observance by the media and lately it is far more than a modicum, it is unadulterated hatred. This bias t least serves to keep a republican administration in check. Look at what we get when something like Obama is elected, a fawning, forgiving state run propaganda machine that insults the people for not loving their dear leader.

Any form of government introduces corruption but the last 5 years have seen something unprecedented. The Senate broke their own rules to get Obamacare passed, the MSM is useless or worse, the IRS was used to punish political opponents on a huge scale, trillions of dollars have disappeared, a 5 year recession, spying on every man woman and child and a corrupted Supreme Court that allowed the democrats to pass an unconstitutional law.

Our country has fundamentally changed under Obama so damn right I have agenda. Every data base can be abused but they haven't been until now.

[+DieChecker]

Yeah, blame it of the republicans. LMFAO.

Dude, I am a Republican. I was pointing out that the ACA is likely to fail Dispite anything the Republicans do.

You wil be one of them BTW.

I very much doubt it, because I am a Thinking Voter, not a lamb that votes Red or Blue regardless of if the name says Big Bird or Mickey Mouse.

[Yamato]

They're all the same argument is a way to excuse yourself for screwing up and voting for Obama. They aren't all the same and the current administration has violated our trust and our rights at a level never before seen even thought about. Bush was excoriated for listening to phone calls that originated overseas from certain countries Compare thaty to what Obama has done through the NSA. Mixon s made y=to be a villian for teh ages but his little escapade ws like a kid shoplifting compared to what this guy did through the IRS. They aren't all heh same.

Another difference is a republican president is under at least a modicum of observance by the media and lately it is far more than a modicum, it is unadulterated hatred. This bias t least serves to keep a republican administration in check. Look at what we get when something like Obama is elected, a fawning, forgiving state run propaganda machine that insults the people for not loving their dear leader.

Any form of government introduces corruption but the last 5 years have seen something unprecedented. The Senate broke their own rules to get Obamacare passed, the MSM is useless or worse, the IRS was used to punish political opponents on a huge scale, trillions of dollars have disappeared, a 5 year recession, spying on every man woman and child and a corrupted Supreme Court that allowed the democrats to pass an unconstitutional law.

Our country has fundamentally changed under Obama so damn right I have agenda. Every data base can be abused but they haven't been until now.

Someday you'll understand, probably not a day before the roof comes down though. Republicans had the majority and the White House and all they did was explode the debt and make the government bigger. And that is the main reason why Barack Obama is President today. They had no credibility whatsoever as fiscal conservatives because they're big government spenders. Stop promoting red failure as a way to oppose blue failure.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/104400/vote-or-die

[ninjadude]

So even after the Marketplaces are created, only 25% of those eligable are predicted to use the Marketplace. And only 17,000 will have their rates actually drop... in a state of 19.5 million. (Maybe they mean NYC, which is 8.3 million?) That sounds crazy for the amount of effort going into all this.

Yes it is a huge amount of disinformation effort and attempts by Republicans to derail the exchanges that won't affect most people. Didn't you know this already?!

[ninjadude]

By delaying the employer mandate until 2015 the guarantee all the pain will come under republican leadership

The delay affects ONE PERCENT of those affected.

[+DieChecker]

Yes it is a huge amount of disinformation effort and attempts by Republicans to derail the exchanges that won't affect most people. Didn't you know this already?!

Dude, that data came from a link posted by Startraveler, who generally does not link to BS. It was posted in the New York Times, which is generally agreed it has a liberal bent to it. These are the Liberal numbers....

I think you just don't like the numbers and so you call it propaganda.

[ninjadude]

Dude, that data came from a link posted by Startraveler, who generally does not link to BS. It was posted in the New York Times, which is generally agreed it has a liberal bent to it. These are the Liberal numbers....

I think you just don't like the numbers and so you call it propaganda.

No you mmissed my sarcasm. Sorry. I know the numbers. Most people are not affected. But to listen to Republicans you would think the world is ending. For instance, the delay that was recently stated only affects 1 percent but to listen to Republicans that shows the whole thing is being delayed.. The exchanges are the open markets. And no, even if a state "opts out" - thereby giving up control, the federal government will run the exchange for them. And during the first years not all uninsured will sign up. That's a given. And most people in the US are insured already by their employer like you and I. People who on this board claim they are "on Obamacare already" are either being lied to or don't know what they're talking about. Sure Obamacare "affects" employer policies but that's a different thing.The interesting thing will be if the open market rates are actually cheaper than employer sponsored rates. That could cause folks to ditch company plans and go to the open market.

Edited July 22, 2013 by ninjadude

[+DieChecker]

No you mmissed my sarcasm. Sorry. I know the numbers. Most people are not affected. But to listen to Republicans you would think the world is ending. For instance, the delay that was recently stated only affects 1 percent but to listen to Republicans that shows the whole thing is being delayed.. The exchanges are the open markets. And no, even if a state "opts out" - thereby giving up control, the federal government will run the exchange for them. And during the first years not all uninsured will sign up. That's a given. And most people in the US are insured already by their employer like you and I. People who on this board claim they are "on Obamacare already" are either being lied to or don't know what they're talking about. Sure Obamacare "affects" employer policies but that's a different thing.The interesting thing will be if the open market rates are actually cheaper than employer sponsored rates. That could cause folks to ditch company plans and go to the open market.

No problem Ninja. I've tried to really stay out of the Crazy end of the conservative arguement, as I'd like to see many elements of Obamacare actually work, as.... most of it was based off the Republican ideas a decade ago. I'm mainly arguing about When will the cost of the legislation be eliminated by the savings. It seems that there is more and more costs that were underestimated and that everything will take longer. But, I do hope there is savings.... Maybe my kids will live in a world where the Insurance Corporations are not skinning everyone all the time.

Edited July 22, 2013 by DieChecker