Is Obamacare on death's door?

[Einsteinium]

Whatever star, enjoy your dreams because it is only goingto get worse. Count on it.

Funny. People said the same thing about Social Security and the new deal laws.

Yet here we are 60+ years later and we are still here, the country has not collapsed, and despite what some of you say, most of us have a better quality of life than our ancestors of the new deal era had.

[+DieChecker]

Funny. People said the same thing about Social Security and the new deal laws.

Yet here we are 60+ years later and we are still here, the country has not collapsed, and despite what some of you say, most of us have a better quality of life than our ancestors of the new deal era had.

But social security IS using up its reserves, and eventually it will only be able to pay out what comes in....

[F3SS]

True. Giving the government money to hang onto for your retirement is akin to giving your drunk degenerate gambling uncle your money to hang onto for your retirement. Unfortunately, there is no choice in the former.

[Merc14]

Funny. People said the same thing about Social Security and the new deal laws.

Yet here we are 60+ years later and we are still here, the country has not collapsed, and despite what some of you say, most of us have a better quality of life than our ancestors of the new deal era had.

Social Security is an IOU and in real deep trouble. It has been looted and used for things it was never designed to do for years and the collapse is coming soon. As for the rest what does it have to do with this topic except many are experiencing a decrease in their quality of life because of Obamacare and it is just getting started. Already the cries for single payer are starting to erupt which is so patently stupid when one considers how badly the federal government has screwed up their end of Obamacare..

Edited April 17, 2014 by Merc14

[+DieChecker]

I don't have any money with the government. All I have is money taken from me that are now numbers in a spreadsheet, and the FedGov's promise to give me some money in return when I retire.

[+DieChecker]

I just read that Kathleen Sebelius resigned last week.

Probably she got tired of being Obama's deflection target for so long.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-10/sebelius-said-to-resign-as-u-s-health-secretary.html

[Merc14]

I just read that Kathleen Sebelius resigned last week.

Probably she got tired of being Obama's deflection target for so long.

http://www.bloomberg...-secretary.html

Rumors are she is planning on a run for a senate seat. Hey, nothing says "Elect me!" to a democrat like failure (see "Run Hillary run!")

[F3SS]

^ Lol, yea right.

[+DieChecker]

Rumors are she is planning on a run for a senate seat. Hey, nothing says "Elect me!" to a democrat like failure (see "Run Hillary run!")

Vote for non-success people. Vote Sebelius.

On a giant Poster....

"Sebelius... She couldn't get that Website to work, but it was not her fault...."

[Merc14]

Vote for non-success people. Vote Sebelius.

On a giant Poster....

"Sebelius... She couldn't get that Website to work, but it was not her fault...."

Worked for Carter

[Gummug]

"If you like the healthcare plan you have, you can can keep it". to many to link, google it

"I am pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office." he doubled it and then some

i can link a lot more lies he has made and they are all whoppers and career-enders for any other man. How about the Benghazi lies he and Hillary told for weeks that were completely and utterly untrue! You won't see it on NBC, CBS or ABC but check out the Brit papers and they'll let you know. Nixon is a cherub compared to this guy but he is a democrat and so is safe from scrutiny by the media.

If you'd like more, ninja, just ask. "Read my lips, no new taxes " is chicken ****e to this guy's lies.

Man this deserves a super-like! I wish I could add more but I'm not as informed as most of the rest of you, but I can at least add, that he states (probably not verbatim) "mine will be the most transparent administration ever". Yeah right, *snicker snicker* hate to be too negative, but just about makes me want to throw up. seriously.

[Einsteinium]

Social Security is an IOU and in real deep trouble. It has been looted and used for things it was never designed to do for years and the collapse is coming soon. As for the rest what does it have to do with this topic except many are experiencing a decrease in their quality of life because of Obamacare and it is just getting started. Already the cries for single payer are starting to erupt which is so patently stupid when one considers how badly the federal government has screwed up their end of Obamacare..

Social security can be fixed, besides, how could F.D.R. forsee the baby boomer generation? Social security is in trouble because we have a population that is getting older, retiring and living longer than ever before after retirement. All we need to do to fix social security is adjust the age at which you can receive it upwards (social security when first introduced was never intended to provide 30 years of income after retirement, as people did not live that long on average back then), and/or raise the social security tax, and/or close the loophole of not having to pay into social security after a certain dollar amount (which equals a heavier SS tax burden on the lower-middle income folks, less burden on the rich).

By the way this issue is very much tied to the healthcare issue in our country. The exponential rise in healthcare costs across the board reflects the aging population (more old people taking more out of the system than what they pay in, and less young people paying into the system). ACA is like social security in that it relies on young able bodied people to pay for the old aging populations health care. Just like what social security has become for retirement.

I think that there are several really awesome things about the ACA, though I do not agree with all of it. I think that having exchanges, allowing people to pool together to buy insurance, removing pre-existing condition dis-qualifiers, allowing people to stay on parents insurance until 26, and removing lifetime care limits are all great improvements.

That being said, ACA is a huge complex monster. What parts of the monster do you actually like and think will improve things?

I know that you are against the mandates and fines, predictable for a conservative to be against those things.

[aztek]

Under Obamacare, The Doctor Won't See You Now

Proponents of the Affordable Care Act insist the law will extend health insurance to millions, expand access to healthcare, and improve Americans' overall health. But, as The New York Times recently reported, at least 20 percent of the new enrollees have not paid their premiums. They therefore do not really have insurance.

Those who do get coverage through the exchanges and pay their premiums will also struggle to get medical care. The ACA requires insurers to accept every patient regardless of risk, provide expansive benefits packages, and eliminate caps on lifetime benefits. Looking to control costs, most insurers are offering exchange plans that severely limit the number of doctors and hospitals patients can visit. Some state exchanges — including New York's — don't offer a single plan that covers visits to out-of-network doctors or hospitals.

If this scenario sounds familiar, it's because we've seen it before, during the failed managed-care experiment of the 1990s. Patients and physicians quickly became disenchanted with the restrictions and bureaucratic complexity of Health Maintenance Organizations. At least patients had options then. They could avoid HMO restrictions by buying broader, more expensive insurance plans. Many plans available now on the state exchanges are highly restrictive, HMO-like networks.

The drafters of the ACA presumably had noble intentions, but the law is failing in all of its intended goals. Unless the ACA is redrafted to provide insurance coverage that most physicians and hospitals will accept, many patients will find that when they need medical care, the doctor is not in.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obamacare-insurance-preferred-doctor/2014/04/15/id/565752/

[Einsteinium]

Under Obamacare, The Doctor Won't See You Now

Proponents of the Affordable Care Act insist the law will extend health insurance to millions, expand access to healthcare, and improve Americans' overall health. But, as The New York Times recently reported, at least 20 percent of the new enrollees have not paid their premiums. They therefore do not really have insurance.

Those who do get coverage through the exchanges and pay their premiums will also struggle to get medical care. The ACA requires insurers to accept every patient regardless of risk, provide expansive benefits packages, and eliminate caps on lifetime benefits. Looking to control costs, most insurers are offering exchange plans that severely limit the number of doctors and hospitals patients can visit. Some state exchanges — including New York's — don't offer a single plan that covers visits to out-of-network doctors or hospitals.

If this scenario sounds familiar, it's because we've seen it before, during the failed managed-care experiment of the 1990s. Patients and physicians quickly became disenchanted with the restrictions and bureaucratic complexity of Health Maintenance Organizations. At least patients had options then. They could avoid HMO restrictions by buying broader, more expensive insurance plans. Many plans available now on the state exchanges are highly restrictive, HMO-like networks.

The drafters of the ACA presumably had noble intentions, but the law is failing in all of its intended goals. Unless the ACA is redrafted to provide insurance coverage that most physicians and hospitals will accept, many patients will find that when they need medical care, the doctor is not in.

http://www.newsmax.c...4/15/id/565752/

In reality, 'under Obamacare, SOME doctors won't see you now'.

http://talkingpoints...eping-socialism

Conservatives ARE attacking ACA from all fronts, trying to undermine it in every way possible even if it hurts citizens in the process. Which if ACA is as bad as they say it is, does not make sense to me. If it is really that bad, just let it run its course and collapse by itself. By attacking it like they are, they are forcing their idealism onto the outcome of it, making it impossible for anyone to objectively analyze what the effects of ACA are by making it seem as though the outcome is 'worse' than it might otherwise be.

It would not surprise me one bit if it turned out conservative activists actively worked to undermine the Healthcare.gov website release. Just seems all too opportunistic to me (conservatives get to say WE TOLD YOU SO before anything even gets started), but admittedly is speculation on my part. I am still reserving my judgement until the full effects of ACA are implemented in the next few years.

Edited April 17, 2014 by Einsteinium

[Merc14]

Social security can be fixed, besides, how could F.D.R. forsee the baby boomer generation? Social security is in trouble because we have a population that is getting older, retiring and living longer than ever before after retirement. All we need to do to fix social security is adjust the age at which you can receive it upwards (social security when first introduced was never intended to provide 30 years of income after retirement, as people did not live that long on average back then), and/or raise the social security tax, and/or close the loophole of not having to pay into social security after a certain dollar amount (which equals a heavier SS tax burden on the lower-middle income folks, less burden on the rich).

By the way this issue is very much tied to the healthcare issue in our country. The exponential rise in healthcare costs across the board reflects the aging population (more old people taking more out of the system than what they pay in, and less young people paying into the system). ACA is like social security in that it relies on young able bodied people to pay for the old aging populations health care. Just like what social security has become for retirement.

I think that there are several really awesome things about the ACA, though I do not agree with all of it. I think that having exchanges, allowing people to pool together to buy insurance, removing pre-existing condition dis-qualifiers, allowing people to stay on parents insurance until 26, and removing lifetime care limits are all great improvements.

That being said, ACA is a huge complex monster. What parts of the monster do you actually like and think will improve things?

I know that you are against the mandates and fines, predictable for a conservative to be against those things.

The problem with Social Security is that money that was supposed to be saved and invested was handed out as largesse and an IOU put in its place. The problem with Social Security is that instead of 41.9 workers supporting one retiree, as it was in 1945, there are now only 2.9 supporting one retiree. The problem with Social Security is that any other retirement fund officers would be in jail fro running their operation the way the SSA runs theirs.

I don't like any aspects of ACA. Any program that puts the IRS in charge of administering my health care I cry foul. Right now you aren't worried about IRS abuse because they didn't attack your side like they have the right but giive it time and sooner or later they'll get around to you as well. Tyranny always attacks all.

Edited April 17, 2014 by Merc14

[Startraveler]

So let's recap here. Enrollment has exceeded expectations, premiums and costs are below expectations, more insurers will be competing in the marketplaces next year.

Obamacare deathwatch!

[Yamato]

Merc makes good points about Obamacare in #415, but how is the government supposed to "save" money exactly? Put it in the federal vaults, piles upon piles of fat stacks of Federal Reserve notes beyond counting?

The only way Social Security could even work is if it was designed exactly like Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme, e.g. I'll just tell you the money is there and then rely upon current revenues to prove it.

[Yamato]

So let's recap here. Enrollment has exceeded expectations, premiums and costs are below expectations, more insurers will be competing in the marketplaces next year.

Obamacare deathwatch!

Obama's alleged umemployment rates above 8% are a great political talking point, up until the point that unemployment is no longer over 8%. Then they all go "Derp!" and find something else to chaw about.

[F3SS]

The only way Social Security could even work is if it was designed exactly like Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme, e.g. I'll just tell you the money is there and then rely upon current revenues to prove it.

That's a good point. If there were a tax revolt right now I'll bet my S.S. check that nobody would receive theirs.

For the record, I don't collect SS.

[ninjadude]

The problem with Social Security is that any other retirement fund officers would be in jail fro running their operation the way the SSA runs theirs.

You seem to have the same lack of understanding SS as you do with the ACA. SS is not a retirement fund. It is an insurance against poverty. And in that, it has been wildly successful.

[ninjadude]

But, as The New York Times recently reported, at least 20 percent of the new enrollees have not paid their premiums. They therefore do not really have insurance.

since 20 percent have just purchased their plans, this is unsurprising. Apparently the reporter at the NYT needs some education.

Those who do get coverage through the exchanges and pay their premiums will also struggle to get medical care.

there is no proof of this. It's mindless speculation.

Looking to control costs, most insurers are offering exchange plans that severely limit the number of doctors and hospitals patients can visit. If this scenario sounds familiar, it's because we've seen it before, during the failed managed-care experiment of the 1990s. Patients and physicians quickly became disenchanted with the restrictions and bureaucratic complexity of Health Maintenance Organizations. At least patients had options then. They could avoid HMO restrictions by buying broader, more expensive insurance plans. Many plans available now on the state exchanges are highly restrictive, HMO-like networks.

Not really failed at all. Nor is it a surprise. Almost all insurance today has doctors controlled by HMOs and PPOs. You'd think the author grew up with a silver spoon.

Unless the ACA is redrafted to provide insurance coverage that most physicians and hospitals will accept, many patients will find that when they need medical care, the doctor is not in.

the ACA does not provide insurance nor is it "accepted". Plans are provided by private insurance companies and are provided by their HMOs and PPOs, the same as almost all other insurance sold today.

Edited April 18, 2014 by ninjadude

[Merc14]

So let's recap here. Enrollment has exceeded expectations, premiums and costs are below expectations, more insurers will be competing in the marketplaces next year.

Obamacare deathwatch!

No one believes this but you and ninja.

You seem to have the same lack of understanding SS as you do with the ACA. SS is not a retirement fund. It is an insurance against poverty. And in that, it has been wildly successful.

That means very little coming from something like you. You two have become laughable so please do keep up your sycophancy.

[Startraveler]

No one believes this but you and ninja.

There's nothing to believe here, the numbers are in. Enrollment is higher, the number of uninsured is falling, costs are lower than expected, more insurers have indicated they'll compete in the exchanges next year.

Just imagine it's November 7 again and you've had to abandon the Romney landslide fantasy for the cold hard reality of actual numbers. I would hope that experience prepared you for this sort of thing.

[Einsteinium]

There's nothing to believe here, the numbers are in. Enrollment is higher, the number of uninsured is falling, costs are lower than expected, more insurers have indicated they'll compete in the exchanges next year.

Just imagine it's November 7 again and you've had to abandon the Romney landslide fantasy for the cold hard reality of actual numbers. I would hope that experience prepared you for this sort of thing.

'Conservatives' always cry conspiracy and lies lies lies! When numbers come in that do not support their ideological worldview. If the numbers show the opposite of what their ideology predicts, then they think the numbers must be wrong. Yet they are so quick to throw up numbers that could just as equally be lies when the numbers support their free market utopian views.

There ARE many good things about the ACA, and there are many bad things. Like any system devised by mankind, it is flawed. If we were to move to a total 'free market system' for healthcare and the numbers came in showing costs were down, insurance enrollment up, etc. then the liberals would be crying "lies lies lies"! I am honestly just sick of the bickering and attempted sabotage of one party or the other's plans.

[Einsteinium]

The problem with Social Security is that money that was supposed to be saved and invested was handed out as largesse and an IOU put in its place. The problem with Social Security is that instead of 41.9 workers supporting one retiree, as it was in 1945, there are now only 2.9 supporting one retiree. The problem with Social Security is that any other retirement fund officers would be in jail fro running their operation the way the SSA runs theirs.

The problem with your reasoning is that social security was never meant to be saved and invested, that is a myth. It was always intended to be a 'pay as you go' system where the current workers pay for the current retirees. The government is NOT supposed to function like a private business, they are NOT a for profit entity and are NOT subject to the same rules as private businesses. Yes, I agree that the ratio of workers to retirees is a huge part of the problem. One of the many potential reasons for raising the official 'retirement age', and increasing the tax is to deal with that issue.

When the free market fails or takes too long to adapt to new conditions, government steps in and forces change. This has been true since the Great Depression. Our healthcare insurance system was failing to adapt to the new reality of a population that is rapidly aging and needing more and more care. This went on for years and years before Obama came along and decided to force change on the issue. The old system had PLENTY of time to change and adapt, but failed to do so and was rapidly going to turn into a true disaster for tens of millions of people. Something had to be done.