Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on October 24, 2016, 02:41:10 PM
-
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_OVERHAUL_PREMIUMS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-10-24-17-03-27
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama's health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer, the administration confirmed Monday. That will stoke another "Obamacare" controversy days before a presidential election.
Before taxpayer-provided subsidies, premiums for a midlevel benchmark plan will increase an average of 25 percent across the 39 states served by the federally run online market, according to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Some states will see much bigger jumps, others less.
Moreover, about 1 in 5 consumers will only have plans from a single insurer to pick from, after major national carriers such as UnitedHealth Group, Humana and Aetna scaled back their roles.
"Consumers will be faced this year with not only big premium increases but also with a declining number of insurers participating, and that will lead to a tumultuous open enrollment period," said Larry Levitt, who tracks the health care law for the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation.
Republicans will pounce on the numbers as confirmation that insurance markets created by the 2010 health overhaul are on the verge of collapsing in a "death spiral." Sign-up season starts Nov. 1, about a week before national elections in which the GOP remains committed to a full repeal. Window shopping for plans and premiums is already available through HealthCare.gov.
The sobering numbers confirmed state-by-state reports that have been coming in for months. Administration officials are stressing that subsidies provided under the law, which are designed to rise alongside premiums, will insulate most customers from sticker shock. They add that consumers who are willing to switch to cheaper plans will still be able to find bargains.
"Headline rates are generally rising faster than in previous years," acknowledged HHS spokesman Kevin Griffis. But he added that for most consumers, "headline rates are not what they pay."
The vast majority of the more than 10 million customers who purchase through HealthCare.gov and its state-run counterparts do receive generous financial assistance. "Enrollment is concentrated among very low-income individuals who receive significant government subsidies to reduce premiums and cost-sharing," said Caroline Pearson of the consulting firm Avalere Health
But an estimated 5 million to 7 million people are either not eligible for the income-based assistance, or they buy individual policies outside of the health law's markets, where the subsidies are not available. The administration is urging the latter group to check out HealthCare.gov. The spike in premiums generally does not affect the employer-provided plans that most workers and their families rely on.
In some states, the premium increases are striking. In Arizona, unsubsidized premiums for a 27-year-old buying a benchmark "second-lowest cost silver plan" will jump by 116 percent, from $196 to $422, according to the administration report. Oklahoma has the next biggest increase for a similarly situated customer, 69 percent.
Dwindling choice is another problem factor.
The total number of HealthCare.gov insurers will drop from 232 this year to 167 in 2017, a loss of 28 percent. (Insurers are counted multiple times if they offer coverage in more than one state. So Aetna, for example, would count once in each state that it participated in.)
Switching insurers may not be simple for patients with chronic conditions.
While many carriers are offering a choice of plan designs, most use a single prescription formulary and physician network across all their products, explained Pearson. "So, enrollees may need to change doctors or drugs when they switch insurers," he said.
---
Online:
www.healthcare.gov
-
So much for the $2500 savings people were supposed to receive.
-
More (as suspected) lies "keep your doctor" "save $2500" blah blah blah..
Obama administration confirms double-digit premium hikes
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/24/obama-administration-confirms-double-digit-premium-hikes.html
Can't say you weren't warned but this would have never happened if Roberts had not have been coerced as suspected and then proven.
-
Our insurance dropped us despite Obama's NUMEROUS assurances that I could keep my plan and doctor. My premium on a PPO plan increased slightly to $975/month but my deductible quadrupled (from $1500 to $6000 per family member). The benefits also deteriorated. I just received a letter that starting 2017, my premium will be $1220/month (which is "only an estimate"…will probably be more) with the same deductible as above. Not only did I not get to keep my insurance or doctor, my deductible quadrupled and I will have to pay AT LEAST $245 more per month starting next year.
-
-
Sickening. Most of us hard working people are getting screwed. My insurance is horrible now and cost an arm and leg. How could people even vote for more of this shit
-
Obamacare only works if you do not.
-
Only a complete fng moron believed Obama
-
Can I just get my old healthcare plan back already?
Wait till you clowns vote Hildog 2016 ... only going to get worse from here
-
Our insurance dropped us despite Obama's NUMEROUS assurances that I could keep my plan and doctor. My premium on a PPO plan increased slightly to $975/month but my deductible quadrupled (from $1500 to $6000 per family member). The benefits also deteriorated. I just received a letter that starting 2017, my premium will be $1220/month (which is "only an estimate"…will probably be more) with the same deductible as above. Not only did I not get to keep my insurance or doctor, my deductible quadrupled and I will have to pay AT LEAST $245 more per month starting next year.
Yep, sounds like us. We are looking into this and probably switching after the next open enrollment....
https://mychristiancare.org/medi-share/
-
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_OVERHAUL_PREMIUMS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-10-24-17-03-27
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama's health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer, the administration confirmed Monday. That will stoke another "Obamacare" controversy days before a presidential election.
Before taxpayer-provided subsidies, premiums for a midlevel benchmark plan will increase an average of 25 percent across the 39 states served by the federally run online market, according to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Some states will see much bigger jumps, others less.
Moreover, about 1 in 5 consumers will only have plans from a single insurer to pick from, after major national carriers such as UnitedHealth Group, Humana and Aetna scaled back their roles.
"Consumers will be faced this year with not only big premium increases but also with a declining number of insurers participating, and that will lead to a tumultuous open enrollment period," said Larry Levitt, who tracks the health care law for the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation.
Republicans will pounce on the numbers as confirmation that insurance markets created by the 2010 health overhaul are on the verge of collapsing in a "death spiral." Sign-up season starts Nov. 1, about a week before national elections in which the GOP remains committed to a full repeal. Window shopping for plans and premiums is already available through HealthCare.gov.
The sobering numbers confirmed state-by-state reports that have been coming in for months. Administration officials are stressing that subsidies provided under the law, which are designed to rise alongside premiums, will insulate most customers from sticker shock. They add that consumers who are willing to switch to cheaper plans will still be able to find bargains.
"Headline rates are generally rising faster than in previous years," acknowledged HHS spokesman Kevin Griffis. But he added that for most consumers, "headline rates are not what they pay."
The vast majority of the more than 10 million customers who purchase through HealthCare.gov and its state-run counterparts do receive generous financial assistance. "Enrollment is concentrated among very low-income individuals who receive significant government subsidies to reduce premiums and cost-sharing," said Caroline Pearson of the consulting firm Avalere Health
But an estimated 5 million to 7 million people are either not eligible for the income-based assistance, or they buy individual policies outside of the health law's markets, where the subsidies are not available. The administration is urging the latter group to check out HealthCare.gov. The spike in premiums generally does not affect the employer-provided plans that most workers and their families rely on.
In some states, the premium increases are striking. In Arizona, unsubsidized premiums for a 27-year-old buying a benchmark "second-lowest cost silver plan" will jump by 116 percent, from $196 to $422, according to the administration report. Oklahoma has the next biggest increase for a similarly situated customer, 69 percent.
Dwindling choice is another problem factor.
The total number of HealthCare.gov insurers will drop from 232 this year to 167 in 2017, a loss of 28 percent. (Insurers are counted multiple times if they offer coverage in more than one state. So Aetna, for example, would count once in each state that it participated in.)
Switching insurers may not be simple for patients with chronic conditions.
While many carriers are offering a choice of plan designs, most use a single prescription formulary and physician network across all their products, explained Pearson. "So, enrollees may need to change doctors or drugs when they switch insurers," he said.
---
Online:
www.healthcare.gov
Still worth it for those without healthcare during the previous administrations.
I think it's a price worth paying.
-
Yep, sounds like us. We are looking into this and probably switching after the next open enrollment....
https://mychristiancare.org/medi-share/
Great. Communism.
-
Still worth it for those without healthcare during the previous administrations.
I think it's a price worth paying.
At what point will you say it isn't worth it? Remember these people are forced to buy these policies or pay a penalty. These premiums are going to start going down no matter how much Obama or Clinton promise. So how many times does the premium have to double before you admit this was a shit sandwich?
-
I don't wanna work on Maggie's farm no more... :'(
-
Our insurance dropped us despite Obama's NUMEROUS assurances that I could keep my plan and doctor. My premium on a PPO plan increased slightly to $975/month but my deductible quadrupled (from $1500 to $6000 per family member). The benefits also deteriorated. I just received a letter that starting 2017, my premium will be $1220/month (which is "only an estimate"…will probably be more) with the same deductible as above. Not only did I not get to keep my insurance or doctor, my deductible quadrupled and I will have to pay AT LEAST $245 more per month starting next year.
My total out-of-pocket doubled. The premiums went down, so did some deductibles. -Works for me since I am a healthy person. Being as how I am on a Medicare Advantage Plan, my very low premiums would bowl you over. Medicare Advantage Plans are probably similar to what we'd have if the country went to a "single payer" medical insurance coverage.
-
Great. Communism.
This coming from someone who's supposedly voting for Killary
-
This coming from someone who's supposedly voting for Killary
I'm voting Democrats because I don't want to vote Trump. Because I don't believe Trump is interested in being president. Because I believe the Republican Party in it's current shape are Democrats wrapped in RINO. You don't vote in a party that can't decide what they stand for. Last election I voted GOP. Hope this helps.
-
At what point will you say it isn't worth it? Remember these people are forced to buy these policies or pay a penalty. These premiums are going to start going down no matter how much Obama or Clinton promise. So how many times does the premium have to double before you admit this was a shit sandwich?
So easy to criticize when you don't have any alternative suggestions. I'd personally be happy for a national socialised healthcare system that's taxpayer funded (Canada/UK/rest of civilised world) but it'll go down like a cold cup of vomit here so I guess we're stuck with what we got.
Even Coach just linked to a socialised healthcare system he appears to be considering.
Maybe we should take the world 'socialist' out of it so it can stop freaking out the dimwits and pea-brains and call it something else.
-
So easy to criticize when you don't have any alternative suggestions. I'd personally be happy for a national socialised healthcare system that's taxpayer funded (Canada/UK/rest of civilised world) but it'll go down like a cold cup of vomit here so I guess we're stuck with what we got.
Even Coach just linked to a socialised healthcare system he appears to be considering.
Maybe we should take the world 'socialist' out of it so it can stop freaking out the dimwits and pea-brains and call it something else.
We already have a Socialized health care with Obamacare which is why it isn't working. The link I posted isn't even close to Socialist health care. I have a choice of whether I want it or not, I don't get a fine for not having it and it's not a government mandate.
Simple Definition of socialism
: a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies
-
I'm voting Democrats because I don't want to vote Trump. Because I don't believe Trump is interested in being president. Because I believe the Republican Party in it's current shape are Democrats wrapped in RINO. You don't vote in a party that can't decide what they stand for. Last election I voted GOP. Hope this helps.
how can u not believe he doesn't want to be pres? What is he 70? Doing 3 rallies a day?
-
He's 70/3 rallies per day/already had more than enough money/great kids/hot wife/easy retirement in sight
He's the one who seems interested in America/Americans; kinda hard to refute that
-
Republicans blast ObamaCare after premium hike announcement
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/25/republicans-pounce-on-obamacare-after-white-house-announcement.html
-
-
(https://earloftaint.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/obamacare-disaster.jpg?w=800)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvoDuPoWgAAjmTz.jpg)
-
Don't know why I'm bothering, but....
Do you have insurance through your employer? Then the rates set on the exchanges have nothing to do with you.
If you don't have insurance through an employer, do you have a private individual plan? Then the rates set on the exchanges have nothing to do with you.
Do you get your insurance through the exchange? The the rates set on the exchange may impact you. If you don't make much money, then you're getting a government subsidy and your rates will stay the same.
This increase mentioned above is on the federal exchange, for people who's state's governments refused to set up their own exchanges. California, which has it's own exchange, announced the rates for next year back in July. The highest rate increase on one of their plans (gold, silver, bronze, etc) was 7%.
Also, Obamacare is more than just the exchanges. It's also a new set of rules for employer and private insurance, such as removal of lifetime caps (before: we've now spent a million dollars on your critically ill child, so we're now canceling your insurance), no ban on pre-existing conditions, banning of bogus major medical plans that really gave you no coverage, allowing parents to keep their children on their employer insurance till age 26, etc. All those features of Obamacare are working great.
So you want to get rid of the exchanges? That would mean poor people would go back to using the ER as their primary care provider. That is very inefficient, medically and financially, and would drive up your employer or private insurance premiums.
If you want to get rid of Obamacare, first tell me exactly how it has negatively impacted you. How has your life been made worse by Obamacare?
-
I have private insurance. Don't post BS as fact! My rates will increase at least 25% in '17.
Don't know why I'm bothering, but....
Do you have insurance through your employer? Then the rates set on the exchanges have nothing to do with you.
If you don't have insurance through an employer, do you have a private individual plan? Then the rates set on the exchanges have nothing to do with you.
Do you get your insurance through the exchange? The the rates set on the exchange may impact you. If you don't make much money, then you're getting a government subsidy and your rates will stay the same.
This increase mentioned above is on the federal exchange, for people who's state's governments refused to set up their own exchanges. California, which has it's own exchange, announced the rates for next year back in July. The highest rate increase on one of their plans (gold, silver, bronze, etc) was 7%.
Also, Obamacare is more than just the exchanges. It's also a new set of rules for employer and private insurance, such as removal of lifetime caps (before: we've now spent a million dollars on your critically ill child, so we're now canceling your insurance), no ban on pre-existing conditions, banning of bogus major medical plans that really gave you no coverage, allowing parents to keep their children on their employer insurance till age 26, etc. All those features of Obamacare are working great.
So you want to get rid of the exchanges? That would mean poor people would go back to using the ER as their primary care provider. That is very inefficient, medically and financially, and would drive up your employer or private insurance premiums.
If you want to get rid of Obamacare, first tell me exactly how it has negatively impacted you. How has your life been made worse by Obamacare?
-
I have private insurance. Don't post BS as fact! My rates will increase at least 25% in '17.
that has nothing to do with Obamacare. Also provide some exact figures.
(http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_premium_growth_2014_0.jpg)
-
"I also will not add a penny to the debt,” - Hillary
I have more trust letting a convicted pedophile watch my children than believing that.
-
that has nothing to do with Obamacare. Also provide some exact figures.
(http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_premium_growth_2014_0.jpg)
You are a lying idiot as usual. It has everything to do with obamacare. The white house isn't denying it, the architects of Obama care aren't denying it, nor are the liberal media at this point. They just try to use averages to make it look prettier. Averages don't account for the real life people that are seeing huge increases
-
Lmfao. GTFO
Don't know why I'm bothering, but....
Do you have insurance through your employer? Then the rates set on the exchanges have nothing to do with you.
If you don't have insurance through an employer, do you have a private individual plan? Then the rates set on the exchanges have nothing to do with you.
Do you get your insurance through the exchange? The the rates set on the exchange may impact you. If you don't make much money, then you're getting a government subsidy and your rates will stay the same.
This increase mentioned above is on the federal exchange, for people who's state's governments refused to set up their own exchanges. California, which has it's own exchange, announced the rates for next year back in July. The highest rate increase on one of their plans (gold, silver, bronze, etc) was 7%.
Also, Obamacare is more than just the exchanges. It's also a new set of rules for employer and private insurance, such as removal of lifetime caps (before: we've now spent a million dollars on your critically ill child, so we're now canceling your insurance), no ban on pre-existing conditions, banning of bogus major medical plans that really gave you no coverage, allowing parents to keep their children on their employer insurance till age 26, etc. All those features of Obamacare are working great.
So you want to get rid of the exchanges? That would mean poor people would go back to using the ER as their primary care provider. That is very inefficient, medically and financially, and would drive up your employer or private insurance premiums.
If you want to get rid of Obamacare, first tell me exactly how it has negatively impacted you. How has your life been made worse by Obamacare?
-
Once again: do you have medical insurance through your work? Through a private individual plan? Or something from the Obamacare exchange?
Previously uninsured people now having insurance through the exchange is better for everyone in that they no longer use the ER for their primary care. This reduces cost all around, costs that were being passed onto everyone else with insurance through higher premiums.
For those who want to get rid of Obamacare, what do you want to replace it? The old way was not sustainable. Poor people using the ER for their primary care was overwhelming the system.
There is really only two choices here: find a way for everyone to get health care, or deny health care to a large chunk of the population. Assuming you just don't want to simply deny health care to poor people, how are you going to do it? Obamacare (subsidized, mandatory, private insurance) is not my preferred way of doing it, but it was the best we could do at this time. There is room for improvement. A public option might help.
If Obamacare fails, we won't be going back to the old way, minimum regulations on private for profit insurance. The only other choices are: nationalized insurance (which is what the Veterans Administration is, also what the UK has; or single payer, which is what Medicare is, and what Canada and most of Europe has.
-
Don't know why I'm bothering, but....
Do you have insurance through your employer? Then the rates set on the exchanges have nothing to do with you.
If you don't have insurance through an employer, do you have a private individual plan? Then the rates set on the exchanges have nothing to do with you.
Do you get your insurance through the exchange? The the rates set on the exchange may impact you. If you don't make much money, then you're getting a government subsidy and your rates will stay the same.
This increase mentioned above is on the federal exchange, for people who's state's governments refused to set up their own exchanges. California, which has it's own exchange, announced the rates for next year back in July. The highest rate increase on one of their plans (gold, silver, bronze, etc) was 7%.
Also, Obamacare is more than just the exchanges. It's also a new set of rules for employer and private insurance, such as removal of lifetime caps (before: we've now spent a million dollars on your critically ill child, so we're now canceling your insurance), no ban on pre-existing conditions, banning of bogus major medical plans that really gave you no coverage, allowing parents to keep their children on their employer insurance till age 26, etc. All those features of Obamacare are working great.
So you want to get rid of the exchanges? That would mean poor people would go back to using the ER as their primary care provider. That is very inefficient, medically and financially, and would drive up your employer or private insurance premiums.
If you want to get rid of Obamacare, first tell me exactly how it has negatively impacted you. How has your life been made worse by Obamacare?
First let me say it has not made my life better, which is actually a better question.
As someone in business, it has made my life worse by creating substantial uncertainty about cost increases. As an individual, it is going to increase our national debt, which affects me as a taxpayer.
Overall, Americans don't have to justify getting rid of a crappy law that was passed in an incredibly deceptive manner, given to us exclusively by Democrats.
-
Once again: do you have medical insurance through your work? Through a private individual plan? Or something from the Obamacare exchange?
Previously uninsured people now having insurance through the exchange is better for everyone in that they no longer use the ER for their primary care. This reduces cost all around, costs that were being passed onto everyone else with insurance through higher premiums.
For those who want to get rid of Obamacare, what do you want to replace it? The old way was not sustainable. Poor people using the ER for their primary care was overwhelming the system.
There is really only two choices here: find a way for everyone to get health care, or deny health care to a large chunk of the population. Assuming you just don't want to simply deny health care to poor people, how are you going to do it? Obamacare (subsidized, mandatory, private insurance) is not my preferred way of doing it, but it was the best we could do at this time. There is room for improvement. A public option might help.
If Obamacare fails, we won't be going back to the old way, minimum regulations on private for profit insurance. The only other choices are: nationalized insurance (which is what the Veterans Administration is, also what the UK has; or single payer, which is what Medicare is, and what Canada and most of Europe has.
Wrong again. It doesn't make everyone's life better. It makes several million people's life significantly worse by the Huge increase. This is what I'm talking about when I say you dumb fucks try to sweeten it up by talking about average cost. The guy that jumped up several thousand dollars doesn't care about the useless person that refuses to work and already leeches tons of government aid from tax payers.
Averages work nice for statistics but they don't help the several million that this actually affect, that were told they wouldn't see an increase. They were fed a lie and they continue to be fed a lie by idiots like you. The white house doesn't even take your stance now
-
Wrong again. It doesn't make everyone's life better. It makes several million people's life significantly worse by the Huge increase. This is what I'm talking about when I say you dumb fucks try to sweeten it up by talking about average cost. The guy that jumped up several thousand dollars doesn't care about the useless person that refuses to work and already leeches tons of government aid from tax payers.
Averages work nice for statistics but they don't help the several million that this actually affect, that were told they wouldn't see an increase. They were fed a lie and they continue to be fed a lie by idiots like you. The white house doesn't even take your stance now
I agree.
-
As someone in business, it has made my life worse by creating substantial uncertainty about cost increases.
there was just as much uncertainty with the cost of private insurance prior to the ACA.
As an individual, it is going to increase our national debt, which affects me as a taxpayer.
previously, private insurance companies did their best to get sick people off their rolls, forcing them onto government programs, affecting you as a taxpayer.
Overall, Americans don't have to justify getting rid of a crappy law that was passed in an incredibly deceptive manner, given to us exclusively by Democrats.
a plan that was first proposed by the right wing think tank The Heritage Foundation, and first implemented at the state level by Republican Mitt Romney
The cost of health care for an entire population is X. There are ways to reduce that cost, such as deny coverage to poor or sick people. Assuming we don't want to do that, we could also reduce costs by getting health care to people before little problems become big problems. Also, to deliver the health care in cheaper settings, such as a local clinic, rather than an Emergency Room. Obamacare does both of those things.
The cost of health care for an entire population can be distributed many ways. Before Obamacare, and now too, no one is turned away from an ER because they cannot pay. The hospital passes that cost along to those with insurance in the form of higher costs overall. Insurance companies, in it to make a profit, would find ways to no longer cover sick people, passing the cost of that care over to the government.
The ability for everyone to see a doctor when problems are small saves money in the long run. Universal coverage reduces the total cost of health care for a population. If you want to propose a better way to distribute that cost among the population, please do.
-
Wrong again. It doesn't make everyone's life better. It makes several million people's life significantly worse by the Huge increase. This is what I'm talking about when I say you dumb fucks try to sweeten it up by talking about average cost. The guy that jumped up several thousand dollars doesn't care about the useless person that refuses to work and already leeches tons of government aid from tax payers.
Averages work nice for statistics but they don't help the several million that this actually affect, that were told they wouldn't see an increase. They were fed a lie and they continue to be fed a lie by idiots like you. The white house doesn't even take your stance now
you're just making up stuff now. No one was told "they wouldn't see an increase."
The cost of private insurance was skyrocketting throughout the 80s, 90s, and 00s.
(https://mises.org/sites/default/files/holly1.jpg)
That system was not sustainable.
Sure, those who were going without medical insurance (the real leeches in the system) or had purchased bogus major medical plans that really did nothing, suddenly required to buy real medical insurance, found themselves having to spend thousands of dollars for proper medical insurance.
Like I said, propose another way to distribute the cost of universal coverage.
-
there was just as much uncertainty with the cost of private insurance prior to the ACA.
previously, private insurance companies did their best to get sick people off their rolls, forcing them onto government programs.
a plan that was first proposed by the right wing think tank The Heritage Foundation, and first implemented at the state level by Mitt Romney
The cost of health care for an entire population is X. There are ways to reduce that cost, such as deny coverage to poor or sick people. Assuming we don't want to do that, we could also reduce costs by getting health care to people before little problems become big problems. Also, to deliver the health care in cheaper settings, such as a local clinic, rather than an Emergency Room.
The cost of health care for an entire population can be distributed many ways. Before Obamacare, and now too, no one is turned away from an ER because they cannot pay. The hospital passes that cost along to those with insurance in the form of higher costs overall. Insurance companies, in it to make a profit, would find ways to no longer cover sick people, passing the cost of that care over to the government.
The ability for everyone to see a doctor when problems are small saves money in the long run. Universal coverage reduces the total cost of health care for a population. If you want to propose a better way to distribute that cost among the population, please do.
Uh, no. There absolutely was not. Businesses had insurance plans and knew precisely what their yearly costs would be.
Who cares if the Heritage Foundation proposed something similar? That has nothing do with the president's dishonesty, the fact this is a bad law, and the fact it was passed solely by Democrats. And as Romney said, his state model would not work at the federal level. Just like our state has a law mandating insurance coverages for employees who work at least 20 hours a week for four consecutive weeks works, but would be a horrible federal mandate.
-
that has nothing to do with Obamacare. Also provide some exact figures.
(http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_premium_growth_2014_0.jpg)
Shilling for the Insurance Companies. My god you are pathetic.
-
Oh, Timmy, Timmy, Timmy......
-
Oh, Timmy, Timmy, Timmy......
Who would have thought that he would abandon his "liberal" principles and begin to shill for Private Corporations such as the Health Insurance Industry? What a joke.
Democrats have become literal fascist shills, championing forced collusion between big business and big government. HAHAHAHAH he supports thousand plus dollar fines or forced purchase of a "product" from a private enterprise. Textbook fascism folks. Disgusting.
-
Uh, no. There absolutely was not. Businesses had insurance plans and knew precisely what their yearly costs would be.
And rates would go up every year, sometimes by double digit amounts.
I remember more than once my company announcing that they were switching to a new insurance company to save money, and suddenly my existing doctor was "out of network" so I'd have to select a new one.
(Also big employers changing insurance plans every few years was a good way to leave behind those on COBRA who tended to be on COBRA because they were dealing with some health issue.)
Shilling for the Insurance Companies. My god you are pathetic.
Hey, I want single payer, I've always wanted single payer. But there was no way to get that at the time. At least with Obamacare millions more have medical coverage.
-
And rates would go up every year, sometimes by double digit amounts.
I remember more than once my company announcing that they were switching to a new insurance company to save money, and suddenly my existing doctor was "out of network" so I'd have to select a new one.
(Also big employers changing insurance plans every few years was a good way to leave behind those on COBRA who tended to be on COBRA because they were dealing with some health issue.)
Hey, I want single payer, I've always wanted single payer. But there was no way to get that at the time. At least with Obamacare millions more have medical coverage.
You can't get to single payer with Obamacare firmly in place and here you are defending it. The larger it gets, the less chance you have at single payer.
Using you like a tool and you don't even realize it.
-
And rates would go up every year, sometimes by double digit amounts.
I remember more than once my company announcing that they were switching to a new insurance company to save money, and suddenly my existing doctor was "out of network" so I'd have to select a new one.
(Also big employers changing insurance plans every few years was a good way to leave behind those on COBRA who tended to be on COBRA because they were dealing with some health issue.)
Hey, I want single payer, I've always wanted single payer. But there was no way to get that at the time. At least with Obamacare millions more have medical coverage.
Employers routinely offer a variety of plans and are always looking to try and cut costs, but the fact is they knew what those costs were going to be every year. That's not true of Obamacare.
-
Employers routinely offer a variety of plans and are always looking to try and cut costs, but the fact is they knew what those costs were going to be every year. That's not true of Obamacare.
nothing has changed for employers who offer medical insurance to their employees. The exchange is for people who do not have insurance from their employer, and who cannot afford individual insurance on their own.
-
You can't get to single payer with Obamacare firmly in place and here you are defending it. The larger it gets, the less chance you have at single payer.
Sure you can. Add a public option. Allow people to buy into Medicare or something like it. If the insurance companies find they can't compete on the exchange with a public option, that the public option can do it cheaper and more efficiently, then the exchange becomes the equivalent to single payer.
-
nothing has changed for employers who offer medical insurance to their employees. The exchange is for people who do not have insurance from their employer, and who cannot afford individual insurance on their own.
That's not true at all. Costs have increased for employers who have to make contributions. For those employers who cover 100 percent of the employee contribution, the employers' costs increase whenever the insurance companies raise their rates. Those increased rates affect raises, hiring, other benefits, etc.
And the costs were significant in states that didn't offer plans that included those new ten mandatory components of healthcare plans.
You can try and put lipstick on this pig all you want. It's still a pig.
-
Sure you can. Add a public option. Allow people to buy into Medicare or something like it. If the insurance companies find they can't compete on the exchange with a public option, that the public option can do it cheaper and more efficiently, then the exchange becomes the equivalent to single payer.
Oh I feel so sorry for you, for being strung along. I really do. When are you going to wake the fuck up?
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/hillary-clinton-campaign-avoided-helping-single-payer-ballot-measure-emails-show
In the email correspondence about Clinton’s 2015 trip to Colorado, a Clinton aide told the campaign team that “CO has asked that we not deliver a strong health care message here.” Clinton’s top staffer, Huma Abedin, then asked, “sorry for the ignorance but why not a strong healthcare message tomorrow?”
Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook responded: “My understanding is we are avoiding that issue because of the single payer referendum.” Another staffer then chimed in to say that “Brad asked us not to do health care tomorrow in Colorado because of the ballot initiative. Said it won't be helpful there.”
As millions of dollars from the health industry flowed into her presidential campaign, Clinton went on to slam Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders for pushing to create a single-payer health care system in which Medicare would be expanded to cover all Americans. She said a Medicare-for-all system would “never, ever come to pass.”
The Intercept has previously reported that “Coloradans for Coloradans” -- the group fighting the ballot measure -- has hired prominent Democratic consultants, including those tied to the super PAC supporting Clinton. According to Colorado campaign finance records, the group has been bankrolled by donations from corporations in the health industry including Anthem ($1 million), United HealthCare ($450,000), Centura Health ($250,000), Cigna ($100,000), and the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America ($100,000).
-
I have private insurance. Don't post BS as fact! My rates will increase at least 25% in '17.
that has nothing to do with Obamacare. Also provide some exact figures.
(http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_premium_growth_2014_0.jpg)
Why did you use a graph of "group health insurance" premiums when Raging Bill specifically said he had private insurance?
Is it that you do not know the difference or are you just a typical full of shit liberal?
-
Why did you use a graph of "group health insurance" premiums when Raging Bill specifically said he had private insurance?
Is it that you do not know the difference or are you just a typical full of shit liberal?
My mistake. Almost all Americans have group insurance through their employer or a trade organization. In fact so few people get non-group non-public medical coverage that I don't find much statistics.
In 2015, 49% of Americans had employer based insurance, 20% Medicaid, 14% Medicare, 7% private individual, and 2% other public.
Only 3% of the public buy insurance off the exchange, and of that 3%, 2/3rds get government subsidies, so this "double digit increases" will affect less than 1% of the population.
-
My mistake. Almost all Americans have group insurance through their employer or a trade organization. In fact so few people get non-group non-public medical coverage that I don't find much statistics.
In 2015, 49% of Americans had employer based insurance, 20% Medicaid, 14% Medicare, 7% private individual, and 2% other public.
Only 3% of the public buy insurance off the exchange, and of that 3%, 2/3rds get government subsidies, so this "double digit increases" will affect less than 1% of the population.
You are so full of crap.
-
Works for me since I am a healthy person.
LOL
IDIOT
-
LOL
IDIOT
He is basically saying he is okay with an inferior policy because his liberal president put it in place and it doesn't affect him. By that reasoning, I don't give a fuck if poor unemployed people have insurance, since it doesn't affect me. There is no reason we should be providing them subsidiaries to cover their medical coverage.
-
ObamaCare architect Emanuel on rate hikes: ‘It’s not a big increase’ and you ‘can shop much faster’
Canada Free Press ^ | 10/126/16 | Robert Laurie
Posted on 10/26/2016, 12:47:45 PM by Sean_Anthony
Stop whining, cheapos.
As you probably know, Ezekiel Emanuel served as a health care policy adviser during Obama’s first term and was instrumental in the creation of ObamaCare. He’s also the creepy gentleman who thinks 75 is the proper age to die. As Obama’s “signature legislation” endures an easily-envisioned and oft-predicted implosion, Emanuel’s been making the rounds playing defense.
He wants to make sure you know a few things.
1. The massive rate hikes caused by the law are not that big. You’re just imagining things. Sure, you can rattle off a list of states where the increases are anywhere from 20% to 100%, but you’re really just nitpicking - probably because you’re cheap and don’t understand what a ridiculous value ObamaCare really is.
-
Obamacare: The Intermediate Step on the Road to Crazy
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/andrew-langer/obamacare-intermediate-step-road-crazy
Obamacare is perpetuating a death spiral
http://www.businessinsider.com/problems-with-obamacare-2016-10
Best/Worst Democrat Tweets in Light of Obamacare's Latest Increase
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/10/24/bestworst-democrat-tweets-in-light-of-obamacares-latest-increase/3/
-
If you want to get rid of Obamacare, first tell me exactly how it has negatively impacted you. How has your life been made worse by Obamacare?
I agree with the conservative viewpoint that the government has no business forcing someone into some contract. It is unprecedented in its kind and many believe it's unconstitutional. Four members of the supreme court also agreed. This is just one of many changes that the liberals are doing to strengthen and empower the government while removing the liberty and say of the individual. I've already wasted several thousand on healthcare that I knew I never was going to use or capitalize on.
-
He is basically saying he is okay with an inferior policy because his liberal president put it in place and it doesn't affect him. By that reasoning, I don't give a fuck if poor unemployed people have insurance, since it doesn't affect me. There is no reason we should be providing them subsidiaries to cover their medical coverage.
If I genuinely feel this way, does it make me a bad person?
I cant imagine those people would give a shit about my problems if they were offered a few grand a year to turn their heads at my struggles.
-
(http://acasignups.net/sites/default/files/2016_total_coverage_pie_chart.jpg)
Obamacare is numbers 11, 13, and 15. The double digit increases is in 15. Private plans that must now meet the ACA mandates is 16.
We already have nationalized health care in the military and VA. That would be number 4.
We already have single payer in Medicare and Medicaid. That would be 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12.
-
(http://acasignups.net/sites/default/files/2016_total_coverage_pie_chart.jpg)
Obamacare is numbers 11, 13, and 15. The double digit increases is in 15. Private plans that must now meet the ACA mandates is 16.
We already have nationalized health care in the military and VA. That would be number 4.
We already have single payer in Medicare and Medicaid. That would be 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12.
How does that make it ok Tim? Even if it is just for the unsubsidized portion of policy holders do you really not understand that as those individuals leave the market that the policies created in those markets become sicker and sicker? You may not like it but for insurance to work there has to be financial incentive for the insurance company to provide policies. That means that take in more than they pay out. At some point they will all simply pull out of the exchanges b/c it just becomes a money pit.
-
How does that make it ok Tim? Even if it is just for the unsubsidized portion of policy holders do you really not understand that as those individuals leave the market that the policies created in those markets become sicker and sicker? You may not like it but for insurance to work there has to be financial incentive for the insurance company to provide policies. That means that take in more than they pay out. At some point they will all simply pull out of the exchanges b/c it just becomes a money pit.
which is why a for profit health care system is bound to fail, and no other industrialized nation has one.
prior to the ACA, you could buy insurance, pay your premiums for years, then get really sick. the insurance company would then figure out how to get you off their rolls, or limit payments. you'd have to spend all your assets, then go bankrupt, and then you'd qualify for government help, if you lived long enough.
Insurance works better when the pool is bigger. The biggest pool is everyone. The ACA is a compromise. It is not my first choice, and I think Obama caved way too early by taking the public option off the table during negotiations. (The Rs did help craft the ACA, they just refused to sign their name to it at the end in fear of the Tea Party. (what ever happened to them?)) Compromise is important. I'd rather have a glass half full, or even 1/4 full, than one completely empty.
The public option will be added to Obamacare. In that chart, sections 5-12 will grow and all the other sections will shrink. You will have the option of paying for your own private or employer based insurance, or participate in single payer.
Just like today: If you are over 65, you can use Medicare (single payer) or use your own insurance.
-
I have a pre-existing. Getting rid of Obamacare will not be good for me. I also have health problems, so I have to buy premium Obamacare. My health care through Obama will be around $650 a month in 2016.
Fucked either way.
-
I have a pre-existing. Getting rid of Obamacare will not be good for me. I also have health problems, so I have to buy premium Obamacare. My health care through Obama will be around $650 a month in 2016.
Fucked either way.
And your deductible is?
-
And your deductible is?
$800
-
which is why a for profit health care system is bound to fail, and no other industrialized nation has one.
prior to the ACA, you could buy insurance, pay your premiums for years, then get really sick. the insurance company would then figure out how to get you off their rolls, or limit payments. you'd have to spend all your assets, then go bankrupt, and then you'd qualify for government help, if you lived long enough.
Insurance works better when the pool is bigger. The biggest pool is everyone. The ACA is a compromise. It is not my first choice, and I think Obama caved way too early by taking the public option off the table during negotiations. (The Rs did help craft the ACA, they just refused to sign their name to it at the end in fear of the Tea Party. (what ever happened to them?)) Compromise is important. I'd rather have a glass half full, or even 1/4 full, than one completely empty.
The public option will be added to Obamacare. In that chart, sections 5-12 will grow and all the other sections will shrink. You will have the option of paying for your own private or employer based insurance, or participate in single payer.
Just like today: If you are over 65, you can use Medicare (single payer) or use your own insurance.
Bound to fail??? The system seems to be doing just fine and it gives us some of the best medical services at much shorter wait times than other industrialized countries. I think we can all agree it has its issues but we get much better medical service in the US and have much shorter wait times.
If you have issues with a system, fix that system. Don't create a whole other issue just for the sake of "doing something".
What part of the ACA did the republicans introduce to the bill?
-
(http://acasignups.net/sites/default/files/2016_total_coverage_pie_chart.jpg)
Obamacare is numbers 11, 13, and 15. The double digit increases is in 15. Private plans that must now meet the ACA mandates is 16.
We already have nationalized health care in the military and VA. That would be number 4.
We already have single payer in Medicare and Medicaid. That would be 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12.
Why are you even bringing this up. Hillary already said that would "NEVER, EVER, Happen" and made fun of Bernie Sanders for raising the idea and then called it naive. She has been given MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of DOLLARS by the Private Health Insurance this cycle. Do you think they just like giving money away? We already know how the Clinton campaign operates and how they view money and what they do with it in terms of "pay to play" or what I would rather characterize as bribery, because that is what it is.
Don't be a fucking dumb ass faqqot. Be a smart faqqot. You have turned yourself into a disgusting pretzel and now support garbage, elitism at the expense of even your own once held ideals. Pathetic.
Is it because dear Hillary is a lesbian and you are a homo that you think its a wise choice. Get off your gay horse for once and use your fucking depraved brain.
-
Why are you even bringing this up. Hillary already said that would "NEVER, EVER, Happen" and made fun of Bernie Sanders for raising the idea and then called it naive. She has been given MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of DOLLARS by the Private Health Insurance this cycle. Do you think they just like giving money away? We already know how the Clinton campaign operates and how they view money and what they do with it in terms of "pay to play" or what I would rather characterize as bribery, because that is what it is.
Don't be a fucking dumb ass faqqot. Be a smart faqqot. You have turned yourself into a disgusting pretzel and now support garbage, elitism at the expense of even your own once held ideals. Pathetic.
Is it because dear Hillary is a lesbian and you are a homo that you think its a wise choice. Get off your gay horse for once and use your fucking depraved brain.
What is your problem? Tim could probably buy and sell you.
-
What is your problem? Tim could probably buy and sell you.
You do realize he is gay and is a faqqot. They call themselves both words, why am I not allowed to.
He has this weird allegiance to the Clintons because of all the gays in the campaign. The elitist type of homos that he wants or desires to be or be with or has been with. There is a whole weird structure to gaydom and effeteness. The Clinton gays are considered at the top of this gay weirdo power structure so anything he can do to be associated with it, he will do.
Certainly his beliefs of how government should work and perform do not match the Clintons view (or did not I should say), but he is willing to be a pretzel faqqot as I mentioned above.
Its disgusting really. Not much different than a cheap whore, just a different kind of whore altogether, just like his master, Hillary.
-
You do realize he is gay and is a faqqot. They call themselves both words, why am I not allowed to.
He has this weird allegiance to the Clintons because of all the gays in the campaign. The elitist type of homos that he wants or desires to be or be with or has been with. There is a whole weird structure to gaydom and effeteness. The Clinton gays are considered at the top of this gay weirdo power structure so anything he can do to be associated with it, he will do.
Maybe he is looking for an ambassador position.
To Saudi Arabia, for example. He'd do well there.
-
http://nypost.com/2016/10/27/the-agony-of-obamacares-collapse-has-just-begun
;)
-
http://nypost.com/2016/10/27/the-agony-of-obamacares-collapse-has-just-begun
;)
This sucks donkey dick. I have UHC = 28% premium increase for 2017.
FML
>:(
-
This sucks donkey dick. I have UHC = 28% premium increase for 2017.
FML
>:(
Moron Fogarty keeps trying to make the excuse, but but but your employer is giving you insurance.
No they aren't. They are charging the employer and now they are going to have to charge the employer even more.
This has a direct effect on employees wages and in some cases, if a an employee will even have a job to go to.
It also puts an even greater stress and burden on resources from an employer perspective.
I can't believe people like Fogarty think its no big deal.
It sounds like their argument for solving the debt- "Why don't they just print more money?"
-
This was designed to fail. Create a problem and then introduce single payer as the "solution" to the problem.
They know that people wouldn't ordinarily accept their leftist ideas so they have to make it appear as if capitalism "doesn't work".
A vote for Hillary is a vote for corruption.
-
This was designed to fail. Create a problem and then introduce single payer as the "solution" to the problem.
They know that people wouldn't ordinarily accept their leftist ideas so they have to make it appear as if capitalism "doesn't work".
A vote for Hillary is a vote for corruption.
bingo.... at least someone has a friggin brain.
thank you...
-
This was designed to fail. Create a problem and then introduce single payer as the "solution" to the problem.
They know that people wouldn't ordinarily accept their leftist ideas so they have to make it appear as if capitalism "doesn't work".
A vote for Hillary is a vote for corruption.
Nah, it was designed to prevent single payer by the mandated inclusion of Private Health Insurance. They, themselves help write the law. All deserve blame. The Insurance Companies to the politicians to all everyone who was shut out of the discussion and law making process.
One of the worst crafted pieces of legislation ever. It was not designed to fail, it failed because it was shit to begin with.