ObamaCare trainwreck - double digit increases in 2017

[RagingBull]

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?

[timfogarty]

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.

[FREAKgeek]

"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.

[iwantmass]

that has nothing to do with Obamacare.  Also provide some exact figures.

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

[Soul Crusher]

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?

[timfogarty]

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.

[Dos Equis]

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.  

[iwantmass]

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

[Dos Equis]

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.

[timfogarty]

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.

[timfogarty]

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.



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.

[Dos Equis]

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.  

[The True Adonis]

that has nothing to do with Obamacare.  Also provide some exact figures.

Shilling for the Insurance Companies. My god you are pathetic.

[mazrim]

Oh, Timmy, Timmy, Timmy......

[The True Adonis]

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.

[timfogarty]

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.

[The True Adonis]

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.

[Dos Equis]

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. 

[timfogarty]

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.

[timfogarty]

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.

[Dos Equis]

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.

[The True Adonis]

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).

[James]

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.

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?

[timfogarty]

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.

[Soul Crusher]

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.