Affordable Care Act: Real Reform or More Bureaucracy? - Part 1

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]452279[/split]

 

[Kelly]

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/index.html Read the law here...

http://commonsense2.com/2012/08/hea...otection-and-affordable-care-act-for-dummies/

http://www.healthcareandyou.org/what-is/

At this moment, I honestly do not know if this is going to be a positive thing for our country or not. I have not seen much of the positive as of yet, but I will continue to wait and hope.

 

[dnno1]

The administration is currently under what they have for a goal to reach to make it cost effective...so apparently I'm not.

It was just a goal that they had set based on numbers that the CBO estimated (and later changed downward). It wasn't necessarily a break even number. Certainly any business proposal wouldn't set a 5 month time-limit to break even or be cost effective.

 

[chaseter]

It has to break even because the insurance companies are paying for the coverage passed down to the consumer...not the government dude. Of course it has to break even. I can't believe some of the stuff you say sometimes. It has to be cost effective immediately or the insurance companies go under and get bailed out by the tax payers that aren't signing up for the healthcare exchanges.

 

[dnno1]

It has to break even because the insurance companies are paying for the coverage passed down to the consumer...not the government dude. Of course it has to break even. I can't believe some of the stuff you say sometimes. It has to be cost effective immediately or the insurance companies go under and get bailed out by the tax payers that aren't signing up for the healthcare exchanges.

What are you talking about? The insurance companies already have a customer base. They're just adding more customers. They are way passed their break-even point.

 

[Kelly]

What are you talking about? The insurance companies already have a customer base. They're just adding more customers. They are way passed their break-even point.

Um, dnno1 when you drop a customers insurance plan, and you do not automatically put them into another....they are no longer paying premiums to you, they do not have insurance. So they are dropping customers.

What you are saying was what "we thought" would happen, when Mr. President said you like your plan you can keep your plan. That kinda fell through.

You are speaking from "what was hoped for...." rather than "reality".

Hoped for = All people who didn't have health insurance and were healthy, or couldn't get health insurance and were sick would sign up.

Reality = People who had health insurance and liked it, many have been dropped and they are still in the middle of fixing that problem, and of the "hoped for" the majority are from the "couldn't get health insurance and were sick", not enough of the "didn't have health care and are healthy". Reality says, thus far, it ain't gettin' paid for, and the insurance companies are going up......THAT IS REALITY.

 

[chaseter]

What are you talking about? The insurance companies already have a customer base. They're just adding more customers. They are way passed their break-even point.

When you pass a law that says you can't deny coverage and that your current coverage has to be beefed up whether you like it or not, your existing base doesn't cover that new uptick in costs. It's part of the deal between insurance companies and the government that the insurance companies get more business from the healthy young people...hence the mandate/penalty. There's a reason why insurance costs are increasing in price and there is a reason why Obamacare has it written that if the insurance companies lose money, the taxpayer bails them out. Obamacare has to be profitable for the insurance companies and there is a reason why the White House and the CBO put out estimates on solvency. If it didn't matter, no one would care if Johnny College age 27 didn't sign up for Obamacare. This whole thing is hinged upon the healthy young who don't have insurance sign up and pay for the old sick people.

 

[dnno1]

When you pass a law that says you can't deny coverage and that your current coverage has to be beefed up whether you like it or not, your existing base doesn't cover that new uptick in costs. It's part of the deal between insurance companies and the government that the insurance companies get more business from the healthy young people...hence the mandate/penalty. There's a reason why insurance costs are increasing in price and there is a reason why Obamacare has it written that if the insurance companies lose money, the taxpayer bails them out. Obamacare has to be profitable for the insurance companies and there is a reason why the White House and the CBO put out estimates on solvency. If it didn't matter, no one would care if Johnny College age 27 didn't sign up for Obamacare. This whole thing is hinged upon the healthy young who don't have insurance sign up and pay for the old sick people.

That was why there was a mandate to ensure that the pool was large enough to absorb that cost. As it turns out We are only talking about an uptick that is less than 3.5% (under 7 million out of 200 million) of the total population of insured. If that is going to break the bank of an insurance companies, then I would question their business practices. I really don't hear insurance companies complaining at all, just people like you who are sadly misinformed. The truth of the matter is that the the drug and health insurance industries were the driving force behind what we know know as Obamacare and they are profiting from it now.

 

[chaseter]

You first sentence agrees with my point and then you go about arguing against my point. You contradict yourself. According to the census bureau, 2010 had 50 million uninsured Americans be it pre-existing or choice. According to Huffpo, 28% of the uninsured were 25-34 (ya know, that young adult age where they are healthy and don't need insurance). So, that right there contradicts your second sentence. That's about 14 million people. 21% were uninsured age 35-44. That is 10.5 million people. So about 25 million people that were age 25-44 didn't have insurance be it choice or pre-existing conditions. You honestly think that only 7 million people in this entire country that are young, healthy, spry, invincible didn't have insurance because they didn't want insurance? There wouldn't be targeted marketing campaigns at younger people if they didn't matter to insurance companies. What about Obama talking about it being as much as your cell phone? What about Brosurance? Remember those? This is just like Social Security and Medicaid, it takes a healthy, young population to pay for those that are elderly and sick. It's the exact same thing. To actually see that you believe that Obamacare doesn't need young people to sign up for it to become solvent is hilariously sad. We don't even know how many people have paid for insurance through Obamacare because they are ashamed of the numbers. They would tout it every day if they met or exceeded their own lowered goals. This doesn't even address Medicaid that is going to balloon out of control and become insolvent. That's an entirely new argument.

It's sad/hilarious/I told you so-ey to see all these brain washed masses realizing that healthcare isn't free and that all of our costs are going up because of Obamacare. I leave you with this gem:

 

[Kelly]

You first sentence agrees with my point and then you go about arguing against my point. You contradict yourself. According to the census bureau, 2010 had 50 million uninsured Americans be it pre-existing or choice. According to Huffpo, 28% of the uninsured were 25-34 (ya know, that young adult age where they are healthy and don't need insurance). So, that right there contradicts your second sentence. That's about 14 million people. 21% were uninsured age 35-44. That is 10.5 million people. So about 25 million people that were age 25-44 didn't have insurance be it choice or pre-existing conditions. You honestly think that only 7 million people in this entire country that are young, healthy, spry, invincible didn't have insurance because they didn't want insurance? There wouldn't be targeted marketing campaigns at younger people if they didn't matter to insurance companies. What about Obama talking about it being as much as your cell phone? What about Brosurance? Remember those? This is just like Social Security and Medicaid, it takes a healthy, young population to pay for those that are elderly and sick. It's the exact same thing. To actually see that you believe that Obamacare doesn't need young people to sign up for it to become solvent is hilariously sad. We don't even know how many people have paid for insurance through Obamacare because they are ashamed of the numbers. They would tout it every day if they met or exceeded their own lowered goals. This doesn't even address Medicaid that is going to balloon out of control and become insolvent. That's an entirely new argument.

It's sad/hilarious/I told you so-ey to see all these brain washed masses realizing that healthcare isn't free and that all of our costs are going up because of Obamacare. I leave you with this gem:

And apparently our President has forgotten that the Baby Boomers, are now booming the elderly population in our country.

In order for this to work, we need the population demographics of Iran....lol

 

[chaseter]

It's not going to work based on their own metrics that they can't meet let alone real world metrics.

 

[Kelly]

On a smaller scale like a state....I could see this working possibly, possibly even a state like Texas that is getting a lot of young people coming here for jobs.....on this large scale, I'm just not seeing it.

 

[Figs]

http://www.examiner.com/article/msnbc-s-al-sharpton-obamacare-a-godsend-not-a-catastrophe

No surprise here. Good 'ol Al Sharpton.

 

[dnno1]

You first sentence agrees with my point and then you go about arguing against my point. You contradict yourself. According to the census bureau, 2010 had 50 million uninsured Americans be it pre-existing or choice. According to Huffpo, 28% of the uninsured were 25-34 (ya know, that young adult age where they are healthy and don't need insurance). So, that right there contradicts your second sentence. That's about 14 million people. 21% were uninsured age 35-44. That is 10.5 million people. So about 25 million people that were age 25-44 didn't have insurance be it choice or pre-existing conditions. You honestly think that only 7 million people in this entire country that are young, healthy, spry, invincible didn't have insurance because they didn't want insurance? There wouldn't be targeted marketing campaigns at younger people if they didn't matter to insurance companies. What about Obama talking about it being as much as your cell phone? What about Brosurance? Remember those? This is just like Social Security and Medicaid, it takes a healthy, young population to pay for those that are elderly and sick. It's the exact same thing. To actually see that you believe that Obamacare doesn't need young people to sign up for it to become solvent is hilariously sad. We don't even know how many people have paid for insurance through Obamacare because they are ashamed of the numbers. They would tout it every day if they met or exceeded their own lowered goals. This doesn't even address Medicaid that is going to balloon out of control and become insolvent. That's an entirely new argument.

It's sad/hilarious/I told you so-ey to see all these brain washed masses realizing that healthcare isn't free and that all of our costs are going up because of Obamacare. I leave you with this gem:

Your argument was that the existing base would not cover the uptick in costs from the new subscribers and that is not true. Insurance companies are still making profits even after the community rating part of the law was enacted some four years ago and the law has ensured that health insurance companies will be making up to 20% profit.

 

[dnno1]

Obamacare Enrollment Heading to 7 Million at Deadline
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-30/obamacare-enrollment-heading-to-7-million-at-deadline.html

 

[SV Fan]

Looks like Obamacare is a failure according to Fox News

I wonder what there new talking point will be since it looks like they won't get 7M people talking point they been using for the past 6 months is wrong. I guess we can all feel good today that America hasn't ceased to exist as we know it

 

[dnno1]

Looks like Obamacare is a failure according to Fox News

I wonder what there new talking point will be since it looks like they won't get 7M people talking point they been using for the past 6 months is wrong. I guess we can all feel good today that America hasn't ceased to exist as we know it

7.066 million seems to be within the margin of error to me (< 1%).

 

[Kelly]

Looks like Obamacare is a failure according to Fox News

I wonder what there new talking point will be since it looks like they won't get 7M people talking point they been using for the past 6 months is wrong. I guess we can all feel good today that America hasn't ceased to exist as we know it

7.066 million seems to be within the margin of error to me (< 1%).

How would anyone know? they can't or won't (not sure which) give us numbers that substantiate anything.

If it is 7M "sign up", that is pretty much a failure. If it is 7M that have signed up, paid their first premium and actually HAVE THE INSURANCE READY TO USE....that is a major win. I would love to hear that that is what the number actually means, but I think reality is going to hit. It has been proven time and time again, administration to administration and this administration is no different than others, they like to fudge/cook the numbers.

 

[SV Fan]

7.066 million seems to be within the margin of error to me (< 1%).

The picture is actually a joke(photoshopped). It was from a week ago when the total hit 6M, the basic point though is unless Obamacare hits a specific target the Republicans will call it a failure, and the second it does hit the target they will find a new talking point

 

[SV Fan]

How would anyone know? they can't or won't (not sure which) give us numbers that substantiate anything.

It's hard to say what that 7M means to be honest(ie how many of those 7m are people who had insurance previously but signed up with the ACA). All I know is if the Number wasn't 7M the Republicans would be all over it calling ti a complete failure.

That being said I think this might be the best indicator of how well the ACA is doing getting people insured

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/03/31/3420881/millions-uninsured-americans-coverage/

Along the same lines, RAND has also documented a drop in the uninsurance rate for Americans between the ages of 18 and 64. The research organization found that the number of adults without health care dropped from about 21 percent last fall to about 17 percent by March 22. That&#8217;s reinforced by other polling that has reported dramatic drops in uninsurance rates among low-income people who stand to benefit from Obamacare.

Now how much extra(or less) it costs some people who pay for insurance is a different thing

ETA: from the same article

Earlier surveys found that about 27 percent of marketplace enrollees were previously uninsured, but RAND believes that number inched higher in March. As Obamacare&#8217;s enrollment period comes to a close, administration officials have seen a surge of interest in the health law.

Also of note

According to the LA Times, RAND estimates that about two million previously uninsured people have enrolled in private coverage on Obamacare&#8217;s new marketplaces; about 4.5 million previously uninsured people have gained public coverage through Obamacare&#8217;s Medicaid expansion; and about three million previously uninsured young people are now covered on their parents&#8217; insurance plans.

 

[wiegeabo]

I believe the point of the pic is that 6 million (in the original) is 1/3 of 7 million, according to the chart.

Fox News had to make the number look worse than it seemed, and there's no easier way to do that then with a graph that has no scale on it.

 

[dnno1]

I believe the point of the pic is that 6 million (in the original) is 1/3 of 7 million, according to the chart.

Fox News had to make the number look worse than it seemed, and there's no easier way to do that then with a graph that has no scale on it.

Have you got your math right? 6 million is about 85% (or more than 2.5/3rds)) of 7 million.

 

[dnno1]

How would anyone know? they can't or won't (not sure which) give us numbers that substantiate anything.

If it is 7M "sign up", that is pretty much a failure. If it is 7M that have signed up, paid their first premium and actually HAVE THE INSURANCE READY TO USE....that is a major win. I would love to hear that that is what the number actually means, but I think reality is going to hit. It has been proven time and time again, administration to administration and this administration is no different than others, they like to fudge/cook the numbers.

The numbers are what they are and they substantiate themselves. I am dead certain that they can be fact-checked via the freedom of information act (FOIA) so they aren't going to lie.

 

[Kelly]

The numbers are what they are and they substantiate themselves. I am dead certain that they can be fact-checked via the freedom of information act (FOIA) so they aren't going to lie.

Oh please, this administration is not the administration from heaven dnno1, they all have cooked the books on everything from spending on wars to this, they will lie. And no, you don't have the ability to fact-check it via the freedom of information act. And um, have you ever tried to to push that act, it usually takes years. For a media outlet, or one person to try and get that information through that act will get an answer back about the time President Obama steps out of office.

I'm not stupid dnno1....

Right now it is looking like the majority of this # 7.1 million that have signed up are not people that have NEVER had health care, it is people that lost their insurance and were forced to apply. But, that won't be put out there because that is a net loss. So, before anyone asks me to sing its praises, show me real numbers.

If in a few years this is working, then cool....but right now all that is being thrown around as far as # are mostly BS....and they think people are stupid enough to throw up their hands in a hail the king.

I'm ok with people that agree with this reform, I would just like a few things changed, and a couple of things added....but don't try and BS people on here.

 

[dnno1]

Oh please, this administration is not the administration from heaven dnno1, they all have cooked the books on everything from spending on wars to this, they will lie. And no, you don't have the ability to fact-check it via the freedom of information act. And um, have you ever tried to to push that act, it usually takes years. For a media outlet, or one person to try and get that information through that act will get an answer back about the time President Obama steps out of office.

I'm not stupid dnno1....

Right now it looks like the majority that have signed up are not people that have NEVER had health care, it is people that lost their insurance and were forced to apply.

If in a few years this is working, then cool....but right now all that is being thrown around as far as # are mostly BS....and they think people are stupid enough to throw up their hands in a hail the king.

I'm ok with people that agree with this reform, I would just like a few things changed, and a couple of things added....but don't try and BS people on here.

[YT]UQsYsGMDqko[/YT]

Look, read this article. The truth of the matter is that the numbers don't come from the federal government at all, but from the states themselves according to the LA Times. It is kind of hard to belive all of the states (most of whom have legislatures that are opposed to the law) are in cahoots with the feds on this. You are actually spouting off a new talking point that was ginned up by the Republicans this past weekend. It is pretty remote to even think that the books are being cooked here. Furthermore there were only 1 million folks who got their policies cancelled last year according to the Times. That is hardly most of the signups and of those who got their policies canceled, most of them were retained by their insurers, who just rolled them into a new plan.