Health Care Thread

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Burnem Wizfyre

Burnem Wizfyre

Log Wizard
12,317
21,391
Grim1_sl said:
And you're just another leech on Obama's ass, sucking his bullshit till your eyes float.
Click to expand...
Someone some time ago made on these forums an analogy that is perfect for you, you are a diver in a diving competition (posting on this site) doing belly flops off the high dive, look at the judges giving you all 0's then gets out of the pool jumping up and down celebrating declaring yourself the victor while the rest of us just stand around trying to figure out how someone could possibly be as retarded as you are.
 
Vaclav

Vaclav

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
12,650
877
Grim1 is starting look more and more like an auto fill Mad Lib.

Name - Obama
Object - Obamacare
Adjective - Asskissing
Etc.

Fun times.
 
Siddar

Siddar

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
6,457
6,003
This program is doomed for the simple reason that it is cheaper to pay penalty for not having coverage and if you get sick just sign up, then it is to keep paying monthly for a healthcare plan. This isn't a young person issue it a everyone that is healthy issue.

Anyone who is healthy enough to not need constant medical care saves money at zero risk by simply not having a health plan. Those that need medical care constantly will be the only ones with plans. Sick people that need plans don't pay enough to cover the cost of there care so system will not have enough money to provide care for them are for the the healthy people that only join the system when they need medical care.
 
Nothar

Nothar

Molten Core Raider
84
80
Siddar_sl said:
This program is doomed for the simple reason that it is cheaper to pay penalty for not having coverage and if you get sick just sign up, then it is to keep paying monthly for a healthcare plan. This isn't a young person issue it a everyone that is healthy issue.

Anyone who is healthy enough to not need constant medical care saves money at zero risk by simply not having a health plan. Those that need medical care constantly will be the only ones with plans. Sick people that need plans don't pay enough to cover the cost of there care so system will not have enough money to provide care for them are for the the healthy people that only join the system when they need medical care.
Click to expand...
There are 2 problems with people just paying the penalty and then trying to wait to get coverage until they need it. First the penalty ramps up quickly in 2015 and 2016, up to 2.5% of income over the federal filing threshold. So a single guy making 60,000 a year will pay a penalty of somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,250 bucks (2.5% of 60,000 less filing threshold - likely to be around 10,000 for 2016), which is not an insignificant amount. Secondly, you cannot sign up for an exchange plan whenever you want. After this first year's initial enrollment period, in subsequent years you can only sign up for a plan between October 1st and December 7th each year. Get sick in January? You are screwed on getting insurance for 9 months and you would still pay the penalty that year even if you signed up in October.
 
Fifey

Fifey

Trakanon Raider
2,898
962
Trollface_sl said:
what's your point? that young people have no money?
Click to expand...
Funny thing is I've had health insurance when I started working at 18 up until about 23? until when the economy shit the bed and never once went to the hospital in that time, been uninsured for the last 5~ years but finally picking up health insurance again thanks to Obama. I used to pay 70~ a month for health insurance under Bush but now I'm looking to be paying 200~, WARGGHABLEOBAMA.
 
Siddar

Siddar

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
6,457
6,003
Nothar_sl said:
There are 2 problems with people just paying the penalty and then trying to wait to get coverage until they need it. First the penalty ramps up quickly in 2015 and 2016, up to 2.5% of income over the federal filing threshold. So a single guy making 60,000 a year will pay a penalty of somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,250 bucks (2.5% of 60,000 less filing threshold - likely to be around 10,000 for 2016), which is not an insignificant amount. Secondly, you cannot sign up for an exchange plan whenever you want. After this first year's initial enrollment period, in subsequent years you can only sign up for a plan between October 1st and December 7th each year. Get sick in January? You are screwed on getting insurance for 9 months and you would still pay the penalty that year even if you signed up in October.
Click to expand...
You only lose the potential subsidy when you sign up after that date. So you pay a bit more for a few months on a non subsidy plan that cant turn you down because of a preexisting condition.

2.5% of 60.000 is $1500 or $125 a month if you get sick you may end up with another $1000 a month charge for a non subsidized healthcare plan. Signing up for Obamacare will most likely cost $400-500 a month. So if you don't get sick you spend $125 a month paying penalty. If you sign up for Obama care you spend 400-500 a month. You end up saving between 3300 to 4500 a year by not having healthcare insurance. Your risk is the potential for a $12,000 medical bill if you get sick the day after enrollment closes and your also ill for the entire year.

Math is fairly clear that people in good health are better off dropping coverage and taking a bit of financial risk.
 
Agraza

Agraza

Registered Hutt
6,890
521
They have to actually spend 80% of your premiums on your care or give you a rebate. So if you're healthy then your plans should be consistently cheaper.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
47,389
80,851
Agraza_sl said:
They have to actually spend 80% of your premiums on your care or give you a rebate. So if you're healthy then your plans should be consistently cheaper.
Click to expand...
I got a rebate for next year. I'm looking forward to learning about all the crooked ways that insurance companies will get around that.
 
Downhammer

Downhammer

Vyemm Raider
1,571
4,092
Agraza_sl said:
They have to actually spend 80% of your premiums on your care or give you a rebate. So if you're healthy then your plans should be consistently cheaper.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure the 80% loss ratio applies to the whole pool, not individuals. Unless you get lucky and your whole group is healthy that year there's no way you're seeing any rebate, especially when insurance companies can count nurse hotlines and internal audits towards the 80%.
 
tad10

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,533
595
South Park nailed it tonight. Obama's refusal to admit the problems with Obamacare and the website just make the whole thing so much worse.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,942
138,364
Americans are losing their coverage by political design.
For all of the Affordable Care Act's technical problems, at least one part is working on schedule. The law is systematically dismantling the individual insurance market, as its architects intended from the start.

The millions of Americans who are receiving termination notices because their current coverage does not conform to Health and Human Services Department rules may not realize this is by design. Maybe they trusted President Obama's repeated falsehood that people who liked their health plans could keep them. But Americans should understand that this month's mass cancellation wave has been the President's political goal since 2008. Liberals believe they must destroy the market in order to save it.
Click to expand...
~

Liberals claim the new insurance should cost more because it's better, at least as defined by liberal paternalism. Butthe real reason they want policies to cost more is to drive as many people as possible out of this market and into the subsidized ObamaCare exchanges.

The exchanges need these customers to finance ObamaCare's balance sheet and stabilize its risk pools. On the exchanges, individuals earning more than $46,000 or a family of four above $94,000 don't qualify for subsidies and must buy overpriced insurance. If these middle-class ObamaCare losers can be forced into the exchanges, they become financiers of the new pay-as-you-go entitlement.
Click to expand...
The political press corps is reporting this as a shocking discovery, and we suppose it is if you believed Mr. Obama's promises. NBC News even reports as a "scoop" that the White House knew all along that millions would lose their policies. But HHS's trail of purpose has been there for anyone willing to look.

The text of the Affordable Care Act said that none of its language "shall be construed to require that an individual terminate coverage" that existed as of March 23, 2010, or the date the law was enacted. But as early as June 2010 HHS published a regulation reinterpreting this "Preservation of Right to Maintain Existing Coverage" to obviate that promise.

Even minor policy changes, such as increasing a copay by as little as $5, means that a plan cannot be renewed without rewriting it to obey all of ObamaCare's regulations. In HHS's "regulatory impact analysis" published in the Federal Register, the department estimated that between 40% and 67% wouldn't qualify as a permitted plan, and this was the point-to prevent such policies "from being bought and sold as a commodity in commercial transactions." HHS knew that lightly regulated policies might be popular, especially compared to the restricted choices in the exchanges.

Next, HHS applied very prescriptive mandates to all plans, including those sold outside the exchanges. The law's 10 very broad categories of statutory benefits like hospitalization, prescription drugs or maternity care were construed so that 79.6% of current individual plans didn't meet the targets, according to HHS's own analysis. The rule even put floors under cost-sharing to prevent consumers from paying out of pocket.

HHS wrote that the purpose was to offer merely "a small number of meaningful choices." Letting people make tradeoffs for themselves "would have allowed extremely wide variation across plans in the benefits offered" and "would not have assured consumers that they would have coverage for basic benefits." Forced equity again trumped individual choice.

Hard to believe, but at the time liberals complained that this HHS "essential health benefits" rule wasn't restrictive enough. Pediatric services stop being required at age 19, not 21, and what about speech therapy, medical foods or lactation services?

Liberals needn't have worried. Once customers are herded into the exchanges, HHS has the power to further standardize benefits, further limit choices by barring certain insurers from selling through selective contracting, and generally police the insurers to behave like the government franchises they now are. The state-run exchanges in Vermont and the District of Columbia have already barred individual coverage outside their exchanges.

***
None of this is an accident. It is the deliberate result of the liberal demand that everyone have essentially the same coverage and that government must dictate what that coverage is and how much it costs. Such political control is the central nervous system of the Affordable Care Act, and it is why so many people can't keep the insurance they like.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,942
138,364
Agraza_sl said:
He has been up front about the website and critical of its issues.
Click to expand...
Upfront is telling people what you know will happen, not misleading people and being silent until it goes live

the website isn't the only problem
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,942
138,364
Here's why Obama said people could keep their insurance

For decades before Obama burst onto the political scene, liberals had been pushing for the federal government to establish some sort of national health care program.

But this effort always ran up against the same obstacle - an overwhelming majority of Americans were happy with their coverage and were leery of any changes.

So the health care status quo prevailed again and again, but most prominently when President Clinton's health care reform effort went down in flames in 1994.

Eventually, Democrats learned that whenever proposing changes to the health care system, they had to emphasize that the changes wouldn't affect those who already had coverage they liked.

In 2007, when Obama was still considered a long shot to win the Democratic presidential nomination, then-frontrunner Hillary Clinton was barnstorming early primary states telling audiences that under her universal coverage proposal, "If you have health insurance, and you like it, you keep it, no questions asked."

When Obama took office and made health care his top priority, he understood that one of his main tasks was to convince Americans that he had a plan that could improve the health care system for those who it wasn't currently working well for (such as those with pre-existing conditions) while leaving it untouched for those who were satisfied.

"I know that there are millions of Americans who are content with their health care coverage -- they like their plan and they value their relationship with their doctor," he told the American Medical Association in June 2009.

"And that means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what," Obama said.

In September 2009 -- the same month Obama made his health care pitch to a special joint session of Congress -- a Gallup survey found that 87 percent of Americans with private insurance were satisfied with their medical care.

Obama knew that a lot of people would lose their coverage. Even if there was nothing in the law that explicitly ordered Americans to get rid of their insurance, legislation that made such sweeping changes to the insurance market inevitably was going to create disruption.
Click to expand...
~
A March 2010 Congressional Budget Office report predicted that 8 million would lose employer or individual market coverage.
Click to expand...
buzzphrase
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,942
138,364
'Why Do You Get to Decide What's Lousy?'


"We decide which plans are substandard" coupled with "use the exchange that's what it's there for" supports the concept the idea is to funnel these people into the exchange who would never have chosen to otherwise.

would the applause be as loud if "insurance companies can't charge you more because you are a woman" was changed to "men are going to pay more to balance out the extra services woman use" ?Studies have shown that women use more health care services than men

 
Mist

Mist

REEEEeyore
<Gold Donor>
31,200
23,383
tad10_sl said:
South Park nailed it tonight. Obama's refusal to admit the problems with Obamacare and the website just make the whole thing so much worse.
Click to expand...
THE WEBSITE ISN'T OBAMACARE. THE WEBSITE IS JUST A FUCKING ECOMMERCE PORTAL TO BUY INSURANCE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.