Four hard truths of health care reform

[Polk]

Not true, our existing small business group plan allowed for employess to refuse to be covered as long as they signed a waiver.

This plan is no longer allowed under obamacare and there is no "grandfather" clause that would allow my employer to continue with the same exact small business group plan and coverage situation we have had for years.

Banyan News: Health Care Reform Bulletin Grandfather Clause

That has now expired since 2010, which is why I didn't have to change until now.

What you linked actually backs up what I was saying: (BTW I'm not union and we didn't collectively bargain for our insurance here)

Collectively bargained multi-employer and single employer plans in effect on March 23, 2010 are not subject to the Reform Act rules until the date on which the last of the collective bargaining agreements relating to the coverage terminates. At that time, a collectively bargained plan is then subject to health care reform rules and, assuming it remains grandfathered (based on the rules then in effect), it would have to comply with the requirements for grandfathered plans. The Reform Act specifically provides, however, that a collectively bargained plan is permitted to be amended early for some or all of the Reform Act’s rules. This voluntary amendment will not be treated as a termination of the collective bargaining agreement which might otherwise subject the plan to an earlier Reform Act compliance deadline.

So your employer knew the plan he was signing you up for ran afoul of the law at the time he signed you up for it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This article is nonsense.

1. People leaving their existing policies because they can get better coverage elsewhere is a negative?
2. No one ever claimed the bill was decrease health care costs. The argument was always about decreasing the rate of growth. Since the law hasn't taken effect yet, we can't answer this question one way or the other, but results from individual states (Mass.) and countries that have undertaken similar reforms (Switzerland) look promising.
3. That's true, but meaningless. The entire budget is guess-work.
4. That's true, but why should anyone care? Just because an idea is unpopular doesn't make it bad policy, any more than being popular would make something good policy.

1. The article did not say that was a negative, did they? They just pointed out that, in the context of Obama's promise that you could keep your coverage if you wanted, Obamacare is a failure.
2. No one? Ever? Seriously? I bet I could find plenty of people who made that claim, starting at the top with the President of the United States. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...said-health-care-reform-will-reduce-cost-hea/ Want to try again?
3. Which makes it OK in what way?
4. Can you name a piece of good policy that got more unpopular as time went on?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's an absurd argument, as your employer would have made the same decision even if the ACA had never been passed.

Why would his employer have elected to switch policies to comply with mandates that don't exist?

Talk about absurd.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The irony is that OBAMA CARE is basically the CATO institute's former concept of a good plan.

Had a Republican POTUS proposed this plan the detractors of it would be supporting it and the supporters of it would be its detractors.

How anybody can imagine that forcing people to BUY a product is anything but FACISM I serious don't know.

Lets review what FASCISM is again, shall we?

Facism is the form of government which is lead by and for the primary benefit of corporations.

If ObamaCare doesn't fit that facsistic model, I don't know what does

Even if that was true, which it isn't, it wouldn't be irony.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's an absurd argument, as your employer would have made the same decision even if the ACA had never been passed.

if the act wasn't passed he would have kept us insured the way he did before.

If it is absurd then explain why he would have done this anyway....go ahead.

He still would have had to comply with the non existent law because otherwise he would have been in trouble with the Dimensional Police.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This article is nonsense.

1. People leaving their existing policies because they can get better coverage elsewhere is a negative?
2. No one ever claimed the bill was decrease health care costs. The argument was always about decreasing the rate of growth. Since the law hasn't taken effect yet, we can't answer this question one way or the other, but results from individual states (Mass.) and countries that have undertaken similar reforms (Switzerland) look promising.
3. That's true, but meaningless. The entire budget is guess-work.
4. That's true, but why should anyone care? Just because an idea is unpopular doesn't make it bad policy, any more than being popular would make something good policy.

Do you tire of being wrong? Are you a paid shill perhaps?


PolitiFact | Obama said health care reform will reduce the cost of health care

I'm not wrong. It's not my fault you can't read.

"Now, I just want to repeat this because there's so much misinformation about the cost issue here. You talk to every health care economist out there and they will tell you that whatever ideas are -- whatever ideas exist in terms of bending the cost curve and starting to reduce costs for families, businesses, and government, those elements are in this bill."

He's referring to costs relative to the projected rate of increase, not in absolute terms.

Whatever you think he was referring to, what he said was "We agree on reforms that will finally reduce the costs of health care." He was wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Some people won't get to keep the coverage they like.

If by like you meaning being discriminated against, having their benefits caped, having insurance bureaucrats make their health decisions and being dropped when they get sick you'd be correct

1. 
   Costs aren't going to go down.

1. 
   Actually every analysis fo Obamacare shows that ti lowers total health care spending by slashing wastingful spending
   The Impact of Health Reform on Health System Spending
   Ezra Klein - Does health-care reform bend the cost curve up?
   http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/05/pdf/system_spending.pdf
   Ezra Klein - The five most promising cost controls in the health-care bill
   

   It's just a guess that the law can pay for itself.

   No acually ever since the law passed the CBO scores it and the law keeps getting cheaper. Also every anaylsis other then the CBO fidns savings far exceed the CBO estimates

1. 
   
   Um, genius, just because it might save the government some money on waste, which was already being worked on before Obamacare, does not mean the law will save everyone money, The promise, in case you weren't paying attention, is that the law would save everyone money and lower premiums. That was a lie.
   
   The law includes Medicare reform that isn't happening, like the not paying doctors as much as they get paid with the doc fix. Every time Congress passes the doc fix the cost of Obamacare goes up.
   
   Come back when you know what you are talking about.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Banyan News: Health Care Reform Bulletin Grandfather Clause

That has now expired since 2010, which is why I didn't have to change until now.

What you linked actually backs up what I was saying: (BTW I'm not union and we didn't collectively bargain for our insurance here)

Collectively bargained multi-employer and single employer plans in effect on March 23, 2010 are not subject to the Reform Act rules until the date on which the last of the collective bargaining agreements relating to the coverage terminates. At that time, a collectively bargained plan is then subject to health care reform rules and, assuming it remains grandfathered (based on the rules then in effect), it would have to comply with the requirements for grandfathered plans. The Reform Act specifically provides, however, that a collectively bargained plan is permitted to be amended early for some or all of the Reform Act’s rules. This voluntary amendment will not be treated as a termination of the collective bargaining agreement which might otherwise subject the plan to an earlier Reform Act compliance deadline.

So your employer knew the plan he was signing you up for ran afoul of the law at the time he signed you up for it.

How would he know that? Did Obamacare exist 5 years ago? 10? Does his employer have a time machine? Psychics? Are you just stupid?

I vote for the latter.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Some people won't get to keep the coverage they like.

If by like you meaning being discriminated against, having their benefits caped, having insurance bureaucrats make their health decisions and being dropped when they get sick you'd be correct

Actually every analysis fo Obamacare shows that ti lowers total health care spending by slashing wastingful spending
The Impact of Health Reform on Health System Spending
Ezra Klein - Does health-care reform bend the cost curve up?
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/05/pdf/system_spending.pdf
Ezra Klein - The five most promising cost controls in the health-care bill

It's just a guess that the law can pay for itself.

No acually ever since the law passed the CBO scores it and the law keeps getting cheaper. Also every anaylsis other then the CBO fidns savings far exceed the CBO estimates

Um, genius, just because it might save the government some money on waste, which was already being worked on before Obamacare,

Incorrect before Obama care Medicare advantage was not being scaled down, comparative effectiveness research wasn't funded or used, payment wasn't bundled and based on quality, there wasn't massive use of computerized records, and there wasn't an IMBD board

does not mean the law will save everyone money, The promise, in case you weren't paying attention, is that the law would save everyone money and lower premiums. That was a lie.

How ever all analysis show that the law will lower TOTAL health care spending, by 0.1-0.2% a year.
Ezra Klein - Does health-care reform bend the cost curve up?
The Impact of Health Reform on Health System Spending

The law includes Medicare reform that isn't happening, like the not paying doctors as much as they get paid with the doc fix.

Considered that wasn't in Obama care one would not mention it when talking a bout ObamaCare if one knew what they were talking about.
The reforms that reduce wasteful Medicare spending are happening, unless clueless people like you elect even more clueless republicans who repeal those provisions.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Incorrect before Obama care Medicare advantage was not being scaled down, comparative effectiveness research wasn't funded or used, payment wasn't bundled and based on quality, there wasn't massive use of computerized records, and there wasn't an IMBD board

The Columbia/HCA was brought in 1996, did the PPACA include a time machine they forgot to tell us about?

How ever all analysis show that the law will lower TOTAL health care spending, by 0.1-0.2% a year.
Ezra Klein - Does health-care reform bend the cost curve up?
The Impact of Health Reform on Health System Spending

Am I suppose to listen to analysis from before the PPACA was implemented, and ignore all the studies from since then? Do I look like you?

Considered that wasn't in Obama care one would not mention it when talking a bout ObamaCare if one knew what they were talking about.
The reforms that reduce wasteful Medicare spending are happening, unless clueless people like you elect even more clueless republicans who repeal those provisions.

I think that was my point, genius.

In explicit contradiction to the establishment media’s reporting over the past two days, the CBO has in fact reported that the Obamacare bill will result in an increase in the deficit spending of the United States by at least $109 billion over the next 10 years. Instead of reporting this indisputable fact, the media has been pushing the Obama and Democrat line that Obamacare will “save” $138 billion over the next 10 years in deficit spending versus present projections as if it was the gospel truth.

The big problem with that reporting, and Obama’s claim that Obamacare will be “one of the biggest deficit-reduction plans in history” is that the CBO has explicitly reported that when the “doctor fix” is enacted, the $138 billion in paper “savings” disappear and a $59 billion dollar deficit over 10 years is created by Obamacare over 10 years:

CBO: Obamacare = at least $109 Billion in Deficit Spending | CentristNet

Seriously, get up to date before you try to argue about something. Go talk to Greenbeard, at least he deals with the fact that there are other things in the world than one badly written law.

 

[syrenn]

1. Some people won't get to keep the coverage they like.
2. Costs aren't going to go down.
3. It's just a guess that the law can pay for itself.
4. The more they know the more they'll like it isn't happening.

4 hard truths of health care reform - POLITICO.com Print View


Life just sucks for anyone that supports Obamacare.

Life will suck for those of us who get stuck with it..... If people want obamacare.. they get what they deserve.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Incorrect before Obama care Medicare advantage was not being scaled down, comparative effectiveness research wasn't funded or used, payment wasn't bundled and based on quality, there wasn't massive use of computerized records, and there wasn't an IMBD board

The Columbia/HCA was brought in 1996, did the PPACA include a time machine they forgot to tell us about?

PLz source where the Columbia/HCA, providing for the 2 billion in comparative effectiveness research spent by ObamaCare, where they changed Medicare/caiids payment system, provided enough funding to make every health care center computerized, and created an IMBD board for Medicare/caid. If you can't then it is obvious that you have no clue what you are talking about

How ever all analysis show that the law will lower TOTAL health care spending, by 0.1-0.2% a year.
Ezra Klein - Does health-care reform bend the cost curve up?
The Impact of Health Reform on Health System Spending

Am I suppose to listen to analysis from before the PPACA was implemented, and ignore all the studies from since then? Do I look like you?

Well considering ALL the studies that are real show that it will reduce costs; it really doesn't matter. But you go ahead with denying reality.

Considered that wasn't in Obama care one would not mention it when talking a bout ObamaCare if one knew what they were talking about.
The reforms that reduce wasteful Medicare spending are happening, unless clueless people like you elect even more clueless republicans who repeal those provisions.

I think that was my point, genius.

I see so you want to be dishonest and blame Obamacare for things that have nothing to do with Obamacare. The reason you do this must be because you have no real objection objects to obama care so you have to lie about it

In explicit contradiction to the establishment media’s reporting over the past two days, the CBO has in fact reported that the Obamacare bill will result in an increase in the deficit spending of the United States by at least $109 billion over the next 10 years. Instead of reporting this indisputable fact, the media has been pushing the Obama and Democrat line that Obamacare will “save” $138 billion over the next 10 years in deficit spending versus present projections as if it was the gospel truth.

The big problem with that reporting, and Obama’s claim that Obamacare will be “one of the biggest deficit-reduction plans in history” is that the CBO has explicitly reported that when the “doctor fix” is enacted, the $138 billion in paper “savings” disappear and a $59 billion dollar deficit over 10 years is created by Obamacare over 10 years:

CBO: Obamacare = at least $109 Billion in Deficit Spending | CentristNet

Seriously, get up to date before you try to argue about something. Go talk to Greenbeard, at least he deals with the fact that there are other things in the world than one badly written law.

You are being dishonest and stupid again. You're blaming Obamacare for things it does not do, and things that are not part of Obamacare. It would be like saying that the death penalty increases the deficit because we are spending billions on a border fence.
The CBO, has been scoring Obamacare since it was created and they first found that it would reduced the deficit by around 200billion in ten years, however their most recent publication says that the deficit reduction will be 50bilthon bigger then they first estimated

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Incorrect before Obama care Medicare advantage was not being scaled down, comparative effectiveness research wasn't funded or used, payment wasn't bundled and based on quality, there wasn't massive use of computerized records, and there wasn't an IMBD board

The Columbia/HCA was brought in 1996, did the PPACA include a time machine they forgot to tell us about?

PLz source where the Columbia/HCA, providing for the 2 billion in comparative effectiveness research spent by ObamaCare, where they changed Medicare/caiids payment system, provided enough funding to make every health care center computerized, and created an IMBD board for Medicare/caid. If you can't then it is obvious that you have no clue what you are talking about


Well considering ALL the studies that are real show that it will reduce costs; it really doesn't matter. But you go ahead with denying reality.


I see so you want to be dishonest and blame Obamacare for things that have nothing to do with Obamacare. The reason you do this must be because you have no real objection objects to obama care so you have to lie about it

CBO: Obamacare = at least $109 Billion in Deficit Spending | CentristNet

Seriously, get up to date before you try to argue about something. Go talk to Greenbeard, at least he deals with the fact that there are other things in the world than one badly written law.

You are being dishonest and stupid again. You're blaming Obamacare for things it does not do, and things that are not part of Obamacare. It would be like saying that the death penalty increases the deficit because we are spending billions on a border fence.
The CBO, has been scoring Obamacare since it was created and they first found that it would reduced the deficit by around 200billion in ten years, however their most recent publication says that the deficit reduction will be 50bilthon bigger then they first estimated

I am not being dishonest about anything. The way Obamacare was written is that it would save money adhering to baseline spending. That is an assumption that was disproved within 6 months when Congress again passed a doc fix that increased compensation to doctors above the Medicare baseline of inflation plus 2%. The assumption that the doc fix would not be passed is inherent in Obamacare, and has everything to do with it. The only people that believed that were a few brain dead people in coma wards. Apparently one of them has figured out how to post in this forum, probably through facilitated communication, which is a lie.

In case you didn't get what I just said, I called you a liar for trying to argue that the assumed baseline is not part of Obamacare.

By the way, I linked to the CBO report earlier, feel free to go back and read the actual report, then come back here and show me where it says what you claim it says.

 

[Polk]

This article is nonsense.

1. People leaving their existing policies because they can get better coverage elsewhere is a negative?
2. No one ever claimed the bill was decrease health care costs. The argument was always about decreasing the rate of growth. Since the law hasn't taken effect yet, we can't answer this question one way or the other, but results from individual states (Mass.) and countries that have undertaken similar reforms (Switzerland) look promising.
3. That's true, but meaningless. The entire budget is guess-work.
4. That's true, but why should anyone care? Just because an idea is unpopular doesn't make it bad policy, any more than being popular would make something good policy.

1. The article did not say that was a negative, did they? They just pointed out that, in the context of Obama's promise that you could keep your coverage if you wanted, Obamacare is a failure.
2. No one? Ever? Seriously? I bet I could find plenty of people who made that claim, starting at the top with the President of the United States. PolitiFact | Obama said health care reform will reduce the cost of health care Want to try again?
3. Which makes it OK in what way?
4. Can you name a piece of good policy that got more unpopular as time went on?

1. That's an absurd standard. People purchase insurance to cover potential costs, not out of some deep and abiding love of Aetna's Plan ABC.
2. That canard has already been disposed of. If you actually read the link, you'd see he is referring to lower costs in the context of projected future increases.
3. Because the entire act of writing a budget is based on assumptions about the future. To say the ACA is bad because of that, while ignoring that's true of every proposal is absurd. Paul Ryan's plan to gut Medicare is also based on assumptions about the future.
4. The space program.

 

[Polk]

That's an absurd argument, as your employer would have made the same decision even if the ACA had never been passed.

Why would his employer have elected to switch policies to comply with mandates that don't exist?

Talk about absurd.

If his policy existed before passage, it was already grandfathered in until the middle of the decade. So yes, the change is entirely elective on his employer's part.

 

[Polk]

Do you tire of being wrong? Are you a paid shill perhaps?


PolitiFact | Obama said health care reform will reduce the cost of health care

I'm not wrong. It's not my fault you can't read.

"Now, I just want to repeat this because there's so much misinformation about the cost issue here. You talk to every health care economist out there and they will tell you that whatever ideas are -- whatever ideas exist in terms of bending the cost curve and starting to reduce costs for families, businesses, and government, those elements are in this bill."

He's referring to costs relative to the projected rate of increase, not in absolute terms.

Whatever you think he was referring to, what he said was "We agree on reforms that will finally reduce the costs of health care." He was wrong.

Context matters. It's helps to not cherry pick.

 

[Polk]

That has now expired since 2010, which is why I didn't have to change until now.

What you linked actually backs up what I was saying: (BTW I'm not union and we didn't collectively bargain for our insurance here)

So your employer knew the plan he was signing you up for ran afoul of the law at the time he signed you up for it.

How would he know that? Did Obamacare exist 5 years ago? 10? Does his employer have a time machine? Psychics? Are you just stupid?

I vote for the latter.

He said his employer purchased the plan after passage (as that's the only way it would not qualify for the grandfather clause).

 

[starcraftzzz]

I am not being dishonest about anything.

Already good so you are ready to retract your stupid statment that Obamacare increases the deficit because of a Doc paying plan that was passed int he 90;s

The way Obamacare was written is that it would save money adhering to baseline spending.

Yep and that baseline spending is curved down and reduces the deficit

That is an assumption that was disproved within 6 months when Congress again passed a doc fix that increased compensation to doctors above the Medicare baseline of inflation plus 2%.

And that has nothing to do with Obamacare.

The assumption that the doc fix would not be passed is inherent in Obamacare,

Plz copy and paste the section where Obamacare makes it law that the doc fix will not be increased.

In case you didn't get what I just said, I called you a liar for trying to argue that the assumed baseline is not part of Obamacare.

I called you a laou because you were lying saying that Obamacare would increase the deficit because of other laws.
Plz try not tos sound like a complete retard the next time you post

By the way, I linked to the CBO report earlier, feel free to go back and read the actual report, then come back here and show me where it says what you claim it says.

"The CBO estimates that the insurance coverage costs of PPACA will be just under $1.1 trillion from 2012 to 2021. This represents a $50 billion decrease in CBO’s estimate from March 2011."
Try actually read your sources then maybe you wont be caught lying

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Banyan News: Health Care Reform Bulletin Grandfather Clause

That has now expired since 2010, which is why I didn't have to change until now.

What you linked actually backs up what I was saying: (BTW I'm not union and we didn't collectively bargain for our insurance here)

Collectively bargained multi-employer and single employer plans in effect on March 23, 2010 are not subject to the Reform Act rules until the date on which the last of the collective bargaining agreements relating to the coverage terminates. At that time, a collectively bargained plan is then subject to health care reform rules and, assuming it remains grandfathered (based on the rules then in effect), it would have to comply with the requirements for grandfathered plans. The Reform Act specifically provides, however, that a collectively bargained plan is permitted to be amended early for some or all of the Reform Act’s rules. This voluntary amendment will not be treated as a termination of the collective bargaining agreement which might otherwise subject the plan to an earlier Reform Act compliance deadline.

So your employer knew the plan he was signing you up for ran afoul of the law at the time he signed you up for it.

You must be assuming I got on this plan after Obama became president, i've had this plan since Bush Jr.'s first term.......

try again to defelct the fact that obama straight up LIED about Obamacare in this respect....that one failed too, what is that 3 failed attempts now?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

That's an absurd argument, as your employer would have made the same decision even if the ACA had never been passed.

Why would his employer have elected to switch policies to comply with mandates that don't exist?

Talk about absurd.

Why am I trying to discuss this with polk again