Video: Workers See for the First Time how Obamacare Affects their Premiums/Deductible

[JakeStarkey]

obviously staged

Mr. Starkey, I'm just curious. If you are a Republican and actually want the GOP to win back the Senate, then why have I not heard you once criticize the left? You seem to support Obamacare, the stimulus, and most of Obama's other policies. Honestly, I'm happy you're not voting Dem just because that helps our side, but does the GOP really match your ideology at all?

We can beat the Dems easily by regaining the center, which means downplaying the far right's disdain of female, minority, Hispanic, and gay issues.

Notice none of those are about small government or taxes, of which I favor both, when possible.

People and their needs and lives come first in prioritizing government service to me.

We can't by yelling at Dems if we are not championing people and their needs and showing how we can do that.

We will keep losing the center as we did in 2008 and 2012 if we do it your way, because the demographic began shifting dramatically after 2004.

Do you want to win elections? Think people not Democratic Party.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You think it will only be two million. Bless your heart.

It is a prediction! More than 2 million jobs will be lost on account of Obamacare?

When will this begin? The shit has been law for three years now. We are not......I repeat NOT....losing jobs in this country.

In fact, we are gaining the. Have been for something like 50 straight months.

When the fuck are these job losses going to start?

Give a fucking month and year. Make. Prediction with some bite to it.

 

[MeBelle]

heres the web site
http://www.zanebenefits.com/blog/bid/301310/Health-Insurance-Tax-Subsidy-Charts

My post that you challenged me with, where you're saying I was full of it ...my post was based on per person... ME, I even said my cost is 250 a month ... there are other charts the show a family of 4 making less the 94,000... I've showed you that one too where it shows a family of 4 pays 680 dollars a month ... and I posted that web site which was the ACA web site ... Where you went silent ... now you coming back again trying to prove WHAT ???? you're poving that they ones who claim that they have these
outrageous cost for health care haven't even gone to the ACA web site.... If I remembere correctly you found out that your software was out dated and that's why you coulnd't get on... and if I'm wrong my question to you is how come you have gone to the web site to see what you would pay ...

Finally one of the reason I don't post web sites are you people on the right always say "well that's a liberal site so it doesn't count... so why would I waste my time just to here you say well that's a liberal site it doesn't count ... here's a though... prove me wrong in my statement ... prove that I lied

No, I didn't go silent. Go back and check the thread.
I posted real time photos from Covered California of a family of four who made $95k, received no subsidies. With their premium and deductibles met before any insurance benefits kicked in it cost them $20,000 a year.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...oid-death-spiral-post8502512.html#post8502512 post #17


The ACA isn't a 'liberal website'. If I were you I would stick with the ACA website for reference.

The chart from the blog is wrong. The penalty is (was) $95 at the time the blogger blogged it.

here's what these bloggers do... the fact thats says you got it from as blogger says it all ... these bloggers go to a health care provider, that they find to be the most costly plan to you then say see it cost them this outrageous amount of money ... then people like you lap it up ...the fact that Ive shown you and others on these web sites where an family of 4 in California paid 680 dollars a month tell you they had the right plan and the person you chose had the wrong plan ... their are thousands of providers to choose from ... I'm for one don't have the time to find me the right plan that's why my plan was pick for me by a health care broker ... that's what they do ... if you are so stupid to believe that you can pick a plan for your self among thousands of providers, well all i can say is I hope you don't do your own taxes ... I know I don't ...

heres the web site
http://www.zanebenefits.com/blog/bid/301310/Health-Insurance-Tax-Subsidy-Charts

My post that you challenged me with, where you're saying I was full of it ...my post was based on per person... ME, I even said my cost is 250 a month ... there are other charts the show a family of 4 making less the 94,000... I've showed you that one too where it shows a family of 4 pays 680 dollars a month ... and I posted that web site which was the ACA web site ... Where you went silent ... now you coming back again trying to prove WHAT ???? you're poving that they ones who claim that they have these
outrageous cost for health care haven't even gone to the ACA web site.... If I remembere correctly you found out that your software was out dated and that's why you coulnd't get on... and if I'm wrong my question to you is how come you have gone to the web site to see what you would pay ...

Finally one of the reason I don't post web sites are you people on the right always say "well that's a liberal site so it doesn't count... so why would I waste my time just to here you say well that's a liberal site it doesn't count ... here's a though... prove me wrong in my statement ... prove that I lied

No, I didn't go silent. Go back and check the thread.
I posted real time photos from Covered California of a family of four who made $95k, received no subsidies. With their premium and deductibles met before any insurance benefits kicked in it cost them $20,000 a year.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...oid-death-spiral-post8502512.html#post8502512 post #17


The ACA isn't a 'liberal website'. If I were you I would stick with the ACA website for reference.

The chart from the blog is wrong. The penalty is (was) $95 at the time the blogger blogged it.

if I were you I would suggest you too stick to the ACA web site ... because nothing you have shown here is actually the truth ... one more time its a right wing Blogger you are using ... they aren't for what I believe ... they are for what they can convince people like you how bad liberal Ideas are ... when you learn that you'll stop going to bloggers...

The ACA website is for States who didn't sign on to the Fed ACA and created their own exchange.

Many bloggers post opinion slanted to their ideology.
Bloggers come from all pol persuasion.

In the state I live in Covered Cal IS part of the Fed ACA.
Most states who run their own HC exchange were lured by medicaid dollars.

ACA only kicks the can down the road.

 

[JakeStarkey]

obviously staged

Mr. Starkey, I'm just curious. If you are a Republican and actually want the GOP to win back the Senate, then why have I not heard you once criticize the left? You seem to support Obamacare, the stimulus, and most of Obama's other policies. Honestly, I'm happy you're not voting Dem just because that helps our side, but does the GOP really match your ideology at all?

Jake voted for Obama twice, don't let him yank your penis.

I voted for McCain and Obama.

Your industry is getting what it earned, Antares.

Tuff dat.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You think it will only be two million. Bless your heart.

It is a prediction! More than 2 million jobs will be lost on account of Obamacare?

When will this begin? The shit has Ben law for three years now. We are not......I repeat NOT....losing jobs in this country.

In fact, we are gaining the. Have been for something like 50 straight months.

When the fuck are these job losses going to start?

Give a fucking month and year. Make. Prediction with some bite to it.

Most of these job "losses" are folks now willing to downscale their working hours or retire because they can get affordable, accessible, quality health care.

No one should be tied to job to get health care, the model that Antares prefers. Work until you die but keep paying your health care.

 

[emilynghiem]

Nothing to worry about. Right Democrats? When every company in the country has these types of meetings over the next year, that won't hurt Democrat prospects, right?

I thought the strategy was to blame Republicans.
That Reagan passed the law pushing all public health care costs onto hospitals and ER.
Then the Democrats tried to pass laws to reform it by mandating insurance to provide more insurance coverage and take the burden off abusing ER/hospitals as first point of service, but passed a flawed bill (also blamed on GOP) to start pushing even that to be reformed.
And the Republicans were supposed to come up with a better alternative
instead of shutting down govt throwing a hissy fit over socialized medicine.

So the Democrats are the underdog good guys, and the Republicans need to provide a fix
instead of abusing this for political points. Because Democrats "NEVER" do that!

Never mind all the other ways that health care costs could be REDUCED or PAID FOR.

[Such as revamping the criminal justice and immigration system to hold people accountable for costs who ARE receiving services at taxpayers expense, instead of charging these to taxpayers who aren't breaking any laws or imposing these costs.]

 

[Meister]

You seem upset. Maybe you should do something about that. It must be terribly frustrating to be so sure about things.....only to have the nation decide to ignore you.

Ahh, leftists. "I said stupid shit, and you called me on it. That must mean I upset you!"

Yes, watching you be a damned blithering moron and brag about it DOES tend to irritate me. I'm not sure if you should be proud of being a walking advertisement for seriously late-term abortions, though.

You think I said stupid shit, huh? Isn't that special?

Everything you say is stupid shit, Lone Goofball.

 

[Antares]

obviously staged

Mr. Starkey, I'm just curious. If you are a Republican and actually want the GOP to win back the Senate, then why have I not heard you once criticize the left? You seem to support Obamacare, the stimulus, and most of Obama's other policies. Honestly, I'm happy you're not voting Dem just because that helps our side, but does the GOP really match your ideology at all?

We can beat the Dems easily by regaining the center, which means downplaying the far right's disdain of female, minority, Hispanic, and gay issues.

Notice none of those are about small government or taxes, of which I favor both, when possible.

People and their needs and lives come first in prioritizing government service to me.

We can't by yelling at Dems if we are not championing people and their needs and showing how we can do that.

We will keep losing the center as we did in 2008 and 2012 if we do it your way, because the demographic began shifting dramatically after 2004.

Do you want to win elections? Think people not Democratic Party.

Pay no attention to what happened in 2010 you moron.

Biggest political bitch slap since the 40's.

 

[Antares]

You think it will only be two million. Bless your heart.

It is a prediction! More than 2 million jobs will be lost on account of Obamacare?

When will this begin? The shit has Ben law for three years now. We are not......I repeat NOT....losing jobs in this country.

In fact, we are gaining the. Have been for something like 50 straight months.

When the fuck are these job losses going to start?

Give a fucking month and year. Make. Prediction with some bite to it.

Most of these job "losses" are folks now willing to downscale their working hours or retire because they can get affordable, accessible, quality health care.

No one should be tied to job to get health care, the model that Antares prefers. Work until you die but keep paying your health care.

Spout that Bammy line Fakey.

 

[Antares]

Mr. Starkey, I'm just curious. If you are a Republican and actually want the GOP to win back the Senate, then why have I not heard you once criticize the left? You seem to support Obamacare, the stimulus, and most of Obama's other policies. Honestly, I'm happy you're not voting Dem just because that helps our side, but does the GOP really match your ideology at all?

Jake voted for Obama twice, don't let him yank your penis.

I voted for McCain and Obama.

Your industry is getting what it earned, Antares.

Tuff dat.

Poor Jake, you voted for Obama...the fact that you voted for Obama at all makes everything you post about being a Repub an absolute lie.

But then all of us knew that.

 

[Antares]

You think it will only be two million. Bless your heart.

It is a prediction! More than 2 million jobs will be lost on account of Obamacare?

When will this begin? The shit has been law for three years now. We are not......I repeat NOT....losing jobs in this country.

In fact, we are gaining the. Have been for something like 50 straight months.

When the fuck are these job losses going to start?

Give a fucking month and year. Make. Prediction with some bite to it.

You aren't real bright kid.....the "jobs" being created are those part time jobs you love so well

 

[LoneLaugher]

You think it will only be two million. Bless your heart.

It is a prediction! More than 2 million jobs will be lost on account of Obamacare?

When will this begin? The shit has been law for three years now. We are not......I repeat NOT....losing jobs in this country.

In fact, we are gaining the. Have been for something like 50 straight months.

When the fuck are these job losses going to start?

Give a fucking month and year. Make. Prediction with some bite to it.

You aren't real bright kid.....the "jobs" being created are those part time jobs you love so well

No they aren't. But don't concern yourself with being accurate.

 

[Antares]

It is a prediction! More than 2 million jobs will be lost on account of Obamacare?

When will this begin? The shit has been law for three years now. We are not......I repeat NOT....losing jobs in this country.

In fact, we are gaining the. Have been for something like 50 straight months.

When the fuck are these job losses going to start?

Give a fucking month and year. Make. Prediction with some bite to it.

You aren't real bright kid.....the "jobs" being created are those part time jobs you love so well

No they aren't. But don't concern yourself with being accurate.

Obama Recovery: 88% of Jobs Created in 2013 are Part-Time!

According to Mort Zuckerman, a stunning 88% of jobs created in 2013 are “part-time.” In case you were wondering if this was “historic,” yeah, yeah it is.

Appearing on PBS’s McLaughlin Group, Zuckerman said late last month, “88 percent of the jobs that have been created this year are part-time jobs. A large part of the reason for that number of part-time jobs which is unprecedented in American history is because people are apprehensive about the impact of ObamaCare on and the costs of ObamaCare on full-time jobs.”

Obama Recovery: 88% of Jobs Created in 2013 are Part-Time! | Independent Journal Review

75 Percent Of Jobs Created This Year Were Part-Time Due To Weak Economy, Obamacare Concerns

U.S. businesses are hiring at a robust rate. The only problem is that three out of four of the nearly 1 million hires this year are part-time and many of the jobs are low-paid.

Faltering economic growth at home and abroad and concern that President Barack Obama's signature health care law will drive up business costs are behind the wariness about taking on full-time staff, executives at staffing and payroll firms say.


75 Percent Of Jobs Created This Year Were Part-Time Due To Weak Economy, Obamacare Concerns

You're welcome.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Cuccinelli says most new jobs have been part-time since Obamacare became law | PolitiFact Virginia

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capito...-part-time-as-obama-critics-say-probably-not/

 

[Antares]

Cuccinelli says most new jobs have been part-time since Obamacare became law | PolitiFact Virginia

Are most new jobs part-time, as Obama critics say? Probably not - Capitol Report - MarketWatch

I used HuffPo just for you

Just thank me.....thank me for informing you.

 

[Antares]

Among franchised businesses, 27 percent report their company has replaced full-time workers with part-time workers and 31 percent have reduced worker hours. Among non-franchised businesses, 12 percent are replacing full-time workers with part-time workers or reducing hours. This is happening now, with more than a year before the mandate goes into effect; and undoubtedly, these numbers will rise as we approach next July's "look back" period for tabulating workers' hours

This shift to more part-time workers reflects a specific problem within the ACA — the definition of a full-time worker. The ACA mandates that any business with more than 50 full-time equivalent workers must provide health-care coverage or potentially pay a penalty. Rather than the traditional 40-hour work week definition, the ACA redefined a full-time worker as anyone working 30 or more hours a week, averaged over the course of a month. For many employers already dealing with thin margins, the threat of these extra costs make reducing hours a business necessity — and could be the difference between staying in business or going out of business.

Business backlash: Obamacare's part-time jobs problem?Commentary

CNBC, CLEARLY a "rightwing" source.

 

[MeBelle]

You think it will only be two million. Bless your heart.

It is a prediction! More than 2 million jobs will be lost on account of Obamacare?

When will this begin?

Bug off with your 'demands' and do your own research. You're in denial, don't do the hard research nor work in the healthcare industry.

The shit has been law for three years now.

Now that statement I agree with!

We are not......I repeat NOT....losing jobs in this country.

In fact, we are gaining the. Have been for something like 50 straight months.

The mere fact employers are cutting hours to <30 per week in order to comply with the ACA mandate which states 30 hours per week consists of 'full time' has cut full time employment to 3/4 time.

And then there's this:

ACA Coverage Mandate Could Hurt Some Calif. Workers
Under the Affordable Care Act, large firms must provide health care coverage to employees who work at least 30 hours per week.

When the fuck are these job losses going to start?
Give a fucking month and year. Make. Prediction with some bite to it.

It's already started.

As a witness at the hearing , chaired by Pennsylvania Republican Joe Pitts, I testified that the new law will reduce employment in America, particularly for low-skill workers, because employers face a higher cost of labor.

Whenever possible, firms will substitute high-skill for low-skill labor, part-time for full-time workers, machinery for people, and refrain from hiring a 50th worker, which can make them liable for penalties.

Obamacare will reduce U.S. employment - Diana Furchtgott-Roth - MarketWatch



According to our resident expert Greenbeard (whom I secretly have a crush on ... but... ) -

Hi all.
The CBO's annual budget outlook came out and it's got some pretty good news in it.

Premiums are cheaper than they expected when determining the cost of the law This became obvious last year when the actual premiums were first released but, to their credit, the CBO copped to it in their first projection post-premiums being announced. As they say: "CBO and JCT lowered their estimate of average premiums for insurance coverage through exchanges in 2014 by about 15 percent on the basis of a preliminary analysis of plans offered through exchanges." Similarly, projections of federal subsidies per subsidized enrollee dropped by about 11% as costs turned out to be lower than expected.

The net cost of the law this year fallen by $8 billion or more than 16%.

The "bailout" will net the government $8 billion. Apparently conservatives found out recently the law has risk corridors through the end of 2016 and turned it into a major cause. Except, according to the CBO, what once was going to break even is now going to net the government a few billion dollars: "CBO now projects that, over the 2015-2017 period, risk corridor payments from the federal government to health insurers will total $8 billion and that the corresponding collections from insurers will amount to $16 billion, yielding net savings for the federal government of $8 billion. By contrast, in its baseline projections in May 2013, the agency estimated that payments and collections for risk corridors would roughly offset one another."

Medicare spending growth just keeps slowing down. Projected Medicare spending over the 2013-23 period is now $116 billion lower than the CBO projected last spring. As they put it, "the slowdown in Medicare cost growth during the past several years has been sufficiently broad and persistent to lead CBO to project that [Medicare cost] growth will be slower than usual for some years to come."

And if you want to compare to a window covered by the last pre-ACA projection of Medicare spending, back in January 2010, you can compare projections for the 2013-2020 period (an 8 year period, which is smaller than the usual 10-year CBO budget window) then and today: Medicare is now projected to be a whopping $1.093 trillion cheaper over that truncated window than pre-ACA estimates suggested. With the savings, the ACA was supposed to do a little better than breaking even--turns out it's doing a lot better than just breaking even.

The part-timer myth is just that. CBO has seen "no compelling evidence that part-time employment has increased as a result of the ACA." Turns out anecdotes don't translate into data.

Ultimately they see the ranks of the uninsured shrinking by 13 million in a single year, costs coming in lower than expected, and, while they don't comment on quality, through other indicators we've seen hospital quality conspicuously increasing in recent years. Who knew?

 

[LoneLaugher]

All this wishful thinking would be cute if you were wishing for good things to happen, nutters.

 

[Politico]

You aren't real bright kid.....the "jobs" being created are those part time jobs you love so well

No they aren't. But don't concern yourself with being accurate.

Obama Recovery: 88% of Jobs Created in 2013 are Part-Time!

According to Mort Zuckerman, a stunning 88% of jobs created in 2013 are “part-time.” In case you were wondering if this was “historic,” yeah, yeah it is.

Appearing on PBS’s McLaughlin Group, Zuckerman said late last month, “88 percent of the jobs that have been created this year are part-time jobs. A large part of the reason for that number of part-time jobs which is unprecedented in American history is because people are apprehensive about the impact of ObamaCare on and the costs of ObamaCare on full-time jobs.”

Obama Recovery: 88% of Jobs Created in 2013 are Part-Time! | Independent Journal Review

75 Percent Of Jobs Created This Year Were Part-Time Due To Weak Economy, Obamacare Concerns

U.S. businesses are hiring at a robust rate. The only problem is that three out of four of the nearly 1 million hires this year are part-time and many of the jobs are low-paid.

Faltering economic growth at home and abroad and concern that President Barack Obama's signature health care law will drive up business costs are behind the wariness about taking on full-time staff, executives at staffing and payroll firms say.


75 Percent Of Jobs Created This Year Were Part-Time Due To Weak Economy, Obamacare Concerns

You're welcome.

It ha squat to do with a weak economy. It is all about not having to offer insurance. Easier to let the taxpayers pay for the subsidies.

 

[Antares]

No they aren't. But don't concern yourself with being accurate.

Obama Recovery: 88% of Jobs Created in 2013 are Part-Time!

According to Mort Zuckerman, a stunning 88% of jobs created in 2013 are “part-time.” In case you were wondering if this was “historic,” yeah, yeah it is.

Appearing on PBS’s McLaughlin Group, Zuckerman said late last month, “88 percent of the jobs that have been created this year are part-time jobs. A large part of the reason for that number of part-time jobs which is unprecedented in American history is because people are apprehensive about the impact of ObamaCare on and the costs of ObamaCare on full-time jobs.”

Obama Recovery: 88% of Jobs Created in 2013 are Part-Time! | Independent Journal Review

75 Percent Of Jobs Created This Year Were Part-Time Due To Weak Economy, Obamacare Concerns

U.S. businesses are hiring at a robust rate. The only problem is that three out of four of the nearly 1 million hires this year are part-time and many of the jobs are low-paid.

Faltering economic growth at home and abroad and concern that President Barack Obama's signature health care law will drive up business costs are behind the wariness about taking on full-time staff, executives at staffing and payroll firms say.


75 Percent Of Jobs Created This Year Were Part-Time Due To Weak Economy, Obamacare Concerns

You're welcome.

It ha squat to do with a weak economy. It is all about not having to offer insurance. Easier to let the taxpayers pay for the subsidies.

Take it up with CBO report that Greenteeth did not read, it is their point also.