Almost 80 million with employer health care plans could have coverage canceled

[LordBrownTrout]

But its possible all those things can and will happen so stop telling half the story if you want to look the least bit credible

But most evidence is proving otherwise to date.

Is most the same as all?

Like I said the sausage is still being made. You want to talk about grinding the pig meat when other people are looking at the bigger picture. The Sausage...people love sausage and other countries love their healthcare

O already tried to lipstick the pig but everyone saw through it. Are you trying to dress up the sausage now....

 

[WelfareQueen]

Good God Almighty, how many times is this bogus meme going to crop up?

Why bogus? Explain in detail.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Sure it has relevance if you're going around saying that people will lose their plan and they are getting another one.

Lies by omission

Except it isn't. There is no guarantee that an employer will be able to afford the new plan. There is no guarantee that the plan will be "better". The ONLY guarantee at this juncture, is that if you liked your plan, you can not keep your plan. Period.

But its possible all those things can and will happen so stop telling half the story if you want to look the least bit credible

Don't be such a kidder. There are those of us who are quite sure those on your side would be content if no one ever questioned Obama or his policies.
That is your actual agenda. That we should all just take our marching orders from Dear Leader and shut up about it.

 

[Katzndogz]

Canceled is half the story....Getting a better or cheaper plan is the part they keep forgetting to mention.

Its like if David Blaine took your dollar and turned it into a $20. The OP would title it "David Blaine takes money from audience!"

It's like David Blaine taking the dollar, turned into a pot metal slug than gave it back saying This is really a $20 dollar gold piece". Liberals would say "Man turns d9wn $20.".

The policies aren't cheaper. They are more expensive with deductibles that eliminate the possibility of any effective insurance. The policies aren't better. They just give coverage for impossible eventualities.

It's like your homeowners policy raising your rates by increasing yourcoverage to include arson due to martian invasion on a thursday afternoon if the moon is full. Yes your coverage has been increased. Does this make your policy better? How much more do you want to pay for this better coverage.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Internal Obama Administration numbers have been found saying 55% of people with employer sponsored insurance will lose their plans as soon as the employer mandate kicks in.

So does the promise still hold...."if you like your plan, you can keep your plan...period?"

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why is this thread not in the "Hate and Fear" forum? Oh, yeah, we don't have one. Maybe it's time.

Thanks for sharing.

You're most welcome. I always appreciate imitation, as most know it is the highest form of flattery.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Fox News is lying to you. See posts 13 and 14 in this topic: http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...l-outcome-of-80-million-employees-losing.html

I read your posts and the rest of that thread.

If a plan is not (un)aca compliant it will be cancelled. Period. You're pointing out that the word 'cancelled' does not appear but rather 'lose grandfather status'.

What does 'lose grandfather status' mean? That they can no longer keep that plan because the plan is not (un)aca compliant. So what happens to the plan?

It. Gets. Cancelled.

Period.

The only one lying is the obama and dems who continue to spew the shit they do.

 

[WelfareQueen]

So Fox News is lying? Right. How about Forbes, CNN, the New York Times or The National Review among many others. Why do liberals always lie? It is easy to google the story and get the real facts, but libtards would rather lie like their Messiah. Here is another source saying exactly the same thing.


In 2010, Administration Predicted 'Majority' of Employer-Based Health Plans Would Disappear | National Review Online

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Why is this thread not in the "Hate and Fear" forum? Oh, yeah, we don't have one. Maybe it's time.

Thanks for sharing.

You're most welcome. I always appreciate imitation, as most know it is the highest form of flattery.

Thanks for Sharing = You're too dumb to warrant a response.

I'm sure this is quite flattering to a simpleton, yes.

 

[Kosh]

So Fox News is lying? Right. How about Forbes, CNN, the New York Times or The National Review among many others. Why do liberals always lie? It is easy to google the story and get the real facts, but libtards would rather lie like their Messiah. Here is another source saying exactly the same thing.


In 2010, Administration Predicted 'Majority' of Employer-Based Health Plans Would Disappear | National Review Online

And if CNN and the New York Times (both far left mouth pieces) are reporting it, this must be true.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Internal Obama Administration numbers have been found saying 55% of people with employer sponsored insurance will lose their plans as soon as the employer mandate kicks in.

So does the promise still hold...."if you like your plan, you can keep your plan...period?"

If true, a bunch of insurance agents will lost their jobs (will CEO's still receive huge bonuses, for cutting down costs?); county hospitals will be treating the unemployed insurance co. employees - agents, clerks, underwriters, custodians - and roads will not be fixed, 911 calls will go unheeded, domestic and wild animals will roam free and local public employees will lose their jobs. Soon the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker and the local deli will go out of business and all because the King didn't listen to Henny Penny.

Well Henny (aka: WelfareQueen), no one can blame you for the coming crash.

 

[Zoom-boing]

So Fox News is lying? Right. How about Forbes, CNN, the New York Times or The National Review among many others. Why do liberals always lie? It is easy to google the story and get the real facts, but libtards would rather lie like their Messiah. Here is another source saying exactly the same thing.


In 2010, Administration Predicted 'Majority' of Employer-Based Health Plans Would Disappear | National Review Online

So when these plans disappear and a company decides not to offer insurance, will the employers raise the pay of the employees? Health insurance benefits are part of an employees pay. Or will the employers just pay whatever fine may apply to them, bag insurance benefits, and keep the employees pay the same?

 

[g5000]

Fox News is lying to you. See posts 13 and 14 in this topic: http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...l-outcome-of-80-million-employees-losing.html

If those plans aren't up to aca regulation specs, how do you reconcile that they will be allowed to keep their plans? I cover 49 employees and the plan that I have offered, through a small business pact with several other owners, doesn't satisfy those standards.

I have explained this the umpteen other times this rumor has come up.

But first, you have less than 50 full time employees, so you are not subject to the employer mandate.


For those who are subject to the mandate, they will have two choices IF they lose their grandfather status and IF they have more than 50 full time employees and IF they do not meet the ACA standards.

The first option will be to improve their plans. This will result in employees having BETTER coverage than they did before. Yay!

The second option will be to stop sponsoring insurance for their employees. This is the dreaded "cancelled policies". It will be nowhere near 80 million people.

In this stuation, the employer will be assessed a fine which will be used toward the insurance their employees will get through an insurance exchange. So, again, the employees will have BETTER coverage than they did before. Yay!


For many, if not most, employees who get insurance through their employer, their workplace insurance plans already exceed the ACA requirements before there even was such a thing as the ACA. For these people, if their employer loses their grandfather status, it will have no effect. Which is why I have said in every topic about this is that people just need to go and speak with their HR department to see if I tell the truth. They will quickly discover Fox News is full of shit.

 

[g5000]

So Fox News is lying? Right. How about Forbes, CNN, the New York Times or The National Review among many others. Why do liberals always lie? It is easy to google the story and get the real facts, but libtards would rather lie like their Messiah. Here is another source saying exactly the same thing.


In 2010, Administration Predicted 'Majority' of Employer-Based Health Plans Would Disappear | National Review Online

So when these plans disappear and a company decides not to offer insurance, will the employers raise the pay of the employees? Health insurance benefits are part of an employees pay. Or will the employers just pay whatever fine may apply to them, bag insurance benefits, and keep the employees pay the same?

That will be for the employees to negotiate with their employer.

The employer-sponsored health insurance tax exemption is the largest individual tax expenditure in the federal budget. So the loss of the employer's share of insurance costs is not a one-for-one exchange. The employee would have to be paid more than the employer's cost share to break even, since they will be taxed on any increase in income which supplants their former insurance benefit.

They can then use this money to buy insurance through an exchange.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Funny, yet again, you've completely overlooked the elephant in the room, g5000;


THE COST OF UPGRADING THESE PLANS.

It's as though you WANT to leave this important morsel out because when you add it in, it becomes a little more clear whether or not what you're saying is true.

SO, what happens when employers can not afford to"upgrade" the group plans to become compliant? When these individuals now have to go to the exchange, where they are likely to experience what individuals are experiencing now - price increases they can not afford?


What then? Suck an egg? Eat cake?

And your personal assessment on how many people are going to become casualties to Obama Tax is irrelevant. 80 million is a lot. But even if 1 million people lose their plan, well, that's just tough shit, right? Pay more! Oh, what you can not afford more? Eat cake!

 

[Zoom-boing]

Fox News is lying to you. See posts 13 and 14 in this topic: http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...l-outcome-of-80-million-employees-losing.html

If those plans aren't up to aca regulation specs, how do you reconcile that they will be allowed to keep their plans? I cover 49 employees and the plan that I have offered, through a small business pact with several other owners, doesn't satisfy those standards.

I have explained this the umpteen other times this rumor has come up.

But first, you have less than 50 full time employees, so you are not subject to the employer mandate.


For those who are subject to the mandate, they will have two choices IF they lose their grandfather status and IF they have more than 50 full time employees and IF they do not meet the ACA standards.

The first option will be to improve their plans. This will result in employees having BETTER coverage than they did before. Yay!

The second option will be to stop sponsoring insurance for their employees. This is the dreaded "cancelled policies". It will be nowhere near 80 million people.

In this stuation, the employer will be assessed a fine which will be used toward the insurance their employees will get through an insurance exchange. So, again, the employees will have BETTER coverage than they did before. Yay!


For many, if not most, employees who get insurance through their employer, their workplace insurance plans already exceed the ACA requirements before there even was such a thing as the ACA. For these people, if their employer loses their grandfather status, it will have no effect. Which is why I have said in every topic about this is that people just need to go and speak with their HR department to see if I tell the truth. They will quickly discover Fox News is full of shit.

Paying for something you neither need nor want is 'a better plan'? In whose world??

If an employer's plan was already (un)aca compliant then it wasn't grandfathered in to begin with, as it was already compliant.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Fox News is lying to you. See posts 13 and 14 in this topic: http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...l-outcome-of-80-million-employees-losing.html

If those plans aren't up to aca regulation specs, how do you reconcile that they will be allowed to keep their plans? I cover 49 employees and the plan that I have offered, through a small business pact with several other owners, doesn't satisfy those standards.

I have explained this the umpteen other times this rumor has come up.

But first, you have less than 50 full time employees, so you are not subject to the employer mandate.


For those who are subject to the mandate, they will have two choices IF they lose their grandfather status and IF they have more than 50 full time employees and IF they do not meet the ACA standards.

The first option will be to improve their plans. This will result in employees having BETTER coverage than they did before. Yay!

The second option will be to stop sponsoring insurance for their employees. This is the dreaded "cancelled policies". It will be nowhere near 80 million people.

In this stuation, the employer will be assessed a fine which will be used toward the insurance their employees will get through an insurance exchange. So, again, the employees will have BETTER coverage than they did before. Yay!


For many, if not most, employees who get insurance through their employer, their workplace insurance plans already exceed the ACA requirements before there even was such a thing as the ACA. For these people, if their employer loses their grandfather status, it will have no effect. Which is why I have said in every topic about this is that people just need to go and speak with their HR department to see if I tell the truth. They will quickly discover Fox News is full of shit.

This is virtually all complete bullshit, but assuming it is true for a second, it raises one major question.

Is Obama a liar or not? I like my employer based plan. I want to keep it. I do not need some assholes in Washington telling me what I want or need.

So can I keep my employer based plan?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Fox News is lying to you. See posts 13 and 14 in this topic: http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...l-outcome-of-80-million-employees-losing.html

If those plans aren't up to aca regulation specs, how do you reconcile that they will be allowed to keep their plans? I cover 49 employees and the plan that I have offered, through a small business pact with several other owners, doesn't satisfy those standards.

I have explained this the umpteen other times this rumor has come up.

But first, you have less than 50 full time employees, so you are not subject to the employer mandate.


For those who are subject to the mandate, they will have two choices IF they lose their grandfather status and IF they have more than 50 full time employees and IF they do not meet the ACA standards.

The first option will be to improve their plans. This will result in employees having BETTER coverage than they did before. Yay!

The second option will be to stop sponsoring insurance for their employees. This is the dreaded "cancelled policies". It will be nowhere near 80 million people.

In this stuation, the employer will be assessed a fine which will be used toward the insurance their employees will get through an insurance exchange. So, again, the employees will have BETTER coverage than they did before. Yay!


For many, if not most, employees who get insurance through their employer, their workplace insurance plans already exceed the ACA requirements before there even was such a thing as the ACA. For these people, if their employer loses their grandfather status, it will have no effect. Which is why I have said in every topic about this is that people just need to go and speak with their HR department to see if I tell the truth. They will quickly discover Fox News is full of shit.

That's still not reconciliation. I knew that much. Again, differing coverages will be subjected to higher premiums and deductibles based on what is offered in these plans. Prices will rise. Who is to say what I should or should not have in my plan? Apparently, govt does and has mandated that the individual pay a higher premium for such coverage.....even if he/she does not want it. There's nothing yay about that.

 

[g5000]

If those plans aren't up to aca regulation specs, how do you reconcile that they will be allowed to keep their plans? I cover 49 employees and the plan that I have offered, through a small business pact with several other owners, doesn't satisfy those standards.

Some things you might find useful:

The small business Health Care Tax Credit helps small employers afford the cost of health care coverage for their employees and is specifically targeted for those employers with low- and moderate-income workers. The credit is designed to encourage small employers to offer health insurance coverage for the first time or maintain coverage they already have

Open for enrollment now, small employers with generally up to 50 employees will have access to the new health care insurance marketplaces through the Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP). Currently, small businesses may pay on average 18% more than big businesses for health insurance because of administrative costs. SHOP offers small employers increased purchasing power to obtain a better choice of high-quality coverage at a lower cost. Costs are lowered because small employers can pool their risk. To enroll, eligible employers must have an office within the service area of the SHOP and offer SHOP coverage to all full-time employees. In 2016, employers with up to 100 employees will be able to participate in SHOP.

SBA.gov

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I for the life of me can not understand what is going through the head of someone who doesn't take into account whether or not someone can actually afford to "improve" or "upgrade" from their current plan. Whether that be an individual or a group, or an employer.

it's like the twilight zone with this.