Looks like Tea Party was right about Obamacare. America owes them an apology

[Redfish]

These dingleberries are deathly afraid that by November of 2014, Americans will find that they like the ACA. And that they think that the major improvement would be a Universal Single Payer Health Care System based on an income tax on all income, at all levels.

As did the residents of Massachusetts and the citizens of Canada.

LOL, better do some checking "dingleberry". The canadians are moving back to free market medical care. Their canadian obozocare is failing them big time.

 

[candycorn]

Look at it this way.....

My 23 year old son had an option....buy his own insurance or risk it without buying insurance and hope he doesn't need it.

1)If he bought insurance, he would pay 2500 a year (arbitrary number)....he would likely benefit from about 500 after his deductible....for his annual visit and perhaps medication...so the insurance company profited 2000 off of him.

2)If he passed on insurance, the insurance company is a non factor.

Now?

3) He no longer pays the 2500.....and he is on my policy....and if he uses 500 as he did in example 1...that is a negative 500 to the insurance company for my policy premium has not changed yet for him being an addition

So when you compare 1 to 3....there is a total bottom line difference of 2500 to the insurance company.

So in #3, you're stating that you'er getting free insurance for you and him?

Most people--in fact every one I've ever met who has kids on their insurance--pays for them.
But if you're one of the few whose insurance is free for you and your family...I guess you have a point. I think most people pay for their kids being on their insurance though.

Nice that you're worried about the insurance company's profits though. Take heart, Obamacare will mean more people than ever will be on insurance. More than making up for the $2,500 hole you've forecasted.

No CC...

I do not get insurance for free.

I have a family plan.

At one point I had all 4 of us on it.

Then it went down to three.
Then down to two (my wife and I).
Now it went back to 4...although my older one is getting his won as he is hitting the 26 mark.
But my premium did not change due to the amount of people on the plan.
They never do. A family plan is a family plan...whether you have 1 kid or 100 kids.

Never is a long time...

Here is the plan for a couple and kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You, your spouse, and your children
$354.12

Here is the plan for a couple with no kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You and your spouse
$255.70

You are paying almost $100 more for having kids on your plan. I see what you're saying. You're be paying $100 more if you had 1 kid on your plan or 100. But earlier you indicated that there are no additional monies going to the insurance companies due to having kids on your health plan. In truth, you're paying $100 or so more than you would be if the cut off were still 18.

There does seem to be a loophole for multiple kids and I see your point.

However, the 40+ million new customers that will be buying insurance will likely make up for this loophole with the insurance companies.

 

[Redfish]

So in #3, you're stating that you'er getting free insurance for you and him?

Most people--in fact every one I've ever met who has kids on their insurance--pays for them.
But if you're one of the few whose insurance is free for you and your family...I guess you have a point. I think most people pay for their kids being on their insurance though.

Nice that you're worried about the insurance company's profits though. Take heart, Obamacare will mean more people than ever will be on insurance. More than making up for the $2,500 hole you've forecasted.

No CC...

I do not get insurance for free.

I have a family plan.

At one point I had all 4 of us on it.

Then it went down to three.
Then down to two (my wife and I).
Now it went back to 4...although my older one is getting his won as he is hitting the 26 mark.
But my premium did not change due to the amount of people on the plan.
They never do. A family plan is a family plan...whether you have 1 kid or 100 kids.

Never is a long time...

Here is the plan for a couple and kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You, your spouse, and your children
$354.12

Here is the plan for a couple with no kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You and your spouse
$255.70

You are paying almost $100 more for having kids on your plan. I see what you're saying. You're be paying $100 more if you had 1 kid on your plan or 100. But earlier you indicated that there are no additional monies going to the insurance companies due to having kids on your health plan. In truth, you're paying $100 or so more than you would be if the cut off were still 18.

There does seem to be a loophole for multiple kids and I see your point.

However, the 40+ million new customers that will be buying insurance will likely make up for this loophole with the insurance companies.

I assume that the $6350 is what you have to pay out of pocket before the insurance pays anything-------------and you somehow think thats a good deal????

 

[Jarhead]

So in #3, you're stating that you'er getting free insurance for you and him?

Most people--in fact every one I've ever met who has kids on their insurance--pays for them.
But if you're one of the few whose insurance is free for you and your family...I guess you have a point. I think most people pay for their kids being on their insurance though.

Nice that you're worried about the insurance company's profits though. Take heart, Obamacare will mean more people than ever will be on insurance. More than making up for the $2,500 hole you've forecasted.

No CC...

I do not get insurance for free.

I have a family plan.

At one point I had all 4 of us on it.

Then it went down to three.
Then down to two (my wife and I).
Now it went back to 4...although my older one is getting his won as he is hitting the 26 mark.
But my premium did not change due to the amount of people on the plan.
They never do. A family plan is a family plan...whether you have 1 kid or 100 kids.

Never is a long time...

Here is the plan for a couple and kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You, your spouse, and your children
$354.12

Here is the plan for a couple with no kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You and your spouse
$255.70

You are paying almost $100 more for having kids on your plan. I see what you're saying. You're be paying $100 more if you had 1 kid on your plan or 100. But earlier you indicated that there are no additional monies going to the insurance companies due to having kids on your health plan. In truth, you're paying $100 or so more than you would be if the cut off were still 18.

There does seem to be a loophole for multiple kids and I see your point.

However, the 40+ million new customers that will be buying insurance will likely make up for this loophole with the insurance companies.

first off....that 40 million number has yet to been proven and to the contrary, it has been largely disproved.....but putting that aside....

the "loophole" you see is just one issue...

Then there is the other issue....the bigger issue.....

Pre existing condition clauses were inserted into the insurance industry as a means to maintain the reason for insurance to begin with....people were not looking at it as insurance. They were looking at it as a "means to cut expenses". They refused to buy insurance until they NEEDED healthcare. They would break a leg....THEN buy insurance.

Dental insurance rectified the problem by not allowing the policy to go into affect for 6 months....eliminating those that bought the policy AFTER they broke a tooth.

Hurricane insurance rectified the problem by not allowing it to go into affect for 30 days....eliminating those that would try to buy it when they saw a hurricane coming.

But it was not so easy for health insurance for a variety of reasons.

So lets look at what we have now....

I am 30 years old (I wish). I don't want to pay the 5000 a year for a policy. I am healthy. I don't need it. I prefer paying the 700 tax/penalty.

But...if I find out I have a serious ailment? THEN I will buy a policy.

And I cant be denied because it is now against the law.

THAT is going to be the true reason why premiums will skyrocket....insurance companies will ultimately go under...and we will be in a single payer plan within one decade.

And whereas you may think that is a good thing, the majority of Americans don't want it.

But that is a debate for another day.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Of course the real life real world positive stories about Obamacare, do the Obama haters around here post them?

Of course not.

A Staunch Republican Tries Obamacare ... And Discovers That It's Actually Pretty Awesome

"...Butch Matthews, a 61-year-old former small business owner from Little Rock, Arkansas. Matthews, a diehard Republican, was skeptical of Obamacare. But the new law has already allowed him to buy insurance that is both much better, and much cheaper, than the astronomically expensive pre-Obamacare plan he was clinging to from Blue Cross Blue Shield.

Matthews' old Blue Cross plan cost $1,069 a month and had a $10,000 deductible.

The plan he just bought on the Arkansas state exchange has a $0 premium (after the government subsidy he gets because of his low income level) and only a $750 deductible. It's also a "Silver" plan, which has much better benefits than the vastly more expensive "Bronze" plan he ditched.

Mukherjee asked Matthews whether he had any advice for fellow Republicans now that he has learned that Obamacare actually isn't that bad.

Here's what he had to say:

“I would tell them to learn more about it before they start talking bad about it....”

A Republican Discovers He Likes Obamacare - Business Insider

What a bunch of hogwash...^

It appears that Butch could have applied for Medicaid help BEFORE if he qualifies now for aid...also plans for those getting financial help MUST be Silver or better...

There is really no "better" plan......as all Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum plans cover the SAME Essential Health Benefits....

The only real differences among the plans is
1) how much you pay upfront and
2) how much of the total costs the plans cover....

You need to be aware of these cost factors when choosing among the 4 plans:
Deductibles
Copayments
Coinsurance
Annual Out Of Pocket Limit (2014 limits set at $6,350 ind/$12,700 fam)

On average a Bronze plan will cover about 60% of the total covered medical expenses and you must pay the remaining 40%....(up to the annual out of pocket limit)

Silver covers about 70%
Gold 80%
Platinum 90%...

How To Choose Between Bronze, Silver, Gold And Platinum Health Insurance Plans - Forbes

 

[Flopper]

Of course the real life real world positive stories about Obamacare, do the Obama haters around here post them?

Of course not.

A Staunch Republican Tries Obamacare ... And Discovers That It's Actually Pretty Awesome

"...Butch Matthews, a 61-year-old former small business owner from Little Rock, Arkansas. Matthews, a diehard Republican, was skeptical of Obamacare. But the new law has already allowed him to buy insurance that is both much better, and much cheaper, than the astronomically expensive pre-Obamacare plan he was clinging to from Blue Cross Blue Shield.

Matthews' old Blue Cross plan cost $1,069 a month and had a $10,000 deductible.

The plan he just bought on the Arkansas state exchange has a $0 premium (after the government subsidy he gets because of his low income level) and only a $750 deductible. It's also a "Silver" plan, which has much better benefits than the vastly more expensive "Bronze" plan he ditched.

Mukherjee asked Matthews whether he had any advice for fellow Republicans now that he has learned that Obamacare actually isn't that bad.

Here's what he had to say:

“I would tell them to learn more about it before they start talking bad about it....”

A Republican Discovers He Likes Obamacare - Business Insider

No offense......but I have trouble believing a 12,500 a year premium for 10,000 deductible policy.

And, besides....of course the ACA is good for those that will have a zero premium. Who would ever argue that?

Under the law, the maximum amount a consumer with an individual plan with single coverage will pay in 2014 including deductibles and copay excluding premiums will generally be $6,350 while a family could pay up to $12,700. There are some plans listed on the exchanges that do have high deductibles that exceed the out of pocket maximums in which case the deductible should be disregarded because it is out of pocket maximum that's important. So it be would legal to list a plan with a $10,000 deductible and $12,000 premium but it would be meaningless because of the lower out of pocket maximums. Insurance companies are now required by law to spend 80% of the premium on healthcare expenses therefore if premiums are out of line with benefits paid, the company has to rebate to customers the excess.

Federal Rule Allows Higher Out-Of-Pocket Spending For One Year - Kaiser Health News

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

It is incredible the opposition to a program that will eventually help America's working classes. Simply incredible the can't do or won't do attitude of the privileged in America.

'Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare'

'UPDATE I re-reported a Fox News segment on Obamacare -- it was appallingly easy to see how it misleads the audience'

Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare - Salon.com


Meanwhile check out the poverty rates in the states most likely to fight care for their own citizens.

http://www.southerneducation.org/cmspages/getfile.aspx?guid=0bc70ce1-d375-4ff6-8340-f9b3452ee088

States with a Majority of Low Income Students in Public Schools: 2011

State Rate (Percent)
Mississippi 71
New Mexico 68
Louisiana 66
Oklahoma 61
Arkansas 60
Georgia 57
Kentucky 57
Florida 56
Tennessee 55
South Carolina 55
Alabama 55
California 54
West Virginia 51
Oregon 51
Nevada 51
North Carolina 50
Texas 50

America has become the land of the haves and the have nots.

If young people and "students" are so concerned about health care, why aren't they excited about signing up? It appears that if something, such as this need to find affordable health care (which is a lie in itself), is SO big and popular, you wouldn't be looking to gimmicks in an attempt to coax them into buying into this program. You wouldn't have to turn to polls, find spokesmen, famous actors or artists, the plan (IF it was that good for Americans) would simply be able to sell itself. Yes Obama. Apple has a few glitches on their iPhones so there was no need to stop producing them and shut it down..... HOWEVER, Apple IS finding extensively long lines of young people just waiting to get their hands on one WITHOUT the need to produce any coaxing nudge from a celebrity. You simply can't boast the same results for THIS Health Care mess.

Polls and speeches - vs - "get your head out of the clouds" reality, are two TOTALLY different things.

because young people are not as stupid as barry and the dems think they are. They are not going to pay high premiums so old people and poor people can get free medical care.

they will just say 'screw it' and pay the penalty, or if they have no tax liability just get off scott free.

the whole ACA is a fraud.

Here is the other thought. If ACA provides health care to those who can't afford it, like the poor, where is the incentive for them to work? I mean why even seek employment so that you would have to then eventually pay for health care to meet a mandate, when you can choose not to work and allow our government (to be specific, the taxpayer) to simply provide a plan at no cost to you? Great incentive idea for the economy Mr. president.

 

[Pop23]

Obama outsourced the setting up of the computer site to canada.

So he started off by giving American jobs to canadians.

Ted Cruz is as Canadian as Maple syrup on a hockey puck...eh

^^^^^^MOONBAT DEFLECTION WARNING^^^^^^^

I wasn't aware Ted Cruz wrote software.

Carry on

 

[Edgetho]

Funny stuff:

Video: Carney Bolts Press Briefing Room After Repeatedly Refusing To Answer Questions About Obamacare…

They asked him about the failed tests in the days leading up to the launch, he referred them to HHS:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UxsbEDDi7lA]W.H. Refers Reporters To HHS When Asked About Failed ObamaCare Tests - YouTube[/ame]

Asked him about decision to bring on Jeff Zients to help fix the problems, he referred them to HHS:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RhEgD82roVk]W.H. Refers Reporters To HHS When Asked About Zients's Role - YouTube[/ame]

Asked him about the costs associated with fixing the site, he referred them to HHS:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XO29yvefhSI]W.H. Refers Reporters To HHS When Asked About Costs Of Fixing ObamaCare - YouTube[/ame]

Asked about the “tech surge,” referred them to HHS:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wTBBwIWuaP8]W.H. Refers Reporters To HHS When Asked About Tech Surge Team - YouTube[/ame]

And finally, he bolts the briefing room before they could ask him another question that he would inevitably referred back to HHS:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mpOXj_7mkms]Jay Carney Leaves Briefing Room Amid Questions About ObamaCare - YouTube[/ame]

When dimocraps run out of lies, they're actually --

Speechless

 

[Flopper]

No CC...

I do not get insurance for free.

I have a family plan.

At one point I had all 4 of us on it.

Then it went down to three.
Then down to two (my wife and I).
Now it went back to 4...although my older one is getting his won as he is hitting the 26 mark.
But my premium did not change due to the amount of people on the plan.
They never do. A family plan is a family plan...whether you have 1 kid or 100 kids.

Never is a long time...

Here is the plan for a couple and kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You, your spouse, and your children
$354.12

Here is the plan for a couple with no kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You and your spouse
$255.70

You are paying almost $100 more for having kids on your plan. I see what you're saying. You're be paying $100 more if you had 1 kid on your plan or 100. But earlier you indicated that there are no additional monies going to the insurance companies due to having kids on your health plan. In truth, you're paying $100 or so more than you would be if the cut off were still 18.

There does seem to be a loophole for multiple kids and I see your point.

However, the 40+ million new customers that will be buying insurance will likely make up for this loophole with the insurance companies.

first off....that 40 million number has yet to been proven and to the contrary, it has been largely disproved.....but putting that aside....

the "loophole" you see is just one issue...

Then there is the other issue....the bigger issue.....

Pre existing condition clauses were inserted into the insurance industry as a means to maintain the reason for insurance to begin with....people were not looking at it as insurance. They were looking at it as a "means to cut expenses". They refused to buy insurance until they NEEDED healthcare. They would break a leg....THEN buy insurance.

Dental insurance rectified the problem by not allowing the policy to go into affect for 6 months....eliminating those that bought the policy AFTER they broke a tooth.

Hurricane insurance rectified the problem by not allowing it to go into affect for 30 days....eliminating those that would try to buy it when they saw a hurricane coming.

But it was not so easy for health insurance for a variety of reasons.

So lets look at what we have now....

I am 30 years old (I wish). I don't want to pay the 5000 a year for a policy. I am healthy. I don't need it. I prefer paying the 700 tax/penalty.

But...if I find out I have a serious ailment? THEN I will buy a policy.

And I cant be denied because it is now against the law.

THAT is going to be the true reason why premiums will skyrocket....insurance companies will ultimately go under...and we will be in a single payer plan within one decade.

And whereas you may think that is a good thing, the majority of Americans don't want it.

But that is a debate for another day.

You're not considering the fact that after the first year, insurance exchanges will be accepting application only between Oct and Dec. with a plan start date of Jan 1. For employer sponsored insurance, you can only sign up for insurance during open enrollment which is once a year for most companies buy can be less frequent. So if a person had a serious accident or illness, they will have to wait up to a year, sometimes longer before coverage begins. Also, by 2017 the penalty for most people for not carrying insurance with be about $2,000/yr for each year there is no coverage.

A strategy of waiting till you're ill to buy insurance, does not make sense when considering the risks and rewards. For a family, it would be a really dumb move.

 

[candycorn]

Never is a long time...

Here is the plan for a couple and kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You, your spouse, and your children
$354.12

Here is the plan for a couple with no kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You and your spouse
$255.70

You are paying almost $100 more for having kids on your plan. I see what you're saying. You're be paying $100 more if you had 1 kid on your plan or 100. But earlier you indicated that there are no additional monies going to the insurance companies due to having kids on your health plan. In truth, you're paying $100 or so more than you would be if the cut off were still 18.

There does seem to be a loophole for multiple kids and I see your point.

However, the 40+ million new customers that will be buying insurance will likely make up for this loophole with the insurance companies.

first off....that 40 million number has yet to been proven and to the contrary, it has been largely disproved.....but putting that aside....

the "loophole" you see is just one issue...

Then there is the other issue....the bigger issue.....

Pre existing condition clauses were inserted into the insurance industry as a means to maintain the reason for insurance to begin with....people were not looking at it as insurance. They were looking at it as a "means to cut expenses". They refused to buy insurance until they NEEDED healthcare. They would break a leg....THEN buy insurance.

Dental insurance rectified the problem by not allowing the policy to go into affect for 6 months....eliminating those that bought the policy AFTER they broke a tooth.

Hurricane insurance rectified the problem by not allowing it to go into affect for 30 days....eliminating those that would try to buy it when they saw a hurricane coming.

But it was not so easy for health insurance for a variety of reasons.

So lets look at what we have now....

I am 30 years old (I wish). I don't want to pay the 5000 a year for a policy. I am healthy. I don't need it. I prefer paying the 700 tax/penalty.

But...if I find out I have a serious ailment? THEN I will buy a policy.

And I cant be denied because it is now against the law.

THAT is going to be the true reason why premiums will skyrocket....insurance companies will ultimately go under...and we will be in a single payer plan within one decade.

And whereas you may think that is a good thing, the majority of Americans don't want it.

But that is a debate for another day.

You're not considering the fact that after the first year, insurance exchanges will be accepting application only between Oct and Dec. with a plan start date of Jan 1. For employer sponsored insurance, you can only sign up for insurance during open enrollment which is once a year for most companies buy can be less frequent. So if a person had a serious accident or illness, they will have to wait up to a year, sometimes longer before coverage begins. Also, by 2017 the penalty for most people for not carrying insurance with be about $2,000/yr for each year there is no coverage.

A strategy of waiting till you're ill to buy insurance, does not make sense when considering the risks and rewards. For a family, it would be a really dumb move.

There are a lot of dumb people out there unfortunately. But yeah. If the system were set up differently and you had 4 trillion years to get insurance, you'd still have people waiting until the deadline. Regardless of the system, there will be people gaming it. I don't think there ever has been a "game-proof" system

 

[candycorn]

No CC...

I do not get insurance for free.

I have a family plan.

At one point I had all 4 of us on it.

Then it went down to three.
Then down to two (my wife and I).
Now it went back to 4...although my older one is getting his won as he is hitting the 26 mark.
But my premium did not change due to the amount of people on the plan.
They never do. A family plan is a family plan...whether you have 1 kid or 100 kids.

Never is a long time...

Here is the plan for a couple and kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You, your spouse, and your children
$354.12

Here is the plan for a couple with no kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You and your spouse
$255.70

You are paying almost $100 more for having kids on your plan. I see what you're saying. You're be paying $100 more if you had 1 kid on your plan or 100. But earlier you indicated that there are no additional monies going to the insurance companies due to having kids on your health plan. In truth, you're paying $100 or so more than you would be if the cut off were still 18.

There does seem to be a loophole for multiple kids and I see your point.

However, the 40+ million new customers that will be buying insurance will likely make up for this loophole with the insurance companies.

first off....that 40 million number has yet to been proven and to the contrary, it has been largely disproved.....but putting that aside....

the "loophole" you see is just one issue...

Then there is the other issue....the bigger issue.....

Pre existing condition clauses were inserted into the insurance industry as a means to maintain the reason for insurance to begin with....people were not looking at it as insurance. They were looking at it as a "means to cut expenses". They refused to buy insurance until they NEEDED healthcare. They would break a leg....THEN buy insurance.

Dental insurance rectified the problem by not allowing the policy to go into affect for 6 months....eliminating those that bought the policy AFTER they broke a tooth.

Hurricane insurance rectified the problem by not allowing it to go into affect for 30 days....eliminating those that would try to buy it when they saw a hurricane coming.

But it was not so easy for health insurance for a variety of reasons.

So lets look at what we have now....

I am 30 years old (I wish). I don't want to pay the 5000 a year for a policy. I am healthy. I don't need it. I prefer paying the 700 tax/penalty.

But...if I find out I have a serious ailment? THEN I will buy a policy.

And I cant be denied because it is now against the law.

THAT is going to be the true reason why premiums will skyrocket....insurance companies will ultimately go under...and we will be in a single payer plan within one decade.

And whereas you may think that is a good thing, the majority of Americans don't want it.

But that is a debate for another day.

Flopper answered your inquiry about buy-when-you-need.

I keep hearing "most Americans don't want it". Obama was re-elected; the Senate stayed in the hands of the Dems. Either the voters are catatonic or there isn't as much angst as is being advertised.

Additionally, it seems as though I recall the health insurance industry signing off on the deal. Are you saying the industry made a mis-calculation of this magnitude?

 

[healthmyths]

Of course,
there is this lie

There are 400,000 jobs just right around the corner..
It will be any day now, once the website works properly

Pelosi: Obamacare Will Supply 400,000 Jobs Almost Immediately! - YouTube

Well that's interesting!
So Obamacare will supply 400,000 jobs?
Actually that figure should be supplying 800,000 jobs and here is why!
Obama said:"I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program"
So if Obama WANTS a single payer, what happens to the current 1,300 health insurance payer companies and their 400,000 employees?

If Pelosi also wants single payer as Obama does.. THAT means 1,300 companies no longer in business.
1) $100 BILLION a year these companies pay in Federal/State/Local taxes and local property taxes... WHAT happens if Obama's preference becomes true?
2) 400,000 insurance companies' employees lose their jobs meaning no more federal/state/local taxes PLUS these 400,000 will need unemployment insurance!

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Never is a long time...

Here is the plan for a couple and kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You, your spouse, and your children
$354.12

Here is the plan for a couple with no kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You and your spouse
$255.70

You are paying almost $100 more for having kids on your plan. I see what you're saying. You're be paying $100 more if you had 1 kid on your plan or 100. But earlier you indicated that there are no additional monies going to the insurance companies due to having kids on your health plan. In truth, you're paying $100 or so more than you would be if the cut off were still 18.

There does seem to be a loophole for multiple kids and I see your point.

However, the 40+ million new customers that will be buying insurance will likely make up for this loophole with the insurance companies.

first off....that 40 million number has yet to been proven and to the contrary, it has been largely disproved.....but putting that aside....

the "loophole" you see is just one issue...

Then there is the other issue....the bigger issue.....

Pre existing condition clauses were inserted into the insurance industry as a means to maintain the reason for insurance to begin with....people were not looking at it as insurance. They were looking at it as a "means to cut expenses". They refused to buy insurance until they NEEDED healthcare. They would break a leg....THEN buy insurance.

Dental insurance rectified the problem by not allowing the policy to go into affect for 6 months....eliminating those that bought the policy AFTER they broke a tooth.

Hurricane insurance rectified the problem by not allowing it to go into affect for 30 days....eliminating those that would try to buy it when they saw a hurricane coming.

But it was not so easy for health insurance for a variety of reasons.

So lets look at what we have now....

I am 30 years old (I wish). I don't want to pay the 5000 a year for a policy. I am healthy. I don't need it. I prefer paying the 700 tax/penalty.

But...if I find out I have a serious ailment? THEN I will buy a policy.

And I cant be denied because it is now against the law.

THAT is going to be the true reason why premiums will skyrocket....insurance companies will ultimately go under...and we will be in a single payer plan within one decade.

And whereas you may think that is a good thing, the majority of Americans don't want it.

But that is a debate for another day.

Flopper answered your inquiry about buy-when-you-need.

I keep hearing "most Americans don't want it". Obama was re-elected; the Senate stayed in the hands of the Dems. Either the voters are catatonic or there isn't as much angst as is being advertised.

Additionally, it seems as though I recall the health insurance industry signing off on the deal. Are you saying the industry made a mis-calculation of this magnitude?

There may have been some issues with Romney and his faith as a Mormon that kept some from voting not simply his views, which left Barrack Obama as the nation's consolation prize. The real question is, if the people were satisfied with Obamacare and the Democrats why did Nancy Pelosi lose her seat? After all, wasn't all the drama and the issue with blue dog Democrats, on the House side of the legislative branch?

 

[RandallFlagg]

Of course,
there is this lie

There are 400,000 jobs just right around the corner..
It will be any day now, once the website works properly

Pelosi: Obamacare Will Supply 400,000 Jobs Almost Immediately! - YouTube

Well that's interesting!
So Obamacare will supply 400,000 jobs?
Actually that figure should be supplying 800,000 jobs and here is why!
Obama said:"I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program"
So if Obama WANTS a single payer, what happens to the current 1,300 health insurance payer companies and their 400,000 employees?

If Pelosi also wants single payer as Obama does.. THAT means 1,300 companies no longer in business.
1) $100 BILLION a year these companies pay in Federal/State/Local taxes and local property taxes... WHAT happens if Obama's preference becomes true?
2) 400,000 insurance companies' employees lose their jobs meaning no more federal/state/local taxes PLUS these 400,000 will need unemployment insurance!

Trust me - you're not far off. This is nothing more than the harbinger for a complete socialist takeover of the entire healthcare industry. It is coming.

And these piss ants on this forum will welcome it with open arms. It will be like the Nazis marching into Paris.

It's coming.

 

[TooTall]

Never is a long time...

Here is the plan for a couple and kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You, your spouse, and your children
$354.12

Here is the plan for a couple with no kids from healthcare.gov
Health Net CommunityCare HMO Open Access Basic 0%/0%/$6350
Health Net of Arizona
HMO | Catastrophic
Estimated monthly premium for You and your spouse
$255.70

You are paying almost $100 more for having kids on your plan. I see what you're saying. You're be paying $100 more if you had 1 kid on your plan or 100. But earlier you indicated that there are no additional monies going to the insurance companies due to having kids on your health plan. In truth, you're paying $100 or so more than you would be if the cut off were still 18.

There does seem to be a loophole for multiple kids and I see your point.

However, the 40+ million new customers that will be buying insurance will likely make up for this loophole with the insurance companies.

first off....that 40 million number has yet to been proven and to the contrary, it has been largely disproved.....but putting that aside....

the "loophole" you see is just one issue...

Then there is the other issue....the bigger issue.....

Pre existing condition clauses were inserted into the insurance industry as a means to maintain the reason for insurance to begin with....people were not looking at it as insurance. They were looking at it as a "means to cut expenses". They refused to buy insurance until they NEEDED healthcare. They would break a leg....THEN buy insurance.

Dental insurance rectified the problem by not allowing the policy to go into affect for 6 months....eliminating those that bought the policy AFTER they broke a tooth.

Hurricane insurance rectified the problem by not allowing it to go into affect for 30 days....eliminating those that would try to buy it when they saw a hurricane coming.

But it was not so easy for health insurance for a variety of reasons.

So lets look at what we have now....

I am 30 years old (I wish). I don't want to pay the 5000 a year for a policy. I am healthy. I don't need it. I prefer paying the 700 tax/penalty.

But...if I find out I have a serious ailment? THEN I will buy a policy.

And I cant be denied because it is now against the law.

THAT is going to be the true reason why premiums will skyrocket....insurance companies will ultimately go under...and we will be in a single payer plan within one decade.

And whereas you may think that is a good thing, the majority of Americans don't want it.

But that is a debate for another day.

Flopper answered your inquiry about buy-when-you-need.

I keep hearing "most Americans don't want it". Obama was re-elected; the Senate stayed in the hands of the Dems. Either the voters are catatonic or there isn't as much angst as is being advertised.

Additionally, it seems as though I recall the health insurance industry signing off on the deal. Are you saying the industry made a mis-calculation of this magnitude?

Hell yes the insurance companies signed off on the deal. The promise by Obama of 30 million new health insurance customers, all paid in full by the US Government. In addition, millions more will be partially funded on their policies with the full faith and credit of Uncle Sugar.
They would have been foolish not to see that bird nest on the ground.

 

[healthmyths]

Lemmings!
Not one of the Obamacare supporters THINK for themselves!
Lemmings!
It is so obvious that the Obamacare site would be huge flop simply because NOT ONE of them seem to be able to do simple math!
For example... When you subtract 42 million from 46 million what is the difference? 4 Million!
Right? Is that correct?
So tell me why these idiots don't seem to understand that:
18 million under 34 make over $50,000 DON'T WANT, DON"T NEED health insurance! They don't need to spend more for their employers' plans!
14 million are people at a poverty level that are right now, immediately all need do is register with Medicaid THEY Are counted as uninsured! Wrong!
10 million are not citizens YET they are counted as "uninsured"!

42 million from 46 million is 4 million!

So if these idiots can't even figure out that there are NOT 46 million but 4 million WHAT would any one expect in their future management skills of 1/6th of the economy!!!

 

[healthmyths]

first off....that 40 million number has yet to been proven and to the contrary, it has been largely disproved.....but putting that aside....

the "loophole" you see is just one issue...

Then there is the other issue....the bigger issue.....

Pre existing condition clauses were inserted into the insurance industry as a means to maintain the reason for insurance to begin with....people were not looking at it as insurance. They were looking at it as a "means to cut expenses". They refused to buy insurance until they NEEDED healthcare. They would break a leg....THEN buy insurance.

Dental insurance rectified the problem by not allowing the policy to go into affect for 6 months....eliminating those that bought the policy AFTER they broke a tooth.

Hurricane insurance rectified the problem by not allowing it to go into affect for 30 days....eliminating those that would try to buy it when they saw a hurricane coming.

But it was not so easy for health insurance for a variety of reasons.

So lets look at what we have now....

I am 30 years old (I wish). I don't want to pay the 5000 a year for a policy. I am healthy. I don't need it. I prefer paying the 700 tax/penalty.

But...if I find out I have a serious ailment? THEN I will buy a policy.

And I cant be denied because it is now against the law.

THAT is going to be the true reason why premiums will skyrocket....insurance companies will ultimately go under...and we will be in a single payer plan within one decade.

And whereas you may think that is a good thing, the majority of Americans don't want it.

But that is a debate for another day.

Flopper answered your inquiry about buy-when-you-need.

I keep hearing "most Americans don't want it". Obama was re-elected; the Senate stayed in the hands of the Dems. Either the voters are catatonic or there isn't as much angst as is being advertised.

Additionally, it seems as though I recall the health insurance industry signing off on the deal. Are you saying the industry made a mis-calculation of this magnitude?

Hell yes the insurance companies signed off on the deal. The promise by Obama of 30 million new health insurance customers, all paid in full by the US Government. In addition, millions more will be partially funded on their policies with the full faith and credit of Uncle Sugar.
They would have been foolish not to see that bird nest on the ground.

If they signed off then tell me why these MAJOR companies aren't participating???

Aetna (AET, Fortune 500) has actually pulled out of at least five exchanges after submitting proposals in 14 states. Its policies will not be found on the exchanges in Maryland, New York, Georgia, Ohio or its home state of Connecticut. The insurer recently bought Coventry Health Plans, which had also filed to be on several state exchanges, so Aetna is now reviewing both companies' remaining fillings.

"We believe it is critical that our plans not only be competitive, but also financially viable, in order to meet the long-term needs of the exchanges in which we choose to participate," the company said last month after withdrawing from the New York exchange. It will offer individual plans outside of Obamacare in the Empire State.

UnitedHealthcare (UNH, Fortune 500) is also planning limited participation in the new exchanges, at least for 2014. The company said it is taking its time to evaluate the exchanges, which it believes have the potential to be a growth market. It is only participating in about a dozen exchanges next year.
"[We] see 2014 as just the very start of the exchange markets," said spokesman Tyler Mason.

For Cigna (CI, Fortune 500), the decision came down to its customer base. A giant player in the employer market, Cigna is relatively new to the individual insurance side of the business. So it decided to join the exchanges in only the five states where it writes 80% of its individual policies, said spokesman Joseph Mondy. But Cigna will continue to offer plans outside the exchange in all 10 states where it is involved in the individual market.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Lemmings!
Not one of the Obamacare supporters THINK for themselves!
Lemmings!
It is so obvious that the Obamacare site would be huge flop simply because NOT ONE of them seem to be able to do simple math!
For example... When you subtract 42 million from 46 million what is the difference? 4 Million!
Right? Is that correct?
So tell me why these idiots don't seem to understand that:
18 million under 34 make over $50,000 DON'T WANT, DON"T NEED health insurance! They don't need to spend more for their employers' plans!
14 million are people at a poverty level that are right now, immediately all need do is register with Medicaid THEY Are counted as uninsured! Wrong!
10 million are not citizens YET they are counted as "uninsured"!

42 million from 46 million is 4 million!

So if these idiots can't even figure out that there are NOT 46 million but 4 million WHAT would any one expect in their future management skills of 1/6th of the economy!!!

Look, here's the deal (at least to me) on this whole debacle:

634 MILLION spent on "getting ready" just to have the whole thing exposed for the incompetent mess that it is. 3/4 of a BILLION DOLLARS!!!!!

That turkey-necked broad sebellius will NOT be held accountable - Barry keeps his "buds" close at all times - just like a gang of thugs.

That same "roll-out" could have been done SUCCESSFULLY by a team from Microsoft or even Apple for 50 MILLION.

The "Little Napoleon" Obama will NEVER take responsibility for this mess - he refuses to accept responsibility for anything, let alone this screw up.

Welcome to Democrat rule.

 

[Vox]

Some people go to college and need to be on insurance a bit longer. Some, like my assistant, have special needs kids who benefit greatly by the extended insurance stay.

Either way, it doesn't cost you a penny so you're "fricken stupid" for letting it bother you.

It costs him increase in taxes and increase in the cost of HIS insurance.

Not sure what you mean by taxes related to someone staying on your insurance.
As for the insurance going up...no. Lets say I had a daughter and her birthday was today; she turns 19. I'm not paying any more for her insurance than I was paying yesterday.

You're making a factually incorrect statement.

you should not make any statements if you do not know the issue. Yes, obamacare is an increase in many taxes for many Americans - you may check it here:ObamaCare Tax: Full List of ObamaCare Taxes

and for ALL on medical device tax plus obamacare is a TAX by itself - therefore all who are actually paying for their increased premiums and deductibles - are being extensively taxed

and your fictituous daughter may stay on your insurance but you will be paying more fr her, as everybody is going to pay more ( unless you get subsidies), but then you make me to pay for you and your daughter.

Anyway around - obamacare is a huge increase in taxes for ordinary Americans through a lot of venues - if you think you are not being taxed, you might want to check how it is falling on you even if you are subsidied.