Wash Times - Obama completely overhauled health care to insure 4 million people.

[dblack]

Yes reality is the fallback to your hyperbolic dystopian nonsense.

It makes sense that you'd equate childish name-calling with reality. Your moral calculus is along the lines of the schoolyard bully.

Now you think you are being bullied?

Me? Not so much. I'm just observing the nature of your political ideology.

 

[Meister]

Yes reality is the fallback to your hyperbolic dystopian nonsense.

It makes sense that you'd equate childish name-calling with reality. Your moral calculus is along the lines of the schoolyard bully.

Now you think you are being bullied?

You really do have a martyr complex. You are not being bullied because we have Medicaid and Medicare or public schools or public roads or whatever else keeps you awake at night. You are being laughed at because you have tried to equate UHC to fascism and refuse to even admit that efficiency matters.

If anyone is being laughed at, it's you. You believe in socialized medicine, most Americans don't.

 

[asterism]

He overhauled it? Really? And we didn't feel a thing!

Nothing.....absolutely nothing changed with the health insurance plans that 95% of insured Americans had before the law.....except premiums didn't go up as much as usual and more preventive care services were included. Oh....and kids can stay on a few more years and preexisting conditions are now covered. Just awful!

Yes....for 95% of those who already had insurance......your outrage falls on deaf ears.

Try harder.

Try facts.
Increases in healthcare expenditures:
2003 8.6%
2004 6.9%
2005 6.5%
2006 6.7%
2007 6.1%
Compare to 10.5% in 1970 and 13% in 1980
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/06/08/downgrading-american-medical-c/print

Also: http://www.bw.edu/academics/bus/programs/hcmba/nl/costs/HealthCareCosts07-_April_2007.pdf

[Health-care costs rose about 8% in 2011 and are projected to rise by 8.5% in 2012. ]Paul Ryan: Where's Your Budget, Mr. President? - WSJ.com




ObamaCare.....the big scam.

Well, well, well. It tried to post something like a normal person. How nice! And with numbers too!

But...I was not referring to our overall health care costs. I was referring to PREMIUM increases for private health insurance plans....which have increased at a slower rate since the law went into effect.

Nice try, though.

If there are modest premium increases it's because of increased deductibles.

How Quickly Are Health Insurance Premiums Rising? | The Rundown | PBS NewsHour | PBS

There definitely was a spike after the law was enacted:

FactChecking Health Insurance Premiums

 

[asterism]

Individual plan premiums increased by double digits last year:

In California, Aetna is proposing rate increases of as much as 22 percent, Anthem Blue Cross 26 percent and Blue Shield of California 20 percent for some of those policy holders, according to the insurers’ filings with the state for 2013. These rate requests are all the more striking after a 39 percent rise sought by Anthem Blue Cross in 2010 helped give impetus to the law, known as the Affordable Care Act, which was passed the same year and will not be fully in effect until 2014.

In other states, like Florida and Ohio, insurers have been able to raise rates by at least 20 percent for some policy holders. The rate increases can amount to several hundred dollars a month.

The proposed increases compare with about 4 percent for families with employer-based policies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/06/b...arp-rise-in-premiums.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[Darkwind]

He overhauled it? Really? And we didn't feel a thing!

Nothing.....absolutely nothing changed with the health insurance plans that 95% of insured Americans had before the law.....except premiums didn't go up as much as usual and more preventive care services were included. Oh....and kids can stay on a few more years and preexisting conditions are now covered. Just awful!

Yes....for 95% of those who already had insurance......your outrage falls on deaf ears.

Try harder.

Try facts.
Increases in healthcare expenditures:
2003 8.6%
2004 6.9%
2005 6.5%
2006 6.7%
2007 6.1%
Compare to 10.5% in 1970 and 13% in 1980
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/06/08/downgrading-american-medical-c/print

Also: http://www.bw.edu/academics/bus/programs/hcmba/nl/costs/HealthCareCosts07-_April_2007.pdf

[Health-care costs rose about 8% in 2011 and are projected to rise by 8.5% in 2012. ]Paul Ryan: Where's Your Budget, Mr. President? - WSJ.com




ObamaCare.....the big scam.

Well, well, well. It tried to post something like a normal person. How nice! And with numbers too!

But...I was not referring to our overall health care costs. I was referring to PREMIUM increases for private health insurance plans....which have increased at a slower rate since the law went into effect.

Nice try, though.

This is code for I'm moving the goal posts.

 

[asterism]

The insurance companies can do anything they want. They couldn't have a patsy without the GOP lying about the ACA and stupid Right-wingers dumb enough to believe them.

Ah... so you don't understand. Well, I can explain it. It's fairly simple. Thanks to the ACA, insurance companies aren't allowed to write any new policies to replace those that don't meet the new minimum requirements. They can grandfather the old policies, so technically they could let people keep those, but they make a lot more money from the policies that do meet the new guidelines. So they're cancelling the old policies and people are then forced onto the more expensive policies.

They could have still tried the same thing, I suppose, without ACA, but competing companies would have been happy to write policies to replace those that were cancelled - scooping up their former customers. But with regulatory capture, other companies aren't allowed to do that. So they have us by the balls, thanks to Congress selling us out.

Does that clear things up?

At least you admit the policies were not grandfathered because the insurance companies saw a way to abuse the law to maximize their profit. Three cheers for Capitalism! But I would call that corporate greed, not Congress selling you out. Now regarding Congress, if the GOP were a little more honest they could work with the Dems to remedy that problem by requiring them to grandfather the old plans, but they had a shit fit when Obama did it with his pen. Obama is also allowing cancelled plans that are a hardship to replace to be replaced with catastrophic coverage, again with his pen and again the GOP Congress are having a shit fit.

What I find hard to believe is there is no insurance company offering compliant plans at a price competitive with the old plans.

So I can accept your summary as quite accurate with one exception, I don't put the blame on Obama or ALL of Congress. I blame the insurance company greed and the GOP's pigheaded demand to eliminate rather than to improve the ACA.

The old non-employer plans had individual underwriting, the new plans cannot. Therefore the plans that could have been grandfathered according to you violated the ACA regulations on EHB and actuarial tables.

So yes, it is the ACA that caused these plans to be cancelled and it's the loss of individual underwriting that is keeping any company from offering new plans at a price competitive with the old plans.

The recent delays and statements by the President only means that many of these rules will not be enforced, it doesn't make them financially sound. If they are not financially sound, the government will sanction companies offering those plans.

 

[asterism]

And a lot of those 4 million never paid their premium. Real number insured is prolly more like 3 million - 1% of america!!!

CURL: We completely overhauled American health care ? to insure 4.2 million people? - Washington Times

Thursday, March 13, 2014,
President Obama said it in August 2009: “I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today. In the wealthiest nation on Earth, 46 million of our fellow citizens have no coverage.”

So, he created Obamacare. The crux of the biscuit: The United States would completely change its entire health care system to make sure those 46 million got insured. Well, at least that’s what every rational American thought.

But last week came word that with just 15 days left for people to enroll for federal coverage, just 4.2 million had.

Another retard thread from Annoyingly Slow Driver.

And a lie to boot!

EVERYONE in America is now safe from being dropped for a pre-existing condition.

You lose again, America wins. Suck it, dope!

What good is that if the prescriptions are too expensive now or if the treatment facilities are no longer in the network?

That's another biggie coming down the pike.

 

[asterism]

The shift is towards the sick and the poor. Has anyone argued otherwise?

Wanna respond to my post? I stand by my previous post, and it could have been done without government mandates...if the government was really interested in insuring those without insurance. But, with what they've done does not address that issue according to the CBO.

Please explain how you address those with pre-existing conditions without mandates.

Keep the good stuff like the federal subsidies for those who are actually low income and move forward with the Accountable Care Organization incentives. Then don't treat people who don't have insurance.

That's something nobody is willing to do because it would put the responsibility back onto those who need something and can pay but don't want to.

 

[asterism]

The "pre-existing" condition group are those who make too much to be on Medicaid and are not old enough to be on Medicare.

So, everybody? Even those who can afford to pay for their own health care? Why do we need to worry about them?

If they can afford their own health care they would already be covered.

That is simply not true.

Key Facts about the Uninsured Population | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

24% of them make more than double the poverty level. That means they could afford catastrophic plans to avoid serious financial problems in a major health event.

The fact is that they simply didn't want to pay for it.

 

[asterism]

Why would anyone get insurance if the government agreed to pay for health care?

Because, most people don't want government healthcare.....haven't you paid attention to the polls?

The ACA is insurance company health care. All the government did was set minimum standards.

It did way more than that, but you know that already.

 

[J.E.D]

I wonder how millions upon millions upon millions of folks made it without health insurance from the time of Adam and Eve to the point that Obama assumed the Presidency? Billions of people maybe? The hardcore pioneers who crossed America in covered wagons -- no insurance. The Pilgrims who sailed across the Atlantic -- no insurance. The Vikings who managed to survive through their harsh environment -- no insurance. The Greek empire, the Roman Empire, the Egyptian Empire, the Babylonian Empire, the Assyrian Empire -- all survived without health insurance. Why on planet earth has it become paramount that all of mankind MUST have insurance? I thought today's secular evolutionists were all about "survival of the fittest" and all that.

Up till 1950 or so most americans did not have health insurance and we managed fine. Many people have suggested we return to those days and ban health insurance. It would certainly encourage patients to shop around when they need health care and also not run to a doctor for every little thing.

The average age for life expectancy in 1860 was 42 years old. Yeah people were doing great back then

Urine ******* idiot

 

[francoHFW]

You morons and Ronny Raygun all believe in the good old days....Read ''The Good Old Days- They Were Terrible!"...the 1890's- which we're now rivalling for unfairness after 30 years of voodoo...

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[
This solution is to shift costs as opposed to making a serious effort to create a more efficient system. IMO the only real proven way to address costs is a UHC system of some sort.
.

Hey loonybird. The proven way to contain costs is to ban health insurance or only allow catastrophic policies. Then patients would NOT run to the doctor for every little thing and when they did need health care, they would shop around.

The proof is that until 1950 most americans did NOT have health insurance and health care was a small part of the economy. THINK

 

[Moonglow]

[
This solution is to shift costs as opposed to making a serious effort to create a more efficient system. IMO the only real proven way to address costs is a UHC system of some sort.
.

Hey loonybird. The proven way to contain costs is to ban health insurance or only allow catastrophic policies. Then patients would NOT run to the doctor for every little thing and when they did need health care, they would shop around.

The proof is that until 1950 most americans did NOT have health insurance and health care was a small part of the economy. THINK

Doctors were still doing a bang up job of killing people back then...

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[

Uh every modern nation has health care for the poor provided by the government so I am not sure where you were going there.

So does america. It's medicaid and the EMTALA act.

 

[Moonglow]

I know now from this thread that shootspeeders is a sock for healthmyths....

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Up till 1950 or so most americans did not have health insurance and we managed fine. Many people have suggested we return to those days and ban health insurance. It would certainly encourage patients to shop around when they need health care and also not run to a doctor for every little thing.

The average age for life expectancy in 1860 was 42 years old. Yeah people were doing great back then

Urine ******* idiot

Hey loony. I said 1950. Why did you drag 1860 into this?

 

[Papageorgio]

This solution is to shift costs as opposed to making a serious effort to create a more efficient system. IMO the only real proven way to address costs is a UHC system of some sort.

It is not popular because a lot of the cost is up front in the form of people having to pay more and the rollout of the system itself is messy. The benefit will likely come later and many may never see a direct benefit from the change.

In the end the US system is still horribly inefficient and more people are going to pay the price for that inefficiency even if the pain is spread out more.

So it's not really a solution?

It is a solution to one maybe two problems but not all problems within our health care system.

It tries to leverage our existing Medicaid model and our current private insurance model to expand coverage to the sick and the poor who don't have insurance. The biggest change is obviously the mandate which is required to manage a universal private insurance approach.

So this is not a fix, and the burden for carrying the insurance is on the backs of the middle class, since it's been decided to waive the business mandate.

 

[J.E.D]

Up till 1950 or so most americans did not have health insurance and we managed fine. Many people have suggested we return to those days and ban health insurance. It would certainly encourage patients to shop around when they need health care and also not run to a doctor for every little thing.

The average age for life expectancy in 1860 was 42 years old. Yeah people were doing great back then

Urine ******* idiot

Hey loony. I said 1950. Why did you drag 1860 into this?

Because driftingsand said:

The hardcore pioneers who crossed America in covered wagons -- no insurance. The Pilgrims who sailed across the Atlantic -- no insurance. The Vikings who managed to survive through their harsh environment -- no insurance. The Greek empire, the Roman Empire, the Egyptian Empire, the Babylonian Empire, the Assyrian Empire -- all survived without health insurance.

Which is an amazingly moronic thing to say. And then you had to chime in with yeah and the 1950s were a great time for people too.

You're both complete idiots I just decided to respond to his idiocy in that case.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The average age for life expectancy in 1860 was 42 years old. Yeah people were doing great back then

Urine ******* idiot

Hey loony. I said 1950. Why did you drag 1860 into this?

Because driftingsand said:

The hardcore pioneers who crossed America in covered wagons -- no insurance. The Pilgrims who sailed across the Atlantic -- no insurance. The Vikings who managed to survive through their harsh environment -- no insurance. The Greek empire, the Roman Empire, the Egyptian Empire, the Babylonian Empire, the Assyrian Empire -- all survived without health insurance.

Which is an amazingly moronic thing to say. And then you had to chime in with yeah and the 1950s were a great time for people too.

You're both complete idiots I just decided to respond to his idiocy in that case.

Plus, the dumbass said "up till 1950", which includes 1860.