"Obamacare"

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I try my best to use common sense. But again, I've even given you articles from liberal publications that point to Obamacare. You have yet to provide anything other than chum1, which is not very convincing. Stop being so dense. Use your head. Read the articles.

Okay, I read them. They do not address the issue I was discussing: that large premium increases are caused by the ACA, though they do speculate about the possibility. They primarily say that exchange plan premiums may or may not have large increases next year, which addresses a completely different issue and is also thoroughly noncommittal.

Ok. A simple Google News search will reveal hundreds of articles quoting experts as saying that Obamacare is the primary cause of these large proposed increases. You have yet to post a single, solitary source to the contrary. Dodge all you want by calling this "speculation" - I'll just call a dumbass a dumbass.

[puniraptor]

its true that more healthy people are covered now that before, right? shouldnt that make prices eventually go down? is it just insurance companies being greedy red lobster dicks about it all?

[chum1]

I try my best to use common sense. But again, I've even given you articles from liberal publications that point to Obamacare. You have yet to provide anything other than chum1, which is not very convincing. Stop being so dense. Use your head. Read the articles.

Okay, I read them. They do not address the issue I was discussing: that large premium increases are caused by the ACA, though they do speculate about the possibility. They primarily say that exchange plan premiums may or may not have large increases next year, which addresses a completely different issue and is also thoroughly noncommittal.

Ok. A simple Google News search will reveal hundreds of articles quoting experts as saying that Obamacare is the primary cause of these large proposed increases. You have yet to post a single, solitary source to the contrary. Dodge all you want by calling this "speculation" - I'll just call a dumbass a dumbass.

It's speculation becuase it's about 2016 rates, which haven't yet been established. I don't care about this stupid link any more than I care about your stupid links, but here's something contrary on increases that actually happened for 2015 rates:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2014/10/31/key-study-on-obamacare-2015-premium-rates-is-out-and-you-wont-believe-whats-going-to-happen/

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

its true that more healthy people are covered now that before, right? shouldnt that make prices eventually go down? is it just insurance companies being greedy red lobster dicks about it all?

No, for two reasons. First, more healthy people are covered, but not the number they needed to make up for all the older/sicker people added to the plans. Insurers don't really track which enrollees are "healthy" or "sick" - but they do at least track the ages of enrollees, and younger people are presumed to be healthier. Analysts said the plans needed about 40% of the new enrollees to be under 35 to make the whole thing fiscally sustainable. The actual number of enrollees under 35 appears to be closer to 24-30%.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/01/14/obamacare_demographics_not_enough_young_people_have_signed_up_yet.html
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/not-enough-young-people-are-buying-obamacare-2014-01-14
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/15/young-people-obamacare-problem-_n_4280469.html
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obamacare-enrollment-mystery-2-million-222400666.html

And, according to surveys, of the young people who are signing up, a disproportionate number appear to be sick - not healthy. http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottgottlieb/2014/06/25/young-obamacare-enrollees-more-likely-to-have-serious-health-problems/

Second, it's likely that even the "healthy" people seem to be getting more "preventative treatment" under their newfound (and newly subsidized by us) coverage, which also drives up costs. That part is difficult to quanitfy, but makes sense.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Speaking of things that are immaterial, the overall percentage of people with insurance before and after the ACA is immaterially different, and largely obviate by mild improvements in the job market.

Increased deductibles should be factored into the obamacare analysis. Mine increased 800%. It's disingenuous to argue about premiums and not account for increased deductibles.

The fact of the matter is everything this law was supposed to do, it has done the opposite or nothing at all. Worse, it has made healthcare generally worse for a large number of people without doing anything for the remaining super minority.  It's a joke.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Well, I have to think that the shitty Obamacare "bronze" and "silver" plans, even with their sky high deductibles, are helping at least some people in need of expensive ongoing treatment who were previously uninsured. But I would agree that those folks are a very small minority in comparison to everyone else who's being mumped over by this law. Like I said in my bar napkin plan, we probably could have subsidized high risk pools for those folks for a fraction of the overall cost of this crap law.

[Spracne]

 

[8manpick]

Is this where our dicks come out?

[star seed 7]

Neocon am radio hosts are really unhappy with scotus. Hannity last night says everyone should start calling it "supreme Court of the United States care" instead of obamacare, but that seems a bit wordy

[steve dave]

Neocon am radio hosts are really unhappy with scotus. Hannity last night says everyone should start calling it "supreme Court of the United States care" instead of obamacare, but that seems a bit wordy

yeah, no way that sticks

[renocat]

CrapCare.  Wait until in a couple of years when employers are force to abandon their premium health plans, so called Cadillac plans, and millions have high deductible high premium silver sewer plans, and insurance companies limit coverage.

[renocat]

Sorry Mr. President just because SCOTUS ruled a provision of Ohdammit Care is lawful, does not mean this law is untouchable as you tried to state in your post vote comments.  The idea may be noble,  but this thing called you call good legislation is a mess.

[mocat]

so is this thing a success or a failure?

[star seed 7]

Stepping stone to the real success

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

so is this thing a success or a failure?

What was it supposed to do?

[wetwillie]

It was intended to make insurance more affordable

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

so is this thing a success or a failure?

Serious answer, I think that depends on your definition of success.

If your goal was to make insurance more affordable for those who already had insurance (which was most people) it's an abject failure. It has made things worse.

If your goal was to spend over a trillion dollars getting about 15-20 million people either added to the Medicaid rolls or on terrible insurance with deductibles they can't really afford, then it's been pretty successful.

[mocat]

so is this thing a success or a failure?

it's been pretty successful.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

so is this thing a success or a failure?

it's been pretty successful.

That was heavily edited and misleading.

[mocat]

so is this thing a success or a failure?

it's been pretty successful.

That was heavily edited and misleading.

Nothing was added.

[Tobias]

i watched the video, can confirm

[renocat]

Hell.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

So, insurance companies are dropping out exchanges like hot cakes, the premiums for these shitty high deductible plans are sky rocketing, enrollment sucks, and United Healthcare announced today it might drop the exchange plans.

Why haven't we laughed at the ill fate of this moranic and predictably failed legislation lately?

[star seed 7]

Single payer here we come