"Obamacare"

[michigancat]

Man, people had to pay a shitload for health insurance before Obamacare.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

What's the employer mandate?  Never heard if it.

Google it.

Oh.  I thought we were talking about things that affect premiums.

It will force many more employees into the exchanges where many will qualify for subsidies that their employer previously covered. Those subsidies will need to be covered through higher premiums.

I thought subsidies were paid by the federal government and funded with a variety of new taxes.

I would consider any new tax associated with obamacare as an increase in my premiums, but that's probably just me.

Even if you're not the one getting taxed?

All business tax increases get pushed to consumers.

And you consider them all to be increases to the cost of your healthcare premiums?

Yes. Any additional cost to me associated with this bill is an increase to my health care costs.

But only indirectly affects your pizza budget?

It will probably affect the pizza budget directly. Did  Pizza Hut and Domino's get exceptions?

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

So the pres is denying he ever said you can keep your plan LOL, watch the video.

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-on-obamacare-if-you-like-your-plan-you-can-keep-it-2013-10

[Institutional Control]

I worked in health insurance for 15 years and never met anybody with an individual plan that they "liked".   If they liked the cost, they certainly didn't like the coverage and vice versa. In most cases, they didn't like either.

[chum1]

At the time, I thought he was merely addressing rampant single payer fears.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

So the pres is denying he ever said you can keep your plan LOL, watch the video.

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-on-obamacare-if-you-like-your-plan-you-can-keep-it-2013-10

Well he certainly is "audacious." The NYT says Obama "misspoke." This isn't about saying something that turned out to be untrue - NBC has already demonstrated that Obama damned-well knew he wasn't telling the truth when he made this promise something like 29 different times.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I worked in health insurance for 15 years and never met anybody with an individual plan that they "liked".   If they liked the cost, they certainly didn't like the coverage and vice versa. In most cases, they didn't like either.

Funny, I've never met anyone who "liked" paying for insurance, period. That's not the point, of course. The question is whether people liked their policies in comparison to what else is available. And the answer, apparently, for many Americans is that they don't like the alternatives to their now-cancelled plans. Hence, Obama lied when he said that if you like your policy, you can keep it. And that lie is a pretty big deal if you're one of those people getting screwed.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I worked in health insurance for 15 years and never met anybody with an individual plan that they "liked".   If they liked the cost, they certainly didn't like the coverage and vice versa. In most cases, they didn't like either.

I like my current plan, both cost and coverage.

[Institutional Control]

I worked in health insurance for 15 years and never met anybody with an individual plan that they "liked".   If they liked the cost, they certainly didn't like the coverage and vice versa. In most cases, they didn't like either.

I like my current plan, both cost and coverage.

Ok.  Sorry you're losing your plan.

And touche' to K-S-U's point, I don't think anybody likes paying for insurance.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I worked in health insurance for 15 years and never met anybody with an individual plan that they "liked".   If they liked the cost, they certainly didn't like the coverage and vice versa. In most cases, they didn't like either.

I like my current plan, both cost and coverage.

Ok.  Sorry you're losing your plan.

And touche' to K-S-U's point, I don't think anybody likes paying for insurance.

I'm not sure if I'm losing it or not, but I really hope not because I know it will have a much higher deductible and cost to either myself or employer.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

What's the employer mandate?  Never heard if it.

Google it.

Oh.  I thought we were talking about things that affect premiums.

I was. When the employer mandate goes into effect, employer-based plans will be subject to the same minimum coverage mandates, and many will be cancelled (sorry - "not renewed") as Kooky Kathleen admitted today.

How many will be cancelled? It's funny, the Obama administration provided its own estimate, tucked away in the regs, all the way back in 2010 (the same time Obama was spouting his lies about how "if you like your plan, you can keep it.") Here's what the administration had to say: http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/10/31/obama-officials-in-2010-93-million-americans-will-be-unable-to-keep-their-health-plans-under-obamacare/

“The Departments’ mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013,” wrote the administration on page 34,552 of the Register. All in all, more than half of employer-sponsored plans will lose their “grandfather status” and become illegal. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 156 million Americans—more than half the population—was covered by employer-sponsored insurance in 2013.

...

How many people are exposed to these problems? 60 percent of Americans have private-sector health insurance—precisely the number that Jay Carney dismissed. As to the number of people facing cancellations, 51 percent of the employer-based market plus 53.5 percent of the non-group market (the middle of the administration’s range) amounts to 93 million Americans.

And when those policies are cancelled (sorry - "not renewed") and the new coverage mandates are imposed, which way do you think premiums will go? up, Up, UP!!! And do you really believe those higher premiums won't be passed along to employees and customers?

I really can't think of a single piece of legislation in the history of the United States more foolish and destructive than the "Affordable" Care Act. I think a lot of Democrats are going to lose their jobs over this by the time the dust settles.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Stories like this warm my heart. More big time Obama supporters loses their health coverage. http://www.propublica.org/article/loyal-obama-supporters-canceled-by-obamacare

San Francisco architect Lee Hammack says he and his wife, JoEllen Brothers, are “cradle Democrats.” They have donated to the liberal group Organizing for America and worked the phone banks a year ago for President Obama’s re-election.

...

The couple — Lee, 60, and JoEllen, 59 — have been paying $550 a month for their health coverage — a plan that offers solid coverage, not one of the skimpy plans Obama has criticized. But recently, Kaiser informed them the plan would be canceled at the end of the year because it did not meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act. The couple would need to find another one. The cost would be around double what they pay now, but the benefits would be worse.

“From all of the sob stories I’ve heard and read, ours is the most extreme,” Lee told me in an email last week.

I’ve been skeptical about media stories featuring those who claimed they would be worse off because their insurance policies were being canceled on account of the ACA. In many cases, it turns out, the consumers could have found cheaper coverage through the new health insurance marketplaces, or their plans weren’t very good to begin with. Some didn’t know they could qualify for subsidies that would lower their insurance premiums.

So I tried to find flaws in what Hammack told me. I couldn’t find any.

- The couple’s existing Kaiser plan was a good one.
- Their new options were indeed more expensive, and the benefits didn’t seem any better.
- They do not qualify for premium subsidies because they make more than four times the federal poverty level, though Hammack says not by much.

Hammack recalled his reaction when he and his wife received a letters from Kaiser in September informing him their coverage was being canceled. “I work downstairs and my wife had a clear look of shock on her face,” he said. “Our first reaction was clearly there’s got to be some mistake. This was before the exchanges opened up. We quickly calmed down. We were confident that this would all be straightened out. But it wasn’t.”

I asked Hammack to send me details of his current plan. It carried a $4,000 deductible per person, a $40 copay for doctor visits, a $150 emergency room visit fee and 30 percent coinsurance for hospital stays after the deductible. The out-of-pocket maximum was $5,600.

This plan was ending, Kaiser’s letters told them, because it did not meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act. “Everything is taken care of,” the letters said. “There’s nothing you need to do.”

The letters said the couple would be enrolled in new Kaiser plans that would cost nearly $1,300 a month for the two of them (more than $15,000 a year).

And for that higher amount, what would they get? A higher deductible ($4,500), a higher out-of-pocket maximum ($6,350), higher hospital costs (40 percent of the cost) and possibly higher costs for doctor visits and drugs.

When they shopped around and looked for a different plan on California's new health insurance marketplace, Covered California, the cheapest one was $975, with hefty deductibles and copays.

...

“In a few cases, we are able to find coverage for them that is less expensive, but in most cases, we’re not because, in sort of pure economic terms, they are people who benefited from the current system ... Now that the market rules are changing, there will be different people who benefit and different people who don’t.”

“There’s an aspect of market disruption here that I think was not clear to people,” Stenrud acknowledged. “In many respects it has been theory rather than practice for the first three years of the law; folks are seeing the breadth of change that we’re talking about here.”

That’s little comfort to Hammack. He’s written to California’s senators and his representative, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., asking for help.

“We believe that the Act is good for health care, the economy, & the future of our nation. However, ACA options for middle income individuals ages 59 & 60 are unaffordable. We’re learning that many others are similarly affected. In that spirit we ask that you fix this, for all of our sakes,” he and Brothers wrote.     

...

So what is Hammack going to do? If his income were to fall below four times the federal poverty level, or about $62,000 for a family of two, he would qualify for subsidies that could lower his premium cost to as low as zero. If he makes even one dollar more, he gets nothing.

That’s what he’s leaning toward — lowering his salary or shifting more money toward a retirement account and applying for a subsidy. [That's the ticket - JUST EARN LESS!  ]

“We’re not changing our views because of this situation, but it hurt to hear Obama saying, just the other day, that if our plan has been dropped it’s because it wasn’t any good, and our costs would go up only slightly,” he said.      “We’re gratified that the press is on the case, but frustrated that the stewards of the ACA don’t seem to have heard.”

[chum1]

What's the employer mandate?  Never heard if it.

Google it.

Oh.  I thought we were talking about things that affect premiums.

I was. When the employer mandate goes into effect, employer-based plans will be subject to the same minimum coverage mandates, and many will be cancelled (sorry - "not renewed") as Kooky Kathleen admitted today.

How many will be cancelled? It's funny, the Obama administration provided its own estimate, tucked away in the regs, all the way back in 2010 (the same time Obama was spouting his lies about how "if you like your plan, you can keep it.") Here's what the administration had to say: http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/10/31/obama-officials-in-2010-93-million-americans-will-be-unable-to-keep-their-health-plans-under-obamacare/

“The Departments’ mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013,” wrote the administration on page 34,552 of the Register. All in all, more than half of employer-sponsored plans will lose their “grandfather status” and become illegal. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 156 million Americans—more than half the population—was covered by employer-sponsored insurance in 2013.

...

How many people are exposed to these problems? 60 percent of Americans have private-sector health insurance—precisely the number that Jay Carney dismissed. As to the number of people facing cancellations, 51 percent of the employer-based market plus 53.5 percent of the non-group market (the middle of the administration’s range) amounts to 93 million Americans.

And when those policies are cancelled (sorry - "not renewed") and the new coverage mandates are imposed, which way do you think premiums will go? up, Up, UP!!! And do you really believe those higher premiums won't be passed along to employees and customers?

I really can't think of a single piece of legislation in the history of the United States more foolish and destructive than the "Affordable" Care Act. I think a lot of Democrats are going to lose their jobs over this by the time the dust settles.

This seems entirely different from the employer mandate that you had me google.  In any case, I know lots of grandfathered plans (which is a term that shouldn't be used interchangeably with "emoloyer based plans") have already implemented Obamacare minimum coverage in anticipation of this.  They'd be stupid not to!  So maybe we'll be able to dodge yet another bullet.  Let's cross our fingers!

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

FYI, nobody, not even the shitbags who voted for this crap law, is defending it anymore, NOBODY.  It's full on damage control and scapegoating at this point.

So, [email protected], you can stop now. 

Your Pal,
Sugar Dick

/thread/

[chum1]

I'm not defending the law.  I don't give a crap about politics, government, or healthcare one way or another.

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

I'm not defending the law.  I don't give a crap about politics, government, or healthcare one way or another.

Much better

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

There's a show on my tv right now called "Finding Bigfoot"

I'm pretty sure its a parity of the Obama administration.  The one called Bobo is clearly Biden.  The one called Rene is clearly Obama.  I cant put my finger on Cliff and Matt yet.  Bigfoot obviously symbolizes so many different things, this is just amazing.

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

Got it, Cliff is Paul Krugman

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

Matt seems to be the leader, so I think he symbolizes Valerie Jarrett.

[star seed 7]

no surprise that you two watch mouthbreather television also.

 

[ednksu]

What's the employer mandate?  Never heard if it.

Google it.

Oh.  I thought we were talking about things that affect premiums.

It will force many more employees into the exchanges where many will qualify for subsidies that their employer previously covered. Those subsidies will need to be covered through higher premiums.

just wanted to point this as a flat out lie

[chum1]

I'm not defending the law.  I don't give a crap about politics, government, or healthcare one way or another.

Much better

The criticisms of the law presented here aren't any less stupid because of my view, though, right?  I'm also not saying that I dislike it. 

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

What's the employer mandate?  Never heard if it.

Google it.

Oh.  I thought we were talking about things that affect premiums.

It will force many more employees into the exchanges where many will qualify for subsidies that their employer previously covered. Those subsidies will need to be covered through higher premiums.

just wanted to point this as a flat out lie

No, it's not, and please just stop until you have something intelligent to offer. Many employers already cancelled health insurance policies before the employer mandate was delayed. When the employer mandate is implemented, many more employers will either elect to pay the penalty or finagle with hours so they don't meet the threshold for the mandate, which in either event will result in employees having to purchase health insurance on their own. Of course, most of these employees will qualify for substantial subsidies, but again, this is just shifting more Americans onto government-subsidized Medicaid-esque insurance - a model that is already unsustainable. This really isn't that hard to understand. Why do you think Obama decided to unilaterally (because, after all, the law is whatever he wants it to be) delay the employer mandate until after the 2014 elections?!

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

What's the employer mandate?  Never heard if it.

Google it.

Oh.  I thought we were talking about things that affect premiums.

It will force many more employees into the exchanges where many will qualify for subsidies that their employer previously covered. Those subsidies will need to be covered through higher premiums.

just wanted to point this as a flat out lie

No, it's not, and please just stop until you have something intelligent to offer. Many employers already cancelled health insurance policies before the employer mandate was delayed. When the employer mandate is implemented, many more employers will either elect to pay the penalty or finagle with hours so they don't meet the threshold for the mandate, which in either event will result in employees having to purchase health insurance on their own. Of course, most of these employees will qualify for substantial subsidies, but again, this is just shifting more Americans onto government-subsidized Medicaid-esque insurance - a model that is already unsustainable. This really isn't that hard to understand. Why do you think Obama decided to unilaterally (because, after all, the law is whatever he wants it to be) delay the employer mandate until after the 2014 elections?!

Not to mention there are many employers with fewer than 50 employees that were offering health benefits that will no longer be able to afford to do so, and they will simply say screw it and send them to the exchanges.

[Emo EMAW]

What's the employer mandate?  Never heard if it.

Google it.

Oh.  I thought we were talking about things that affect premiums.

It will force many more employees into the exchanges where many will qualify for subsidies that their employer previously covered. Those subsidies will need to be covered through higher premiums.

just wanted to point this as a flat out lie

No, it's not, and please just stop until you have something intelligent to offer. Many employers already cancelled health insurance policies before the employer mandate was delayed. When the employer mandate is implemented, many more employers will either elect to pay the penalty or finagle with hours so they don't meet the threshold for the mandate, which in either event will result in employees having to purchase health insurance on their own. Of course, most of these employees will qualify for substantial subsidies, but again, this is just shifting more Americans onto government-subsidized Medicaid-esque insurance - a model that is already unsustainable. This really isn't that hard to understand. Why do you think Obama decided to unilaterally (because, after all, the law is whatever he wants it to be) delay the employer mandate until after the 2014 elections?!

Not to mention there are many employers with fewer than 50 employees that were offering health benefits that will no longer be able to afford to do so, and they will simply say screw it and send them to the exchanges.

I work(ed) part time at a hobby kind of shop and that's what they've decided to do/did.