Obamacare

[Shaun__]

Nah, the free market doesn't work at all (sarcasm).

Imagine if all the bureaucracy was eliminated and CEOs, VPs, etc., weren't getting riduculously overpaid. Things can actually run rather efficiently.

The CEOs, VPs, and etc. getting riduculously overpaid is what the free market gave us. Turns out people really like health insurance, and will pay lots of money to keep it. Almost like they need it or something.

 

[Lintilla]

First of all, I'm a Canadian expat (now in the USA for 10 years), so you need to understand that in general I think this whole thing is fully batshit, but:

In my opinion health insurance needs to be universal, since in so many ways it relates to externalities. That's my opinion as someone who has studied economics. Externalities need to be governed by a higher body (not just health care!), since it's unrealistic that everyone in this country should plan to have several million dollars put away just in case they are the one unlucky person who winds up with cancer.

Systems with major externalities need to be governed from the outside because there is usually little or no motivation to keep things in check from the inside. That's what externality means. Those that are unaffected can twaddle on for years and years, not giving a shit.

Everyone in this country is taking a gamble as to whether they'll end up with some asshole disease that's going to cost them millions of dollars, and that asshole disease doesn't discriminate between whether you were born rich or poor. So, in my ideal system, everyone who can tosses in some cash according to how much cash they have, and hopes that it isn't them that ends up needing to use that money to pay for their treatment. And if you happened to toss in a bunch of your cash via taxes and didn't get sick... well be fucking glad that your money went to help someone who did. I AM SERIOUSLY NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW AMERICANS ARE ANGRY THAT THEIR TAX DOLLARS MIGHT GO TO SOMEONE WHO WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE SUFFERED OR DIED. I know you're not that cruel, but I can't understand the rationalization that must go on. And then I know there ARE people who ARE that cruel, and don't want a single cent they earned to prevent the death of another.

Then there is a LARGE portion of this country that thinks "charity" like this can be achieved through Christian tithing, and ... they're delusional. Also I'm not religious, and Jesus is never the answer to anything.

Obamacare is fucked because it is not a single payer system and does nothing to solve the real problems with health care in this country, and also because the whole fucking thing is garbaged up with jibber jabber that's only there because they tried (why?) to appeal to the other political side that's only there to deny anything they say even if they'd previously supported it. And also because insurance companies want to stay in business and will lobby their asses off to keep making money off of people who are sick and people who are dying. Insurance companies have the most to lose. (And are revolting.)

We have the highest per capita expenditure on health care, but far from the best health care results. It is bloody EMBARRASSING. This is a disgusting position for any developed country to be in.

I could expand more and more, but the main thing I've taken from all of this "Obamacare" shit is...

I am self employed. My husband is self employed. We have not been able to buy insurance in years. AT ANY PRICE. They would not sell it to us. He has asthma, those drugs cost him less than $50 a month, max. I have a history of depression, my drugs cost me less than $20 a month, but currently I don't take any. $0. But they would not allow us, at any price, to buy private insurance. Pre-existing conditions. No insurance AT ANY PRICE. Even catastrophic insurance, even insurance excluding those conditions. That is obscene. That is, in my opinion, uncivilized, embarrassing and... well I don't know. I think America is still suffering from the after effects of the "Red Scare" and is run by capitalist fuckwad corporations rather than its citizens but... what to do. Move back to Canada? America, I like your "freedom of speech", but you're dialing back on that one, and it's really the only thing you had going for you that no other country had. End drunken rant.

 

[Nordling]

Granted, the ACA is far from ideal, and single payer is the goal--but nothing would have been passed if the Democrats had dug in their heels and demanded it.

ACA (Obamacare) is a start, from its foundation we can gradually shift to single payer, universal health care.

 

[LuckySmiles]

this is unrelated/related and made me laugh pretty hard...speaking of free speech.

Oh here's an article (cnn)http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/26/politics/obamacare-medicaid-enroll/index.html?hpt=hp_inthenews on obamacare wonder what they're saying here...*reads* interesting... wonder how hard people argued in the comments section... oh... :?

 

[Jupiter551]

Not gonna lie, it's pretty amusing watching you guys come up with complex arguments why making healthcare a public issue like schooling, roads etc can't work - all while you have the shittiest first world health system bar none, more on par with Central and South American countries where (just like you guys) the rich get the best healthcare they can afford and the poor, well, whatever.

Hey, you know what costs a ton of money? Continually bitching about Obamacare, and trying to block it when it's already passed.

Land of the free - free to die if you can't afford basic medicine

 

[Bocefish]

Hey, you know what costs a ton of money? Continually bitching about Obamacare, and trying to block it when it's already passed.

It was shoved down our throats when the majority of the people don't want it. Rather than just bend over and take the reaming, yes, people are fighting to change it.

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." -- Thomas Jefferson

 

[Bocefish]

Nah, the free market doesn't work at all (sarcasm).

Imagine if all the bureaucracy was eliminated and CEOs, VPs, etc., weren't getting riduculously overpaid. Things can actually run rather efficiently.

The CEOs, VPs, and etc. getting riduculously overpaid is what the free market gave us. Turns out people really like health insurance, and will pay lots of money to keep it. Almost like they need it or something.

Without competition like the example I posted, healthcare will be controlled by lobbyists and bureaucrats instead of physicians.

Increasing government control & bloat will exponentially complicate what should be a simple, straight forward process.

Posting the example again.

 

[Bocefish]

Obamacare is fucked because it is not a single payer system and does nothing to solve the real problems with health care in this country, and also because the whole fucking thing is garbaged up with jibber jabber that's only there because they tried (why?) to appeal to the other political side that's only there to deny anything they say even if they'd previously supported it. And also because insurance companies want to stay in business and will lobby their asses off to keep making money off of people who are sick and people who are dying. Insurance companies have the most to lose. (And are revolting.)

It's fucked because it does nothing to fix the real problem which is hospitals having a monopoply to creatively price gouge, basically charging whatever the hell they want to. It's over complicated now and complicating it even further will only increase costs while simultaneously lowering the quality of care and increasing wait times for patients.

There's not enough qualified doctors as it is and Obamacare will only drive more out of the profession.

:twocents-02cents:

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

To me the most telling thing about ObamaCare is this thread. Several weeks after website was rolled out we have one thread and the participant are the usual members of the political debating society, including some Aussie who are unaffected, plus a few camgirls.

The one thing everyone agrees with is that in order for ACA to be viable young people need to sign up to buy insurance. Camgirls are self-employed, and unless covered by their parents policies, spouse or another job, need to buy health insurance. For camgirls who make a between say $20-30K a year they will be eligible for a subsidy and generally speaking they can get health insurance they will cost $100-$150/month. If they have a kid the subsidy amount goes up in to about $45,000. On the other end of the scale the top 20 camgirls are looking at fines of 1% of their income which could easily be a few thousand dollars unless they buy health insurance.

Now maybe there is an active thread in the models only section, but I am surprised at the lack of interest. In contrast in another forum I am active, there are dozen of different threads about ACA and more than thousand posts. It is made up of many self-employed, retired or semi-retired people in their 40s to 60s The moderators delete partisan political post so they are all about the understanding how subsidies and/or fines work, and the frustrations of trying to use the website, and understanding coverage. Of course to be fair the websites in most states are so fucked up there is little point to in trying to sign up for at least month. After spending several hours on several days on my state website, and a few phone calls. I finally found out the info I want won't be available until Nov 1 at the earliest. :-x

 

[Bocefish]

This a good tool for people wanting a general estimate that doesn't crash.

Subsidy Calculator

 

[LuckySmiles]

To me the most telling thing about ObamaCare is this thread. Several weeks after website was rolled out we have one thread and the participant are the usual members of the political debating society, including some Aussie who are unaffected, plus a few camgirls.

The one thing everyone agrees with is that in order for ACA to be viable young people need to sign up to buy insurance. Camgirls are self-employed, and unless covered by their parents policies, spouse or another job, need to buy health insurance. For camgirls who make a between say $20-30K a year they will be eligible for a subsidy and generally speaking they can get health insurance they will cost $100-$150/month. If they have a kid the subsidy amount goes up in to about $45,000. On the other end of the scale the top 20 camgirls are looking at fines of 1% of their income which could easily be a few thousand dollars unless they buy health insurance.

I agree even though, I don't 100% know everything about it. :lol: maybe other people don't want to step into an argument. But it is something everyone should be aware of how it affects them. I didn't really start looking at it until the other day when a friend is like,
"When are you signing up for obamacare?"
me: "Nah, I don't want that"
friends:"haha you have to."
Me:"what why what are they going to do if I don't"
friend:"find out where you live, put it on your taxes suspend your license kidnap your puppy"

ok so i don't have a puppy and friend was part wrong. But I really didn't know. It's not like i don't understand the importance of health insurance, um i've had it before. But the reality is I can take a chance and get by a year here or there with no coverage and at my age 999/1000(made up stat) no big deal. In contrast as someone with multiple grand in debt, forking over a few grand (and your numbers up there might be a little off.. maybe it depends on age.. :? )
makes a big difference for me and my future at this time. As someone financially responsible my whole life, it pisses me off. I can get what I need health wise for less than a couple hundred a year as is, so leave me alone while i sort out my shit so I'm not still in debt when I am older and more likely to have health problems and then have no money.

maybe that's just me. Also from the calculator I've used even if you make 30K in places like ny and vermont your paying $200 a month plus. call me crazy but 30k after taxes is not a lot of money. And take away $2400 health care thats "suddenly" forced upon you if you aren't paying attention, is a big deal. Also add just 5k to your income and you start to see the subsidies rapidly decline. Raising the cost further.

Self employment especially in a business like camming, can be unpredictable. If you underestimate your earnings and qualify for a subsidy, and then randomly have some blowout month or two with an extra 5-10k on your earnings for the year, if your not paying attention, you'll lose that subsidy. And hellooo, you'll have to pay back the goverment what you owe them the following year. That's a cost that could be really easy to miss. You might think oh but I covered my taxes? Yeah but if you were only paying $200 insurance a month with a subsidy, and then spontaneously had some great earnings putting you out of subsidy range, you will owe the gov more money. As much as $1,000 more for only earning 5k more than you expected. It's something to be aware of.

It's an important issue. Relevant to camming, and girls try and do their own research and be informed.

 

[Shaun__]

Hey, you know what costs a ton of money? Continually bitching about Obamacare, and trying to block it when it's already passed.

It was shoved down our throats when the majority of the people don't want it. Rather than just bend over and take the reaming, yes, people are fighting to change it.

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." -- Thomas Jefferson

Some of those who do not like ACF are people like me who wanted single payer. A better poll would include the reason for it being disliked.

Nah, the free market doesn't work at all (sarcasm).

Imagine if all the bureaucracy was eliminated and CEOs, VPs, etc., weren't getting riduculously overpaid. Things can actually run rather efficiently.

The CEOs, VPs, and etc. getting riduculously overpaid is what the free market gave us. Turns out people really like health insurance, and will pay lots of money to keep it. Almost like they need it or something.

Without competition like the example I posted, healthcare will be controlled by lobbyists and bureaucrats instead of physicians.

Increasing government control & bloat will exponentially complicate what should be a simple, straight forward process.

Posting the example again.

I watched your video, and it is a good video. The low cost provider seems to only be giving surgical services to patients who pay cash, and that is the secret of why they can offer such a cheap price. Regular hospitals can not legally turn patients away, and somebody has to pay for those people.

Obamacare is fucked because it is not a single payer system and does nothing to solve the real problems with health care in this country, and also because the whole fucking thing is garbaged up with jibber jabber that's only there because they tried (why?) to appeal to the other political side that's only there to deny anything they say even if they'd previously supported it. And also because insurance companies want to stay in business and will lobby their asses off to keep making money off of people who are sick and people who are dying. Insurance companies have the most to lose. (And are revolting.)

It's fucked because it does nothing to fix the real problem which is hospitals having a monopoply to creatively price gouge, basically charging whatever the hell they want to. It's over complicated now and complicating it even further will only increase costs while simultaneously lowering the quality of care and increasing wait times for patients.

There's not enough qualified doctors as it is and Obamacare will only drive more out of the profession.

:twocents-02cents:

Again cost are high, because of all the people too poor to have insurance or pay in cash. Unless you are willing to deny those people care, our medical cost are not going to go down.

 

[Bocefish]

Again cost are high, because of all the people too poor to have insurance or pay in cash. Unless you are willing to deny those people care, our medical cost are not going to go down.

There are free or low cost options. Many stores now have low cost clinics as well. The biggest problem, IMO, is the waste, fraud and abuse of those Government funded programs for the less fortunate like Medicaid. Just about EVERY Government program is loaded with waste, fraud and abuse.


People can find low or no cost health centers here: http://findahealthcenter.hrsa.gov/Search_HCC.aspx

HRSA health centers care for you, even if you have no health insurance. You pay what you can afford, based on your income.

Health centers provide:

checkups when you're well
treatment when you're sick
complete care when you're pregnant
immunizations and checkups for your children
dental care and prescription drugs for your family
mental health and substance abuse care if you need it
Health centers are in most cities and many rural areas. Type in your address and click the 'Find Health Centers' button to find health centers near you.

 

[Bocefish]

Even the MSM is showing the amount of policy cancellations and sticker shock of Obamacre: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162- ... obamacare/

 

[NaNatasha]

World Health Care Satisfaction Rankings:

The United States, which came in sixth overall, was followed by Poland, Germany, Canada and Britain.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/1 ... 20252.html

NEW YORK, June 11 (Reuters) - Healthcare has improved in many countries in the last five years, but patients in South Korea, Argentina and Japan are the most satisfied with their medical care, according to an Ipsos poll released on Tuesday.

Are you saying we should copy South Korea, Argentina, and Japan?

I actually spent a year living in South Korea, and I was covered under their national health insurance plan. It cost me ~$100/month (the cost is proportional to an individual's income) and covered nearly all the cost of any primary, secondary, or emergency care, as well as dental and mental health care. The quality of care was excellent. I took significantly fewer sick days that year and was generally more productive without the looming possibility of ending up deeply in debt should I suddenly become ill. On a policy level, the ratio of net costs to net benefits was, in this case, cost-saving.

Currently, I do not have insurance. I cannot afford it, because I've recently graduated from college and am on the very, very expensive road of trying to get into med school. That's right, my decision to become a doctor comes at the cost of compromising my own medical care. I do academic research (looking at cost-efffectiveness in US healthcare settings) under a professor who has a huge amount of academic clout. I get paid almost nothing and receive no benefits, but I'm lucky to be paid anything at all; there are massive numbers of crazy + wealth pre-meds clawing to do the same work for free.

I, like many others who lack health insurance, lack access to primary care. Consequently, I've had to utilize urgent care and the ER when a couple of serious medical events came up (which likely would not have occurred had I had access to preventive care); urgent and, especially, emergency care is unbelievably expensive, as patients in these healthcare settings are far more likely to be poor, homeless, and unable to pay their ER bill. Lacking primary care, the ER effectively becomes the first-line source of care for those living in poverty. Despite being insanely expensive, emergency departments of hospitals are almost always operating at a loss, causing a huge decrease in the quality of care and further driving up the cost for those who do pay.

The logistics of guaranteeing access to care are tricky, and I'm not quite sure where the best answer lies, but I think that the benefits of establishing such a system are enormous enough to justify working to figure out a tenable system.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

I agree even though, I don't 100% know everything about it. :lol: maybe other people don't want to step into an argument. But it is something everyone should be aware of how it affects them. I didn't really start looking at it until the other day when a friend is like,
"When are you signing up for obamacare?"
me: "Nah, I don't want that"
friends:"haha you have to."
Me:"what why what are they going to do if I don't"
friend:"find out where you live, put it on your taxes suspend your license kidnap your puppy"

ok so i don't have a puppy and friend was part wrong. But I really didn't know. It's not like i don't understand the importance of health insurance, um i've had it before. But the reality is I can take a chance and get by a year here or there with no coverage and at my age 999/1000(made up stat) no big deal. In contrast as someone with multiple grand in debt, forking over a few grand (and your numbers up there might be a little off.. maybe it depends on age.. :? )
makes a big difference for me and my future at this time. As someone financially responsible my whole life, it pisses me off. I can get what I need health wise for less than a couple hundred a year as is, so leave me alone while i sort out my shit so I'm not still in debt when I am older and more likely to have health problems and then have no money.

maybe that's just me. Also from the calculator I've used even if you make 30K in places like ny and vermont your paying $200 a month plus. call me crazy but 30k after taxes is not a lot of money. And take away $2400 health care thats "suddenly" forced upon you if you aren't paying attention, is a big deal. Also add just 5k to your income and you start to see the subsidies rapidly decline. Raising the cost further.

Self employment especially in a business like camming, can be unpredictable. If you underestimate your earnings and qualify for a subsidy, and then randomly have some blowout month or two with an extra 5-10k on your earnings for the year, if your not paying attention, you'll lose that subsidy. And hellooo, you'll have to pay back the goverment what you owe them the following year. That's a cost that could be really easy to miss. You might think oh but I covered my taxes? Yeah but if you were only paying $200 insurance a month with a subsidy, and then spontaneously had some great earnings putting you out of subsidy range, you will owe the gov more money. As much as $1,000 more for only earning 5k more than you expected. It's something to be aware of.

It's an important issue. Relevant to camming, and girls try and do their own research and be informed.

Yup you pretty much nailed many of the complexities. The issues with subsidy cliff can be maddeningly complicated, since the way the calculate income isn't look at line 37 (AGI) of your 1040 and input the number. If you have kids and/or an older husband you can easily lose $1000-1500 in subsidies if you make $1 over the 400% federal poverty level. So it very well maybe the case the you'd be better off taking the last few weeks not camming in Dec. and not risk one of your regulars tip bombing you with a Xmas present and causing you to lose your ACA subsidy.

One of the many flaws in the system is that it assumes you have predictable earnings, which is pretty silly cause if you worked a full time 9-5 job, generally speaking you'd have employer provide insurance and wouldn't need the exchanges. From what I understand the training of the folks on the support lines also assume a steady paycheck which create confusion in trying to figure out subsidies. I make money from investments and while less variable than camming can still vary widely. After the market melt down in 2008 I could have easily qualified for a subsidy only to have to pay it back in 2010 when the market turned around. When you are struggling with bills, paying back student loans, and asking 20 something to save enough for taxes, and then get hit with paying the subsidy cause they had a good cam year, is enough to give you grey hairs. Grey is probably not the best hair color for a cam model .

The only reason I know what is going on is because spent the last couple of years reading a forum, with lots of smart and highly motivated folks and collectively we took parts of the law apart line by line. Many of the folks would quit work or switch to a low pressure job (making room for younger people to advance) but they can't get insurance at any price or crazy expensive 25-30K/year for the family. So they are very excited about ACA, but frustrated in the process of enrolling.

But for a young person the benefits are really unclear. BTW you are right for an 18-29 year the chances off of running up a $50K medical bill are in face .%1. Which would essentially bankrupt most young people. On the other paying $200 month in order to avoid the 1/1000 chance of getting hosed with a big medical bill is very expense insurance. Hell if you were afraid of risks you wouldn't be a camgirl. So you are probably better off paying the 1% or $300 for those making $30k then buying insurance. Next year the fine doubles to 2% income you might be better off buying cheap insurance with subsidy. You do get some decent benefits, annual exams, free birth control, free or cheap mammograms, but you are still on the hook for several thousand dollars worth of medical expense.

This is a long, math heavy article, but pretty comprehensive look at the economies of young invincible's signing up for Obamacare.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-01/will-the-young-invincibles-join-obamacare-.html
tl:dr save your money, pay the fine and skip the insurance at least for 2014.


But the rub is if there aren't enough young people to subsidize the insurance for us old folks, the whole system collapses. So I think if you voted for Obama then you should sign up for ObamaCare.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

I think i've pretty much decided. I'll be opting out of it all together. The whole thing sickens me (pun intended).

 

[Shaun__]

Again cost are high, because of all the people too poor to have insurance or pay in cash. Unless you are willing to deny those people care, our medical cost are not going to go down.

There are free or low cost options. Many stores now have low cost clinics as well. The biggest problem, IMO, is the waste, fraud and abuse of those Government funded programs for the less fortunate like Medicaid. Just about EVERY Government program is loaded with waste, fraud and abuse.


People can find low or no cost health centers here: http://findahealthcenter.hrsa.gov/Search_HCC.aspx

HRSA health centers care for you, even if you have no health insurance. You pay what you can afford, based on your income.

Health centers provide:

checkups when you're well
treatment when you're sick
complete care when you're pregnant
immunizations and checkups for your children
dental care and prescription drugs for your family
mental health and substance abuse care if you need it
Health centers are in most cities and many rural areas. Type in your address and click the 'Find Health Centers' button to find health centers near you.

Here let me show you the list for my area.

You arguments are a joke, you seem to have no idea how crappy poor people have it in life. I have great insurance and PP ACA is going to raise my already high taxes, but you do not see me complaining. That is because I actually think everyone should be able to get medical help, without driving two hours, something very hard to do if you are poor.

 

[Bocefish]

You arguments are a joke, you seem to have no idea how crappy poor people have it in life. I have great insurance and PP ACA is going to raise my already high taxes, but you do not see me complaining. That is because I actually think everyone should be able to get medical help, without driving two hours, something very hard to do if you are poor.

FYI, I wasn't arguing anything by posting that locator link. It was something I ran across that was worth sharing just like the other links I've posted. And btw, there are 10 free or low cost health centers within a 30 minute radius of my current location. It obviously won't be the same for everybody.

Everybody already gets medical care that wants or needs it. Like you said, hospitals can't legally turn people away.

I don't give a shit how you spend or waste your money. If you're fine with paying higher premiums and deductibles for Government run healthcare, goody for you. The majority of people are not.

CBS News report discusses a growing source of disquiet: In almost half the states with exchanges, the overwhelming majority of enrollments are coming from Medicaid, not the new insurance markets -- 87 percent in Washington, 82 percent in Kentucky and, last time I looked, 100 percent in Oregon (which delayed opening its insurance exchange in order to work out technical bugs). The Medicaid expansion side of the bill seems to be working fine in the states that opted for the expansion. But the private insurance side doesn’t seem to be getting a lot of pickup.

Gail Wilensky, a former Medicaid director, said the numbers are causing concern in the insurance industry, which needs healthy adults to buy private insurance in large numbers for the system to work.

"Either the private insurance enrollments come up somewhere around the expected amount or there's going to be a problem. ... You need a volume and you need a mix of people that are healthy as well as high users in private insurance, in order to have it be sustainable," she said.

The Obama administration says they expected these high enrollment numbers in Medicaid because the law expands the number of low-income people who can get Medicaid, CBS News' Jan Crawford reported on "CBS This Morning." Supporters say this shows demand. But industry sources say that if we do not see some real turnaround soon, there could be big problems for the entire system.

Imagine that.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

You arguments are a joke, you seem to have no idea how crappy poor people have it in life. I have great insurance and PP ACA is going to raise my already high taxes, but you do not see me complaining. That is because I actually think everyone should be able to get medical help, without driving two hours, something very hard to do if you are poor.

Shaun, I've found that the biggest supporters of ObamaCare are people like yourself and my liberal friends in CA who are covered by employer insurance and won't be using the exchanges. Please explain how somebody like Lucky Smiles is helped. For a camgirl who lives in Vermont and makes 30K a year and silver insurance policy will run $375-$400, she is eligible for a subsidy of about $200/month but if she make $35,000 loses about 1/2 the subsidy. So she is spending $2100 to $2400 a year to buy health care and all she gets is a free annual and birth control. She is in Vermont so imagine she has a skiing accident and breaks a leg and the bill runs $7,000 (probably cheap). Most silver plans require a $2K deductible and then a 30% copay. So after she forks over $2K then she has to pay an additional 30%* $5,000= $1,5000. So grand total (not so) Lucky smiles spent $2400 for insurance premiums, and $3500 for copays and deductible for breaking a leg or $5,900. If she had no insurance she'd pay $7,000. If you are only making $30,000 the difference between paying $5,900 and $7,000 is still unaffordable. Why wouldn't she be better off just skipping insurance, and saving the $2400? But Obamacare makes it worse for poor people she now has to pay $300 fine, next year the fine goes to $600, and $750 in 2016 because she doesn't have insurance.

Obamacare sounds ok until you actually start looking at the numbers, then you realize the game is rigged for young people they are paying high premium to help subsidize the premiums for the 50 and 60 years olds.

 

[LuckySmiles]

You arguments are a joke, you seem to have no idea how crappy poor people have it in life. I have great insurance and PP ACA is going to raise my already high taxes, but you do not see me complaining. That is because I actually think everyone should be able to get medical help, without driving two hours, something very hard to do if you are poor.

Shaun, I've found that the biggest supporters of ObamaCare are people like yourself and my liberal friends in CA who are covered by employer insurance and won't be using the exchanges. Please explain how somebody like Lucky Smiles is helped. For a camgirl who lives in Vermont and makes 30K a year and silver insurance policy will run $375-$400, she is eligible for a subsidy of about $200/month but if she make $35,000 loses about 1/2 the subsidy. So she is spending $2100 to $2400 a year to buy health care and all she gets is a free annual and birth control. She is in Vermont so imagine she has a skiing accident and breaks a leg and the bill runs $7,000 (probably cheap). Most silver plans require a $2K deductible and then a 30% copay. So after she forks over $2K then she has to pay an additional 30%* $5,000= $1,5000. So grand total (not so) Lucky smiles spent $2400 for insurance premiums, and $3500 for copays and deductible for breaking a leg or $5,900. If she had no insurance she'd pay $7,000. If you are only making $30,000 the difference between paying $5,900 and $7,000 is still unaffordable. Why wouldn't she be better off just skipping insurance, and saving the $2400? But Obamacare makes it worse for poor people she now has to pay $300 fine, next year the fine goes to $600, and $750 in 2016 because she doesn't have insurance.

Obamacare sounds ok until you actually start looking at the numbers, then you realize the game is rigged for young people they are paying high premium to help subsidize the premiums for the 50 and 60 years olds.

lol. I don't live in vermont. And that might not be my income But I was breaking it down with examples to explain camspective arguments sake. hehehe just wanted to clarify cause that made me giggle but, yes. Point remains. If I did live in vermont I would ski all winter though. irrelevant lol. Carry on. :handgestures-salute:

 

[Just Me]

Hey, you know what costs a ton of money? Continually bitching about Obamacare, and trying to block it when it's already passed.

It was shoved down our throats when the majority of the people don't want it. Rather than just bend over and take the reaming, yes, people are fighting to change it.

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." -- Thomas Jefferson

Not a quote by Jefferson. http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/if-law-unjustquotation

The latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll found widespread misconceptions about the health care law, including the notion that government panels would be set up to make decisions about end-of-life care for Medicare recipients — the so-called death panels.

Nearly two-thirds of those polled said they did not know that the health insurance exchanges were set to open on Oct. 1, including almost three-quarters of uninsured Americans. And half of Americans were under the impression that the law created a government-run insurance plan that would compete with private sector insurance plans.

http://www.nytimes.com/news/afforda...ls-in-overtime-on-affordable-care-act-3/?_r=0
http://kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/kaiser-health-tracking-poll-september-2013/

Polls do not tell the whole story.

 

[Just Me]

You arguments are a joke, you seem to have no idea how crappy poor people have it in life. I have great insurance and PP ACA is going to raise my already high taxes, but you do not see me complaining. That is because I actually think everyone should be able to get medical help, without driving two hours, something very hard to do if you are poor.

Shaun, I've found that the biggest supporters of ObamaCare are people like yourself and my liberal friends in CA who are covered by employer insurance and won't be using the exchanges. Please explain how somebody like Lucky Smiles is helped. For a camgirl who lives in Vermont and makes 30K a year and silver insurance policy will run $375-$400, she is eligible for a subsidy of about $200/month but if she make $35,000 loses about 1/2 the subsidy. So she is spending $2100 to $2400 a year to buy health care and all she gets is a free annual and birth control. She is in Vermont so imagine she has a skiing accident and breaks a leg and the bill runs $7,000 (probably cheap). Most silver plans require a $2K deductible and then a 30% copay. So after she forks over $2K then she has to pay an additional 30%* $5,000= $1,5000. So grand total (not so) Lucky smiles spent $2400 for insurance premiums, and $3500 for copays and deductible for breaking a leg or $5,900. If she had no insurance she'd pay $7,000. If you are only making $30,000 the difference between paying $5,900 and $7,000 is still unaffordable. Why wouldn't she be better off just skipping insurance, and saving the $2400? But Obamacare makes it worse for poor people she now has to pay $300 fine, next year the fine goes to $600, and $750 in 2016 because she doesn't have insurance.

Obamacare sounds ok until you actually start looking at the numbers, then you realize the game is rigged for young people they are paying high premium to help subsidize the premiums for the 50 and 60 years olds.

In 2010, the average cost per hospital stay was $9,700. That is the lowball government estimate, others have average hospital stays at $17,390 to $33,079. While in the short term your hypothetical would be better off to just pay the fine but all it takes is one average hospital stay and now they have paid the fine and then pay for the insurance (I think that will still be an option) while in the hospital. If getting insurance while you are hospitalized is not an option it makes even less financial sense to not get insurance.

Healthcare should not be a gamble. It should be a right like most other western democracies have.

As to posts about government run agencies. Medicare Is More Efficient Than Private Insurance

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, administrative costs in Medicare are only about 2 percent of operating expenditures. Defenders of the insurance industry estimate administrative costs as 17 percent of revenue.

 

[Bocefish]

Views on the law: Most Americans don’t like it. In every poll conducted by eight major national pollsters this year, opposition to the Affordable Care Act outweighs support.

http://www.american.com/archive/2013/oc ... e-care-act

Medicare & Medicaid Fraud

http://www.cato.org/publications/congre ... ealth-care

Medicare and Medicaid are rife with fraud and other types of improper payments. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that Medicare made at least $48 billion in improper payments in 2010.9 That figure does not include improper payments in Part D, which auditors believe is also highly susceptible to abuse.10 Nevertheless, $48 billion amounts to more than 9 percent of total Medicare spending and nearly four times the combined profits of private health insurance companies.11 CMS also estimates that the federal government alone made $22.5 billion in improper Medicaid payments in 2010, making the combined total of improper payments in the two programs somewhere north of $70 billion per year.12 In one infamous case, a New York dentist once billed that state’s Medicaid program for 991 procedures in a single day. In 2005, the New York Times reported that New York’s Medicaid program “has become so huge, so complex and so lightly policed that it is easily exploited,” and that “a chief state investigator of Medicaid fraud and abuse in New York City said he and his colleagues believed that at least 10 percent of state Medicaid dollars were spent on fraudulent claims, while 20 or 30 percent more were siphoned off by what they termed abuse, meaning unnecessary spending that might not be criminal.”13 Some experts estimate that improper payments are even more prevalent in these programs. Harvard University’s Malcolm Sparrow estimates that improper payments account for 20 percent of spending in federal health care programs.14 That suggests Medicare alone makes $100 billion in improper payments annually. The Government Accountability Office has for two decades designated both Medicare and Medicaid as posing a high risk for fraud.15 Decades of congressional efforts to combat Medicare and Medicaid fraud have proven largely fruitless and even harmful to patients, as my colleague Prof. David Hyman explains in his satirical book Medicare Meets Mephistopheles, an excerpt from which I have attached as an appendix.16

Medicare fraud is not confined to the behavior of criminals and a few health care providers.17 Elected and unelected officials, in both legislative and executive branches of the federal government, routinely defraud the American public by pretending that the so-called Medicare trust funds contain assets that may be used to pay future Medicare benefits.18 As the Clinton administration explained in its 2000 budget submission, the “balances” in the Medicare and Social Security trust funds “do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits … The existence of large trust fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits.”19 Congress and the White House, under the control of both parties, have also defrauded the American people by using budgetary gimmicks that hide the full cost of Medicare. These fraudulent gimmicks include the legislated reductions in Medicare payments to physicians under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and Part A providers under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. Such spending reductions are so politically implausible that Congress routinely rescinds them. Yet their inclusion in statute makes Medicare appear less costly than it actually will prove to be in a 10-year budget window and beyond. This type of fraud has become so routine that the Congressional Budget Office attempts to correct for it by projecting future Medicare outlays based on current policy (assuming that Congress rescinds the spending reductions) as opposed to current law (which assumes the reductions will take effect)

 

[Just Me]

Views on the law: Most Americans don’t like it. In every poll conducted by eight major national pollsters this year, opposition to the Affordable Care Act outweighs support.

http://www.american.com/archive/2013/oc ... e-care-act

Medicare & Medicaid Fraud

http://www.cato.org/publications/congre ... ealth-care

Medicare and Medicaid are rife with fraud and other types of improper payments. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that Medicare made at least $48 billion in improper payments in 2010.9 That figure does not include improper payments in Part D, which auditors believe is also highly susceptible to abuse.10 Nevertheless, $48 billion amounts to more than 9 percent of total Medicare spending and nearly four times the combined profits of private health insurance companies.11 CMS also estimates that the federal government alone made $22.5 billion in improper Medicaid payments in 2010, making the combined total of improper payments in the two programs somewhere north of $70 billion per year.12 In one infamous case, a New York dentist once billed that state’s Medicaid program for 991 procedures in a single day. In 2005, the New York Times reported that New York’s Medicaid program “has become so huge, so complex and so lightly policed that it is easily exploited,” and that “a chief state investigator of Medicaid fraud and abuse in New York City said he and his colleagues believed that at least 10 percent of state Medicaid dollars were spent on fraudulent claims, while 20 or 30 percent more were siphoned off by what they termed abuse, meaning unnecessary spending that might not be criminal.”13 Some experts estimate that improper payments are even more prevalent in these programs. Harvard University’s Malcolm Sparrow estimates that improper payments account for 20 percent of spending in federal health care programs.14 That suggests Medicare alone makes $100 billion in improper payments annually. The Government Accountability Office has for two decades designated both Medicare and Medicaid as posing a high risk for fraud.15 Decades of congressional efforts to combat Medicare and Medicaid fraud have proven largely fruitless and even harmful to patients, as my colleague Prof. David Hyman explains in his satirical book Medicare Meets Mephistopheles, an excerpt from which I have attached as an appendix.16

Medicare fraud is not confined to the behavior of criminals and a few health care providers.17 Elected and unelected officials, in both legislative and executive branches of the federal government, routinely defraud the American public by pretending that the so-called Medicare trust funds contain assets that may be used to pay future Medicare benefits.18 As the Clinton administration explained in its 2000 budget submission, the “balances” in the Medicare and Social Security trust funds “do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits … The existence of large trust fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits.”19 Congress and the White House, under the control of both parties, have also defrauded the American people by using budgetary gimmicks that hide the full cost of Medicare. These fraudulent gimmicks include the legislated reductions in Medicare payments to physicians under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and Part A providers under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. Such spending reductions are so politically implausible that Congress routinely rescinds them. Yet their inclusion in statute makes Medicare appear less costly than it actually will prove to be in a 10-year budget window and beyond. This type of fraud has become so routine that the Congressional Budget Office attempts to correct for it by projecting future Medicare outlays based on current policy (assuming that Congress rescinds the spending reductions) as opposed to current law (which assumes the reductions will take effect)

Strawman argument. How much fraud waste and abuse is in the DoD? I am willing to bet there is enough of it in the defense budget that you could use it to pay for everyone's healthcare. Yet there is no call from the right to get the government out of defense. Though some are trying with all the defense contractors being used instead of our own DoD, but the only customer they have is the US government.

As to the polls, most Americans do not even know what the ACA is and what is in it, as my previous post showed. In most polls, when they are told specific items from the law they are for it until you tell them it is "Obamacare".

 

[Bocefish]

Strawman argument. How much fraud waste and abuse is in the DoD? I am willing to bet there is enough of it in the defense budget that you could use it to pay for everyone's healthcare. Yet there is no call from the right to get the government out of defense. Though some are trying with all the defense contractors being used instead of our own DoD, but the only customer they have is the US government.

As to the polls, most Americans do not even know what the ACA is and what is in it, as my previous post showed. In most polls, when they are told specific items from the law they are for it until you tell them it is "Obamacare".

Oh that's right, Pelosi, Reid and the liar in chief, Obama, along with his administration know what's better for Americans than Americans themselves do. If, according to you, people don't know what's in Obamacare, who's fault is that and how did it get passed? The government is supposed to work for the people, not the other way around.

The facts of government waste, fraud and abuse are undeniable, so ya, let's give them even more power so they can waste even more money and ration our healthcare too. :dance:

 

[Bocefish]

 

[Bocefish]

President Obama repeatedly assured Americans that after the Affordable Care Act became law, people who liked their health insurance would be able to keep it. But millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under Obamacare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years.

Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC NEWS that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

None of this should come as a shock to the Obama administration. The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date — the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example — the policy would not be grandfathered.

Buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to keep their policy. And because many policies will have been changed since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.”

That means the administration knew that more than 40 to 67 percent of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.

Yet President Obama, who had promised in 2009, “if you like your health plan, you will be able to keep your health plan,” was still saying in 2012, “If [you] already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.”


http://weaselzippers.us/2013/10/28/bomb ... ince-2010/

In other words, while Obama was promising Americans over and over again they could “keep their plans if they liked them” he knew this was a lie and that close to 70% could be dumped by their carriers.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

In 2010, the average cost per hospital stay was $9,700. That is the lowball government estimate, others have average hospital stays at $17,390 to $33,079. While in the short term your hypothetical would be better off to just pay the fine but all it takes is one average hospital stay and now they have paid the fine and then pay for the insurance (I think that will still be an option) while in the hospital. If getting insurance while you are hospitalized is not an option it makes even less financial sense to not get insurance.

Healthcare should not be a gamble. It should be a right like most other western democracies have.

As to posts about government run agencies. Medicare Is More Efficient Than Private Insurance

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, administrative costs in Medicare are only about 2 percent of operating expenditures. Defenders of the insurance industry estimate administrative costs as 17 percent of revenue.

So lets rerun the number for a $9,700 average hospital stay. No insurance $9,700. A silver plan $2,000 deductible plus 30% of (9,700-2000)=$2,310 plus $2400 in insurance premium = $6710 in total medical expenditures. Is spending $6700 really that much more affordable than spending $9700 when you only make $30K a year? If you can avoid going to the hospital more than once every three years you are better off skipping the insurance. If you get unlucky and are one in the thousand young people that get hit with a $50K plus hospital bill , either work with the hospital to negotiate it down to a reasonable bill or declare bankruptcy. Hospital bills unlike student loans are dischargable in bankruptcy. Now I am not advocating people declare bankruptcy at the drop of the hat, but honestly running up huge medical bills seems me to be a perfectly good reason to do so.

Now to be fair in some states you can by a bronze plan for $50-75/month after subsidies. I'd think even if you are making 30K a year that is probably affordable. However a bronze plan is is basically useless except it limits your out of pocket expenses to $6350 or so. If you can buy a cheap plan you are probably better off buying that than paying the fine.

I'm not 100% sure I agree that Healthcare should be a right. Cause where do we draw the line on rights, college education, high speed internet, a good job, free porn (oh we got that ) But even I agree I just don't see how Obamacare moves us toward the goal.

 

[Shaun__]

You arguments are a joke, you seem to have no idea how crappy poor people have it in life. I have great insurance and PP ACA is going to raise my already high taxes, but you do not see me complaining. That is because I actually think everyone should be able to get medical help, without driving two hours, something very hard to do if you are poor.

Shaun, I've found that the biggest supporters of ObamaCare are people like yourself and my liberal friends in CA who are covered by employer insurance and won't be using the exchanges. Please explain how somebody like Lucky Smiles is helped. For a camgirl who lives in Vermont and makes 30K a year and silver insurance policy will run $375-$400, she is eligible for a subsidy of about $200/month but if she make $35,000 loses about 1/2 the subsidy. So she is spending $2100 to $2400 a year to buy health care and all she gets is a free annual and birth control. She is in Vermont so imagine she has a skiing accident and breaks a leg and the bill runs $7,000 (probably cheap). Most silver plans require a $2K deductible and then a 30% copay. So after she forks over $2K then she has to pay an additional 30%* $5,000= $1,5000. So grand total (not so) Lucky smiles spent $2400 for insurance premiums, and $3500 for copays and deductible for breaking a leg or $5,900. If she had no insurance she'd pay $7,000. If you are only making $30,000 the difference between paying $5,900 and $7,000 is still unaffordable. Why wouldn't she be better off just skipping insurance, and saving the $2400? But Obamacare makes it worse for poor people she now has to pay $300 fine, next year the fine goes to $600, and $750 in 2016 because she doesn't have insurance.

Obamacare sounds ok until you actually start looking at the numbers, then you realize the game is rigged for young people they are paying high premium to help subsidize the premiums for the 50 and 60 years olds.

If you subtract 2400 from 7000 you get 4600, that is going to be devastating to someone who actually tries to pay her bills. Also her broken leg could have required surgery to install pins, if it simply shattered when she hit the tree, and her cost would be a lot higher. The end result is going to be everyone else paying higher costs, and her trying to file for bankruptcy or hiding from bill collectors.

ACA was supposed to help really poor people, the people with a little higher income levels were going to be helped by the states. Not all states decided to participate. If the democrats in congress had not been terrified of being called socialists we would have looked at the best healthcare systems around, and just copied things that would work for us. Still if the risk pool is larger prices will have to go down over time, since profits are capped. Those young people paying will be happy for this when they are the ones who need it.