Obamacare- the well oiled machine....screwing taxpayers with precision

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gatordowneast, May 17, 2014.

  1. gatordowneast

    gatordowneast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,747
    Likes Received:
    303
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +985
    Over 1 M people are receiving incorrect subsidies and will face large tax bills

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/su...mail_job=1569635_05172014&promo_code=2q3bccq9

    AND

    Insurance Companies are not getting paid

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obamacare-insurance-companies/2013/11/29/id/539223/

    These are in addition to the complaints about access to docs and huge deductables that must be met.

    And of course the next open enrollment has been moved back to November 15th....after the midterm elections.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. dirigo

    dirigo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +23
    Let me get this straight, after years of warnings of the cataclysmic destruction of our way of life the salvos the far right is now reduced to seeking sympathy for (1) insurance companies who'll have some delay in their premium receipts and (2) enrollees who got too good a deal on their subsidies? Didn't the sign-up period just end about 30 days ago? Startling turn around isn't it?
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    32,762
    Likes Received:
    2,468
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,345
    I want to rid our lives 'entirely' of the middle man (insurance companies) all together. That's why I'd like some sort of healthcare saving account and the freedom to shop for the best or nearest doctor that I want.
  4. gatordowneast

    gatordowneast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,747
    Likes Received:
    303
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +985
    Dirigo, another day...more lies surface, problems are encountered and the achievement of "original objectives of Obamacare" are a joke.

    Obamacare was to cut health care costs while ensuring more of the uninsured, while allowing those insured to keep their docs and plans. Sure hasn't cut my costs...premiums up 24% this year. Deductable up too.

    We've added about 1 M who were previously uninsured and are subsidizing 95% of those. We got 5.9 M tossed from their plans and signed them up for Obamacare and we are subsidizing 82% of them. That is called CHURN. And we added a few million more to Medicaid. Good luck to them in finding docs who will take it. And the employer mandate and huge cost increases that go with it, have been delayed until Nov 15th. How convenient? Right after the midterm elections so we can trick the $hit out of the electorate again. Truth, honesty, integrity, transparency.

    This was not health care reform. It is "health care redistribution of costs".
    • Winner Winner x 3
  5. dirigo

    dirigo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +23
    While I disagree with the bulk of your post I will acknowledge that there were those who lost ground as a result of the ACA (healthy young males the most often identified). Perhaps more important I tend to agree with your conclusion.

    While 45+million of us were without coverage 275+million did have some type of coverage and most of us in that group railed constantly about the out of control spending forced on the federal government by the ever increasing number of uninsured coupled with an unholy rate of inflation in healthcare costs. Some on this board saw the only way out as throwing all the freeloaders into the gutter but down deep they knew that was never going to happen. Others saw the gaping hole that healthcare created in our budget as perhaps the least difficult target to attack if we are to make long-term progress toward a more sane spending policy - one of the first being Pres. Richard M. Nixon.

    It's my view that the ACA took much of those costs absorbed by the government and transferred them directly to us, the citizens. A small portion of that transfer was in the form of traditional taxes but without a doubt the largest portion is in the form of the premiums, the individual mandate, and the new standards for coverage by all policies (mental health, gender specific procedures/maladies regardless of whether you're a man or woman, well care, contraceptives, etc.). High deductibles introduced greater market forces that should stem the obscene rate of inflation. Within 10 years (and with bi-partisan legislation that improves the ACA including states like Florida coming around and expanding Medicare) we have a real chance of having close to 90% of our nation covered and those paying premiums and co-pays funding their own healthcare coats. Ideally that would leave the government to deal with the healthcare of our poor, working poor, vets and elderly. That makes sense to me.
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. gatordowneast

    gatordowneast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,747
    Likes Received:
    303
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +985
    Dirigo, the bottom line is that any of us including you, who already had insurance coverage, whether we pay for it personally as I do (small biz employer) or through our company or through medicare are worse off with Obamacare. Government imposing their will on the HC industry has increased regulations and costs. All of us want to assist the poor, but turning upside down, the present healthcare system, was not the answer.

    I am from the school of allowing states to serve as "laboratories" and sharing best practices. We've spent Tens Billions of taxpayer funds on websites, advertising, navigators and legal fees, while delaying the bulk of the legislation (which will be even more expensive). And businesses have spent 10s of $ billions on the complexities involved. And anyone who thinks employment has not been affected is out of their mind.

    And what have we really gained? And at what cost?
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. g8rnbft

    g8rnbft VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    4,101
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +118
    Lets see - a LAW is passed saying that YOU have to purchase this.
    THEN - purchase is banned for 7 months (or whatever).

    HOW friggin STUPID is THIS?
  8. dirigo

    dirigo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +23
    Not sure what you're getting at. What was banned for 7 months?
  9. dirigo

    dirigo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +23
    Once again I agree with much of what you wrote but not your conclusion. The business of our nation is business and we have been at a disadvantage on the world market (which affects all of us) on that front for nearly 20 years. The ACA is the first rational step I've seen us take that has a good chance to reverse that.

    Yes, our states should and must act as laboratories for national policy. In my view that has already happened in the healthcare sector. Over the past 15-20 years At least 7 states have attempted major changes to their healthcare systems, all included barring health insurers from refusing to cover individuals based on pre-existing conditions. Two of the most prominent being Massachusetts and Washington. Of the 7 states only Massachusetts included the Heritage Foundation's "individual mandate". Washington state and the other 5 failed miserably and abandoned their high ideals within 2-4 years. Only Republican led Massachusetts was successful. We have operations up there and you can find critics without too much trouble but the vast majority of the people are very satisfied.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. GatorFanCF

    GatorFanCF Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,919
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +815
    dirigo said in part: "Let me get this straight, after years of warnings of the cataclysmic destruction..."

    Here's what is straight: the ACA has not been implemented! It's being put in by pieces and parts, in accordance with that medically critical timing issue called "elections," and the delays have been specifically to ward off the adverse effects of the law/tax/mandate/hoopla/BS. If it's soooo good, why not put it into effect?...why not now?
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. QGator2414

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,640
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +527
    I fully expect our grandfathered plan to be shelved this year for 2015 like the individual policies in Florida were last year for 2014.

    I fear we will have to end the health benefits we offer our employees (currently paying 100% of the premiums).
  12. gatordowneast

    gatordowneast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,747
    Likes Received:
    303
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +985
    With any laboratory and "experiment" you will have failures. But by experimenting on a state by state basis with what works, you avoid a "national experiment" that doesn't work. I'm in Maine 4 months of the year and I can tell you some horror stories about the Mass health plan from seasonal neighbors. For example, if you do not have a primary care doc and call for an appointment, ave wait time in Boston is about 30 days.

    My daughter just told us the story of an office cleaner who now has to work 3 jobs to support his family as his primary employer cut back his hours. Guess why? This has happened to millions. So sad. Liberalism's unintended consequences. What will we do next...legislate that companies cannot cut back hours? And mandate a minimum wage of $15 hour? When does it stop?

    We do not need more government interference. We need less.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. dirigo

    dirigo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +23
    Check the avg wait time in Florida pre-ACA if you don't have a primary care doc. It's about the same.

    I'm sure that there have been many unintended adverse consequences of RomneyCare just as there will be with the ACA and there were pre-ACA (biggest driver of personal bankruptcies; most expensive system in the world with middle go the road results; etc.). I've yet to see a human, particularly a politician, create anything that comes close to perfect. You do your best to provide the most help with the minimum amount of burden/harm to others and hope that there is always enlightened improvement when flaws are revealed. The GOP and its supporters have tremendous political power and nearly inexhaustible resources. Now is the time for them to step forward with the big ideas on this and the other big issues facing our nation. The time for hand-wringing and complaining is over. We need to see bills put before Congress by the loyal opposition that address these issues.
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. dirigo

    dirigo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +23
    If you're referencing things other than the delay in the "employer mandate", please state 2 or 3 of them. Also, I've always wondered why those who seem to have been the most antagonistic toward the implementation ACA are even more antagonistic toward a delay in the implementation of one of its major policies. Again, if there are other aspects of the ACA being deferred, please state them so that they can be addressed.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. GatorFanCF

    GatorFanCF Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,919
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +815
    Quoting the end of dirigo: "We need to see bills put before Congress by the loyal opposition that address these issues."

    Thus, the fundamental difference about how we believe problems should be solved. (and, no, I don't believe in "no government at all"). One side thinks that CONGRESS needs to act to solve society's problems...the other side believes that CONGRESS should stop adding more and more complexity to our world and try to minimize their influence while maximizing freedom and liberty of the people.

    This would be my favorite State of the Union speech: "Good evening, all Americans. Tonight I'm going to put forth an agenda that will reduce the size of the Federal Government by 3% per year in actual terms (not baseline budgeting BS) in the next 4 years and by 5% per year in actual terms should I serve a second term. Good night; and, God Bless America."
  16. GatorFanCF

    GatorFanCF Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,919
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +815
    http://www.galen.org/newsletters/changes-to-obamacare-so-far/
    Happy to help. :)
  17. dirigo

    dirigo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +23
    Just my opinion but that's a pretty weak list to anyone who wants to take the time to read it. Just these 2 of the 22 show the quality of these items:

    "2. Employee reporting: The administration, contrary to the Obamacare legislation, instituted a one-year delay of the requirement that employers must report to their employees on their W-2 forms the full cost of their employer-provided health insurance. (January 1, 2012)

    3. Subsidies may flow through federal exchanges: The IRS issued a rule that allows premium assistance tax credits to be available in federal exchanges although the law only specified that they would be available “through an Exchange established by the State under Section 1311.” (May 23, 2012)"
  18. dirigo

    dirigo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings Received:
    +23
    Your position is one that would receive widespread support, particularly from those that post regularly on this board and I'd have your back should anyone challenge your right to push for it. However I believe "that ship has sailed", not just in this country but in any country that you or I might consider moving to to live out the rest of our lives. If there are countries out there that don't fall into that classification please list them and let's get our passports ready!
  19. RealGatorFan

    RealGatorFan Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    13,192
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +506
    Without that "middle man", the hospitals and doctors would ream your butt. Have you ever looked at your itemized charges when you go to your doctor for just basic blood work? Or even an MRI? Without your insurance company, you'd be paying thousands on that MRI. My blood work from earlier this year for just an annual checkup was $1,200. I paid $30 for that visit. Even with an 80/20 plan, you are liable for $240, but with a "middle man", that still would get adjusted to $400 before I would have to pay 20% of that. Worse still, if the entire industry goes to a form of high-deductible coverage, which many in the industry believes it is heading, you have to meet a deductible before the actual coverage kicks in.

    Additionally, after the mid-terms, a new rider is getting added to ACA that affects everybody. The way that works is the insurance companies and your employer say they will cover a hip replacement for $30K max, but you like your hospital and they charge you $40K. You are on the hook for the $10K plus whatever you pay for the first $30K. Since it is considered out-of-network, that $10K is not included in your annual out-of-pocket maximum. What it forces you to do is to shop doctors and hospitals for the best price (but not necessarily the best care). You will need to read every word in your coverage and know what the maximums are.

    The company I was with 2 years ago switched their health coverage from BCBS PPO to UHC High-Deductible HSA. The HSA part was actually cool. You could use it like an IRA and put money there that earns interest. It also didn't have a 1 year limit like the flexible spending accounts we have today (I call them for what they are - thieves). For those that use FSA, if you don't submit your reimbursements usually 3 months past the year deadline, they keep all money remaining. Every year you have to guess how much you want taken out of your paycheck to go into this bucket for use on medical expense and even dependent care expenses. If you don't know what to expect you might have more taken out than you use. Whatever doesn't get used, is gone. They keep your money. I lost $365 last year because we didn't use up all of our medical expenses. What HSA does is wipe that crap out. The money you put in that account stays with you even if you move or get new coverage. Of course, there are conditions so the uber rich don't misuse it but it's a great idea.

    Ok, back to my original thought. The problem with the high-deductible plans is the insurance doesn't really manage it. You do. That means you have to treat doctors and hospitals like used car salesmen to get a good price. The first week that the plan went into affect, my daughter had to see a doctor about her eyes. She developed sties on her lids and they had to be removed via laser. It took 10 minutes to do. The problem is I couldn't get them to give me even a ballpark amount. I got from $500 to $5000. Frustrating and I hate bringing back that memory too. So, we had to give the go ahead because she was in pain. It took 4 months before all the fees STOPPED coming in. All told, it was over $5,000 but I never could tell exactly because we have 23 charges for that procedure. I think 30 people submitted charges; anyone who even stepped in the room submitted charges. Some were even dupes. I had to spend the remainder of the year getting them removed but the thing I came away from all this, I never want to go on a high-deductible plan ever again. Not having that "middle man" almost made me quit work so I could meet with all of the doctors and hospital admins to negotiate a fair price. I was exhausted and it was just one 10 minute procedure.

    Another example was last August. I'm on BCBS PPO with my current employer. My 11yr old son was at the YMCA day camp and they were playing baseball. He took a bat to the face from a boy who let go of the bat as he swung. He had to be taken to Children's Hospital via ambulance. All told, we paid $400 total ($300 for the emergency room visit and $100 ambulatory). Had we not have that "middle man", the charges would have been nearly $30,000. Try talking them down.

    Obama ultimately wants no insurance company as the middle man, but he does want the government to be the middle man. Are you sure you want them to be the middle man? Look at the VA and Medicare if you want a ton of past performance. Medicare was a fiasco so much that they gave it away to the insurance companies. BCBS of Alabama actually administers that plan now and from what I read about in the papers, they do a much better job than the government ever did. The problem with the government handling it is they have no skin in the game. If they suck, there's no one there to put them out of business. They are the monopoly.

    So, that "middle man" is really needed in our healthcare system. Since Obama was an idiot to begin with and ignored the real problem in our healthcare system, we built this elaborate ACA system on top of it and it will all fall apart because the foundation is a landfill.
  20. QGator2414

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,640
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +527
    Yeah beginning to cancel $200 billion is a weak... :rolleyes:

    Or it is politically opportune once realized it was going to upset someone. This was probably one of the correct parts of the law though it should have just been handled on its own and not part of a law. But Obama needed to have the cbo (not the cbo's fault but asking them to score is thing was not going to be possible) score the law deficit neutral (which only the naive would have believed) in order to sell it. So instead of just paying for his law and cutting an already insolvent program he decides to cut from the insolvent program (not enough) to pay for his law and what happens...we end up with no cuts and a larger burden to hand our kids. Sad!

    22. Canceling Medicare Advantage cuts: The administration canceled scheduled cuts to Medicare Advantage. The ACA calls for $200 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage over 10 years. (April 7, 2014)

Share This Page