Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And they'll have all next year up to November 4th to stew on that.
Flat-out denying the Republicans' request for a year's delay for the Obamacare individual mandate may very well be one of the dumbest things Obama, Reid, and the Dems have ever done.
They held off the implementation until after the 3023 elections and blew it this time around.
First off, who says the high d plans are an integral part of Obamacare? Please provide a link.
The Bronze plans have high co-pays and high deductibles.
Quote:
In Massachusetts, where an exchange began operating in 2006, 84% of enrollees opted for bronze or silver plans, according to the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation. Although such plans' deductibles will be very high (e.g., $4,000 to $10,000 for family plans in California), persons with household incomes below 400% and 250% of the federal poverty level will benefit from out-of-pocket spending limits (see table: Annual Deductible and Out-of-Pocket Maximums after Implementation of Affordable Care Act Coverage Provisions) and generous cost-sharing subsidies, respectively. However, the resulting protections may be robust only for persons with incomes below 200% of the poverty level; Cover Oregon, for example, estimates that cost sharing for Oregon families with incomes between 200 and 399% of the poverty level will include $5,000 deductibles, 30% coinsurance for many services even after reaching the deductible, and out-of-pocket spending maximums of $8,500 to $12,700.
In general, a family of four with annual income at 200% of the poverty level ($47,100) and the highest allowable deductible could face out-of-pocket payments of 8 to 27% of its income, depending on the coverage vehicle (see table). Sentier Research has estimated that the median U.S. household income in February 2013 was $51,404, so the aggregate financial burden on middle-income Americans will be substantial.
Secondly, I have participated in threads like this for many years. The more conservative Rs have rampaged for that entire time about how people should pay their own bills, "personal responsibility", ask why any service other than hospitalization is even covered, yada, yada. Now, they have the opportunity to buy such plans, with the added perk of covered physical exams and preventive care, and they're shrieking about that? Doesn't make sense.
They're warning Dems of the impending backlash as more and more of the American public experiences first-hand their substantial Obamacare costs.
They're warning Dems of the impending backlash as more and more of the American public experiences first-hand their substantial Obamacare costs.
I emphasize:
Quote:
In Massachusetts, where an exchange began operating in 2006, 84% of enrollees opted for bronze or silver plans, according to the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation.
Their choice; get it? Just what the cons have been asking for-options. Options, baby!
The cons were shrieking for years about the need for "catastrophic" plans. Now that they've got them, they don't like what they see! Just like "shut down the government" turned into, "We didn't mean the WH, the national monuments and the national parks".
Their choice; get it? Just what the cons have been asking for-options. Options, baby!
The cons were shrieking for years about the need for "catastrophic" plans. Now that they've got them, they don't like what they see! Just like "shut down the government" turned into, "We didn't mean the WH, the national monuments and the national parks".
"Be careful what you wish for. . . "
I get the impression that many who are knocking Obamacare plans do not realize that there is a huge amount of personal choice involved. Just like this thread started with - "see your premium (singular)" they erroneously assume that there is one and only one option much like employer plans. Nothing is further from fact. There are literally dozens and dozens of options in many states. In fact, nearly as hard as using the ACA website is trying to decide what is the best plan for your family. I love the choice. It's about time!
This paper is meant to provide a necessary segue to HHS’s data summary, creating an apples-to-apples comparison of exchange data to what the costs are for individuals.
OK - "apples-to-apples comparison" - I like that. But I'm not finding it.
And:
Quote:
This comparison is different from others in that, rather than comparing specific plans, it is designed to capture the difference in premium levels between the exchange and what could be acquired in the market.
This I don't understand. If you don't look at specific plans, then what exactly makes up the "premium levels" noted above? Where do the numbers associated with the "premium levels" come from? Are they an average?
For example, the first group is adults age 27. We know that adults age 27 have a number of choices available to them via Obamacare: different levels of coverage (bronze, silver, gold), different types of plans (HMO, fee-for service, etc.), and so on. And I'm assuming that such individuals, purchasing health insurance coverage on the open market, would also have options to look at with regard to the type of plan, the coverage, and the cost.
So again, I come back to ... where are the numbers in the chart coming from, and what do they represent? There's no way of telling if what is being compared is the most expensive plan in Obamacare with the cheapest plan on the open market, or vice versa. And the article's section on methodology includes none of these details.
1. Not knowing what the plans are that are being compared makes the comparison meaningless.
2. Ignoring the impact of subsidies on the bottom-line cost of some of the Obamacare plans also makes the comparison meaningless.
3. This could have been a useful analysis. It's not.
So after 6 pages of discussion, no one knows where the numbers are coming from in this report. In other words, the report is meaningless, and this is just another useless "I hate Obamacare" thread. Got it.
Heritage dot org....doesn't get more right wing biased than that!
You are the type that will only believe the left wing media. Seems like some of your liberal Icons are starting to howl at the moon over the rate increase....The Daily Kos.....and others are brave enough to state on the boob tube that this bill is a freaking disaster for all but a few. I doubt that you are brave at all and are one of the bottom feeders....
So after 6 pages of discussion, no one knows where the numbers are coming from in this report. In other words, the report is meaningless, and this is just another useless "I hate Obamacare" thread. Got it.
I did not "hate" the ACA act only questioned whether or not it was even doable. Looks like some of us are right and you do not get a free lunch after all the millions spent on a worthless website. We were hopeful to see the subsidies stand but looks like they are shriveling up like, well you know.
Oh---- now that would be excellent irony and will prove Ted Cruz was right all along.
They're going door to door here trying to sign people up for obamacare and the best thing about obamacare is how terrible it is, the total lack of interest in it.
Oh -- and the fact that all those 50 million uninsured can no longer be an issue at election time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
