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.
That's conjecture as is my assertion that it will come together given time. In either case, we will have to wait and see. I presume you are rooting for failure while I am hoping for success.
Hey Ponderosa, help me out. Can we talk about how to define "success?" I'll go first:
1. Success would mean providing health care to the tens of millions that are now uninsured, 15% of the population by some estimate. The ACA offers the promise of insurance policies, not health care, to only a fraction of the currently uninsured. Some of those who receive subsidized policies will still not be able to afford actual health care due to high deductibles and high out of pocket coinsurance costs. I think the ACA is an improvement over the old status quo on this point, but still an abject failure in terms of getting health care to the currently uninsured.
2. Success would mean reducing the currently insured citizens' outlays for health care (insurance premiums plus out of pocket expenses minus subsidies.) I think the president talked about $2500 per year in savings for the average household. Don't know how this can possibly be construed as a success.
3. Success would mean reducing the heavy burden of health care expenses that falls on our employers. I don't think a big fat FAIL requires any explanation on this count.
4. Success would mean, at a minimum, faithful execution of the law passed by Congress in an efficient manner that was usable by the citizenry. When you say you are 'hoping for success' I believe you mean in this narrow sense, that the government will some day be able to do what it said it was going to do, and in compliance with the law. It is 4th down and 87 yards to go; but I guess some day "success" is possible.
So far the law is flunking on all counts, it does not provide care to the now uninsured, it is far more expensive than advertised, it hurts the economy, and has thus far been unimaginably rotten in the implementation.
Perhaps it is time to begin working toward a bipartisan reform of health care reform. The partisan version currently in flames may not be recoverable.
Hey Ponderosa, help me out. Can we talk about how to define "success?" I'll go first:
1. Success would mean providing health care to the tens of millions that are now uninsured, 15% of the population by some estimate. The ACA offers the promise of insurance policies, not health care, to only a fraction of the currently uninsured. Some of those who receive subsidized policies will still not be able to afford actual health care due to high deductibles and high out of pocket coinsurance costs. I think the ACA is an improvement over the old status quo on this point, but still an abject failure in terms of getting health care to the currently uninsured.
2. Success would mean reducing the currently insured citizens' outlays for health care (insurance premiums plus out of pocket expenses minus subsidies.) I think the president talked about $2500 per year in savings for the average household. Don't know how this can possibly be construed as a success.
3. Success would mean reducing the heavy burden of health care expenses that falls on our employers. I don't think a big fat FAIL requires any explanation on this count.
4. Success would mean, at a minimum, faithful execution of the law passed by Congress in an efficient manner that was usable by the citizenry. When you say you are 'hoping for success' I believe you mean in this narrow sense, that the government will some day be able to do what it said it was going to do, and in compliance with the law. It is 4th down and 87 yards to go; but I guess some day "success" is possible.
So far the law is flunking on all counts, it does not provide care to the now uninsured, it is far more expensive than advertised, it hurts the economy, and has thus far been unimaginably rotten in the implementation.
Perhaps it is time to begin working toward a bipartisan reform of health care reform. The partisan version currently in flames may not be recoverable.
Excellent post. What is not talked about is when a subsidized enrollee gets a bill for a copay or bill towards a deductable and fails to pay it. How good is a subsidy when thry get cancelled for failure to pay thier deductable.
It's always darkest before dawn, as they say. Now that the website is running well, people will be able to check out their options as needed instead of getting inapplicable info from the news.
The Web site is running well? Really? Since when? Last I heard it was not going to be ready even by Dec 1, as they promised, and IT experts say it may be months, because the coding is such a mess. Where are you getting information that it is "running well?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa
Also, as open enrollment begins and ends for the vast majority of people with employer insurance, they will see that all the brouhaha over the website and cancellations has nothing to do with them and tune it out. The leftists can still point with some hope to the same kind of issues in the Romneycare rollout and the overwhelming support for the program in that state today. Give it time.
Few people know anything about Romneycare. I sure don't, and what does that matter anyway? I couldn't care less what the people in MA have. People do not want ObamaCare, and never did. There has never been a demand for a complete "reinvention" of health insurance. Our health care delivery system was not broken, and neither was the health insurance industry. And what was the replacement for a good system? A system that costs much, much more, will not provide the same level of service (it can't possibly, as nothing run by government bureaucrats does), and it is still true that rationing and fewer choices will be it's only achievements. This we know.
Excellent post. What is not talked about is when a subsidized enrollee gets a bill for a copay or bill towards a deductable and fails to pay it. How good is a subsidy when thry get cancelled for failure to pay thier deductable.
The ACA was set out to slow th rising cost of healthcare across the entir spectrum. It's too early to call it a success or failure
Any deductible that needs to be met are at rates that are paid for by the insurance company. Which means that something that cost $500 could cost $250 to the family or the individual. Without insurance they would be paying full sticker price.
Many who will choose high deductible plans will be those that do not visit doctors or have procedures often. The care they do get will be at the reduced negotiated rates as.
Me I can get a platinum plan for $290 month and no deductible in network. That's without subsidies. I use it often and so I go with more money monthly for less of a deductible and a lower co insurance.
If they so visit docs often they'll pay more a month in health insurance and have no or small deductibles.
In either scenario they are shelling out less money than seeking treatment as an uninsured person.
There is the ability to estimate but, get real here, it depends on your particular circumstances. There is a page of caveats on it on the website and they direct you to the Kaiser calculator to get more accurate info if you don't want to put yours in. But in the end, if you want accurate pricing you have to provide accurate info. It's like buying a car part. If you won't tell them your model year, and engine type, they are going to have a hard time giving you a repair quote.
They direct you to the Kaiser site to get a better idea of the dollar amount you might save.
This is laughable. From what we hear, nobody is saving anything, but will be paying up to three times more. Who are you trying to kid?
You are a "Navigator," I just know it. Your are so behind this abomination, you just have to be. You have fallen for this hook line and sinker. How much do they pay you to do this?
Yes. First I got a letter with instructions to go look at the Summary of Benefits on the insurers website. A couple days letter I got a welcome letter telling me what a great choice I made, and an official-looking acceptance form from the insurer along with a payment stub for the first month's premium.
Of course they are going to tell you that you made a great choice! That's what all con artists do. What a sucker! And I suppose you've sent in your payment already?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa
The info and payment amount was exactly the same as on the exchange. I have to pay that by Dec 15 for the insurance to be effective. They will not issue any cards until they get that payment.
What I did not get and can't find is the "Evidence of Coverage" which is basically all the small print stuff. I have some questions regarding the network that I need answers to before I pay up.
That's conjecture as is my assertion that it will come together given time. In either case, we will have to wait and see. I presume you are rooting for failure while I am hoping for success.
It already has proven to be a failure. There will be no success, because it was hacked together by people who have no clue about how insurance works. They have tried to reinvent something that has been working well for many, many years, and they have ignored basic principles. Those who are the least likely to need insurance, those who are the lowest risk, are paying the highest rate. This is why they aren't signing up. This is backwards of what it should be.
Safe drivers, people with no record of accidents or tickets, pay the lowest auto insurance rates. Why? Because they are low risk.
ObamaCare turns health insurance upside down. This is one reason it won't work.
There are many other problems with it as well, one being doctors increasingly refusing to join a network. Who was it that warned of doctor shortages? Hmmmmm, was it Sarah Palin?
Death panels? We already know that's coming, right along with rationing. And you and your doctor are not going to be making decisions on your care. Some bureaucrat will have the final say on what treatment you will have, or none at all.
Hey Ponderosa, help me out. Can we talk about how to define "success?" I'll go first:
1. Success would mean providing health care to the tens of millions that are now uninsured, 15% of the population by some estimate. The ACA offers the promise of insurance policies, not health care, to only a fraction of the currently uninsured. Some of those who receive subsidized policies will still not be able to afford actual health care due to high deductibles and high out of pocket coinsurance costs. I think the ACA is an improvement over the old status quo on this point, but still an abject failure in terms of getting health care to the currently uninsured.
2. Success would mean reducing the currently insured citizens' outlays for health care (insurance premiums plus out of pocket expenses minus subsidies.) I think the president talked about $2500 per year in savings for the average household. Don't know how this can possibly be construed as a success.
3. Success would mean reducing the heavy burden of health care expenses that falls on our employers. I don't think a big fat FAIL requires any explanation on this count.
4. Success would mean, at a minimum, faithful execution of the law passed by Congress in an efficient manner that was usable by the citizenry. When you say you are 'hoping for success' I believe you mean in this narrow sense, that the government will some day be able to do what it said it was going to do, and in compliance with the law. It is 4th down and 87 yards to go; but I guess some day "success" is possible.
So far the law is flunking on all counts, it does not provide care to the now uninsured, it is far more expensive than advertised, it hurts the economy, and has thus far been unimaginably rotten in the implementation.
Perhaps it is time to begin working toward a bipartisan reform of health care reform. The partisan version currently in flames may not be recoverable.
Frankly, the American people have been sold a "bill of goods." Propagandized, lied to, defrauded, ripped off. Period.
I think ObamaCare should be repealed and tossed on the trash heap of bad ideas. There are better ways to improve health insurance (like allowing policies to be sold across state lines).
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.
