GatewayRedbirds.com

New Pagodi wrote:

stlouie_lipp wrote:Obama administration knew millions could not keep their health insurance

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.

Here Is What’s Wrong With That Story About Obama Knowing That Your Health Care Policy Would Get Cancelled

This all sounds very ominous until you consider that the naturally high turnover rate associated with the individual market means that it’s highly unlikely that individuals would still be enrolled in plans from 2010 in 2014. In fact, the Obama administration publicly admitted this when it issued the regulations in 2010, leading Republicans like Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) to seize on the story in order to push for repeal of the grandfather regulations...

The debate was widely covered in the press, so it’s unclear what exactly the NBC investigation unit has uncovered...

So yes, individuals can keep the plans they have if those plans remain largely the same. But individuals receiving cancellation notices will have a choice of enrolling in subsidized insurance in the exchanges and will probably end up paying less for more coverage.

Except that's not at all what's happening. Thinkprogress.org can keep blowing smoke and sucking on rainbows but the reality is that people are getting gouged.

From the LA Times, not exactly a conservative paper

Fullerton resident Jennifer Harris thought she had a great deal, paying $98 a month for an individual plan through Health Net Inc. She got a rude surprise this month when the company said it would cancel her policy at the end of this year. Her current plan does not conform with the new federal rules, which require more generous levels of coverage.

Now Harris, a self-employed lawyer, must shop for replacement insurance. The cheapest plan she has found will cost her $238 a month. She and her husband don't qualify for federal premium subsidies because they earn too much money, about $80,000 a year combined.

"It doesn't seem right to make the middle class pay so much more in order to give health insurance to everybody else," said Harris, who is three months pregnant. "This increase is simply not affordable."

letsgocards89 wrote:

New Pagodi wrote:

stlouie_lipp wrote:Obama administration knew millions could not keep their health insurance

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.

Here Is What’s Wrong With That Story About Obama Knowing That Your Health Care Policy Would Get Cancelled

This all sounds very ominous until you consider that the naturally high turnover rate associated with the individual market means that it’s highly unlikely that individuals would still be enrolled in plans from 2010 in 2014. In fact, the Obama administration publicly admitted this when it issued the regulations in 2010, leading Republicans like Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) to seize on the story in order to push for repeal of the grandfather regulations...

The debate was widely covered in the press, so it’s unclear what exactly the NBC investigation unit has uncovered...

So yes, individuals can keep the plans they have if those plans remain largely the same. But individuals receiving cancellation notices will have a choice of enrolling in subsidized insurance in the exchanges and will probably end up paying less for more coverage.

Except that's not at all what's happening. Thinkprogress.org can keep blowing smoke and sucking on rainbows but the reality is that people are getting gouged.

From the LA Times, not exactly a conservative paper

Fullerton resident Jennifer Harris thought she had a great deal, paying $98 a month for an individual plan through Health Net Inc. She got a rude surprise this month when the company said it would cancel her policy at the end of this year. Her current plan does not conform with the new federal rules, which require more generous levels of coverage.

Now Harris, a self-employed lawyer, must shop for replacement insurance. The cheapest plan she has found will cost her $238 a month. She and her husband don't qualify for federal premium subsidies because they earn too much money, about $80,000 a year combined.

"It doesn't seem right to make the middle class pay so much more in order to give health insurance to everybody else," said Harris, who is three months pregnant. "This increase is simply not affordable."

They are pissing and moaning about paying less than 5% of their income on good health insurance? I'm going to guess their car insurance is more than that. I'm also going to guess some people just have to piss and moan.

It sure is easy to spend other people's money.

Joe Shlabotnik wrote:

letsgocards89 wrote:

New Pagodi wrote:

stlouie_lipp wrote:Obama administration knew millions could not keep their health insurance

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.

Here Is What’s Wrong With That Story About Obama Knowing That Your Health Care Policy Would Get Cancelled

This all sounds very ominous until you consider that the naturally high turnover rate associated with the individual market means that it’s highly unlikely that individuals would still be enrolled in plans from 2010 in 2014. In fact, the Obama administration publicly admitted this when it issued the regulations in 2010, leading Republicans like Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) to seize on the story in order to push for repeal of the grandfather regulations...

The debate was widely covered in the press, so it’s unclear what exactly the NBC investigation unit has uncovered...

So yes, individuals can keep the plans they have if those plans remain largely the same. But individuals receiving cancellation notices will have a choice of enrolling in subsidized insurance in the exchanges and will probably end up paying less for more coverage.

Except that's not at all what's happening. Thinkprogress.org can keep blowing smoke and sucking on rainbows but the reality is that people are getting gouged.

From the LA Times, not exactly a conservative paper

Fullerton resident Jennifer Harris thought she had a great deal, paying $98 a month for an individual plan through Health Net Inc. She got a rude surprise this month when the company said it would cancel her policy at the end of this year. Her current plan does not conform with the new federal rules, which require more generous levels of coverage.

Now Harris, a self-employed lawyer, must shop for replacement insurance. The cheapest plan she has found will cost her $238 a month. She and her husband don't qualify for federal premium subsidies because they earn too much money, about $80,000 a year combined.

"It doesn't seem right to make the middle class pay so much more in order to give health insurance to everybody else," said Harris, who is three months pregnant. "This increase is simply not affordable."

They are pissing and moaning about paying less than 5% of their income on good health insurance? I'm going to guess their car insurance is more than that. I'm also going to guess some people just have to piss and moan.

I understand it though, especially with young people on individual plans. It's always painful when you're trying to redistribute costs and improve services and coverage. Everyone's used to paying more than they'll probably ever use for car insurance, so it's not a big deal. This is a substantial jump overnight and it's going to hurt, even if it's more equitable and the right thing to do in the long run. I do wonder how insurance companies' premiums under ACA are kept in check. Right now, they're completely basing them on data modeling that may or may not hold true when ACA is actually in practice, probably being very conservative in doing so.

letsgocards89 wrote:It sure is easy to spend other people's money.

1. I was raised to look after myself.
2. I have to buy car insurance to protect my vehicle and others.
3. My health is more important than my car.
4. Health insurance is a priority to me because of #1 and #3.
5. 5% of my income to insure I can get my owwies taken care of? Where do I sign.

Dude - i don't want to spend your money. If I was your dad, I'd be telling you that living without health care is living like an idiot - you are one bad accident away from the poor house. Don't make other people pay for your mistakes. If you can afford it, look after yourself and get it.

In fact I'll turn it around - some people sure are ok with making me pay for their catastrophic health needs. Be an adult, take responsibility, and get yourself health insurance.

Joe Shlabotnik wrote:

letsgocards89 wrote:It sure is easy to spend other people's money.

1. I was raised to look after myself.
2. I have to buy car insurance to protect my vehicle and others.
3. My health is more important than my car.
4. Health insurance is a priority to me because of #1 and #3.
5. 5% of my income to insure I can get my owwies taken care of? Where do I sign.

Dude - i don't want to spend your money. If I was your dad, I'd be telling you that living without health care is living like an idiot - you are one bad accident away from the poor house. Don't make other people pay for your mistakes. If you can afford it, look after yourself and get it.

In fact I'll turn it around - some people sure are ok with making me pay for their catastrophic health needs. Be an adult, take responsibility, and get yourself health insurance.

Whoa, that's not the point though. The lady (and others in the article) HAD insurance. They're pissed because, despite being told it wouldn't happen, they're losing their insurance plan and seeing their premiums go up. Way up. Your response was basically, "it's not so bad. STFU." and that's a real easy thing to say when it's someone else's money.

letsgocards89 wrote:

Joe Shlabotnik wrote:

letsgocards89 wrote:It sure is easy to spend other people's money.

1. I was raised to look after myself.
2. I have to buy car insurance to protect my vehicle and others.
3. My health is more important than my car.
4. Health insurance is a priority to me because of #1 and #3.
5. 5% of my income to insure I can get my owwies taken care of? Where do I sign.

Dude - i don't want to spend your money. If I was your dad, I'd be telling you that living without health care is living like an idiot - you are one bad accident away from the poor house. Don't make other people pay for your mistakes. If you can afford it, look after yourself and get it.

In fact I'll turn it around - some people sure are ok with making me pay for their catastrophic health needs. Be an adult, take responsibility, and get yourself health insurance.

Whoa, that's not the point though. The lady (and others in the article) HAD insurance. They're pissed because, despite being told it wouldn't happen, they're losing their insurance plan and seeing their premiums go up. Way up. Your response was basically, "it's not so bad. STFU." and that's a real easy thing to say when it's someone else's money.

It's not so bad - they should quit their [expletive]. 5% of income for good health insurance? First world problem bro.

I'd be pissed too if the gov't was making me spend an extra 1600 a year for something I was already satisfied with.

The problem with the ACA is that the healthcare system is too divided and trying to combine private with public and it doesn't work. They never want to address efficiency with anything.

Just like they want to spend like a big country and tax like a little one.

letsgocards89 wrote: The lady (and others in the article) HAD insurance.

Not really. $98 a month outside of an umbrella and with no employer contribution gets you jack [expletive] as far as coverage. Did she have an insurance card? Yes. But she didn't have any real coverage. I would wager that premium cost increase she is seeing pales in comparison to what she was going to owe in office visits and out of pocket costs from her pregnancy under her old plan.

Was there a segment of people whose premiums went up when Romneycare was implemented in Massachusetts? The answer is likely either A) Yes but they did it anyway because it was deemed the "least bad" way of implementing it or B) No because Romneycare was a little different. If the answer is "B", then I want to know what the differences are.

This is why its a shame Republicans are being so insane on this issue. They had the blueprint for health care reform done by the guy they nominated for president. They could have taken this issue away from Democrats, and also taken some of the lessons from Romneycare and maybe even done a better job on it than Democrats. We have a massive problem with health care in this country. The choices to solve it should not be between Obamacare and nothing. But Obamacare is all we got because the other side doesn't want to even acknowledge government can do anything about this problem.