Page 12 of 41 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 401

Thread: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits'

  1. #111
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    This part of your post has always confused me. Around here an annual checkup costs as little as $80 and as much as $250. There are even annual free health fairs which do a fairly comprehensive examination including BP, heart rate and blood work. My confusion is how someone cannot afford to set aside $8-$20/month to cover the annual expense and yet will be able to afford $?(presumably much more) per month in premiums. Sure if there is some medical issue discovered in these checkups the individual has NEW cost issues but the 'preventative care' point is mute at that point isn't it?
    Um, what do you think would have happened otherwise? Those issues discovered would have just gone away? Never been paid for?

    Or is maybe catching them earlier potentially cheaper? Like, before you have to go to the ER.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  2. #112
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,697

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by vvx View Post
    Very true. And many people don't really understand their benefits anyway. Even after ACA requirements are present I still don't expect people will understand their benefits any better than before. It's how companies like McDonald's were offering "insurance" to their employees with approximately $2,000/year maximum benefit payout. Someone could purchase the insurance, tell people they were insured, but even a minor injury would put them way over their coverage. Of course they wouldn't know this until they had an accident or a stroke or whatever and end up getting an ambulance ride to the hospital. Then of course the hospital can't collect the bill and the cost gets passed on to the rest of us. Even though they had "insurance". If they never had an accident or needed the insurance they will never have known what they had was so terrible. And no doubt comparing the cost of that fake insurance to the minimum mandated in ACA makes insurance under the ACA much more expensive.

    The minimum insurance requirements under ACA fix that. Can't offer something with $2,000 maximum payout and call it health insurance.


    Which is a pointless differentiation, really, since the new bronze coverage which is all the McDonald's worker can afford has at least a $12.5k out of pocket so they will go broke from that ambulance ride anyway.

  3. #113
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by trfjr View Post
    you are already anxious to run up a bill
    did you not understand my post? for the premiums to stay where they are at now million will need to sign up for Obama care and not use it. if all that signs up are like you looking forward to running up a bill Obama care will collapse
    And you want to delay the mandate so that more healthy people will fail to sign up. Which means that you want premiums to go up faster, you want fewer people to be able to afford them. All in the name of collapsing the insurance industry, for some reason. Not Obamacare. That's a law. The premiums offered by private health insurance companies would have to go up. They're the ones who are going to collapse in your scenario. We could have had a public option for you to insist on destroying instead, but no. Offering people an additional choice was just too much socialism.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  4. #114
    Educator
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Seen
    11-15-15 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    802

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Which is a pointless differentiation, really, since the new bronze coverage which is all the McDonald's worker can afford has at least a $12.5k out of pocket so they will go broke from that ambulance ride anyway.
    If they end up with $100k in medical bills following an auto accident the $6,350 maximum out of pocket for an insurance plan combined with whatever they had to pay for the insurance might cause the individual to go bankrupt all the same, that's true. But at least the hospital doesn't end up with $95k in noncollectable bills - the insurance pays it. Which means the hospital has less expenses to spread out among the rest of us and doesn't need to raise rates as much to cover the non-payers.

  5. #115
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,867
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    One problem, your side keeps losing when it goes to the public.
    Ok, I think I see your problem here. The maority of the PUBLIC did not and still does not want the individual mandate. The GOVERNMENT, those in congress, that passed Obamacare ignored the public completely on this. They lost the public vote in the Mandate, yet Congress still voted FOR the mandate. Congress did not represent the people with Obamacare. Do you not see a difference there? A problem with that?
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  6. #116
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    For the 93rd time:

    What are Democrats getting in this supposed negotiation?
    The ability to continue to spend.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  7. #117
    Be different, be honest
    EdwinWillers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Divided States of Kardashia
    Last Seen
    12-25-15 @ 04:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,361

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    For the 93rd time:

    What are Democrats getting in this supposed negotiation?
    Good press.

    But you may have a point in that - they'd get good press regardless.
    Who chimes "No Absolutes!" chimes absolutely.

    zoom zoom

  8. #118
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Um, what do you think would have happened otherwise? Those issues discovered would have just gone away? Never been paid for?
    'happened otherwise'...ambiguous? I did address 'issues discovered' but consider if they find out your blood sugar/cholesterol/BP is slightly elevated, prognosis modify die thus no continuing cost ergo 'preventative'.

    Or is maybe catching them earlier potentially cheaper? Like, before you have to go to the ER.
    Sure it is but you failed address the premise in my post of "how someone cannot afford to set aside $8-$20/month to cover the annual expense and yet will be able to afford $?".
    "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure" - 2006 Senator Obama...leadership failure indeed!

  9. #119
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by vvx View Post
    Very true. And many people don't really understand their benefits anyway. Even after ACA requirements are present I still don't expect people will understand their benefits any better than before. It's how companies like McDonald's were offering "insurance" to their employees with approximately $2,000/year maximum benefit payout. Someone could purchase the insurance, tell people they were insured, but even a minor injury would put them way over their coverage. Of course they wouldn't know this until they had an accident or a stroke or whatever and end up getting an ambulance ride to the hospital. Then of course the hospital can't collect the bill and the cost gets passed on to the rest of us. Even though they had "insurance". If they never had an accident or needed the insurance they will never have known what they had was so terrible. And no doubt comparing the cost of that fake insurance to the minimum mandated in ACA makes insurance under the ACA much more expensive.

    The minimum insurance requirements under ACA fix that. Can't offer something with $2,000 maximum payout and call it health insurance.
    I have seen those types of plans....Let me tell you about my niece....She moved down here with us about 6 months ago, to get a fresh start. She got a job working for a feeder company for BMW, that uses a temp agency for staffing. And although she makes pretty good money for what she does, the insurance offered by the agency is total crap, and expensive. It also has a disclaimer that they are not covered under the ACA.

    Now we are hoping that she will become permanent with the company she is working with soon, but who knows? This company may choose to keep her as a temp worker to avoid offering insurance. Under the ACA (she is a healthy 21y.o.) her insurance will be more than she can afford, and may choose to just pay the penalty, $95. this year.... A choice that many of the young people that Obama is relying on to make this work.

    What I don't understand is this...I was listening to a program yesterday, where a simple solution was what they were talking about. It involved using what they were calling 'Concierge' Medical service, along with a catastrophic coverage plan, and an employer contributed HSA that rolled over year to year. This would be less expensive, give more control to patients and doctors, and cost less over all.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  10. #120
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,383

    Re: Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    In principal? In this case the House told the President he could have the cash and he refused it. The condition they made was the temporary funding of a program. So yes. In this case the House is doing, what the constitution says it should. It is controlling the government's funding.
    The Senate refused to defund/delay the AHC act you mean. They passed the CR and it is sitting back in the House at this moment but Boner won't allow it to come to a vote.

Page 12 of 41 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •