- Joined
- Sep 28, 2011
- Messages
- 15,190
- Reaction score
- 11,430
- Location
- SF Bay Area
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Oh look, propaganda! Well at least that money spent to fool the easily swayed was apparently well spent.
Yep. Sangha is trying to distract with quibbling about hundreds of thousands, when the program is failing in its original prediction of 8 million newly enrolled for 2016.
"I noticed Renae cited the Wall Street Journal for his facts. I noticed you cited nothing for yours."
I established that fact, with citation, in the preceding post #26 with the chart. Wiper the eyeballs and follow along.
You mean the chart that has the "actuals" for 2016, a year which hasn't even started yet? :lamo
According to the chart
Well, if a picture says so, IT MUST BE TRUE!!!
:lamo
According to the chart it is actuals plus trend prediction. If prior predictions are no longer realistic (or disputed by the CBO) there is little hope that things will turn out substantively different. The Titanic engineers are estimating when we will be hull down; you are the ships deck band, playing a jolly tune of denial. Our next melody will be: "What, no water around my ankles...these actuals and predictions must be daffy".
Many, if not most, saw Obamacare as a way to take federal control of and bankrupt the private medical insurance industry - paving the way for UHC to replace the "broken system". The initial deal (guaranteed profits for "private" insurers) expires right after Obama leaves office - that will be when the party is over. PPACA mandated all manner of "no out of pocket cost" services which virtually guarantee that premiums, co-pays and deductibles will increase (but only as soon as they have to).
The insurance companies (foolishly?) expected lots more young and healthy enrollees to be forced into their herd (to be shorn at will) boosted by lots of federal subsidy money but that is not panning out. What was more likely to happen is that more older and sicker folks will be buying insurance only when they feel that they will need expensive care - they can not be denied coverage or charged higher premiums based on most actuarial risk factors (aka pre-existing conditions).
What good is insurance if you have no assets to protect and can't afford the co-pay or deductible anyway? I can be certified as disabled (for Medicaid billing purposes) fairly easily if I become too injured/ill to work and no ER can turn me away. The other care that I need I simply pay for out of pocket (20% discount for cash) for less than the insurance co-pay amount in most cases.
Less care for fewer and fewer | Physicians for a National Health Program
I read an article recently that part of the problem with poor people who qualify for subsidies and get a policy is that they don't use it, because they can't afford the copays or deductibles.
And of those who are insured, many are called insured, but they are really underinsured, with very high deductibles and out of pocket limits. The spin is now "well, people have to have skin in the game, or they'll run to the dr for no good reason." That's spin. "Skin in the game" for poor people is $10 or $20, not $6,000.