• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143:248]

Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

If I have a right to the product of your labor, then you are my slave. You equate paying for a service and being forced to provide service to someone. That is a specious argument.
Who IS BEING FORCED?

Is a poll worker FORCED? Is a medical provider paid via Medicare or private insurance FORCED?

You keep claiming someone is being FORCED, but you cannot show where this is happening in the real world OUTSIDE OF YOUR MIND.
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

The immaturity of a libertarian argument. You don't "want" it.....until you are lying in your own blood, unconscious.

Your next argument will be to leave you lying there.....or that you are immortal.

Try learning sometime before you get yourself in trouble the difference between "want" and "need".

The kicker is....you don't have to buy it, you can remain as irresponsible as you desire. Your desire is not free....but some have such high levels of paranoia and infantilism as to call this "totalitarianism".

"We're only trying to help" and "It's for the greater good" are the phrases that totalitarians teach their useful idiots to repeat so that their subjects don't revolt. People don't "need" health insurance. People occasionally do "need" health care, which is why responsible people don't spend every last dime they earn (or advocate giving it all to the government in exchange for "free" stuff).

The kicker is, you'll be the first one to bitch about it when they use health care spending as the rationalization for making you run 5 miles a day because you've put on 10 pounds since your last checkup.
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

"We're only trying to help" and "It's for the greater good" are the phrases that totalitarians teach their useful idiots to repeat so that their subjects don't revolt. People don't "need" health insurance. People occasionally do "need" health care, which is why responsible people don't spend every last dime they earn (or advocate giving it all to the government in exchange for "free" stuff).

The kicker is, you'll be the first one to bitch about it when they use health care spending as the rationalization for making you run 5 miles a day because you've put on 10 pounds since your last checkup.
Uh...the private insurance corporations.....are going to demand that I run 5 miles a day.......because they looked at my private medical chart......and see that I gained 10lbs.

You have no idea what your argument is any longer.
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

Who IS BEING FORCED? Is a poll worker FORCED? Is a medical provider paid via Medicare or private insurance FORCED? You keep claiming someone is being FORCED, but you cannot show where this is happening in the real world OUTSIDE OF YOUR MIND.
What is a government mandate, if not force?
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

Uh...the private insurance corporations.....are going to demand that I run 5 miles a day.......because they looked at my private medical chart......and see that I gained 10lbs.

You have no idea what your argument is any longer.

The private insurance corporations, who I'm forced to do business with by federal law...wait, that sounds a little bit like fascism. How should I rephrase that in a way that doesn't imply force? I'm sure there's a big brother-approved phrase that says down is up and up is down. Help a brother out.
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

What is a government mandate, if not force?
FFS! The mandate is on the PURCHASE of private insurance....NOT ON THE MEDICAL PROVIDER!

AGAIN, YOU HAVE LOST TRACK OF YOUR ARGUMENT
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

Funny thing is if they don't get this fixed soon Obama will have no choice but to delay the individual mandate for a year WHICH IS ALL THE GOP WANTED IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

sorry for shouting
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

The private insurance corporations, who I'm forced to do business with by federal law...wait, that sounds a little bit like fascism. How should I rephrase that in a way that doesn't imply force? I'm sure there's a big brother-approved phrase that says down is up and up is down. Help a brother out.
Yes, if have a car on public roads, you are mandated to purchase car insurance....and that is fascism!
If you earn income, you pat into a social insurance called Social Security.....and that is fascism....created by FDR...a well know fascist.
If you have a body in this public space known as the US, you are mandated to carry HI on it.....and that is fascism....and it is an idea created by the fascist Heritage Foundation!

I'm sure if you keep going on tangents you will never be cornered!
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

FFS! The mandate is on the PURCHASE of private insurance....NOT ON THE MEDICAL PROVIDER!

True. You really should try to keep up though. The mandate is on purchase of insurance. In other words, people who do not use the service (health care) are forced by federal law to pay for those who do use the service, with a private corporation as a go-between. Making it complicated and putting private corporations inbetween the person who receives care and the person who pays for the care doesn't remove the element of force.

AGAIN, YOU HAVE LOST TRACK OF YOUR ARGUMENT

Correction, you've lost track of my argument.
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

FFS, you lost track of your argument, you started this loop I am trying to close by saying:

Again, the provider of the service DOES not have to be a slave, the state via the citizens PAYS for the service, whether the service is provided by a poll worker or a medical worker.

There is no need for "slaves". Rights are not dependent upon "slaves". It is a specious argument.
If I have a right to the product of your labor, then you are my slave. You equate paying for a service and being forced to provide service to someone. That is a specious argument.
Who IS BEING FORCED?

Is a poll worker FORCED? Is a medical provider paid via Medicare or private insurance FORCED?

You keep claiming someone is being FORCED, but you cannot show where this is happening in the real world OUTSIDE OF YOUR MIND.
What is a government mandate, if not force?
FFS! The mandate is on the PURCHASE of private insurance....NOT ON THE MEDICAL PROVIDER!

AGAIN, YOU HAVE LOST TRACK OF YOUR ARGUMENT
True. You really should try to keep up though. The mandate is on purchase of insurance. In other words, people who do not use the service (health care) are forced by federal law to pay for those who do use the service, with a private corporation as a go-between. Making it complicated and putting private corporations inbetween the person who receives care and the person who pays for the care doesn't remove the element of force.



Correction, you've lost track of my argument.
I did?

You were on this kick about "SLAVES" being "FORCED" to provide something....and that now has been dropped.....to where you argue that health insurance is "complicated".

If you cannot figure out who, supposedly, the "SLAVE" is, I'll leave you your really ill informed rhetoric.
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

Yes, if have a car on public roads, you are mandated to purchase car insurance....and that is fascism!
There is no federal or state mandate to purchase car insurance. There is also no federal or state mandate to carry car insurance while operating a car on public roads in Texas. California, Washington, Tennessee, Ohio, New Hampshire as well. I can't help you with your arguments if they are so plainly false.
If you earn income, you pat into a social insurance called Social Security.....and that is fascism....created by FDR...a well know fascist.
No. That's called socialism, although they're two branches of the same statist tree.
If you have a body in this public space known as the US, you are mandated to carry HI on it.....and that is fascism....and it is an idea created by the fascist Heritage Foundation!
I don't care where the idea came from. People you agree with on some things are not immune to stupid ideas.
I'm sure if you keep going on tangents you will never be cornered!
Sure, Mr. "I have a right to health care & poll workers".
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

So progressives create a problem, and then bring us the solution to the problem they've created. That's how it works.

I really believe that more than just the "progressives" would be loath to deny someone treatment for an illness or accident because they didn't have the foresight to have insurance.

What is your solution this problem?
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

Another thing that bothers me about this exchange is the fact that it takes insurance salespeople out of the mix. The greater majority of people need someone to interpret insurance legalese. Even though these programs are supposed to be idiot proof? When I was able to briefly view options, they were confusing to me. I've learned that if I'm confused, the greater majority of people are as well.

Insurance salespeople are able to cut through the baloney and compare features. There's a huge assumption being made that people are going to take the time and have the smarts to wade through the exchange and determine what policy is most advantageous for them. That, in my opinion, is a mistake.


Though I probably sound like a broken record citing healthcare pieces from Trudy Lieberman, she had a great piece on the difficulties experiance while shopping the exchanges

The AP story brought to mind a piece I have been waiting to comment on—a fine story by WBUR’s Martha Bebinger that reporters ought to use as a model when looking for interesting ways to report on a not-so-interesting subject.
Bebinger reported on the shopping experience of Sarah Bechta, a wife, mother, and doctor living in Northborough, Massachusetts. Bechta spent six to eight hours comparing plans, trying to figure out whether one of those newfangled insurance plans with tiers of high, medium, and low-priced docs and hospitals was right for her. Massachusetts is leading the way in creating new insurance products that, in turn, create more headaches for consumers. Insurers are encouraging them to choose low-cost providers; in return, they will give them a price break either on the premium or on their out-of-pocket costs. In effect, they are following a sales strategy that assumes buying insurance is like making a choice at Baskin Robbins.

Dr. Bechta’s experience shows the difficulty of “choosing the best.” Bechta learned that a tiered plan would cut her premium in half, and she would save around $1400 a year, a sum that “made me stop and think,” she said. But then she asked herself the relevant question: Would higher deductibles and copayments gobble up the savings? They might if she could predict what illnesses her family would have during the year. “I could not figure it out,” she said. Of course she couldn’t. If you have a chronic illness, some medical expenses are predictable. But for other people, they are not. Bechta did some rough calculations of the costs she would incur if her daughter came down with appendicitis. If her daughter went to a tier 3, higher cost hospital—such as Children’s, which her doctor might recommend—the premium savings would be wiped out.

continued at link:

Is Buying Health Insurance Like Shopping on Amazon? : Columbia Journalism Review
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

Though I probably sound like a broken record citing healthcare pieces from Trudy Lieberman, she had a great piece on the difficulties experiance while shopping the exchanges



continued at link:

Is Buying Health Insurance Like Shopping on Amazon? : Columbia Journalism Review

What she's identified is not specifically a problem with the exchanges. It's a problem with any "market oriented" approach to supply health insurance. According to market theory, the market works when people possess the information necessary to make a proper decision.

Ask yourself "Who the **** knows how much health care they're going to need in the next 12 months?"
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

your tinfoil hat is on crooked

That's rich coming from the guy who fabricated an OP citing Fox News whining about how all of Obamacare is a complete failure because some people couldn't log in on the first day.
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

the Obama care navigators :lamo union and acorn thugs that has no experience with 20 hour of training and no back ground checks
your better off consulting to a magic 8 ball at least you will know with the magic 8 ball your personal information will remain secure

ACORN? Really?
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

What she's identified is not specifically a problem with the exchanges.

No, it would be actually an issue with how the exchanges are designed and implamented


It's a problem with any "market oriented" approach to supply health insurance.

I'm not sure about that, but that is rather irrelevant to the fact that ACA is built on a model that depends on the avg consumer buying a plan he is just ill prepared to properly access

Ask yourself "Who the **** knows how much health care they're going to need in the next 12 months?"

I'm not sure pointing to poor planning and implementation serve as the best defense here

Also, it's worth reading on further: <<<She calculated some more, constructing a table of her family doctors and the tiers in which they had been placed by the various insurance companies. There was no uniformity. All the family’s primary care docs were in different tiers for different health plans. So while Blue Cross might have put one physician in tier 1, Harvard Pilgrim might have put the same doc in tier 2. “There’s no way my pediatrician can be tier 1 for one insurer and tier 3 for another,” said Bechta. “It just makes no sense.”>>>
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

No, it would be actually an issue with how the exchanges are designed and implamented




I'm not sure about that, but that is rather irrelevant to the fact that ACA is built on a model that depends on the avg consumer buying a plan he is just ill prepared to properly access

The "problem with ACA" and it's model is the same problem people who didn't get their insurance through their employer had - having to determine which plan would be best for future needs which couldn't be predicted

IOW, there's nothing "special" about the plans in the exchange that makes them any more problematic that the plans offered to individuals and families in the private market. That's because "the model" ACA is built on is "the free market" even though health insurance and health care is not amenable to being sold on the free market due to a lack of information

That's why the problems she identifies (in your quote) have nothing to do with how the exchanges are designed an implemented. The problems concern the difficulty of comparing the different plans against what a person or family's future health care needs will be.
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

The "problem with ACA" and it's model is the same problem people who didn't get their insurance through their employer had - having to determine which plan would be best for future needs which couldn't be predicted

Actually, no, if you read the piece, this is very clearly addressed

AP reported: “The new marketplaces are supposed to work like an Amazon.com for health insurance, providing consumers with one-stop shopping for competitively priced coverage.” As she has before, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius argued that “more competition will drive down costs and exchanges will give individuals and small businesses the same purchasing power big businesses have today.” The AP didn’t say how that would happen, nor did it mention that up to half of the governing board for these shopping services could be composed of industry reps , creating the potential for fox-in-the-hen-house regulation. At least one consumer rep must be on the board...

...Bechta spent six to eight hours comparing plans, trying to figure out whether one of those newfangled insurance plans with tiers of high, medium, and low-priced docs and hospitals was right for her. Massachusetts is leading the way in creating new insurance products that, in turn, create more headaches for consumers. Insurers are encouraging them to choose low-cost providers; in return, they will give them a price break either on the premium or on their out-of-pocket costs. In effect, they are following a sales strategy that assumes buying insurance is like making a choice at Baskin Robbins.

Insurers have responded to such legislation by changing how they model their insurance plans ...

IOW, there's nothing "special" about the plans in the exchange that makes them any more problematic that the plans offered to individuals and families in the private market.

Let's see, a yale journalist professor who specializes in healthcare coverage and is considered one of the leading experts on healthcare reform, or random person on the internet.

Yeah, I'm going to have to go with the person with extensive knowledge of the subject. Sorry : (
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

Actually, no, if you read the piece, this is very clearly addressed



Insurers have responded to such legislation by changing how they model their insurance plans ...

I don't see anything in that quote that says the changes are due to ACA. From what you've quoted, it seems she's talking about the plans in Mass, and even those are not the result of any legislation but rather, insurers trying to keep costs down by creating tiers of doctors based on what they charge. AFAIK, there's nothing in ACA that either requires the insurers to do that or forbids them from doing so.

Let's see, a yale journalist professor who specializes in healthcare coverage and is considered one of the leading experts on healthcare reform, or random person on the internet.

Yeah, I'm going to have to go with the person with extensive knowledge of the subject. Sorry : (

I'm not disagreeing with anything she said in the quote you posted. I'm disagreeing with your dishonest misrepresentation of what she said.

And what's so dishonest about your post? Why, it's how you claim this has something to do with the exchange and ACA when the underlying story shows that it's a problem for people who are not buying insurance through the exchange


http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2012/January/17/Mass-Tiered-Insurance.aspx

Insurers say a growing number of employers are offering tiered insurance plans because they are the best way to lower premiums while still giving consumers some choice in where they go for care. Limited network plans that restrict where patients go for care in exchange for lower premiums are the other option many employers are considering as they try to hold down rising health care costs. Insurers are watching the consumer response to these plans with great interest.

Bechta wasn't buying insurance through the exchange. Her problem has nothing to do with the exchange, and your claim that it has something to do with the exchange was nothing more than a lie

Sarah Bechta, a wife, mother and physician from Northborough, Mass. sat down at her kitchen table with a folder full of brochures, pages from insurance websites and a hand-drawn spreadsheet to try to find out if a new "tiered" health plan would be the cheapest option for her family.

And the problems Bechta is facing are, according to the underlying article, unlikely to occur anywhere other than Mass.

"Massachusetts is in the vanguard with these plans," says Alwyn Cassil at the Center for Studying Health System Change. Cassil says large employers have not been willing to try this type of coverage in other states because the savings aren't worth the change. And Massachusetts is unusual, says Cassil "because of the (insurers) ability to include hospitals." In many states, hospitals can demand to be placed in the top tier of an insurance plan as a contract condition, but not in Massachusetts.
 
Last edited:
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

I don't see anything in that quote that says the changes are due to ACA. From what you've quoted, it seems she's talking about the plans in Mass, and even those are not the result of any legislation but rather, insurers trying to keep costs down by creating tiers of doctors based on what they charge.

Yes, Massachusetts. The state with healthcare reform that served as a model for the ACA and it's wider network of exchanges, and the changes to the health insurence industry, and the measures to keep cost down, are a response to that legislation ...

And what's so dishonest about your post? Why, it's how you claim this has something to do with the exchange and ACA when the underlying story shows that it's a problem for people who are not buying insurance through the exchange

How would that change the premise the average consumer isn't competent enough to make such decisions on their own?


Bechta wasn't buying insurance through the exchange.

It highlights the fundamental issue with the exchange: that the average consumer doesn't have the ability to make a competent decision here, especially once aca style legislation starts shaping policies

Massachusetts is in the vanguard with these plans," says Alwyn Cassil at the Center for Studying Health System Change. Cassil says large employers have not been willing to try this type of coverage in other states because the savings aren't worth the change. And Massachusetts is unusual, says Cassil "because of the (insurers) ability to include hospitals." In many states, hospitals can demand to be placed in the top tier of an insurance plan as a contract condition, but not in Massachusetts.

Yes, before implementation of ACA style legislation, the savings were not worth the hassle in Mass either. But once such took effect, guess what was worth the change ...

Note :

On Monday, the AP reported that, as part of its health reform efforts, the federal government would require states to establish online shopping services that would ostensibly make it easier for consumers to research and purchase health insurance.AP reported: “The new marketplaces are supposed to work like an Amazon.com for health insurance, providing consumers with one-stop shopping for competitively priced coverage.”...


...The AP story brought to mind a piece I have been waiting to comment on—a fine story by WBUR’s Martha Bebinger that reporters ought to use as a model when looking for interesting ways to report on a not-so-interesting subject....

....Dr. Bechta’s experience shows the difficulty of “choosing the best.”
 
Last edited:
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

People can go down to their local DOH and speak to one in person.

They have local DOH's out here in the country?
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

I really believe that more than just the "progressives" would be loath to deny someone treatment for an illness or accident because they didn't have the foresight to have insurance.

What is your solution this problem?

This to me, with all due respect Ditto is the deflection problem that permeates the current administration, and progressive argument we have today.

To think that it is up to the minority party to come up with a solution to a massive problem that was 100% of the majority party's making, is akin to me to throwing your hands in the air, after walking into a room and kicking all the domino's over, and saying that it is up to others to figure out how to fix it, and save their asses.

No, it is up to those who broke it, and they now own it lock, stock, and barrel.
 
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]

Yes, Massachusetts. The state with healthcare reform that served as a model for the ACA and it's wider network of exchanges, and the changes to the health insurence industry, and the measures to keep cost down, are a response to that legislation ...

No, as the underlying article says, it's a response to businesses desire to keep costs down. I quoted where it says that.

How would that change the premise the average consumer isn't competent enough to make such decisions on their own?

It doesn't. That premise has nothing to do with ACA. It has to do with the fact that the consumer doesn't know what health care they are going to need.

It highlights the fundamental issue with the exchange: that the average consumer doesn't have the ability to make a competent decision here, especially once aca style legislation starts shaping policies

Again, that has nothing to do with ACA. ACA did not render consumers incompetent.




Yes, before implementation of ACA style legislation, the savings were not worth the hassle in Mass either. But once such took effect, guess what was worth the change ...

Wrong again. Tiered plans started in Mass before ACA


Again, your quote says nothing about ACA being the cause of this problem. If you think it's because of ACA, please quote where the article says that tiered plans began because of ACA

The underlying article about Bechta is from Jan 2012, a full year before ACA takes effect

Here's another article about tiered insurance plans. It's from 2008

http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/18/health-insurance-tiered-biz-pharma-cx_0421oxford.html
 
Last edited:
Re: Insurers reportedly receiving faulty data from ObamaCare exchanges [W:143]


I don't really think you lost track of it, because I don't think you're stupid.

You were on this kick about "SLAVES" being "FORCED" to provide something....and that now has been dropped.....to where you argue that health insurance is "complicated".

That's still the argument. It hasn't been dropped. If you have a right to health care, then someone must provide it for you.

If you cannot figure out who, supposedly, the "SLAVE" is, I'll leave you your really ill informed rhetoric.
The slave is the one who is forced to provide a service for you. It's not that difficult a concept.
 
Back
Top Bottom