• 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!

Consumer Reports: ‘Don’t even bother trying’ Obamacare website yet...

Captain America said:
I don't pretend to understand it all myself. But I do believe that Americans should contribute to their own healthcare in as much as they are able too. I am so glad that they have to, by law, now.

Now, if we could do something to address the "professional welfare," people in our society, we might be able to get somewhere.

In my widest dreams, I never thought it would be a democrat who would mandate people taking personal responsibility for their well being. That was always a republican kind of position to take. And yet, the republicans are the ones doing most of the whining.

Old school democrats seem to have become modern day republicans.
Click to expand...


Well, heh, heh....I wouldn't go that far Cap, but I see what you are saying....Now, the scenario I am talking about goes something like this....

person A. has a full time, say $11.00 per hour job, with a young wife, and a new born child...He was getting a standard 80/20 BC/BS plan with a $1K per person deductible. His company informs him that they will no longer be offering insurance to any employees other than management due to costs. He then looks on the exchange for his state/area, and there is a plan that comes close, but the premium that was around $50 per week out of his check tax free, is now $150 per week, and a deductible that was $1K per person, is now $14K for the family...He will be subsidized, but only at the end of the year through a tax credit, leaving him with the entire cost up front until then. Hopefully, it will be like what Samhain said, and just paid directly on his behalf by the government, and bringing that premium down, but we don't know yet.


1. Where in the hell, is he supposed to come up with an extra $400. per month?

2. How is he paying less?

3. Why shouldn't his choice be to for the moment to take the penalty, and pay out of pocket for the baby's visits...?
 
VanceMack said:
Never fear.As I understand it they are now calling in teams of private businessmen to fix the problem with their government system, designed to replace a private system. Because government is 'the answer'...
Click to expand...

Yeah...Obama calls it a "tech surge". LOL!!
 
The government is always so good at stuff. I'm sure this will be silky smooth in no time.

$300 million for this website, and now we're hiring outside firms to come and basically re-do the whole site.

And even once it's fixed, darn near nobody will sign up for it anyway. They don't pay their bills; why are they going to bother with a fine? They'll treat it like a parking ticket and throw it in the trash. Do you really think Obama is going to harass and jail his own constituents?

Predictable and absolute disaster.
 
Summerwind said:
I have to say I'm beginning to wonder if
this wasn't a set up? It was outsourced to a private firm, and even those that are accustomed to getting all their income from government contracts still seem to hate Obama, ACA, and resolving the budget crises with higher taxes on the rich. What better way to be pissy, than to sabotage the opening weeks of ACA.
Click to expand...

The pathology evidenced by the level of denial among Obama supporters is the only positive in all of this Democrat created misery.

Quick, we have to name it. Any ideas ?
 
Erod said:
The government is always so good at stuff.
I'm sure this will be silky smooth in no time.

$300 million for this website, and now we're hiring outside firms to come and basically re-do the whole site.

And even once it's fixed, darn near nobody will sign up for it anyway. They don't pay their bills; why are they going to bother with a fine? They'll treat it like a parking ticket and throw it in the trash. Do you really think Obama is going to harass and jail his own constituents?

Predictable and absolute disaster.
Click to expand...

I swear a Lib poster said the IT firm who did this did it on purppse....LOL ?

300 Million....makes you wonder where the money really went.
 
Fenton said:
The pathology evidenced by the level of denial among Obama supporters is the only positive in all of this Democrat created misery.

Quick, we have to name it. Any ideas ?
Click to expand...
Except I'm not an Obama supporter or voter either time. I couldn't bring myself to vote for the lesser of evils. Glad the lesser of evils won, nonetheless ;)
 
Grant said:
They are also blaming a Canadian company for the ballsup but why were they outsourcing this work when there are so many experts at this sort of thing in the US?
Tech firm is behind glitchy healthcare exchange; shares rise anyway - latimes.com
Click to expand...
Its ALWAYS someone elses fault with the administration. One would think that a government so heavily invested in this program with such a broad reach and implication would have had this in place MONTHS ago with beta testing.
 
VanceMack said:
Its ALWAYS someone elses fault with the administration. One would think that a government so heavily invested in this program with such a broad reach and implication would have had this in place MONTHS ago with beta testing.
Click to expand...

My recommendation has always been that Obama should have had the Oct rollout as the beta test. That's what smart developers do.

Of course, he couldn't do that because he had set a hard deadline in the law and it would have been politically devastating to admit failure.

You know, the most respected game developers are the ones who tell their customers the game will be released when it's ready...not by some specified date. Just another thing Obama could have learned if he had hired competent help.
 
Mycroft said:
My recommendation has always been that Obama should have had the Oct rollout as the beta test. That's what smart developers do.

Of course, he couldn't do that because he had set a hard deadline in the law and it would have been politically devastating to admit failure.

You know, the most respected game developers are the ones who tell their customers the game will be released when it's ready...not by some specified date. Just another thing Obama could have learned if he had hired competent help.
Click to expand...
I think he was relying on the mindless support of those that didnt bother to know WHAT they were supporting...but supported it anyway. Yay...they...ummm...'won'...
 
Mycroft said:
My recommendation has always been that Obama should have had the Oct rollout as the beta test. That's what smart developers do.

Of course, he couldn't do that because he had set a hard deadline in the law and it would have been politically devastating to admit failure.

You know, the most respected game developers are the ones who tell their customers the game will be released when it's ready...not by some specified date. Just another thing Obama could have learned if he had hired competent help.
Click to expand...

And that seem to be the real problem. It's all about Obama, not America.

And given the adulation he gets for just being Obama, with no accountability required, who can blame him?
 
Grant said:
Yep. They won.
Click to expand...
We'll see just how much they feel like 'winners' once this is fully implemented. Personally...I cant wait. Ive said it from the beginning...the BEST thing politically the republicans could have done was not try to stop it but rather to force full implementation.
 
Captain America said:
I don't pretend to understand it all myself. But I do believe that Americans should contribute to their own healthcare in as much as they are able too. I am so glad that they have to, by law, now.

Now, if we could do something to address the "professional welfare," people in our society, we might be able to get somewhere.

In my widest dreams, I never thought it would be a democrat who would mandate people taking personal responsibility for their well being. That was always a republican kind of position to take. And yet, the republicans are the ones doing most of the whining.

Old school democrats seem to have become modern day republicans.
Click to expand...

I think you are confusing "forcing people to make responsible decisions" with "not rewarding people for making irresponsible decisions".
 
Erod said:
The government is always so good at stuff. I'm sure this will be silky smooth in no time.

$300 million for this website, and now we're hiring outside firms to come and basically re-do the whole site.

And even once it's fixed, darn near nobody will sign up for it anyway. They don't pay their bills; why are they going to bother with a fine? They'll treat it like a parking ticket and throw it in the trash. Do you really think Obama is going to harass and jail his own constituents?

Predictable and absolute disaster.
Click to expand...

Yup. Government is going to do awesome at running healthcare.
 
Health insurance exchange launched despite signs of serious problems - The Washington Post

Days before the launch of President Obama’s online health *insurance marketplace, government officials and contractors tested a key part of the Web site to see whether it could handle tens of thousands of consumers at the same time. It crashed after a simulation in which just a few hundred people tried to log on simultaneously.

Despite the failed test, federal health officials plowed ahead.
Click to expand...

Say it with me now...... INCOMPETENCE. Incompetence at every level of management on this project.

One key problem, according to a person close to the project, was that the agency assumed the role of managing the 55 contractors involved and had not ensured that all the pieces were working together.

Some key testing of the system did not take place until the week before launch, according to this person. As late as Sept. 26, there had been no tests to determine whether a consumer could complete the process from beginning to end: create an account, determine eligibility for federal subsidies and sign up for a health insurance plan, according to two sources familiar with the project.
Click to expand...
 
Samhain said:
Health insurance exchange launched despite signs of serious problems - The Washington Post



Say it with me now...... INCOMPETENCE. Incompetence at every level of management on this project.
Click to expand...

I think you've nailed it Sam.

What do you think of Summerwind's theory that the incompetence could have been intentional? And isn't this thing in real trouble, when you consider that those that even tacidly would be considered supporters of the administration, are now looking at this and wondering if what just weeks ago would have gotten you labeled a racist, conspiracy theorist, or worse?
 
j-mac said:
I think you've nailed it Sam.

What do you think of Summerwind's theory that the incompetence could have been intentional? And isn't this thing in real trouble, when you consider that those that even tacidly would be considered supporters of the administration, are now looking at this and wondering if what just weeks ago would have gotten you labeled a racist, conspiracy theorist, or worse?
Click to expand...

He's off the mark. You never start an IT project, unless you are planning on following Agile development rules, with a hard deadline and functional requirements that are being created, changed, and removed throughout. I feel bad for the folks that worked on it, because everyday most likely required re-doing what you worked on yesterday.

They started developing the site in late Spring, which gave them little to no time for requirements gathering or basic unit/system/integration testing, let alone stress testing.

700.jpg
 
Samhain said:
He's off the mark. You never start an IT project, unless you are planning on following Agile development rules, with a hard deadline and functional requirements that are being created, changed, and removed throughout. I feel bad for the folks that worked on it, because everyday most likely required re-doing what you worked on yesterday.

They started developing the site in late Spring, which gave them little to no time for requirements gathering or basic unit/system/integration testing, let alone stress testing.

700.jpg
Click to expand...


This law passed in 2009. It is now 2013, that is 3 plus years for there to have been the proper protocols, and development in place to ensure that this went right. In the private sector, wouldn't the person tasked with the development have been fired, and possibly the CEO themselves in trouble with the board of any company in America?

That's one of the reasons that deep down I think this was planned to crash and burn just as it is doing, and I wait for the other shoe to drop where we get forced into single payer, again hastily written, and pushed on the people as a solution, when in reality it too will be a disaster.
 
j-mac said:
Well, heh, heh....I wouldn't go that far Cap, but I see what you are saying....Now, the scenario I am talking about goes something like this....

person A. has a full time, say $11.00 per hour job, with a young wife, and a new born child...He was getting a standard 80/20 BC/BS plan with a $1K per person deductible. His company informs him that they will no longer be offering insurance to any employees other than management due to costs. He then looks on the exchange for his state/area, and there is a plan that comes close, but the premium that was around $50 per week out of his check tax free, is now $150 per week, and a deductible that was $1K per person, is now $14K for the family...He will be subsidized, but only at the end of the year through a tax credit, leaving him with the entire cost up front until then. Hopefully, it will be like what Samhain said, and just paid directly on his behalf by the government, and bringing that premium down, but we don't know yet.
...
Click to expand...

Much of your post is quite logical. I do take exception to that bolded portion above. As I understand it (but can't substantiate) the interface between HHS/IRS and the insurance companies directs the adjusted monthly premium and the insured pays merely the net. THEN at the end of the year the insured/IRS 'adjusts' for shortage/overage in the subsidy provided through income tax payment/refund. As I see it these relationships are were the PPACA will morph into perpetual disarray. I have read that some of the Ins Cos who decided to not participate in the exchange made their decision based on this arrangement...and I don't blame them.
 
Summerwind said:
The gov't has never presented anything so massive before either.
Click to expand...

Well it's settled then. Obamadon'tcare is our governments biggest failure of all time. Remember, brought to you by Obama and the Democrats.
 
Dickieboy said:
Much of your post is quite logical. I do take exception to that bolded portion above. As I understand it (but can't substantiate) the interface between HHS/IRS and the insurance companies directs the adjusted monthly premium and the insured pays merely the net. THEN at the end of the year the insured/IRS 'adjusts' for shortage/overage in the subsidy provided through income tax payment/refund. As I see it these relationships are were the PPACA will morph into perpetual disarray. I have read that some of the Ins Cos who decided to not participate in the exchange made their decision based on this arrangement...and I don't blame them.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, no doubt...If your understanding is correct, then that leaves the door wide open for massive fraud! That would mean that there is NO verification component to what people can simply plug in and lock their premium support at...If that were me, I'd get the premium down to affordable levels and take the hit at the end of the year, and make some kind of payment arrangement for the shortfall...
 
Dickieboy said:
Much of your post is quite logical. I do take exception to that bolded portion above. As I understand it (but can't substantiate) the interface between HHS/IRS and the insurance companies directs the adjusted monthly premium and the insured pays merely the net. THEN at the end of the year the insured/IRS 'adjusts' for shortage/overage in the subsidy provided through income tax payment/refund. As I see it these relationships are were the PPACA will morph into perpetual disarray. I have read that some of the Ins Cos who decided to not participate in the exchange made their decision based on this arrangement...and I don't blame them.
Click to expand...

It depends on your income. Some are paid direct, others are done via the tax credit. Either way, you are on the hook for that subsidy if when you file your taxes the following year, it was incorrectly given to you.
 
j-mac said:
Oh yeah, no doubt...If your understanding is correct, then that leaves the door wide open for massive fraud! That would mean that there is NO verification component to what people can simply plug in and lock their premium support at...If that were me, I'd get the premium down to affordable levels and take the hit at the end of the year, and make some kind of payment arrangement for the shortfall...
Click to expand...

EXACTLY! And to continue what of those who have 'gamed' the system and do not have the resources/income/tax return to overcome the shortage? Is Holder gonna go after them? How long can one appeal the 'decision' and how long does that last?...while the overage burdens the 'system'...
 
Captain America said:
I don't pretend to understand it all myself. But I do believe that Americans should contribute to their own healthcare in as much as they are able too. I am so glad that they have to, by law, now.

Now, if we could do something to address the "professional welfare," people in our society, we might be able to get somewhere.

In my widest dreams, I never thought it would be a democrat who would mandate people taking personal responsibility for their well being. That was always a republican kind of position to take. And yet, the republicans are the ones doing most of the whining.

Old school democrats seem to have become modern day republicans.
Click to expand...

I'd bet you were a champ at that old game "twister".

Getting people to take "personal responsibility" for their healthcare does not mean them being placed on Medicaid or having taxpayers pay most/some of the health insurance tab just for them existing. That's anything but taking personal responsibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom