• 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!

State Obamacare exchanges enroll 3 pct of target so far -report

Well, its the greater of $95 or a 1% surtax on taxable income... that would be $1,000 to someone with $100K of taxable income. That is a little more compelling. ... and this is the "soft year". Each go up next year to $325 or a 2% surtax in 2015; and finally to $695 or 2.5% of taxable income thereafter.

The Individual Mandate And Health Insurance

Make your tax due > 0.01 and your penalty is 0.00
 
Yes, its what happens when the Dems wuss out and implement a Republican idea rather than the right thing, Medicare Part E (aka, single payer)...

A non-binding mandate to purchase catastrophic insurance, which if doing so, would make you eligible for a tax credit? That's what they implemented? News to me
 
According to an article I've read the #'s of people signing up for plans must be higher. There were 40,000 people enrolling plans just in NY State, and 8,000 in KY, so I don't see how the nationwide total could be 49,000.

Kentucky GOP senators were wrong that state didn't want Obamacare | MSNBC

Oregan has enrolled exactly zero. Not sure how much better that is.

Here is a classic case of perception being reality.

Real or not real?

Zero is pretty bad. I'm fond of OR, lived in Eugene for 1.5 years.
 
Here is a classic case of perception being reality.

Real or not real?

Zero is pretty bad. I'm fond of OR, lived in Eugene for 1.5 years.

At this point, I don't believe any of the #'s nor do I care. What counts is what happens in the longer term.
 
At this point, I don't believe any of the #'s nor do I care. What counts is what happens in the longer term.

History will be written by the victors.
 
According to an article I've read the #'s of people signing up for plans must be higher. There were 40,000 people enrolling plans just in NY State, and 8,000 in KY, so I don't see how the nationwide total could be 49,000.

Well, my guess would be that the disparity might have something to do with the Administrations' decision to count people who had created accounts, but not, you know, actually purchased insurance.

Or (and this is likely) they may be buffering the numbers with Medicaid enrollees.
 
At this point, I don't believe any of the #'s nor do I care. What counts is what happens in the longer term.

Sort of. In the shorter term, you need those 7 million enrollees (2.7 million of which need to be those "young invincibles) purchasing health insurance through the exchange in order for the system not to collapse.... so Obamacare may not have a "longer term", unless it starts doing much, much better in the "shorter" term.
 
Sort of. In the shorter term, you need those 7 million enrollees (2.7 million of which need to be those "young invincibles) purchasing health insurance through the exchange in order for the system not to collapse.... so Obamacare may not have a "longer term", unless it starts doing much, much better in the "shorter" term.

The Plan B for if the federal website isn't ready by the end of the month, and based on "insider" reports it isn't, is to direct people to each insurer's own website for product information and purchasing. Not really sure why they didn't just do that in the first place....
 
The Plan B for if the federal website isn't
ready by the end of the month, and based on "insider" reports it isn't, is to direct people to each insurer's own website for product information and purchasing. Not really sure why they didn't just do that in the first place....

Because people finding out that their out of pocket cost has been increased exponentially in premiums and deductables is worse than having them sit in limbo not knowing.

People have missed the point here. Obama-Care is going to cause massive increases at a time when people are already struggling.

Democrats are more afraid of the consequences of that than the cosequences of a down website.

Remember, we were suppose to have massive new economic growth from Obama's green jobs iniative by now. Obama-Care was also supppsed to "lower the deficit.".

Democrats just generally, have really turned into a bunch of low lifes.
 
Agreed. Then again, the Cons have made political suicide an art form. It seems the Dems should get a little fun for themselves.

In the long-run, single payer works and works quite well. If they could get it passed, it would have put the Dems in power for a generation. However, it never would have passed. Only this bastardized view of national healthcare was doable. In the short-run, it has already been a form of political suicide for the Dems. In the long-run, however, the tables will turn on the Cons and they know it (which is why they are fighting to the death right now.)

Anything operated by the government is going to be a cluster ****.
 
Well, my guess would be that the disparity might have something to do with the Administrations' decision to count people who had created accounts, but not, you know, actually purchased insurance.

Or (and this is likely) they may be buffering the numbers with Medicaid enrollees.

No, the #'s are people who signed up for coverage.

IT may include Medicaid. In fact it probably does but that's not surprising. If someone is eligible for Medicaid, then it's a no-brainer for them. It's the cheapest option. If they're not eligible, then they have a decision to make. That takes time
 
Hmm...You have a choice to pay $95 this year via a fine from the IRS.. OR you have a choice to pay (i'll be nice and say..) $50 per month for insurance. (because lets face it..most people will not qualify for fully subsidized health insurance..the ones that can might as well be on Medicaid.) So....pay $95 or pay 600. What choice do you all think people are going to pick? I know which one I am going to pick...
 
Hmm...You have a choice to pay $95 this year via a fine from the IRS.. OR you have a choice to pay (i'll be nice and say..) $50 per month for insurance. (because lets face it..most people will not qualify for fully subsidized health insurance..the ones that can might as well be on Medicaid.) So....pay $95 or pay 600. What choice do you all think people are going to pick? I know which one I am going to pick...

I agree. Which is why the people dropped from their individual plans at this point, and those that will be dropped from group plans next year when the business waiver runs out are needed by Obama, always were. And he cynically lied straight to the face of the American people with his promises. Now it may be too late....The system may be irrevocably broken, just as I believe was the plan all along...
 
Well, its the greater of $95 or a 1% surtax on taxable income... that would be $1,000 to someone with $100K of taxable income. That is a little more compelling. ... and this is the "soft year". Each go up next year to $325 or a 2% surtax in 2015; and finally to $695 or 2.5% of taxable income thereafter.

The Individual Mandate And Health Insurance

If you don't get a tax refund, they have no way of collecting it. (And as anyone with any financial sense knows, you should never get a refund if you're doing it right.)

This will hurt people who actually think a tax refund is a good idea. And they will be none to happy when they find out their spending more on Obamacare in the long run than what their tax refund is.

This monster needs cash. And it needs it fro 22-year-old perfectly healthy people who would rather spend that cash on iPhones and beer.
 
The fine is - what? 95 bucks? v a health insurance bill that is in many cases 50, 75, 100% higher? oh yeah - and the IRS has no way of enforcing the fine?

color me..... jaundiced with the notion that that is going to work terribly well.

You mean that big bad mandate that according to the Right is going to plunge us into socialism has no teeth? So they lied about it? Why is that not surprising?
 
If you don't get a tax refund, they have no way of collecting it. (And as anyone with any financial sense knows, you should never get a refund if you're doing it right.)

This will hurt people who actually think a tax refund is a good idea. And they will be none to happy when they find out their spending more on Obamacare in the long run than what their tax refund is.

This monster needs cash. And it needs it fro 22-year-old perfectly healthy people who would rather spend that cash on iPhones and beer.

Perhaps you prefer the old system where $116B is spent on the uninsured, with $42.7B absorbed by insurance companies in the form of premium pass-throughs to their holders (costing your family an estimated $1,017 per year) and the other $73.3B picked up by your government, costing the average tax payer another $2,000 (at least) per year?

Unpaid care hikes private insurance premiums by billions - amednews.com

So, you can pay the $3,000 or your can figure out a way for the user of the service to pay this amount. The Heritage Foundation plan seems as practical as any.
 
Last edited:
No, the #'s are people who signed up for coverage.

IT may include Medicaid. In fact it probably does but that's not surprising. If someone is eligible for Medicaid, then it's a no-brainer for them. It's the cheapest option. If they're not eligible, then they have a decision to make. That takes time

LOL. It takes no time to jump on a better deal, if one exists. It's become even clearer by the day, Obamadon'tcare is a bad deal. Especially, right now, for those that purchased their own plans. Next year we'll see the same type thing with employer sponsored plans. Even more employers will quit providing plans for their employees.

This idea was a brain dead idea from the get go. People capable of thought saw through it right away.
 
If you prefer the old system where $116B is spent on the uninsured, with $42.7B absorbed by insurance companies in the form of premium pass-throughs to their holders (costing your family an estimated $1,017 per year) and the other $73.3B picked up by your government, costing the average tax payer another $2,000 (at least) per year.

Unpaid care hikes private insurance premiums by billions - amednews.com

So, you can pay the $3,000 or your can figure out a way for the user of the service to pay this amount. The Heritage Foundation plan seems as practical as any.

LOL. And you expect Obamadon'tcare to fix this? It's going to make the problem worse. Plus the numbers in that article don't account for the 2 trillion dollar ten year tab for this disaster.
 
Well, my guess would be that the disparity might have something to do with the Administrations' decision to count people who had created accounts, but not, you know, actually purchased insurance.

Or (and this is likely) they may be buffering the numbers with Medicaid enrollees.

True, but as a practical matter, something like insurance is a complicated acquisition. You are not likely to buy the insurance on your first visit. I am in the market, I am enrolled and I am weighing the option of a silver plan vs. re-upping on my Kaiser small business plan, which will renew for one year at a 15% increase. The Kaiser silver plan appears to be more than 50% less from what I had been paying. I am trying to get comfortable that it truly is less and what I might lose moving from one to the other. So, I am a legit active buyer, but have not yet bought.
 
True, but as a practical matter, something like insurance is a complicated acquisition. You are not likely to buy the insurance on your first visit. I am in the market, I am enrolled and I am weighing the option of a silver plan vs. re-upping on my Kaiser small business plan, which will renew for one year at a 15% increase. The Kaiser silver plan appears to be more than 50% less from what I had been paying. I am trying to get comfortable that it truly is less and what I might lose moving from one to the other. So, I am a legit active buyer, but have not yet bought.

If you are weighing purchase options, then you aren't enrolled. Even with the White House's special "enrolled" definition, you aren't enrolled.
 
True, but as a practical matter, something like insurance is a complicated acquisition. You are not likely to buy the insurance on your first visit. I am in the market, I am enrolled and I am weighing the option of a silver plan vs. re-upping on my Kaiser small business plan, which will renew for one year at a 15% increase. The Kaiser silver plan appears to be more than 50% less from what I had been paying. I am trying to get comfortable that it truly is less and what I might lose moving from one to the other. So, I am a legit active buyer, but have not yet bought.


Pull the trigger! I think every liberal supporter of passing this crap should be forced to get it. What the hell are you waiting for? Even your "trying to get comfortable that it truly is less and what I might lose..." shows that even you don't believe your own parties words selling you the plan....What a joke.

Liberal ideas - Ideas so good they have to be mandatory!
 
Perhaps you prefer the old system where $116B is spent on the uninsured, with $42.7B absorbed by insurance companies in the form of premium pass-throughs to their holders (costing your family an estimated $1,017 per year) and the other $73.3B picked up by your government, costing the average tax payer another $2,000 (at least) per year?

Unpaid care hikes private insurance premiums by billions - amednews.com

So, you can pay the $3,000 or your can figure out a way for the user of the service to pay this amount. The Heritage Foundation plan seems as practical as any.

You mean the old system, when my copays were $20 instead of $100, and when my deductible was $500 instead of $2,000?

Yes, I miss that system, and I'm fortunate to be able to afford it. This is KILLING a lot of middle-class and poor Americans right now, who aren't taking their kids to the doctor because they don't have the $100.

Not to mention, overall rates are skyrocketing, and people can't see their doctors in many cases.

Yeah, this is just great.
 
Back
Top Bottom