Obama Admin knew millions could not keep their health ins.

  • Thread starter Thread starter MJE
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gamewell45 said:
So its an opinion.

I think its reasonable to assume medical costs don’t disappear; they’ve always been shifted to the taxpayers, hence the passage of ACA to reduce costs and eventually reduce the costs to taxpayers. The ACA will reduce costs since those covered will shift the costs to the insurance companies as opposed to the taxpayers.

It’s my opinion that long term costs will be significantly reduced. I base that on common sense.
Click to expand...
News Flash.

Shifting costs to insurance companies instead of taxpayers means one of two things:
  1. Increasing premiums, deductibles, and/or cost-shares to consumers
  2. Reducing reimbursements to providers
The most profitable health insurer in the country only makes a little over 7% profit. There are several of them that make less than 5%.

easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/808/4534906899.png

Interestingly, you should read the description of Maximus, Inc (the one company listed with a net profit margin over 7%):MAXIMUS, Inc. is a provider of business process services (BPS) to government health and human services agencies under its mission of Helping Government Serve the People. The Company is primarily focused on operating government-sponsored programs, such as Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), health insurance exchanges and other health care reform initiatives, Medicare, welfare-to-work, child support services and other government programs. The Company serves both domestic and international governments, providing administrative services in the United States, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia…
If you ask a company to continually lose money, you are asking that company to shutter its doors. As a union supporter (America Works Best When We Say Union Yes!), you ought to really appreciate that idea for the impact it will have on workers.
 
This tragic story was posted yesterday evening in the Wall Street Journal:

You Also Can’t Keep Your Doctor: I had great cancer doctors and health insurance.My plan was cancelled. Now I worry how long I’ll live.

Everyone now is clamoring about Affordable Care Act winners and losers. I am one of the losers.

My grievance is not political; all my energies are directed to enjoying life and staying alive, and I have no time for politics. For almost seven years I have fought and survived stage-4 gallbladder cancer, with a five-year survival rate of less than 2% after diagnosis. I am a determined fighter and extremely lucky. But this luck may have just run out: My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31.

My choice is to get coverage through the government health exchange and lose access to my cancer doctors, or pay much more for insurance outside the exchange (the quotes average 40% to 50% more) for the privilege of starting over with an unfamiliar insurance company and impaired benefits.

Read the rest of it here.

But it’s for the common good, right? But it will improve the situation for most of us (too bad that some eggs will have to be broken to make this omelet)

:banghead:
 
gamewell45 said:
So its an opinion.

I think its reasonable to assume medical costs don’t disappear; they’ve always been shifted to the taxpayers, hence the passage of ACA to reduce costs and eventually reduce the costs to taxpayers. The ACA will reduce costs since those covered will shift the costs to the insurance companies as opposed to the taxpayers.

It’s my opinion that long term costs will be significantly reduced. I base that on common sense.
Click to expand...
What do you think happens to those costs once they are shifted to insurance companies?

Your economics understanding is fatally flawed and lacking if you don’t realize the answer to this question. (Hint: The insurance companies don’t have a magical money tree.)
 
markomalley said:
Mr. Obama denies being a communist. Therefore, I would think some may consider it uncharitable to accuse of that…unless, of course, you can find him saying that about himself.

Mr. Obama normally calls himself a Christian (his statement “my muslim faith” notwithstanding). Therefore, it would be considered by some to be uncharitable to call him a Muslim.

And so forth.

At least in my opinion.
Click to expand...
So his actions and policies are to be ignored? He can call himself a tuna-fish sandwich, but it doesn’t make it so. His policies, beliefs and actions are completely in line with a hard-core leftist/marxist. Calling him a communist is apropos.
 
markomalley said:
News Flash.

Shifting costs to insurance companies instead of taxpayers means one of two things:
  1. Increasing premiums, deductibles, and/or cost-shares to consumers
  2. Reducing reimbursements to providers
The most profitable health insurer in the country only makes a little over 7% profit. There are several of them that make less than 5%.

easycaptures.com/fs/uploaded/808/4534906899.png

Interestingly, you should read the description of Maximus, Inc (the one company listed with a net profit margin over 7%):MAXIMUS, Inc. is a provider of business process services (BPS) to government health and human services agencies under its mission of Helping Government Serve the People. The Company is primarily focused on operating government-sponsored programs, such as Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), health insurance exchanges and other health care reform initiatives, Medicare, welfare-to-work, child support services and other government programs. The Company serves both domestic and international governments, providing administrative services in the United States, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia…
If you ask a company to continually lose money, you are asking that company to shutter its doors. As a union supporter (America Works Best When We Say Union Yes!), you ought to really appreciate that idea for the impact it will have on workers.
Click to expand...
Contrary to popular opinion, the insurance companies are not very profitable. They barely break even.

As an investor, based on these numbers I would shy away from health insurers as there are better places to put your money. Go look at Google and Apple. Apple makes a huge margin off the backs of Chinese Workers. Yet I don’t see the same criticism.
 
gamewell45 said:
So its an opinion.

I think its reasonable to assume medical costs don’t disappear; they’ve always been shifted to the taxpayers, hence the passage of ACA to reduce costs and eventually reduce the costs to taxpayers. The ACA will reduce costs since those covered will shift the costs to the insurance companies as opposed to the taxpayers.

It’s my opinion that long term costs will be significantly reduced. I base that on common sense.
Click to expand...
You didn’t complete the pay cycle there. It goes from taxpayers to insurance companies to insurance customers.

Psst…taxpayers and insurance customers are the same people
 
zz912 said:
So his actions and policies are to be ignored? He can call himself a tuna-fish sandwich, but it doesn’t make it so. His policies, beliefs and actions are completely in line with a hard-core leftist/marxist. Calling him a communist is apropos.
Click to expand...
From “the rules”:

No name calling or belittling anyone, including political candidates and politicians. Keep all comments charitable. Participants are strongly reminded that charity is essential to our discussions here.

If you wish to review the subject, please see Charity for specifics, or CAF rules for an overview, both of which are located in the Rules of the Road sub-forum.

(Snip)

It is fair to discuss a politician’s or newsmaker’s position on the issues and their qualifications for office, it is not fair to discuss their spiritual well being. Criticisms of a anyone’s spiritual life or spirituality should be left between that person and their spiritual director or confessor. They are not allowed in the forums. If a politician or newsmaker states that they are a certain religion that is the assumed religion of the politician in this forum, please do not question it.

Since Mr Obama is not a member, as far as I know, of CPUSA, it wouldn’t be appropriate to use that pejorative. On the other hand, it would be entirely correct to say that he supports socialist policies, that he spots the same political agenda as CPUSA. And so on. Particularly when those claims are backed up by evidence.

See the difference?
 
ComputerGeek25 said:
Contrary to popular opinion, the insurance companies are not very profitable. They barely break even.

As an investor, based on these numbers I would shy away from health insurers as there are better places to put your money. Go look at Google and Apple. Apple makes a huge margin off the backs of Chinese Workers. Yet I don’t see the same criticism.
Click to expand...
Profit isn’t the best predictor of capital gains to be made. Look at sports teams.

Just saying.
 
Dawnia said:
You didn’t complete the pay cycle there. It goes from taxpayers to insurance companies to insurance customers.

Psst…taxpayers and insurance customers are the same people
Click to expand...
Exactly. “Costs” have not been reduced…just moved. Add to that the costs of the new bureaucracy, and costs increase.
 
SaintAugustine said:
Problem: They are pushing to convince Obama and the Democrats for a delay of Obamacare. What happens with all these folks, if it is successful? Will the insurers reverse the cancelations for a year? I’m thinking some of these folks are in for a world of hurt whether Obamacare is delayed or not.
Click to expand...
There are a lot of people posting their letters. Most of them automatically get enrolled in the “rainbows & sunshine” obamacare approved policies that are 2 or 3 times the cost of the original policy. Many people are wondering if they will even have insurance come January because they can’t afford the new policy, but can’t get hooked up with the exchanges.
 
Dawnia said:
There are a lot of people posting their letters. Most of them automatically get enrolled in the “rainbows & sunshine” obamacare approved policies that are 2 or 3 times the cost of the original policy. Many people are wondering if they will even have insurance come January because they can’t afford the new policy, but can’t get hooked up with the exchanges.
Click to expand...
I know…that’s why it’s scary. If we delay Obamacare, does that mean they are able to revert to the canceled policies? I’m not clear that they would be able to. If true, then their options are the 2-3x cost or no coverage - not great options. Thanks Obama and Democrats…thanks a lot. 😦
 
SaintAugustine said:
I know…that’s why it’s scary. If we delay Obamacare, does that mean they are able to revert to the canceled policies? I’m not clear that they would be able to. If true, then their options are the 2-3x cost or no coverage - not great options. Thanks Obama and Democrats…thanks a lot. 😦
Click to expand...
The old health plans won’t come back unless Obamacare is repealed (not postponed).

The next batch who will get hit is those with employer-based coverage…that will start hitting at the end of next year (probably political pressure will cause announcements to go out the day after election day).

Just watch.
 
markomalley said:
The old health plans won’t come back unless Obamacare is repealed (not postponed).

**The next batch who will get hit is those with employer-based coverage…that will start hitting at the end of next year **(probably political pressure will cause announcements to go out the day after election day).

Just watch.
Click to expand...
Yes. That is what the owners of our small company think will happen. They renewed our Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan by locking in before Oct 1st, but it is only until next year. Since the CA exchange was up and running prior to Oct 1st, we were able to compare numbers. They weren’t as good as the coverage we renewed - more expensive, higher deductibles.

We are a small business, and the owners pay 100% of the premiums on “platinum” plans with reasonable deductibles. Apparently, that isn’t what Obama and the Democrats want us to have.
 
From the New Orleans Times-Picayune:

80,000 Louisianians’ health insurance policies will be canceled under Affordable Care Act

About 80,000 Louisiana residents will see their health insurance policies canceled in 2014 because they don’t meet new federal health-care standards, the state’s insurance commissioner said Monday.
Jim Donelon said the Department of Insurance collected the information from health insurance providers last week in response to numerous requests for an estimate.
The figure could account for close to half of the 165,000 people in Louisiana who hold individual health insurance plans that they pay for without the help of an employer or the government.
“These people were obviously satisfied with their insurance,” Donelon said, “and I hope that they don’t drop out of the market.”
The issue drew national attention last week after NBC News credited four unnamed sources with saying that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually would receive policy cancellation notices.
Well, obviously, these people have substandard plans. After all, a single woman clearly needs coverage for prostrate cancer…and a single man needs to have his hysterectomy covered. 🤷

Ingrates.
 
Lawmakers push to keep Obama’s health care pledge

Looks like Dems are trying to backpeddle, while the Repubs try to play the heroes.

I wonder if they either side has bothered to find out if it’s even possible for insurance companies to do anything at this point. It’s not like this hasn’t been in the works for months because there are hoops insurance companies have to go through to get approval for any policies and/or changes in policies. And one of the reasons so many people are getting cancellations is because the insurance companies would have been making changes to the policies beyond the scope of the grandfather clause.
 
Dawnia said:
Lawmakers push to keep Obama’s health care pledge

Looks like Dems are trying to backpeddle, while the Repubs try to play the heroes.

I wonder if they either side has bothered to find out if it’s even possible for insurance companies to do anything at this point. It’s not like this hasn’t been in the works for months because there are hoops insurance companies have to go through to get approval for any policies and/or changes in policies. And one of the reasons so many people are getting cancellations is because the insurance companies would have been making changes to the policies beyond the scope of the grandfather clause.
Click to expand...
Good question. It seems the insurance companies should have known the rules for some time, but their actuaries still needed the time to whip up premiums based on limited and untested information. As if eliminating the underwriting step wasn’t difficult enough. If they were to repeal the whole ACA, they’d have all kinds of start-up costs, having to rehire those underwriters and the actuaries would have to find all the health records and statistics that they thought they no longer needed. They would need time to do that obviously. In any case I suspect the cancellations are on policies which were only transitional, never designed to apply after 2013 anyway. If the premiums had not changed since 2010, then the chances are the policy was only transitional.
 
zz912 said:
What do you think happens to those costs once they are shifted to insurance companies?

Your economics understanding is fatally flawed and lacking if you don’t realize the answer to this question. (Hint: The insurance companies don’t have a magical money tree.)
Click to expand...
All I can tell you is that the costs are going down in NY by almost 50%.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top