Doc Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Chaddy will no doubt be getting an exemption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Obamacare insurance is working Fixed The bill had zero to do with care Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 Even dead people have a right to Obamacare http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/04/dead-people-can-sign-up-for-health-care-in-kentucky/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 They are the only people who should be signed up for that crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/04/youre-going-to-want-to-check-out-the-sign-we-found-posted-at-a-recently-shut-down-restaurant-in-texas/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 Obamacare is working Another insightful and fact filled post. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 6, 2013 Share Posted October 6, 2013 From the Socialist Republic of SF. Interesting. http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/Health-insurance-shoppers-suffer-sticker-shock-4872701.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 6, 2013 Share Posted October 6, 2013 From the Socialist Republic of SF. Interesting. http://www.sfgate.co...ock-4872701.php If people think the rates are bad now, just wait until next year. So much for the belief that health insurance would be free or even cheap now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted October 6, 2013 Share Posted October 6, 2013 If people think the rates are bad now, just wait until next year. So much for the belief that health insurance would be free or even cheap now. Just as they had to pass the abortion of a law so that we could find out what was in it, they had to implement this nonsense so that we could all find out how much it sucks. Everyone who predicted that this exact scenario would happen back before the bill was passed were just racist teabaggers using Faux News generated feigned outrage to keep the black man down. Besides, the failure of Obamacare is all Bush's and Boehner's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 6, 2013 Share Posted October 6, 2013 Just as they had to pass the abortion of a law so that we could find out what was in it, they had to implement this nonsense so that we could all find out how much it sucks. Everyone who predicted that this exact scenario would happen back before the bill was passed were just racist teabaggers using Faux News generated feigned outrage to keep the black man down. Besides, the failure of Obamacare is all Bush's and Boehner's fault. And I think that even those of us so against this bill were saying something needed to be done with regard to healthcare in the country. But what most of us were saying take your time. Implement it step by step. First the ability to cross state lines, addressing pre-existing conditions, medical tort reform. But no Obama didn't know if he was going to get a second term and if this had not been passed 100% during his first and potentially only term his legacy would not have been fulfilled. bull **** politics 101. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) And I think that even those of us so against this bill were saying something needed to be done with regard to healthcare in the country. But what most of us were saying take your time. Implement it step by step. First the ability to cross state lines, addressing pre-existing conditions, medical tort reform. But no Obama didn't know if he was going to get a second term and if this had not been passed 100% during his first and potentially only term his legacy would not have been fulfilled. bull **** politics 101. Yes, and in fine leftist fashion, yet again he confirms the premise: "If you want something done right, put the far left in charge of doing the opposite". I've spent most of the weekend looking for ways to cash in on this CF. I've come away with the notion that we need to pass, for now. We'll see what everybody else in my group says, but, they better have a hell of an argument. The risk is too high, and the reward is nebulous at best. My analysis, and it's only that, is that there's a 60-70% chance that the HHS "receiving end" of the architecture is massively flawed. I predicate this on: how is it that every single "navigtor" front end is having problems? Unless they all used the same software, which isn't unlikely either, the fact that every single 1st-3rd tier architecture is encountering difficulty tells us that the 4th tier is probably where the greatest # of issues lie. We should assume that at least one "navigator" is able to get it right. None have. However, that does not mean that 1-3 works, or is any good. In fact, since this "navigator" thing is now clearly a handout to political operatives/lawyers, for them to cash in on, it's likely that the 1-3 solutions are horrible as well. With this level of failure is very difficult to establish the nature and severity of the flaws. Yet another case of people who try to do my job on the cheap, or because they think they can, instead of paying qualified people to do it properly. In that, we are exactly like: plumbers! See, I can talk my job, and talk plumbing, at the same time! Everybody's happy! Please understand, this is about business, and nothing to do with politics. There seems to be a serious problem on the DC side of the architecture, such that regardless of what we might do on our side, it wouldn't matter. We will take another look in a month. Understand, if we think we can move in, we will. We have the ability and the agility to get there quite quickly. Hence, we are passing, for now. Probably the same conclusion that Microsoft, Google, and IBM, all came to, 2 years ago, because they had their DC guys look into it. That's perhaps the most telling thing. Why aren't they in this? This business problem is practically custom-designed for big software/cloud heavies. Nope, in the end? I think the ass falls out of this thing, without some sort of $5 billion intervention from somebody like Accenture. And, I'd lay odds that they do that, and fail anyway, after 10 years and $10 billion(which is Accenture's track record, btw). Doubt they will get the 10 years or the cash. They won't get the 10 years. In 6 months, the IT horror stories alone will be enough to kill this thing. And what's worse? State-centered health care is probably going to end up just as dead as gun control, as a Demcratic issue going forward. Edited October 7, 2013 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 (edited) just got off the phone with my of our largest donors at the hospital, and my ear is literally bleeding, one of his family friends was just diagnosed with cancer, but we won't take his care because he is uninsured... he can't fathom why we cannot take him, he says our position is bull **** and unnacceptable. I didn't have the stones to tell him that the ACA solves this issue for people like his friend, only because he has spent the last 3 years telling me how awful and evil the ACA is... I think I can get the guy on Cover Colorado, the pre-ACA solution to uninsured.. 1200/mo if not more, and a month waiting period. Better than nothing I guess... hope that month doesn't make a big difference in his prognosis. And I think that even those of us so against this bill were saying something needed to be done with regard to healthcare in the country. But what most of us were saying take your time. Implement it step by step. First the ability to cross state lines, addressing pre-existing conditions, medical tort reform. But no Obama didn't know if he was going to get a second term and if this had not been passed 100% during his first and potentially only term his legacy would not have been fulfilled. bull **** politics 101. Still, nobody has explaned how that would have made any difference. the contention with the ACA is that it does nothing about cost or improving care, how would selling am insurance policy across State lines be any different than what the ACA does? Its still a coverage plan. Compaines would just rate the policy based on the State you reside in anyway... Also interesting. One of my buddies is best freinds with a top injury attorney here in town, and he said that Med Malpractice as well Perosnal Injury Punitive damage awards all have Caps in Colorado... it appears we do a prety decent job here of keeping outrageous judgement and settlements tame.. Edited October 8, 2013 by B-Large Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 just got off the phone with my of our largest donors at the hospital, and my ear is literally bleeding, one of his family friends was just diagnosed with cancer, but we won't take his care because he is uninsured... he can't fathom why we cannot take him, he says our position is bull **** and unnacceptable. I didn't have the stones to tell him that the ACA solves this issue for people like his friend, only because he has spent the last 3 years telling me how awful and evil the ACA is... I think I can get the guy on Cover Colorado, the pre-ACA solution to uninsured.. 1200/mo if not more, and a month waiting period. Better than nothing I guess... hope that month doesn't make a big difference in his prognosis. Still, nobody has explaned how that would have made any difference. the contention with the ACA is that it does nothing about cost or improving care, how would selling am insurance policy across State lines be any different than what the ACA does? Its still a coverage plan. Compaines would just rate the policy based on the State you reside in anyway... Nobody explained how addressing preexisting conditions would have made a difference for a patient with a preexisting condition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 Nobody explained how addressing preexisting conditions would have made a difference for a patient with a preexisting condition? my question was about the "Across State Lines" notion, I underlined it, and noone has ever articulated how it would lower cost of care, other than that is creates "competition"... but compaines rate by State and don't compete for sick people. I don't think anyone would debate the pre-existing condition effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 just got off the phone with my of our largest donors at the hospital, and my ear is literally bleeding, one of his family friends was just diagnosed with cancer, but we won't take his care because he is uninsured... he can't fathom why we cannot take him, he says our position is bull **** and unnacceptable. I didn't have the stones to tell him that the ACA solves this issue for people like his friend, only because he has spent the last 3 years telling me how awful and evil the ACA is... I think I can get the guy on Cover Colorado, the pre-ACA solution to uninsured.. 1200/mo if not more, and a month waiting period. Better than nothing I guess... hope that month doesn't make a big difference in his prognosis. Still, nobody has explaned how that would have made any difference. the contention with the ACA is that it does nothing about cost or improving care, how would selling am insurance policy across State lines be any different than what the ACA does? Its still a coverage plan. Compaines would just rate the policy based on the State you reside in anyway... Also interesting. One of my buddies is best freinds with a top injury attorney here in town, and he said that Med Malpractice as well Perosnal Injury Punitive damage awards all have Caps in Colorado... it appears we do a prety decent job here of keeping outrageous judgement and settlements tame.. You of all people should know that there is a lot of expensive "defensive" medicine being performed and tort reform would tend to bring that down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 (edited) my question was about the "Across State Lines" notion, I underlined it, and noone has ever articulated how it would lower cost of care, other than that is creates "competition"... but compaines rate by State and don't compete for sick people. I don't think anyone would debate the pre-existing condition effort. As a guy who did health insurance work, I can just tell you: rating by State is done only because they have to. If they had the ability to rate by wide, sprawling demograhic groups, and the ability to pool in sick/well across state lines, and underwrite that? They would do it in a heart beat. A simple TPA proves that, because most of what "across state lines" would look like? Just a huge TPA. Think: Selling health insurance at Walmart. Yeah, the cost goes through the floor, because that risk is mitigated by the sheer force of #s...and...it's Wal Mart, so everybody knows the score. Walmart corporate does what they always do: they unlock the office door in the morning, and tell the sales guys in the waiting room that they are willing to pay X for health insurance, Y for car batteries, Z for jeans, and nothing more. Whichever health care sales guy can, takes the deal, because he just sold 1 million health insurance policies. What idiot wouldn't take that deal? EDIT: To clarify, Wal-Mart, as the TPA, would merely move the money, which Wal Mart does better than any existing health insurance group, including Medicare. The insurance company still sells the policy, and deals with the underwriting of the policy they sell, etc. Hence, Wal Mart = Third Party Administrator. If Obamacare had done this, then it would have made a lot more sense. A LOOOOOOT more. No, no, no. The reason that they didn't drop the state lines thing? Union insurance companies, who are by definition incapable of competing in a market, would be instantly raped. Think about it: if I have the ability to come in and offer lower rates to all of SEIU over state lines? I blow them out of the water immediately. This is precisely what happened in Wisconsin, and THAT is one of the underlying causes for the union freak out. As soon as the average joe was offered competing insurance plans? He took em. The union lost its control over their worker's health plans instantly, and lost the $ they were taking as a result. It is the UNIONS and only the UNIONS, who made sure that "across state lines" stayed out. Now, the UNIONS are getting quite a comeuppance, as they thought getting their one thing, meant nothing else would effect them. Wrong. Edited October 8, 2013 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 +1 How can you give that 1? You didn't build that one, somebody else built that with a hammer they did not own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 How can you give that 1? You didn't build that one, somebody else built that with a hammer they did not own With "undocumented workers" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 So...uhhhh...anyone visit the ACA website yet? No? You really should. Right now. https://www.healthca...registration.js Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts