The Affordable Care Act is Coming Home to Roost

[Tiberius]

"People want to buy this insurance, and companies want to sell it"- really, I thought yougn healthy people won't buy what they don't need? How did that change? Under another GOP health reform law, do we really think all of the sudden young people will be jazzed up to do their duty, but that policy they don't need, and what us think it will be that much less expensive anyway? Premium will still be there, deductible will still be there... and what is considered "affordable and attractive" to young people?

 

Who cares?? This isn't about health care, its about handing a defeat to this President, period.

[3rdnlng]

Who cares?? This isn't about health care, its about handing a defeat to this President, period.

 

No you idiot, this isn't about just defeating this president or the color of his skin (beat you to it). It's about this terrible law that is screwing up 1/6 of our economy and promising to screw it up even more. We conservatives have been pointing out the major flaws in this law for three years. You libtards have used up all your ammunition, thrown the gun and now are making your last Alamo like stand and trying to say this is just about defeating the president. It's about rejecting Obama's kind of hope and change. We don't want socialism here, and we certainly don't want incompetent socialism. Keep up your blind defense of Obama, but I feel obligated to tell you that deck hands don't have to go down with the ship.

[B-Man]

 

Coming up next: ObamaCare taxes and fees

 

This reminder from the New York Post came on Christmas, when few paid attention, but it’s worth noting today. The disastrous rollout of ObamaCare is only the appetizer for Americans, the 2013 lead-in to higher costs and fees built into the so-called Affordable Care Act. What most people haven’t heard — yet — is the new fees that ObamaCare charges for access to those higher premiums:

The cost of President Obama’s massive health-care law will hit Americans in 2014 as new taxes pile up on their insurance premiums and on their income-tax bills.

Most insurers aren’t advertising the ObamaCare taxes that are added on to premiums, opting instead to discretely pass them on to customers while quietly lobbying lawmakers for a break.

But one insurance company, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama, laid bare the taxes on its bills with a separate line item for “Affordable Care Act Fees and Taxes.”

The new taxes on one customer’s bill added up to $23.14 a month, or $277.68 annually, according to Kaiser Health News. It boosted the monthly premium from $322.26 to $345.40 for that individual.

 

These “fees” will add up to a considerable hike, as the Post notes. They include a 2% fee on the plans themselves for consumers, which will eventually raise $14.3 billion a year for the federal government. Insurers are paying a 3.5% fee for participating in the exchange, a cost to the risk pool that will get transferred — as all risk-pool expenses do — to the consumers in the form of higher premiums. The medical-device tax has long been debated, and will also get passed to the consumer.

 

It’s going to cost consumers at tax time, too. Remember when you could deduct all of your medical expenses if they exceeded the normal threshold for itemization?

Americans are currently allowed to deduct expenses that exceed 7.5 percent of their annual income. The threshold jumps to 10 percent under ObamaCare, costing taxpayers about $15 billion over 10 years.

 

That means that consumers will pay more for their medical care than ever, thanks to the tax limitation.

[Tiberius]

No you idiot, this isn't about just defeating this president or the color of his skin (beat you to it). It's about this terrible law that is screwing up 1/6 of our economy and promising to screw it up even more. We conservatives have been pointing out the major flaws in this law for three years. You libtards have used up all your ammunition, thrown the gun and now are making your last Alamo like stand and trying to say this is just about defeating the president. It's about rejecting Obama's kind of hope and change. We don't want socialism here, and we certainly don't want incompetent socialism. Keep up your blind defense of Obama, but I feel obligated to tell you that deck hands don't have to go down with the ship.

It's screwing up our economy?

 

And if you don't want socialism want didn't the Tea Party take to the streets calling for an end to Medicare? Oh ya, that's right, they all want that socialism, its for them!

 

 

You trust Kaiser Health News??

[B-Man]

 

The doctor won’t see you? Analysts warn ObamaCare plans could resemble Medicaid

 

Those signing up for private health care coverage on the ObamaCare exchanges may be in for an unpleasant surprise -- they'll have insurance, but they might have trouble getting the doctor to see them.

 

As hundreds of thousands enroll for coverage beginning Jan. 1, analysts are warning that the plans are likely to give them access to fewer doctors and hospitals. So much so, they warn, that the system could begin to resemble Medicaid, the health care program for low-income Americans.

 

"Indeed, I think this will eventually be like Medicaid," said Merrill Matthews, director of the Council for Affordable Health Insurance.

 

Matthews said the only way many insurers are going to be able to control costs is by "simply clamping down on the amount they are willing to pay."

 

Just as with Medicaid, analysts warn that if payments get too low, many doctors might start refusing to see patients. That will leave more and more patients jockeying to see fewer and fewer doctors.

 

They emphasize, then, that having health insurance won't necessarily translate into access to health care.

 

"About half of the physicians in many communities refuse to take Medicaid patients because the payment system is just too low," said James Capretta, of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/12/26/doctor-wont-see-analysts-warn-obamacare-plans-could-resemble-medicaid/

[DC Tom]

Who cares?? This isn't about health care, its about handing a defeat to this President, period.

 

Ironically, for the left it was never about health care as much as it was handing a victory to this President, period.

 

It's a bad law. It has always been a bad law. It's still a bad law. It's SUCH a bad law, in fact, that even above and beyond satisfying the stated (and unrealistic) goals of the law, the administration can't even functionally implement it as written.

[3rdnlng]

It's screwing up our economy?

 

And if you don't want socialism want didn't the Tea Party take to the streets calling for an end to Medicare? Oh ya, that's right, they all want that socialism, its for them!

 

 

 

You trust Kaiser Health News??

 

Do you live in a vacuum? Do you not understand that 2/3 of this country hate this obamanation?

[Tiberius]

Do you live in a vacuum? Do you not understand that 2/3 of this country hate this obamanation?

 

No they don't, but how is the economy being ruined again??

 

Oh, and here is some good old health care for profit:

 

"Hospice patients are expected to die: The treatment focuses on providing comfort to the terminally ill, not finding a cure. To enroll a patient, two doctors certify a life expectancy of six months or less.

But over the past decade, the number of “hospice survivors” in the United States has risen dramatically, in part because hospice companies earn more by recruiting patients who aren’t actually dying, a Washington Post investigation has found. Healthier patients are more profitable because they require fewer visits and stay enrolled longer."

 

Let's blame Obama, because you know the health care system was working so well before it!

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/medicare-rules-create-a-booming-business-in-hospice-care-for-people-who-arent-dying/2013/12/26/4ff75bbe-68c9-11e3-ae56-22de072140a2_story.html

[3rdnlng]

No they don't, but how is the economy being ruined again??

 

Oh, and here is some good old health care for profit:

 

"Hospice patients are expected to die: The treatment focuses on providing comfort to the terminally ill, not finding a cure. To enroll a patient, two doctors certify a life expectancy of six months or less.

But over the past decade, the number of “hospice survivors” in the United States has risen dramatically, in part because hospice companies earn more by recruiting patients who aren’t actually dying, a Washington Post investigation has found. Healthier patients are more profitable because they require fewer visits and stay enrolled longer."

 

Let's blame Obama, because you know the health care system was working so well before it!

 

http://www.washingto...40a2_story.html

 

Now this is a canard. BTW, can you tell me how many people recentlly signed up vs, the people who had their insurance cancelled?

Edited December 27, 2013 by 3rdnlng

[IDBillzFan]

And if you don't want socialism want didn't the Tea Party take to the streets calling for an end to Medicare? Oh ya, that's right, they all want that socialism, its for them!

 

Typical progressive fool. You can't even properly spew out your low-hanging liberal talking points without sounding even more foolish than the very law and narcissistic president you try to defend.

 

Unlike Medicare, Obamacare is absolutely, positively 100% owned by the left. It's your mess. And everyone knows it. Everyone except..y'know...typical progressive fools like yourself who refuse to accept the blame.

 

But hey...TeabaggerCruzRummyCheneyBush!!!

 

Idiot.

[John Adams]

 

 

No they don't, but how is the economy being ruined again??

 

Oh, and here is some good old health care for profit:

 

"Hospice patients are expected to die: The treatment focuses on providing comfort to the terminally ill, not finding a cure. To enroll a patient, two doctors certify a life expectancy of six months or less.

But over the past decade, the number of “hospice survivors” in the United States has risen dramatically, in part because hospice companies earn more by recruiting patients who aren’t actually dying, a Washington Post investigation has found. Healthier patients are more profitable because they require fewer visits and stay enrolled longer."

 

Let's blame Obama, because you know the health care system was working so well before it!

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/medicare-rules-create-a-booming-business-in-hospice-care-for-people-who-arent-dying/2013/12/26/4ff75bbe-68c9-11e3-ae56-22de072140a2_story.html

 

Are you and B-man are in a battle to see who has fewer original thoughts?

[Keukasmallies]

Seniors have the "very most bestest" deal under ObamaCare, they are projected to pay up to 25% of their income for health care before subsidies, etc. kick in. Dividing their net income by four seems easy enough, doesn't it?

 

http://news.investors.com/122613-684287-obamacare-middle-class-subsidy-cliff-for-older-americans.htm?ven=googlepicks&src=aurlafw&google_editors_picks=true

[Azalin]

Seniors have the "very most bestest" deal under ObamaCare, they are projected to pay up to 25% of their income for health care before subsidies, etc. kick in. Dividing their net income by four seems easy enough, doesn't it?

 

http://news.investors.com/122613-684287-obamacare-middle-class-subsidy-cliff-for-older-americans.htm?ven=googlepicks&src=aurlafw&google_editors_picks=true

sounds like a sweet deal to me.....everyone knows that all seniors have wads of cash just falling out the wazoo.

[B-Man]

Surprise! Bronze plans may cost a lot more than you expect

 

 

 

Think 2013 was bad for health politics?

It's funny when stereotypes self-confirm: Obamacare’s Pajama Boy: ‘I am a liberal ****.’

.

[Azalin]

It's funny when stereotypes self-confirm: Obamacare’s Pajama Boy: ‘I am a liberal ****.’[/size]

that's one of the most ignorant sounding 'intellectuals' ever.

[boyst]

No they don't, but how is the economy being ruined again??

When you draw straws to support an argument it does not actually defend your standpoint or hold validity to the point.

 

So, I will ask what others haven't.

 

As many continue to point out Obama is heavily disliked right now, 39% I think in favorability polls but I am not certain. Regardless, you cannot deny that the national opinion of him is piss poor. So, what does that opinion reflect? Why are Americans so low on Obama?

• Does this reflect his politics?
  
• Does this solely reflect his character?
  
• Is it a combination of both?
  
• Is this country of a bunch of racist bigots who are fueled by Fox News to believing lies and mis-truths?
  

What do the polls mean? Why do we hate Obama, Obamacare, and Obama's politics?

 

 

 

The follow up for you will be what does this mean for the Democratic party to which you cling? How will the Democrats turn this around for mid terms? 2016?

 

*At no point did I ask about the Tea Party, Republicans, Communists, Socialists, Gymnasts or Bronies. This series of questions has to do with your viewpoint of the Democratic Party and Barack Obama.

[Koko78]

It's funny when stereotypes self-confirm: Obamacare’s Pajama Boy: ‘I am a liberal ****.’

 

So from that article I gather that during an "argument" he goes off on nonsensical libtard rants then declares victory when people get sick of him being a moron.

 

That sounds eerily close to a few mouth breathers around here...

[Azalin]

why are Americans so low on Obama?

how about 'because with the IRS scandal and the outright lie: if you like your plan you can keep your plan period, Obama has managed to out-Nixon Nixon with blatant lies and an enemies list.'

 

any of you old enough to remember the Nixon years knows exactly how outraged the american public was with Nixon. that people are no longer outraged across both aisles until it gets this bad speaks volumes to the pure partisanship and deliberate denial on the part of the populace.

Edited December 27, 2013 by Azalin

[boyst]

how about 'because with the IRS scandal and the outright lie: if you like your plan you can keep your plan period, Obama has managed to out-Nixon Nixon with blatant lies and an enemies list.'

 

any of you old enough to remember the Nixon years knows exactly how outraged the american public was with Nixon. that people are no longer outraged across both aisles until it gets this bad speaks volumes to the pure partisanship and deliberate denial on the part of the populace.

but look at this whole situation through 3 different perspectives:

 

The Republican/AntiObama/Conservative - they're going to hate Obama and everything Democratic, ever and regardless. They're going to be outraged Obama took a selfie just as much as they will be that he lied about the ACA.

 

The opposite of the above is going to apologize for everything above and they're going to shed blame any which way they can.

 

Both of the above roles switch when the opposing office is in office. Both provide the most convenient excuse to minimize responsibility of their party to justify the outcome of whatever happened/happens.

 

The final group is the average American who doesn't know crap, doesn't want to know crap and looks to the simplest solution in the simplest of ways to garner an opinion based off of nothing more then what is simple. They do not use their own principles or their own beliefs and instead let themselves be swayed by popular opinion, media narratives and whatever is the easiest answer. Thus is concluded: If you go down the street and ask someone "Are you happy with Obama?" They will say "No, I feel like he could do more with the Obamacare thing, it seems very confusing and he doesn't seem to tell the truth." "What about Benghazi?" "Well, I think we need to uncover what happened there."

 

Basically, the average American is a dolt who doesn't know their arse from a hole in the ground. These are the ones that change their voting habits and are impressionable. It is these people who decide elections and these people who are influenced by whatever popular opinion is at the time. This is why I asked Gator or any one else for that matter what derives popular opinion and what good is it? Does popular opinion mean anything?

[Azalin]

but look at this whole situation through 3 different perspectives:

 

The Republican/AntiObama/Conservative - they're going to hate Obama and everything Democratic, ever and regardless. They're going to be outraged Obama took a selfie just as much as they will be that he lied about the ACA.

 

The opposite of the above is going to apologize for everything above and they're going to shed blame any which way they can.

 

Both of the above roles switch when the opposing office is in office. Both provide the most convenient excuse to minimize responsibility of their party to justify the outcome of whatever happened/happens.

 

The final group is the average American who doesn't know crap, doesn't want to know crap and looks to the simplest solution in the simplest of ways to garner an opinion based off of nothing more then what is simple. They do not use their own principles or their own beliefs and instead let themselves be swayed by popular opinion, media narratives and whatever is the easiest answer. Thus is concluded: If you go down the street and ask someone "Are you happy with Obama?" They will say "No, I feel like he could do more with the Obamacare thing, it seems very confusing and he doesn't seem to tell the truth." "What about Benghazi?" "Well, I think we need to uncover what happened there."

 

Basically, the average American is a dolt who doesn't know their arse from a hole in the ground. These are the ones that change their voting habits and are impressionable. It is these people who decide elections and these people who are influenced by whatever popular opinion is at the time. This is why I asked Gator or any one else for that matter what derives popular opinion and what good is it? Does popular opinion mean anything?

I get it, and I'm not trying to contradict anything you posed. to answer in more detail, I would automatically lump the first two groups into what I already referred to as 'pure partisan'.....very predictable responses from either group.

 

there is indeed a vast american 'middle' that has no real party leanings, doesn't pay attention to the details of the daily events in Washington, finds civics boring in general, and can't name their representitive, Senators, Supreme Court Justices, etc....these are as you call them, dolts.

 

there is another group that I believe is often overlooked when we generalize like this, and that's the non-partisans or independents that are very well informed, understand the role and mechanics of government from federal to local, and are party-independent out of disgust for both major parties. I would also tend to include Liberatarians in this group, though they are obviously partisans as well....but they are by far the most critical of their own leadership of any major american political party. they know a lot about the mechanics of government, separation of powers, checks & balances, and constitutionality in general, more so in my experience than the average democrat or republican. and as the american left continues it's path toward socialism, the republicans move to the center to become basically what the JFK democrats were....pro-welfare, lower-ish taxes, socially liberal, and big on national defense. in the republicans' move toward the middle, the Liberatarian ranks are beginning to swell with those who feel the republicans are moving away from their modern conservative values, offering a platform of individual liberty, property rights, gun ownership, less involvement in foreign wars, etc.

 

popular opinion is just that.....it's popular. so is Lady Gaga, McDonalds, the Twighlight movies, and a whole host of shallow, insipid cultural inanities that have no lasting value whatsoever. what bothers me is that broadly speaking, people react most strongly to what 'resonates'.....usually a firm jaw and a good speaking voice. I don't think that will ever change, especially since people don't seem to be getting any smarter as time passes.

Edited December 27, 2013 by Azalin