DC Tom Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Well, the good news is insurance companies won't be raising premiums too much this year. The bad news is, well, predictable for anyone smart enough not to confuse individual success with federal failure. WH to Insurance companies: Don't raise your rates too much, and we'll use taxpayer dollars to cover your loses. Wow. I honestly hadn't expected that bailout to start for another 20 years or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 At this point you guys should simply get medical treatment in canada via medicare so we could all go bankrupt together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Wow. I honestly hadn't expected that bailout to start for another 20 years or so. The minute the WH plan for handling the broken website was to tell insurance companies "Just cover people and we'll make sure you'll get your money," it was pretty clear it wasn't going to be 20 years away. But hey...some people had a positive experience, so it's all kinda worth it, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) So, spending yesterday and today trying to straighten this out - aka yesterday frustration with barely speaking english obviously Indian dude and nothing solved - well, tonight I get told a million stupid ways by an Indian woman that I cannot sign up because I did not pay but I have coverage according to the ACA site. So, I am covered by ACA terms but not covered in real life is what she broke it down to meaning. Before that I spoke to a woman in Eastern Kentucky who basically told me what I need to say to get this fixed when I talk to the next person. That next person was stupid as hell, and mind you I spoke to a woman from Eastern Kentucky before that who said "awe schucks" when we were on the phone. I guess that sounds good for politics, as I am one of the how many unmillions? I am enrolled...but didn't pay and therefore not eligible unless I have a special exemption which lets me reapply. I tried calling BCBS finally tonight, even though the letter I had said I need to contact Healthcare.gov. They were closed by that time and I will call again tomorrow and likely have to pay full price. Seriously, !@#$ you Obama. she is good at it, was good at it, whatever. i just put my stuff on autopay, the water bill i couldn't so i just let her do it because she would actually check the mail. You poor, tortured soul. Of all the people in this entire country to put in charge of Obamacare customer service....Eastern Kentucky? Indians? Some days I think somebody at CMS is an agent, who works for...Oh, I don't know...the Koch BrothersTM, and THAT's why these F ups keep happening. How else can you explain these terrible decisions, one right after the next? If I was a manager at CMS, given a new program that we were trying to roll out, that was clearly dependent upon a goal of 80%, immediate, customer retention, they very last thing I would do is put dunces/the unintelligible in charge of customer service. Then? I remind myself who is in charge, and who is doing the work. Then it all makes sense. There isn't some operative sabotaging the works. This is merely what happens when you let these people try to run large projects without adult supervision. Oh, and before the excuses: I know all about the intricacies of CRM systems, and how difficult it can be to deploy them....and how much a call center costs. So does Geico....which is why they located their call centers in Buffalo, morons!. They get relatively intelligent English speakers for cheaper than they will pay anywhere else. But why reuse a model that has been producing kick-ass results for 5 years? Why bother talking to people that have call centers and make $ off them? "Nah, we are Democrats, so we know everything, and, we need to come up with our own ideas, because they are automagically better, and because we don't want "corporate" thought to contaminate our perfect plan." Buffalo was the answer here. No doubt about it. The work(all the research/time/$/pay/etc.) was already done for them, but they found a way to F it up. But hey...some people had a positive experience, so it's all kinda worth it, I guess. I see what you did there. Edited May 21, 2014 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Well, the good news is insurance companies won't be raising premiums too much this year. The bad news is, well, predictable for anyone smart enough not to confuse individual success with federal failure. WH to Insurance companies: Don't raise your rates too much, and we'll use taxpayer dollars to cover your loses. The good news is that when the government removes risk from the market, nothing bad can happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 (edited) The good news is that when the government removes risk from the market, nothing bad can happen. Perverse incentive??? Or were you in a coma for 2008 and 2009? Or are you stating that the private profits with socialized losses are a good thing? Edited May 22, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Perverse incentive??? Or were you in a coma for 2008 and 2009? Or are you stating that the private profits with socialized losses are a good thing? Moran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Perverse incentive??? Or were you in a coma for 2008 and 2009? Or are you stating that the private profits with socialized losses are a good thing? I believe that was sarcasm. Though given he's not usually sarcastic about the ACA, I'm not positive. But JA's generally not a complete tool, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Moran. Heh. I believe that was sarcasm. Though given he's not usually sarcastic about the ACA, I'm not positive. But JA's generally not a complete tool, either. Yeah, looks like it was sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 But JA's generally not a complete tool, either. I like you too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 http://www.truthrevolt.org/commentary/shapiro-lefts-va-worship-comes-back-bite As the fallout from the Veterans Administration cooking of the books and the related deaths of over three dozen veterans continues, President Obama took to the podium on Wednesday to explain that problems at the VA are nothing new. On Wednesday, President Obama took to the podium to first express his tremendous anger – VA Secretary Eric Shinseki was “mad as hell” but President Obama was “madder than hell,” thus winning the rage sweepstakes – and then explained that the VA’s issues go back years: [A]ll of us, whether here in Washington or all across the country, have to stay focused on the larger mission, which is upholding our sacred trust to all of our veterans, bringing the VA system into the 21st century, which is not an easy task…. caring for our veterans is not an issue that popped up in recent weeks. Some of the problems with respect to how veterans are able to access the benefits that they've earned, that's not a new issue. Obama’s statement, however, was remarkably short on actual solutions for the VA. Throwing money at the problem hasn’t fixed it: using 2011 dollars, America spent $88.8 billion on the VA in 2007, and $125.3 billion on the VA in 2012. And herein lies the problem for the left: the failures at the VA, including its bureaucratic incompetence, its waiting lists, and its deaths, all debunk the notion that a government-run healthcare system will work. It’s a fresh slap in the face to all those commentators who, in pushing Obamacare, endorsed the VA as a model. There are some pretty big names on that list. Paul Krugman in 2011 wrote of the VA’s “huge success story”: Read what Krugman and the others had to say at the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 http://www.truthrevo...comes-back-bite As the fallout from the Veterans Administration cooking of the books and the related deaths of over three dozen veterans continues, President Obama took to the podium on Wednesday to explain that problems at the VA are nothing new. On Wednesday, President Obama took to the podium to first express his tremendous anger – VA Secretary Eric Shinseki was “mad as hell” but President Obama was “madder than hell,” thus winning the rage sweepstakes – and then explained that the VA’s issues go back years: [A]ll of us, whether here in Washington or all across the country, have to stay focused on the larger mission, which is upholding our sacred trust to all of our veterans, bringing the VA system into the 21st century, which is not an easy task…. caring for our veterans is not an issue that popped up in recent weeks. Some of the problems with respect to how veterans are able to access the benefits that they've earned, that's not a new issue. Obama’s statement, however, was remarkably short on actual solutions for the VA. Throwing money at the problem hasn’t fixed it: using 2011 dollars, America spent $88.8 billion on the VA in 2007, and $125.3 billion on the VA in 2012. And herein lies the problem for the left: the failures at the VA, including its bureaucratic incompetence, its waiting lists, and its deaths, all debunk the notion that a government-run healthcare system will work. It’s a fresh slap in the face to all those commentators who, in pushing Obamacare, endorsed the VA as a model. There are some pretty big names on that list. Paul Krugman in 2011 wrote of the VA’s “huge success story”: Read what Krugman and the others had to say at the link. Krugman denying what he said, and calling anyone who links to his own words, an idiot...this Sunday! Step right up and subscribe to the New York Times! How funny is this(from your link...quoting Krugman)? Many people still have an image of veterans’ health care based on the terrible state of the system two decades ago. Under the Clinton administration, however, the V.H.A. was overhauled, and achieved a remarkable combination of rising quality and successful cost control. Well....so much for the "this problem goes back for decades" excuse, huh, Obama WH political office? Professor Krugman told us that this problem has been solved...for decades! Multiple surveys have found the V.H.A. providing better care than most Americans receive, even as the agency has held cost increases well below those facing Medicare and private insurers. My mere existence, and the work that I do/data and information that we generate, on a daily basis, disproves this statement totally. Furthermore, the V.H.A. has led the way in cost-saving innovation, especially the use of electronic medical records. Now this is just absurd. Um, I have it on pretty good authority (my client and I) that this is what the VA wants to do. We are nowhere near able to support this claim yet, in terms of demonstrable cost measurement, never mind cost savings. The VISTA(EMR) program(to which Krugman is cluelessly referring) is a F'ing hackfest. VISTA would not pass any corporate standard. I know. I have integrated with the thing. Thus, I have read large chunks of it's code, line by line, and also hooked a tracer to its DB. Has Paul Krugman ever written a single line of code? No? Then how does he know if VISTA is innovative? How can he call VISTA bad, or good, or anything? How about I help him: VISTA is early/mid 90s technology. How often do we consider 20 year-old architecture "leading the way" in IT? "Led the way" If I wasn't a professional, I'd post "something" on Youtube. Then we'd see who is leading...and who is being a belligerent asshat...regarding the "use of electronic medical records" at the VA. EMRs. Yeah, that's the solution. Something that hasn't solved the exact same problems for 15 years, is automagically going to start solving it this year? The design patterns of EMRs literally make them incapable of solving the problems that you will find in EVERY 50+ bed health care facility in the country, and these problems have existed every year EMRs have, if not longer. But please, somebody say EMR again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 27, 2014 Share Posted May 27, 2014 (edited) Obamacare Costs Fuel Union Tension in Upcoming Labor Talks With the Affordable Care Act set to raise costs by millions of dollars for union workers across the country, employers and labor unions find themselves struggling to reach agreements in negotiations over who will shoulder the costs amid uncertainty surrounding the law. For some, the increases are coming as a surprise. “When we first supported the calls for health-care reform, we thought it was going to bring costs down,” one labor lawyer told the Wall Street Journal. The law’s impact on labor talks is affecting employees ranging from Alaska Airlines flight attendants to Las Vegas casino hospitality workers to Philadelphia transit-system employees. Among the reasons for the cost increases are the requirement that employees’ kids up to 26 years old be covered, and the “Cadillac tax,” a tax on premium plans, according to the Journal. Many unions that backed Obamacare at its inception are now increasingly skeptical as their workers are being asked to pay more for their plans to cover the increases from the incoming costs. Philadelphia transit employees turned down a deal that would have required them to contribute an additional 1 percent towards their health coverage. Alaska Airlines flight attendants voted down a proposal for not providing enough protection against potential future cost increases. “It’s been a challenge for even some of the stronger unions to maintain the quality health plans that they have offered over the years,” another lawyer said. In other cases, unions are cutting coverage for certain employees altogether in order to preserve the plans for other workers at a manageable cost. More at the link: Edited May 27, 2014 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Employers will take a major step back from the brink of providing health insurance by "easing" employees into exchanges. Less costly, fewer administrative requirements and more focus on the objectives of the business rather than health care--what's not to like? http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/31/analysts-predict-most-employer-provided-insurance-will-disappear-as-obamacare/?intcmp=HPBucket Of course the other side of that coin is that the American taxpayers will shoulder more and more of the burden since government subsidies will be a major part of the premiums paid by those "shifted" employees. Nothing new, just revisiting the facts...move along.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Employers will take a major step back from the brink of providing health insurance by "easing" employees into exchanges. Less costly, fewer administrative requirements and more focus on the objectives of the business rather than health care--what's not to like? http://www.foxnews.c...intcmp=HPBucket Of course the other side of that coin is that the American taxpayers will shoulder more and more of the burden since government subsidies will be a major part of the premiums paid by those "shifted" employees. Nothing new, just revisiting the facts...move along.... Not so fast... Many employers had thought they could shift health costs to the government by sending their employees to a health insurance exchange with a tax-free contribution of cash to help pay premiums, but the Obama administration has squelched the idea in a new ruling. Such arrangements do not satisfy the health care law, the administration said, and employers may be subject to a tax penalty of $100 a day — or $36,500 a year — for each employee who goes into the individual marketplace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) you have to be specific when posing the question, and in my mind there are 3 types "Government Funded" healthcare: 1. Socialized Medicine- the Government run the Hospitals, employs the Practicioners, collects taxes foe the cost of care. 2. Single Payor- the Government collects taxes to pay for care, people use private providers. 3. Subsidized Premium Support- Private system the government collect taxes and subsidizes premium payment for private health insurance- they do not pay claims, and don't own the means or care. We doubled down on a system that really didn't work in the first place if you were not healthly, not young, had preexisting condition, etc. We fixed access, but did little to address cost of care in the grand scheme of things. Yes, there will be cost cutting measures and maybe those will help, but the key disconnect is that individuals/ hospitals do not have an efficient cost/ payment relationship because of third party payments. Its still almost impossible to get a cash quote for services at a hospital in this country... I'd like to the States/Federal Government fund a risk pool that pays claims that are over a certain amont based on each person income. So the individual is charged with paying for their routine care, seeking out cost effective ways to do so... when they need the 50K surgery, the risk pool pays the provider. I'd like to see a system like this have an auto opt-in... so people would have to make a choice not to participate/opt out, so either go without coverage for which they could be denied care if needed and couldnt pay, or buy a private plan if they qualify. Fund the risk pool with taxes, each person has a deducitble and an HSA they could use if they wanted. You take TPA out of the mix, get a better relationship between consumer/ provider and get economies of scale in the process. The people of the Nation/ State could vote on how much they wanted to spend for care in the country, instead of now it seems like a open spigot free for all. People vote for no waits for anything, more spending. Americans decided a hip replacement wait of 6 months is acceptable, less spending. Seems reasonable to me. That's one of the biggest problems right there. I had a broken arm without insurance and couldn't shop around for treatment b/c they wouldn't tell me the price. Years ago I needed MRIs and didn't find out until after I got the bill that the small MRI shop in a strip mall charged less than half what the hospital charged. We've removed price, the invisible hand that finds the optimal point (+/-) between supply and demand, then we wonder why costs continue to rise. We're retarded. Edited May 31, 2014 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 (edited) http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-candidates-show-signs-of-retreat-on-full-obamacare-repeal-as-midterms-approach/2014/05/30/3c175b30-e5ab-11e3-8f90-73e071f3d637_story.html uh oh. the boat's leaving and the tea party is stuck on the dock. Edited June 1, 2014 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-candidates-show-signs-of-retreat-on-full-obamacare-repeal-as-midterms-approach/2014/05/30/3c175b30-e5ab-11e3-8f90-73e071f3d637_story.ht. uh oh. the boat's leaving and the tea party is stuck on the dock. You've linked to nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 You've linked to nothing. Even when you read it TYTT..........it's still nothing. Simply WaPo agitprop, filled with wishful thinking, the Democrats rely upon Republican stupidity to get their base of gimme-dat and left-wing voters to the polls. Because Obama is an albatross around their necks, they desperately want their voters to feel threatened by something — that they have “entitlements” to lose, and that Obama’s signature achievement is threatened by mean racists, etc. The WaPo wants conservative voters to pressure their reps to take hard positions, and play into the Dems’ hands. November is coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Even when you read it TYTT..........it's still nothing. Simply WaPo agitprop, filled with wishful thinking, the Democrats rely upon Republican stupidity to get their base of gimme-dat and left-wing voters to the polls. Because Obama is an albatross around their necks, they desperately want their voters to feel threatened by something — that they have “entitlements” to lose, and that Obama’s signature achievement is threatened by mean racists, etc. The WaPo wants conservative voters to pressure their reps to take hard positions, and play into the Dems’ hands. November is coming. While that may all be true, it literally linked to nothing. "Page Not Found We're unable to locate the page you requested. The page may have moved or may no longer be available. We want to help you find what you're looking for." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts