The Truth About Obamacare

[GostHacked]

Well, I'm pretty sure we don't have a Queen that wears funny hats.

Your Presidents still bow to them regardless. In more than one way.

[Shady]

Your Presidents still bow to them regardless. In more than one way.

Stop hijacking my thread for trolling purposes.

[bush_cheney2004]

Stop hijacking my thread. This is about Obamacare. If you want to discuss electoral processes, start your own thread.

Unfortunately, the U.S. electoral process ultimately resulted in this ACA Obamacare monstrosity that will distort markets and raise premiums, forcing people to buy insurance they don't need. The U.S. Supreme Court stopped the charade and called it out as a the new tax that it is.

It could be worse...like universal single payer !

[guyser]

Well, I'm pretty sure we don't have a Queen that wears funny hats.

so much better

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=Q20qNyZkbo4gsM&tbnid=6R1v2M-aDGdEOM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webwombat.com.au%2Fentertainment%2Fhumour%2FGrumpy_Old_Coot%2F275bush.htm&ei=qL3FUpSIDKmwyQH76oHACw&bvm=bv.58187178,d.aWc&psig=AFQjCNHx9jMgBo99Q2VPWoGSCWi7fhUQJg&ust=1388777124318263

[jacee]

It's definitely scrapping the bottom of the barrell when an administration decides its going to force nuns to have to pay for contraception and abortion health insurance coverage. Obama should be completely ashamed of himself. It's disgusting.

You think everybody should be able to only pay for medical services they choose to?

Well I don't have testicles so I don't want to pay for anything to do with them.

I don't agree with breast enlargement so I won't pay for any damage when they start leaking or migrating to someone's armpit.

I don't want any more kids so scratch all pregnancy, delivery and child health care off my list.

I'm opposed to boxing and risky extreme sports so I don't want to pay for their medical care.

I could go on, but you get the picture. It's a real can of worms and an expensive nightmare to administer when you start picking and choosing what medical services you want your taxes to pay for.

Ridiculous.

[bush_cheney2004]

You think everybody should be able to only pay for medical services they choose to?

The issue with the nuns forced to buy insurance for abortions and contraception is one of religious rights. Furthermore, not even the U.S. federal government funds abortion "services" through Medicaid except in the case of rape, incest, or threat to a mother's life (Hyde Amendment).

[Peter F]

Are you suggesting that if Medicaid doesn't fund it then insurance companies should not insure for it?

[Shady]

You think everybody should be able to only pay for medical services they choose to?

Yes, you're absolutely right. Imagine that, choosing to pay for what services YOU wish to have covered in YOUR insurance. You lefties used to be all about freedom of choice. I guess that only pertains to ending the life of unborn babies huh? We can choose which cable packages, but not our insurance packages. Interesting, and highly inefficent and impersonal.

You think everybody should be able to only pay for medical services they choose to?

Well I don't have testicles so I don't want to pay for anything to do with them.

I don't agree with breast enlargement so I won't pay for any damage when they start leaking or migrating to someone's armpit.

I don't want any more kids so scratch all pregnancy, delivery and child health care off my list.

I'm opposed to boxing and risky extreme sports so I don't want to pay for their medical care.

I could go on, but you get the picture. It's a real can of worms and an expensive nightmare to administer when you start picking and choosing what medical services you want your taxes to pay for.

Ridiculous.

Yes, you're absolutely right. Imagine that, choosing to pay for what services YOU wish to have covered in YOUR insurance. You lefties used to be all about freedom of choice. I guess that only pertains to ending the life of unborn babies huh? We can choose which cable packages, but not our insurance packages. Interesting, and highly inefficent and impersonal.

No, plastic surgery isn't something covered in health insurance. That's elective surgery. Other than that you've absolutely got the right idea. If you're not having kids, than yes, pregnancy and maternaity coverage shouldn't be something thatnyou're forced to purchase. It's your insurance, and your money, you should have the final say. And no, it's not at all a can of worms and a nightmare to administer. It's quite easily done, just as variations in coverage of other types of insurance is done on a regular basis. But you're wrong in bringing up taxes. We're not talking about taxes, we're talking about private insurance policies paid for out of the pockets of individuals and businesses. It's not rocket science.

Edited January 3, 2014 by Shady

[On Guard for Thee]

Yes, you're absolutely right. Imagine that, choosing to pay for what services YOU wish to have covered in YOUR insurance. You lefties used to be all about freedom of choice. I guess that only pertains to ending the life of unborn babies huh? We can choose which cable packages, but not our insurance packages. Interesting, and highly inefficent and impersonal.

No, plastic surgery isn't something covered in health insurance. That's elective surgery. Other than that you've absolutely got the right idea. If you're not having kids, than yes, pregnancy and maternaity coverage shouldn't be something thatnyou're forced to purchase. It's your insurance, and your money, you should have the final say. And no, it's not at all a can of worms and a nightmare to administer. It's quite easily done, just as variations in coverage of other types of insurance is done on a regular basis. But you're wrong in bringing up taxes. We're not talking about taxes, we're talking about private insurance policies paid for out of the pockets of individuals and businesses. It's not rocket science.

So if we fol;low that "logic" and I hesitate to call it that, then if you don't now have cancer you shouldn't buy cancer insurance.

[guyser]

So if we fol;low that "logic" and I hesitate to call it that, then if you don't now have cancer you shouldn't buy cancer insurance.

You have his argument pegged right

[bush_cheney2004]

So if we fol;low that "logic" and I hesitate to call it that, then if you don't now have cancer you shouldn't buy cancer insurance.

Not for cancer (bad logic), but my 21 year-old son does not need coverage for pregnancy, pap smears, mammograms, etc. Why can't he buy a policy that reflects this reality ?

[guyser]

Not for cancer (bad logic), but my 21 year-old son does not need coverage for pregnancy, pap smears, mammograms, etc. Why can't he buy a policy that reflects this reality ?

Dont know much about insurance do you?

[Shady]

So if we fol;low that "logic" and I hesitate to call it that, then if you don't now have cancer you shouldn't buy cancer insurance.

No, that's incorrect.

[bush_cheney2004]

Dont know much about insurance do you?

No, I only worked for insurance programs administration and underwriting for five years (group policies, enrollment, eligibility, and claims processing). And I've only purchased insurance as a consumer for the past 35 years. I am sure you are much smarter about insurance and will tell us just that, because the health insurance market is so much larger and competitive in Canada compared to the U.S.

[guyser]

No, I only worked for insurance programs administration and underwriting for five years (group policies, enrollment, eligibility, and claims processing). And I've only purchased insurance as a consumer for the past 35 years. I am sure you are much smarter about insurance and will tell us just that, because the health insurance market is so much larger and competitive in Canada compared to the U.S.

Oh good for you !

Naw, I dont need to tell anyone, least of all you, that I am smarter about insurance. Ive forgotten more than one would learn in 5 yrs admin + uw.

Then your dsiplayed ignorance of and about insurance was what? A ruse, trolling ? (seeing as you would then know that insurance is a risked pool covering plenty of things that will not affect many)

Hey Nuns, you too could get knocked up. Best be safe . Now go pay your premiums.

[bush_cheney2004]

Naw, I dont need to tell anyone, least of all you, that I am smarter about insurance. Ive forgotten more than one would learn in 5 yrs admin + uw.

See...I knew you would share your assumed superiority over all others in the land. How is that wait list insurance product doing in Canada, which has the biggest and most important health insurance market in the world ? We all know that people who work on private health insurance in Canada are at the top of the game because that's where the action is.

Then your dsiplayed ignorance of and about insurance was what? A ruse, trolling ? (seeing as you would then know that insurance is a risked pool covering plenty of things that will not affect many)

Hey Nuns, you too could get knocked up. Best be safe . Now go pay your premiums.

Oh sure....just one big risk pool. No group policy exceptions or options...just one big pool. Must be true since you are the expert on insurance products in the U.S. too. We could learn so much from you...how did our insurance sector survive without you all these years?

[guyser]

See...I knew you would share your assumed superiority over all others in the land.

Aw...not at all. Only for the ignorant. Some people have more knowledge, not including you of course .

How is that wait list insurance product doing in Canada, which has the biggest and most important health insurance market in the world ?

Pretty lousy from my understanding. Lame policy, lame u/w rules. Lame product.

Gosh, it isnt the biggest nor the most important.

We all know that people who work on private health insurance in Canada are at the top of the game because that's where the action is.

Oh my, such bitter and small mindedness . The game up here is on par with anywhere.

Must be true since you are the expert on insurance products in the U.S. too. We could learn so much from you...how did our insurance sector survive without you all these years?

Just more an expert than you are. Pretty obvious by the scribbling of non-sense you posted here.

Your sector survived by having people dedicated to it for decades, not fly by night 5 year pissants

[bush_cheney2004]

Aw...not at all. Only for the ignorant. Some people have more knowledge, not including you of course .

Pretty lousy from my understanding. Lame policy, lame u/w rules. Lame product.

You didn't even know it existed before i told you.

Gosh, it isnt the biggest nor the most important.

Oh my, such bitter and small mindedness . The game up here is on par with anywhere.

Of course, because we all know that private health insurance is all the rage in Canada. Canada....the insurance capital of the world. With Canada's single payer monopoly, it only makes sense that health care insurance experts like you would emerge as leaders in the field. Why, I bet that President Obama's team consulted with you...am I right ?

Just more an expert than you are. Pretty obvious by the scribbling of non-sense you posted here.

Your sector survived by having people dedicated to it for decades, not fly by night 5 year pissants

Yes...we are just "pissants" compared to Canadian insurance behemoths. BCBS, United Health Group, Wellpoint, Aetna, Cigna and others just tiny compared to the industry giants in Canada.

I left the insurance game about 10 years ago because it was mind rotting boredom, but apparently it's plenty enough to keep you challenged.

Edited January 3, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[guyser]

You didn't even know it existed before i told you.

I didnt? Wow !

Of course, because we all know that private health insurance is all the rage in Canada.

More of that ignorance....good job...followed by

Canada....the insurance capital of the world.

Clap clap...more of same

With Canada's single payer monopoly, it only makes sense that health care insurance experts like you would emerge as leaders in the field. Why, I bet that President Obama's team consulted with you...am I right ?

No expertise as a health care insurance expert. You must be confused...again.

No, wasnt in the office when he called.

Yes...we are just "pissants"

Oh sorry, you misread that.

Its not the 'we' are pissants, it was YOU who is the pissant w 5yrs experience that was referenced. Woo hoo....5 yrs.

BCBS, United Health Group, Wellpoint, Aetna, Cigna and others just tiny compared to the industry giants in Canada.

Oops, theres that small mindedness and bitterness welling. No one, apart from you. for who knows what reason, invoke names of companies (none of them top 10) no one is talking about. Par for the course. If no point ....then deflect.

Woot!

I left the insurance game about 10 years ago because it was mind rotting boredom, but apparently it's plenty enough to keep you challenged.

Judging by your lack of knowledge on the subject and admitted cup of coffee in the business, leaving it was probably a decision you didnt make.

In the end, always better to be treated by a Dr than have the treatment dictated by an HMO. Nothing will change that. Some lackey in an office deciding if you can have the treatment is not what we here care for.

[bush_cheney2004]

Judging by your lack of knowledge on the subject and admitted cup of coffee in the business, leaving it was probably a decision you didnt make.

Leaving is a decision I can always make...I'm not dependent on state sponsored health care.

In the end, always better to be treated by a Dr than have the treatment dictated by an HMO. Nothing will change that. Some lackey in an office deciding if you can have the treatment is not what we here care for.

Maybe that's why you have to wait so long for procedures....many things don't require a doctor gatekeeper at all. Enjoy the patriotic suffering in queue .

[bush_cheney2004]

Before Obamacare and after our "resident expert" ruled the industry:

Many Individual Health Policies Do Not Cover Pregnancy

When Amy Tiller became pregnant six years ago, she was a high school biology teacher in Waynesville, N.C., and the health insurance plan she had through her school system covered the tab for the birth of her twins.

A few years later, when she discovered she was pregnant again, she didn't give insurance a thought, assuming she'd be covered once again. But by then she had left her teaching job to open a personal training studio with her husband, and they were covered under individual health insurance policies.

Tiller was shocked to discover that her new plan didn't cover maternity care at all unless she purchased a special rider for the coverage, something she could not do after she became pregnant. "I was paying so much -- $400 a month" for the insurance premium, she says. "I thought it must be a mistake."

It wasn't. Tiller's experience is common. Individual health insurance policies generally don't cover maternity care, as a recent investigation by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce reported. In an October memo outlining its findings based on responses from the four largest for-profit health insurers -- Aetna, Humana, UnitedHealth Group and WellPoint -- the committee reported that most individual policies at those companies didn't cover most of the expenses for a normal delivery.

Edited January 4, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[guyser]

Leaving is a decision I can always make...I'm not dependent on state sponsored health care.

Ah...the well documented deflection you thrive on.

The first having nothing to do with the second.

Maybe that's why you have to wait so long for procedures....many things don't require a doctor gatekeeper at all. Enjoy the patriotic suffering in queue .

The tired canard of the ignorant in the first part, in the second, whilst true, you get a statement telling you to pay X since we dont cover that.

As was said, better to be seen by a Dr than some schmuck in an office telling you it isnt covered. (or getting a bill for unpaid services)

[bush_cheney2004]

The tired canard of the ignorant in the first part, in the second, whilst true, you get a statement telling you to pay X since we dont cover that.

As was said, better to be seen by a Dr than some schmuck in an office telling you it isnt covered. (or getting a bill for unpaid services)

More ignorance about U.S. health insurance....procedure charges are billed at a negotiated rate for group or individual policies. Multiple policies reduce patient costs further. EOB's report reimbursement levels before elective procedures. Web sites report membership, eligibility, and coverage instead of how many months it will take to get a simple MRI or CT scan.

[waldo]

so much better

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=Q20qNyZkbo4gsM&tbnid=6R1v2M-aDGdEOM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webwombat.com.au%2Fentertainment%2Fhumour%2FGrumpy_Old_Coot%2F275bush.htm&ei=qL3FUpSIDKmwyQH76oHACw&bvm=bv.58187178,d.aWc&psig=AFQjCNHx9jMgBo99Q2VPWoGSCWi7fhUQJg&ust=1388777124318263

[waldo]

recent report from the Minority Staff of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce... of those Americans whose insurance was erroneously reportedly canceled, only 10,000, or 0.2 percent, will actually wind up with no access to an Obamacare insurance alternative.

of course, within the points outlined below, related Medicaid enrollment would be significantly higher if not for the 'dozen or so' Republican states that refused to upgrade their Medicaid programs to comply with Obamacare... well done Republicans! Notwithstanding, of course, the millions of expected Americans who will voluntarily cancel their insurance to take advantage of exchange subsidies.

Opponents of the Affordable Care Act claim that four to five million people will lose their health insurance coverage next year because of the law. They cite as evidence a report by the Associated Press that estimated that 4.7 million Americans have received or will receive notices cancelling their 2013 health insurance plans. The extrapolation from that report to the claim that millions will lack coverage next year rests on multiple erroneous premises:

• It ignores the efforts of insurance companies to re-sign individuals who received cancellation notices. Major insurance companies have indicated that they expect that the vast majority of the individuals to whom they sent notices will renew their 2013 coverage, be automatically enrolled in new coverage, or sign up for plans through the exchanges. As a result of Administration actions to allow additional 2013 policy renewals, half of the reported 4.7 million individuals who received cancellation notices have the option to renew their prior
coverage.

• It assumes that no individuals who had private insurance will sign up for insurance through the new health exchanges or Medicaid. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that half of individuals with current individual market coverage are eligible for tax credits through the
new marketplaces and that an additional one million are eligible for Medicaid. These individuals will receive better coverage at lower cost by enrolling through the exchanges or signing up for Medicaid, and many have done so.

• It overlooks the availability of low-cost catastrophic coverage. Individuals who received cancellation notices are eligible to apply for a hardship exemption and purchase catastrophic health plans typically offered only to individuals under thirty. These plans are widely
available throughout the United States.

When these factors are taken into account, a much different picture emerges. While there is no central repository of data on insurance coverage in the individual market, the number of individuals who will lose individual coverage and be unable to renew pre-ACA coverage, enroll in subsidized coverage, or access a catastrophic plan is sure to be small. Of the reported 4.7 million people who receive cancellation notices, half should have the option to renew their 2013 coverage.

Of the remaining 2.35 million individuals, approximately 1.4 million should be eligible for tax credits through the marketplaces or Medicaid. Of the remaining 950,000 individuals, fewer than 10,000 people in 18 counties in a single state would lack access to an affordable catastrophic plan. This is less than 0.2% of the estimate made by opponents of the Affordable Care Act