The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

But they are, along with corporations, for whom which the last system was modeled. Both are gross.

Aca is setup to be free enterprises based, any insurance company is free to make a proposal to be your insurer.

I (and the hospitals I'm sure) would have preferred a single payer system. But for political reasons, the conservative Republican designed model,was the one that was passed. Basically the Romney model.

I'm not sure about Daddy. Daddy is the one that throws you in jail for smoking a joint, right? Maybe we are on the same page about Daddy.

So it's now the conservatives falt? Priceless.

Last I checked not a single conservative, or Republican voted for it. Dems own it.

Are u sure it's not George Bush's fault?

You would have preferred a single payer system? That's like telling the US Postal Service, You've done such a good job we're giving you UPS and Fed Ex.

My individual premium is much better and I am way ahead coverage wise and deductible wise than pre-ACA. Much appreciated.

(04-09-2014 09:31 PM)DesertBronco Wrote:  My individual premium is much better and I am way ahead coverage wise and deductible wise than pre-ACA. Much appreciated.

Somehow I doubt that.

#1 I doubt you qualify for a subsidy, which is about the only way your premium might be lower.

#2 You are in the early portion of the high risk age bracket. From a simple actuarial standpoint premiums don't go down as you chug past 50.

#3. Most insurance executives I have heard on the talking head shows stated because of federally mandated add ons (coverage for sex changes, labor/delivery, penial implants, boob jobs, butt plugs, etc.) automatically drove up the cost of premiums.

Kidding aside, because this law literally changes by the day, and the demographics of the pool is unknown, insurance actuaries can only guess an appropriate rate to charge. But they can't lose. If they're wrong and their companies lose money there is a provision in the bill where the Feds cut them a check so they still turn a profit. That goes away after the next election .......... And that's when the real increases will be know.

It's $110.00 per month lower, for the same BCBS policy that I paid for the last two years. Read it and weep. I think because there's more participation, and plans are directly comparable on the state exchange creating a sense of competition. Which was the whole intention.

Yup, the system design is Republican. Private enterprise based.

The fact is red states delayed and stalled on the state exchanges, which is odd because that was the least fed government controlled part of the deal. And all the stalling and bad mouthing caused the fed website design and implementation delays.

Actually almost no one I know has used the insurance part of ACA. My brother in law retired at 62 and had an insurance gap before Medicare at 65. He got nice coverage at a reasonable cost, he is satisfied.

Even at 7,000,000, that is a very small percent of the population in that exchange part of the law. The rest of us kept our existing coverage and doctors. Then there are those who had no coverage and don't want any now. Good luck to them, yes Daddy will charge them a penalty, that has to do with inefficient emergency room use, and the reality is the low income won't pay that anyway, just like they don't pull their weight now.

(04-10-2014 06:58 AM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  Yup, the system design is Republican. Private enterprise based.

The fact is red states delayed and stalled on the state exchanges, which is odd because that was the least fed government controlled part of the deal. And all the stalling and bad mouthing caused the fed website design and implementation delays.

Actually almost no one I know has used the insurance part of ACA. My brother in law retired at 62 and had an insurance gap before Medicare at 65. He got nice coverage at a reasonable cost, he is satisfied.

Even at 7,000,000, that is a very small percent of the population in that exchange part of the law. The rest of us kept our existing coverage and doctors. Then there are those who had no coverage and don't want any now. Good luck to them, yes Daddy will charge them a penalty, that has to do with inefficient emergency room use, and the reality is the low income won't pay that anyway, just like they don't pull their weight now.

So cute. My 7 year tries to blame everyone but herself when her bad choices don't work out. Mom and dad aren't fooled. We'll see if the low information crowd that voted in massive entitlements and agreeing to let their children foot the bill, figure out their folly.

Quote:Even at 7,000,000, that is a very small percent of the population in that exchange part of the law. The rest of us kept our existing coverage and doctors. Then there are those who had no coverage and don't want any now. Good luck to them, yes Daddy will charge them a penalty, that has to do with inefficient emergency room use, and the reality is the low income won't pay that anyway, just like they don't pull their weight now.

That's a fact.