(07-13-2014 12:46 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 12:24 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 11:59 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 08:29 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 07:31 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  link?
Are you talking about problems resolving data inconsistencies? That hardly disputes the above chart. It doesn't have anything to do with how many get subsidies. Read the chart.

Who the heck are the graph creators? Why should we believe their data/graph. Because you say we should? There is no official government attribution.

Why is the HHS not able to provide real data and a graph? They are the holders of the real numbers.

btw whoever created that graph could use a lesson or two in graphic design. That has to be about the ugliest and least communicative way to present information. It's hideous.

Charles Gaba is a private citizen that has been compiling the numbers from the start. It is his chart and it has been his numbers that I've primarily been citing in this thread and the old "It is not too Late to signup" thread from the beginning. As many times as I've provided a link to his site I figured you knew that by now. Sorry you don't like the way the graph looks. You can take that up with Gaba. Just post a comment at his site and I'm sure he will respond. He is pretty accessible. http://acasignups.net/graph

SO Gaba created a graph from his own made up numbers, which the IG has said is bullsh*t

I'm still waiting for a link to an IG report that says that.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/reports-f...1404232287

(07-13-2014 12:46 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 12:24 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 11:59 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 08:29 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 07:31 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  link?
Are you talking about problems resolving data inconsistencies? That hardly disputes the above chart. It doesn't have anything to do with how many get subsidies. Read the chart.

Who the heck are the graph creators? Why should we believe their data/graph. Because you say we should? There is no official government attribution.

Why is the HHS not able to provide real data and a graph? They are the holders of the real numbers.

btw whoever created that graph could use a lesson or two in graphic design. That has to be about the ugliest and least communicative way to present information. It's hideous.

Charles Gaba is a private citizen that has been compiling the numbers from the start. It is his chart and it has been his numbers that I've primarily been citing in this thread and the old "It is not too Late to signup" thread from the beginning. As many times as I've provided a link to his site I figured you knew that by now. Sorry you don't like the way the graph looks. You can take that up with Gaba. Just post a comment at his site and I'm sure he will respond. He is pretty accessible. http://acasignups.net/graph

SO Gaba created a graph from his own made up numbers, which the IG has said is bullsh*t

I'm still waiting for a link to an IG report that says that.

First, how many of the 7.75 Million ALREADY HAD private insurance, but their plans by their insurers were cancelled and their state insurance commissioners wouldn't allow the obamba LIE (if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance) "cure" of being able to keep what they'd had?

Second, how many of these were in state insurance risk pools and were paying MORE MONEY and very HIGH RISK with extremely expensive pre-existing conditions? These plans were all CANCELLED via Obamacare, and the insureds went directly to get insurance. Almost NONE qualified for subsidies, because they were already well-off enough to have been paying for costly coverage through a state high risk pool.

(07-13-2014 02:13 PM)G-Man Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 12:46 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 12:24 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 11:59 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 08:29 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Who the heck are the graph creators? Why should we believe their data/graph. Because you say we should? There is no official government attribution.

Why is the HHS not able to provide real data and a graph? They are the holders of the real numbers.

btw whoever created that graph could use a lesson or two in graphic design. That has to be about the ugliest and least communicative way to present information. It's hideous.

Charles Gaba is a private citizen that has been compiling the numbers from the start. It is his chart and it has been his numbers that I've primarily been citing in this thread and the old "It is not too Late to signup" thread from the beginning. As many times as I've provided a link to his site I figured you knew that by now. Sorry you don't like the way the graph looks. You can take that up with Gaba. Just post a comment at his site and I'm sure he will respond. He is pretty accessible. http://acasignups.net/graph

SO Gaba created a graph from his own made up numbers, which the IG has said is bullsh*t

I'm still waiting for a link to an IG report that says that.

First, how many of the 7.75 Million ALREADY HAD private insurance, but their plans by their insurers were cancelled and their state insurance commissioners wouldn't allow the obamba LIE (if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance) "cure" of being able to keep what they'd had?

Second, how many of these were in state insurance risk pools and were paying MORE MONEY and very HIGH RISK with extremely expensive pre-existing conditions? These plans were all CANCELLED via Obamacare, and the insureds went directly to get insurance. Almost NONE qualified for subsidies, because they were already well-off enough to have been paying for costly coverage through a state high risk pool.

The last figures I saw for canceled policies when all was said and done was around 2 million. That of course isn't an indication of how many signed up for plans from the exchanges. Unless they would qualify for a subsidy there would be little reason for them to go that route.

Recent surveys indicate that a little less than 6 out of 10 that got policies on the exchanges were previously uninsured and about half of all those that bought individual plans were previously uninsured.

I understand that you are trying to say that people might be mistakenly included in the previously uninsured that had their policies canceled but from what I have seen regarding the wording of the questions this isn't the case.

Also a recent Kaiser study showed that about half of those that had their non-compliant policies canceled are paying more and about half are paying less.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(07-13-2014 01:45 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 12:46 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 12:24 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 11:59 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 08:29 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Who the heck are the graph creators? Why should we believe their data/graph. Because you say we should? There is no official government attribution.

Why is the HHS not able to provide real data and a graph? They are the holders of the real numbers.

btw whoever created that graph could use a lesson or two in graphic design. That has to be about the ugliest and least communicative way to present information. It's hideous.

Charles Gaba is a private citizen that has been compiling the numbers from the start. It is his chart and it has been his numbers that I've primarily been citing in this thread and the old "It is not too Late to signup" thread from the beginning. As many times as I've provided a link to his site I figured you knew that by now. Sorry you don't like the way the graph looks. You can take that up with Gaba. Just post a comment at his site and I'm sure he will respond. He is pretty accessible. http://acasignups.net/graph

SO Gaba created a graph from his own made up numbers, which the IG has said is bullsh*t

I'm still waiting for a link to an IG report that says that.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/reports-f...1404232287

I've read those reports. I thought you guys had some report that indicated sign up numbers weren't accurate? There are problems with data inconsistency with the subsidies, not with policy sign ups. Nothing in that report disputes Gaba's calculations.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Why do we have to rely on numbers from Yo Gaba Gaba?
Where are the real numbers from the HHS?

(07-13-2014 04:37 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Why do we have to rely on numbers from Yo Gaba Gaba?
Where are the real numbers from the HHS?

As the IG has reported, the administration has no numbers on hand, because they haven't reconciled the lists.

But

The reason they havent reconciled the lists is because they know the numbers are sh*tty. So they refuse to reconcile so that the real numbers remain hidden, and allow some dude that writes a blog to report over inflated "signup" numbers that have no relevance on the sustainability of OBlunder care.

Even if 10 million signed up it doesn't justify the legislation. There are 300 million people in this country. Screwing with 290 million for 10 million is stupid. Instead you just pass a program to deal with the 10 million.

(07-13-2014 05:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 04:37 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Why do we have to rely on numbers from Yo Gaba Gaba?
Where are the real numbers from the HHS?

As the IG has reported, the administration has no numbers on hand, because they haven't reconciled the lists.

But

The reason they havent reconciled the lists is because they know the numbers are sh*tty. So they refuse to reconcile so that the real numbers remain hidden, and allow some dude that writes a blog to report over inflated "signup" numbers that have no relevance on the sustainability of OBlunder care.

That would be an opinion. Also Gaba's accuracy has been very good throughout the year as the numbers have come in.

(07-13-2014 06:13 PM)Claw Wrote:  Even if 10 million signed up it doesn't justify the legislation. There are 300 million people in this country. Screwing with 290 million for 10 million is stupid. Instead you just pass a program to deal with the 10 million.

There is a lot more to it than those that signed up on the exchanges. You can't be denied coverage or charged huge premiums because of a pre-existing condition. There are no longer yearly or lifetime caps on coverage. If your child graduates from college but can't immediately land a job with benefits you can keep them on your policy until they turn 26. Those are a few ways you benefit from the ACA even if you never need an individual market plan.

(07-13-2014 09:37 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 06:13 PM)Claw Wrote:  Even if 10 million signed up it doesn't justify the legislation. There are 300 million people in this country. Screwing with 290 million for 10 million is stupid. Instead you just pass a program to deal with the 10 million.

There is a lot more to it than those that signed up on the exchanges. You can't be denied coverage or charged huge premiums because of a pre-existing condition. There are no longer yearly or lifetime caps on coverage. If your child graduates from college but can't immediately land a job with benefits you can keep them on your policy until they turn 26. Those are a few ways you benefit from the ACA even if you never need an individual market plan.

Did we have to wholesale reinvent health care and insurance for all Americans to achieve those changes that are helpful?

(07-13-2014 09:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 05:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 04:37 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Why do we have to rely on numbers from Yo Gaba Gaba?
Where are the real numbers from the HHS?

As the IG has reported, the administration has no numbers on hand, because they haven't reconciled the lists.

But

The reason they havent reconciled the lists is because they know the numbers are sh*tty. So they refuse to reconcile so that the real numbers remain hidden, and allow some dude that writes a blog to report over inflated "signup" numbers that have no relevance on the sustainability of OBlunder care.

That would be an opinion. Also Gaba's accuracy has been very good throughout the year as the numbers have come in.

Who says they are accurate? What official numbers?

(07-13-2014 09:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 05:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 04:37 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Why do we have to rely on numbers from Yo Gaba Gaba?
Where are the real numbers from the HHS?

As the IG has reported, the administration has no numbers on hand, because they haven't reconciled the lists.
But
The reason they havent reconciled the lists is because they know the numbers are sh*tty. So they refuse to reconcile so that the real numbers remain hidden, and allow some dude that writes a blog to report over inflated "signup" numbers that have no relevance on the sustainability of OBlunder care.

That would be an opinion. Also Gaba's accuracy has been very good throughout the year as the numbers have come in.

Accurate compared to what standard?

(07-13-2014 09:52 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 09:37 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 06:13 PM)Claw Wrote:  Even if 10 million signed up it doesn't justify the legislation. There are 300 million people in this country. Screwing with 290 million for 10 million is stupid. Instead you just pass a program to deal with the 10 million.

There is a lot more to it than those that signed up on the exchanges. You can't be denied coverage or charged huge premiums because of a pre-existing condition. There are no longer yearly or lifetime caps on coverage. If your child graduates from college but can't immediately land a job with benefits you can keep them on your policy until they turn 26. Those are a few ways you benefit from the ACA even if you never need an individual market plan.

Did we have to wholesale reinvent health care and insurance for all Americans to achieve those changes that are helpful?

Well they will definitely not work without the individual mandate.

(07-13-2014 09:56 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 09:32 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 05:30 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 04:37 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Why do we have to rely on numbers from Yo Gaba Gaba?
Where are the real numbers from the HHS?

As the IG has reported, the administration has no numbers on hand, because they haven't reconciled the lists.
But
The reason they havent reconciled the lists is because they know the numbers are sh*tty. So they refuse to reconcile so that the real numbers remain hidden, and allow some dude that writes a blog to report over inflated "signup" numbers that have no relevance on the sustainability of OBlunder care.

That would be an opinion. Also Gaba's accuracy has been very good throughout the year as the numbers have come in.

Accurate compared to what standard?

Quote:Accuracy of Past Projections








Private QHPs: Total thru the end of December
ACA Signups, 12/25 2,100,000 98.24% accurate
Actual (HHS), 1/13 2,137,630
Medicaid/CHIP: Total thru the end of December
ACA Signups, 1/21 6,320,000 99.68% accurate
Actual (CMS), 1/22 6,300,001
Private QHPs: Total thru the end of January
ACA Signups, 2/07 3,300,000 99.98% accurate
Actual (HHS), 2/12 3,299,492
Private QHPs: Percent Paid (as of mid-February)
ACA Signups, 2/13 (10 AM) 75-80%
basically the same

New York Times, 2/13 (5 PM) 75-80%
Private QHPs: Total thru Feb. 19
ACA Signups, 2/19 3,860,000 at least 95% accurate
Pres. Obama, 2/20 "close to 4M"
Private QHPs: Total thru Feb. 24
ACA Signups, 2/25 (3:48pm) 4,013,762 99.66% accurate
Actual (HHS), 2/25 (5:59pm) 4,000,000
Private QHPs: Total thru the end of February
ACASignups, 3/01 4,202,000 99.05% accurate
Actual (HHS), 3/13 4,242,325

California Hitting 1 Million Private QHP Enrollments:

On March 8th I projected CA hitting 1M on March 11th or 12th. However, I didn't realize at the time how ugly CoveredCA's mid-February outage had been.

Once I realized this, I revised my projection to sometime over that weekend instead; sure enough, they crossed the 1M mark on Friday the 14th.


National Exchange QHP Enrollments hitting 5 Million:

I originally projected total exchange QHPs to hit 5M on March 18th.

Around 2:50pm on March 17th I realized that since CA has been averaging around 20% of the total QHPs all along, once they hit 1M, the national tally should hit around 5M at right around the same time, so I moved my 5M estimate up one day.

Sure enough, a few hours later the HHS Dept. made the 5M announcement.


Final March 31st Open Enrollment Period Projection:

I made my final 3/31 call of 7.08 million a day or two earlier, and tweeted my projection officially at 11:15pm that night.

The exact 3/31 number has never been released, to my knowledge, but it ended up being almost exactly 7.1 million, meaning that I was off by just 0.3%.


April 15th Open Enrollment Extension Period Projection:

My final official Exchange QHP enrollment projection as of 4/15 was 7.78 million; I made the call at 1:51pm on the 15th.

Two days later, at 4:00pm on April 17th, President Obama announced that the number of enrollees had actually passed the 8 million milestone.

Now, the official number announced in the last HHS report was actually 8,019,763...but that was as of April 19th, so we don't know the precise moment that 8M was reached, but I'd imagine it was sometime on or around April 16th.

The earliest that 8M could have been reached was sometime on the afternoon of the 15th. The latest it could have been reached would have been around midnight on the 16th.

This means that at worst I was off by 2.75%; at best I nailed it right on the mark.

http://acasignups.net/past-projections

(07-13-2014 10:14 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 09:52 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 09:37 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 06:13 PM)Claw Wrote:  Even if 10 million signed up it doesn't justify the legislation. There are 300 million people in this country. Screwing with 290 million for 10 million is stupid. Instead you just pass a program to deal with the 10 million.

There is a lot more to it than those that signed up on the exchanges. You can't be denied coverage or charged huge premiums because of a pre-existing condition. There are no longer yearly or lifetime caps on coverage. If your child graduates from college but can't immediately land a job with benefits you can keep them on your policy until they turn 26. Those are a few ways you benefit from the ACA even if you never need an individual market plan.

Did we have to wholesale reinvent health care and insurance for all Americans to achieve those changes that are helpful?

Well they will definitely not work without the individual mandate.

That's bull. There are hundreds of ways to do things. Simply raising premiums would do it without any other effort. Unleash the market and you would see better solutions. What we have now is legislation that prevents market solutions. That is stupid.

(07-13-2014 10:41 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 10:14 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 09:52 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 09:37 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 06:13 PM)Claw Wrote:  Even if 10 million signed up it doesn't justify the legislation. There are 300 million people in this country. Screwing with 290 million for 10 million is stupid. Instead you just pass a program to deal with the 10 million.

There is a lot more to it than those that signed up on the exchanges. You can't be denied coverage or charged huge premiums because of a pre-existing condition. There are no longer yearly or lifetime caps on coverage. If your child graduates from college but can't immediately land a job with benefits you can keep them on your policy until they turn 26. Those are a few ways you benefit from the ACA even if you never need an individual market plan.

Did we have to wholesale reinvent health care and insurance for all Americans to achieve those changes that are helpful?

Well they will definitely not work without the individual mandate.

That's bull. There are hundreds of ways to do things. Simply raising premiums would do it without any other effort. Unleash the market and you would see better solutions. What we have now is legislation that prevents market solutions. That is stupid.

Well it is a mute point now.

(07-13-2014 10:46 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 10:41 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 10:14 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 09:52 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 09:37 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  There is a lot more to it than those that signed up on the exchanges. You can't be denied coverage or charged huge premiums because of a pre-existing condition. There are no longer yearly or lifetime caps on coverage. If your child graduates from college but can't immediately land a job with benefits you can keep them on your policy until they turn 26. Those are a few ways you benefit from the ACA even if you never need an individual market plan.

Did we have to wholesale reinvent health care and insurance for all Americans to achieve those changes that are helpful?

Well they will definitely not work without the individual mandate.

That's bull. There are hundreds of ways to do things. Simply raising premiums would do it without any other effort. Unleash the market and you would see better solutions. What we have now is legislation that prevents market solutions. That is stupid.

Well it is a mute point now.

Mute point = A point that can't speak. That makes no sense.
I suppose you meant moot?

(07-14-2014 07:43 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 10:46 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 10:41 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 10:14 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-13-2014 09:52 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Did we have to wholesale reinvent health care and insurance for all Americans to achieve those changes that are helpful?

Well they will definitely not work without the individual mandate.

That's bull. There are hundreds of ways to do things. Simply raising premiums would do it without any other effort. Unleash the market and you would see better solutions. What we have now is legislation that prevents market solutions. That is stupid.

Well it is a mute point now.

Mute point = A point that can't speak. That makes no sense.
I suppose you meant moot?

yes I did

Here is another update from Gaba.

Quote:Estimated Exchange QHPs as of 7/14/14: 7.75M PAID (8.75M Total)

Estimated Total, all sources: (24 Million - 29 Million)

Exchange + Off-Exchange QHPs: 15.7M • Medicaid/CHIP (7.1M - 9.9M)

ESIs (156K confirmed; up to 8M more possible) • Sub26ers (1.6M - 3.1M)

Yet another report that indicates the number of uninsured declined significantly this spring.

Using Gallup polling and HHS data, Harvard researchers estimate that the uninsured rate declined by 5.2 percentage points in the second quarter of this year, corresponding to 10.3 million adults gaining coverage

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/ne...z38LfHFau0