I'll tell you everything I needed to know about Obamacare and I learned it within weeks of it passing. I'm self-employed and my wife had been laid off at the time so I had bought my own insurance for the both of us. Less than one week after Obamacare passed I received a 15 page letter from the company explaining why my rates were going up 34%. I had never used the insurance.

(07-09-2012 03:11 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

That graphic needs to be viewed in context. So I'm going to provide some. Remember the CBO report that supposedly said that Obamacare would reduce the federal deficit?

What it actually said, if you take the time to read the report, instead of just look at the pretty charts and graphs, is that Obmacare could reduce the federal deficit IF AND ONLY IF certain conditions were met. Those conditions had been given to CBO by congress as assumptions, and one of them included a reduction in the rate of growth, after inflation, of health care costs, from 4% per person per year to 2% per person per year. CBO said that it was questionable whether this reduction could be achieved (and the whole "reduces the deficit" goes flying out the window if it can't). CBO further said that if it were achieved, it would have to come from some combination of reduced administrative costs, reduced access, and reduced quality, and that it could not determine how much would come from each.

Now look back at the graphic. How much is going to come form reduced admin costs? I'm guessing we're going to be looking at a lot of reduced access and reduced quality if they're going to bend down the cost curve. What do you think?

(07-09-2012 04:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-09-2012 03:11 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

That graphic needs to be viewed in context. So I'm going to provide some. Remember the CBO report that supposedly said that Obamacare would reduce the federal deficit?

What it actually said, if you take the time to read the report, instead of just look at the pretty charts and graphs, is that Obmacare could reduce the federal deficit IF AND ONLY IF certain conditions were met. Those conditions had been given to CBO by congress as assumptions, and one of them included a reduction in the rate of growth, after inflation, of health care costs, from 4% per person per year to 2% per person per year. CBO said that it was questionable whether this reduction could be achieved (and the whole "reduces the deficit" goes flying out the window if it can't). CBO further said that if it were achieved, it would have to come from some combination of reduced administrative costs, reduced access, and reduced quality, and that it could not determine how much would come from each.

Now look back at the graphic. How much is going to come form reduced admin costs? I'm guessing we're going to be looking at a lot of reduced access and reduced quality if they're going to bend down the cost curve. What do you think?

The extraordinary amount of bureaucracy was the point. They won't cut that...jobs right? The only things left to cut are payments to doctors and limiting services. Which will lead to what you described.

(07-09-2012 03:29 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  In regard to a tax, the tax is not a tax like you and I know. Property tax, sales tax, it's a tax for people that have money to pay for insurance and refuse. Those people are costing me money. I'm tired of paying for the lawyer down the street who refuses to buy health insurance, shows up at the ER and then the care is charged to a local indigent care fund for which I pay taxes. Ridiculous !!1

You are seriously claiming that the problem with the medical insurance system is the LAWYER WITHOUT INSURANCE????? You really believe he doesn't pay his medical bills? That he's just as ******* that gets off on putting his medical bills on everyone else? THATS STUPID. If 100 lawers without insurance end up in the ER I would bet my years salary that 99 pay their bill every time. You know who doesn't pay? The woman that goes every 3 days to have her blood pressure checked. The single mom who takes her 5 year old in for a fever immediately. The ones that don't pay are the ones that can't afford insurance in the first place.
The mere fact that you are concerned about paying a lawyers medical bills show how you've taken the bait on Obamacare. I bet you believe everything that comes from a website ending in .gov

[/quote]

What is 100 lawyers in the ER?

A good start.

(07-08-2012 09:32 AM)Vewb1 Wrote:  For those of you (conservatives) that simply don't understand the healthcare law, here's a website that could help overcome those deficiencies. Please, for those conservatives that read, read the website and try to understand. I find it very difficult to listen to the ramblings of a group that is one of the most uninformed groups on the planet. Some common Rush listeners misconceptions:

- the law will allow one to keep children on family health insurance through the age of 26

- private health insurance companies cannot drop you for requiring too much care or going over maximum care amounts

- cannot be excluded for having a pre-exisiting medical condition

- the mandates are not a tax, but penalty for not paying for premiums. About 1% of the total population will be penalized.

-people that show up at the hospital emergency rooms with gunshot wounds, illness, infections, accidents without insurance, the current system passes the cost on to the insured through higher premiums and prices. The new system, everyone will be insured and the cost to the patient will not be passed onto others but absorbed by the insurance company and patient that is ill or sick.

-all that do have health insurance will see virtually no changes other than not being dropped for high cost needs, pre-existing conditions or children at 26 years old.

-those without health insurance can pick from a market place established by the states of four possible insurers. For those states refusing to establish such market places by 2014 (Ohio one of the state) the federal gov't will establish the markets for you.

- the purchase of health from these market places will be subsidized by the federal gov't. For instance, a normal health plan for a family of 5 may cost 1000.00 to 1500.00 dollars a month. This will be subsidized by the federal gov't with many changes directly to the consumer in the range of 100.00 to 150.00 per month for total coverage.

-all preventitive type measures such as well physicals, and tests to prevent problems will not have copayments associated with them. So there will be no cost to consumers for preventitive measures.

-Insurance companies in health care use a pool. The pool takes in money from all those insured. The larger the pool, the more money available. Therefore larger insurance companies are better, smaller not so good. With the larger pool of money, cash flow is better and costs are reduced. Each company will offer similar coverage. If one offers special care such as eye surgery, then all those with that eye condition will sign up for that type of coverage that will in turn require that company to have large payouts for that eye problem. Many of the health insurance company contractors will be large, therefore, these problems will not occur. Because the federal gov't is subsidizing the insurance companies, the federal gov't will now control what, when and why people are covered.

-any health care insurance company that does not use 80% of revenue generated for paying out claims, that company will required to reimburse customers. So many of you with insurance, if your company has high administrative costs exceeding 20% of revenues, then your company will provide you with a check for the difference.

-the gov't is not taking over health care. Health insurance companies will continue to trade on the NYSE, they will continue to have boards, continue to have dividends to stock holders, will not be laying off employees, hosptials will continue as private organizations. The money will be coming from the federal gov't. Right now, I pay for health insurance through my employer and I also pay taxes to local hospitals for indigent care throughout the county I live in. Those now coming to the emergency rooms will have coverage thus reducing my taxes. Hospitals and providers of care will be paid adequately for their services.


http://www.healthcare.gov/

You deaf? We don't want federally controlled health care. How you dress it is not the problem.

The problem is that federal control of health care means federal control of life and death, and that is fundamentally incompatible with a government founded to preserve the liberty of the individual.

Obamacare is going to kill countless numbers of jobs.

Obamacare is going to require all businesses that have at least 50 full-time workers to either provide very expensive health insurance for their employees or pay a $2,000 penalty for each worker after the first 30 employees.

This is going to do a few things….

1) It is going to encourage small businesses to stay under the 50 full-time employee cap.

2) It is going to encourage some businesses to fire workers because they are now too expensive to be profitable.

3) It is going to make businesses operating in the United States even less competitive with foreign businesses than they were before. So even more jobs and even more businesses will leave the United States.

But even though Obama knows all of this, he is completely and totally unrepentant about this law. The following is a statement that Obama made at a campaign event.

“I’ll work with anybody who wants to work with me to continue to improve our health care system and our health care laws, but the law I passed is here to stay”

Its far more likely that these business will just not give *any* benefits because a 2K penalty and a note that says "go into a govt pool" is cheaper than providing insurance.

This is what make the "you can keep your insurance" the biggest lie of the whole push for this law.

(07-10-2012 09:46 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Obamacare is going to kill countless numbers of jobs.

Obamacare is going to require all businesses that have at least 50 full-time workers to either provide very expensive health insurance for their employees or pay a $2,000 penalty for each worker after the first 30 employees.

This is going to do a few things….

1) It is going to encourage small businesses to stay under the 50 full-time employee cap.

2) It is going to encourage some businesses to fire workers because they are now too expensive to be profitable.

3) It is going to make businesses operating in the United States even less competitive with foreign businesses than they were before. So even more jobs and even more businesses will leave the United States.

But even though Obama knows all of this, he is completely and totally unrepentant about this law. The following is a statement that Obama made at a campaign event.

“I’ll work with anybody who wants to work with me to continue to improve our health care system and our health care laws, but the law I passed is here to stay”

I finally understood Obamacare Saturday morning.

I was waiting for the pawnshop to open with my wife to buy yet another firearm, when a black man who was wearing a shiny hospital bracklet approached us asking for money & cigarettes. I couldn't understand anything he said except cigarettes, but from holding his hand out I assume he wanted my money too.

This man now has the right to a kidney transplant before I do... an judging from the Obama administration's dispersement of FEMA funds, I'd say the crackhead would get a transplant first.

(07-10-2012 12:44 PM)OLD DIRTY Wrote:  I finally understood Obamacare Saturday morning.

I was waiting for the pawnshop to open with my wife to buy yet another firearm, when a black man who was wearing a shiny hospital bracklet approached us asking for money & cigarettes. I couldn't understand anything he said except cigarettes, but from holding his hand out I assume he wanted my money too.

This man now has the right to a kidney transplant before I do... an judging from the Obama administration's dispersement of FEMA funds, I'd say the crackhead would get a transplant first.

Idiot.

(07-10-2012 12:52 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Idiot.

Yes, he was an idiot. Would you care to expand on your deep thought?