Author Topic: ACA  (Read 26202 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 24427
  • Gender: Male
ACA
« on: November 07, 2013, 09:30:05 AM »
ACA/ObamaCare has been a disaster so far, from the website being a train wreck, to Obama lying his ass off while many are losing their previous insurance which he said would never happen. 

Also, for a good laugh, go to http://www.whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/proposal/titlei/keepit

Title I. Quality, Affordable Health Care for All Americans

If You Like the Insurance You Have, Keep It:
Nothing in the proposal forces anyone to change the insurance they have.  Period.

 :lol :lol :lol

My buyer's remorse regarding Obama (I voted for him in '08, but not '12) is almost as strong as mine was for voting for W in '00.  We will ever see a president worth a crap in the 21st century??

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: ACA
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2013, 09:39:57 AM »
I'd like to know who's losing their current insurance, why, and whether or not Obamacare is going to be an improvement for them.

Offline Prog Snob

  • Posts: 15502
  • Gender: Male
  • Resident Tolkien Geek
Re: ACA
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2013, 09:44:34 AM »

*snip*

My buyer's remorse regarding Obama (I voted for him in '08, but not '12) is almost as strong as mine was for voting for W in '00.  We will ever see a president worth a crap in the 21st century??


I stand with Rand!

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17763
  • Bad Craziness
Re: ACA
« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2013, 09:47:24 AM »
I'd like to know who's losing their current insurance, why, and whether or not Obamacare is going to be an improvement for them or not.
People with rock bottom policies that don't meet the minimum requirements. To be fair, Obama probably should have pointed out to people that some of their policies wouldn't fly, but I'm not sure it was actual lying as opposed to incompetence. As for whether or not there'll will be an improvement, that remains to be seen. Eventually I suspect there will be, but that depends on whether the pool is allowed to evolve or is constantly fucked with by the people who desperately want it to fail.

As for the various failures, I think there's a lot of blame to go around. I've said all along that insurers, doctors and hospitals are a huge part of the problem with healthcare in this country, and I think they're a huge part of the problem with Obamacare. There's the right who did little or nothing to craft a system that would actually be worth a damn, specifically so they could gloat if it failed. Then there's Obama who is stubbornly defending a really lousy system, despite some obvious flaws. FOX and it's minions are the only people who want to dump this solely on Obama, which is a real shame.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: ACA
« Reply #4 on: November 07, 2013, 09:59:30 AM »
People with rock bottom policies that don't meet the minimum requirements. To be fair, Obama probably should have pointed out to people that some of their policies wouldn't fly, but I'm not sure it was actual lying as opposed to incompetence. As for whether or not there'll will be an improvement, that remains to be seen. Eventually I suspect there will be, but that depends on whether the pool is allowed to evolve or is constantly fucked with by the people who desperately want it to fail.
I'm not opposed to people having to get rid of their rock bottom policies for Obamacare - in addition to all you mentioned, unpaid emergency room visits are also a big drain on the system, so I think people themselves are somewhat responsible to be covered adequetly. Also, people should be protected from being allowed to spend their money on policies that are still gonna stick them with a huge bill they won't be able to pay.

As for the various failures, I think there's a lot of blame to go around. I've said all along that insurers, doctors and hospitals are a huge part of the problem with healthcare in this country, and I think they're a huge part of the problem with Obamacare. There's the right who did little or nothing to craft a system that would actually be worth a damn, specifically so they could gloat if it failed. Then there's Obama who is stubbornly defending a really lousy system, despite some obvious flaws. FOX and it's minions are the only people who want to dump this solely on Obama, which is a real shame.
Agreed with all of this, too. The gloating in the OP is a good example of what I've seen from the right thus far: lots of people don't want ACA to work, and *can't  wait* to point it out to all of their friends as soon as it fails. I think that's the wrong attitude, but it's all a lot of the right seem interested in. Anyway, I am sure that ACA will fail in the short term, but I am hoping that we'll all be better off in the longer run, if only slightly, regardless of whatever bumps in the road are coming up.

One thing I was wondering, though - since "everyone's covered" now, can we stop mandating auto insurance?

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 4433
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #5 on: November 07, 2013, 10:12:28 AM »
Also, people should be protected from being allowed to spend their money on policies that are still gonna stick them with a huge bill they won't be able to pay.

Government: Protecting people from themselves :p
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 24427
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #6 on: November 07, 2013, 10:26:50 AM »
The gloating in the OP is a good example of what I've seen from the right thus far: lots of people don't want ACA to work, and *can't  wait* to point it out to all of their friends as soon as it fails. 

 ???

Gloating?

The right?  Jeez, how many times do I have to say that I am neither a Republican nor a conservative? 

I voted for Obama in 2008 (and Kerry in 2004), as I stated in the OP, yet I am on the right? 

I am in favor of stricter gun laws, although I don't scream and shout about it non-stop whenever anything happens like so many on the far left do, so that means I am on the right?

I am in favor of sex education being required teaching in all four years of high school, which is a very progressive stance and/or a very anti-conservative stance, yet I am on the right?

Okay. 


Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: ACA
« Reply #7 on: November 07, 2013, 10:35:52 AM »
Kev, your initial wording and stuff like

Quote
:lol :lol :lol

It seems like gloating.

I know you don't self-identify with the right. It doesn't matter. When you mock the failure of policies you disagree with it, and follow it up those kinds of smileys, your post doesn't seem a far cry away from "Obamacare sux LOL".

Maybe that isn't your intent, but it IS how you are sometimes percieved.

EDIT: BTW, it doesn't bother me that you're gloating, nor does your gloating discredit the valid points you are making, regarding the website and the loss of coverage for some. However, not unlike your quick judgment of ACA as a failure, the hasty gloating and mockery of ACA on the right is I think indicative of the short-sighted attitude toward Healthcare reform adopted by the GOP in this country. That's my only point with that comment. I'm not trying to turn this into a discussion or debate about your tone in the OP, but figured I should respond, since you are getting so defensive about the comment.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2013, 10:47:39 AM by Perpetual Change »

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 24427
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #8 on: November 07, 2013, 10:47:49 AM »
I wasn't mocking a failure of policy with those laughing emoticons; I was laughing at the administration trying to stick by their "If you like your insurance, you can keep it, period" mantra from years ago, which is quite clearly not true.  I criticize politicians of all ilk, and when one is caught in a lie, and they double down on it instead of just admitting that they misspoke, they deserved to get mocked, especially when that politician is the most powerful one in the country.  Do you disagree?  Are you okay with just looking the way on such an outrageous, damaging lie?

As for how I am perceived, in my many years on the internet, I have learned that if you give an opinion on anything related to P/R, someone will always perceive you in a way that does not run parallel with what the reality is, and I can't help that.  Maybe the laughing emoticons were a bit over the top, but again, see the last part of the previous paragraph.

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: ACA
« Reply #9 on: November 07, 2013, 10:57:01 AM »
Do you disagree?  Are you okay with just looking the way on such an outrageous, damaging lie?
Considering that the act is the byproduct of a long and confusing compromise, I'm not prepared to appraise the sincerety of anything the president may or may not have said about it at a given point in time, ESPECIALLY if that time was before all of the compromise happened.

I'm certainly not "outraged". To me, it makes sense that some people would have to give up coverage they currently have, especially if that coverage wasn't up to snuff.

I also expect more than a few bumps in the road.

Overall, Obama's been disappointing to me, but I am still far more outraged by the real damage done by Republican leadership in the country, especially the shenanigans we had to go through last month.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17763
  • Bad Craziness
Re: ACA
« Reply #10 on: November 07, 2013, 11:00:28 AM »
Yeah, the laughing emotes were over the top. I interpreted the OP as gloating.

They were also somewhat misplaced.
Nothing in the proposal forces anyone to change the insurance they have.  Period.
Technically this is correct. The bill doesn't mandate anybody dump their insurance. What's actually happening (IIRC) is that the insurance companies are dumping people rather than bringing their policies up to standard.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: ACA
« Reply #11 on: November 07, 2013, 11:12:33 AM »
I will also add that, this is one of my least favorite subjects to have come up among family. My Dad likes ACA. My Mom doesn't. My brother hates it. I'm open toward it. My grandparents hate it. My other grandparents love it.

Ultimately, when it comes up there's a LOT of emotional discussion. And yet, no one really knows what this thing is gonna do, long term. The Onion ran an article awhile ago where the headline was something like, "Dude who understands 10% of Obamacare debates with dude who understands 5% of Obamacare", and really, that's how it is. Everyone is getting really fired-up over something, when really we do not know to what extent it's going to affect us.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17763
  • Bad Craziness
Re: ACA
« Reply #12 on: November 07, 2013, 11:28:42 AM »
It's really not even an issue of understanding how it works. Nobody can predict how it will work. Even if it were allowed to operate smoothly the outcome is pretty uncertain. Once you factor in the constant desire to sabotage it from the right, it becomes completely impossible to know. That's what the real shame is (well, after the fact that it was passed at all). We'll never really know how it might have played out.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 24427
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #13 on: November 07, 2013, 12:14:49 PM »


Overall, Obama's been disappointing to me, but I am still far more outraged by the real damage done by Republican leadership in the country, especially the shenanigans we had to go through last month.

Oh, I agree. The whole shutdown fiasco was just that: a fiasco.  The GOP deserves any and all criticism they get for pulling that.  And what exactly did it accomplish?  Nothing. 

And I think that is one of the biggest problems with the political landscape right now: both sides are so far apart that neither is willing to give on anything for fear of looking weak or giving their opponent an edge.  I honestly think that is why the administration doesn't want to come out and admit that they misled us about the ACA, because it would be conceding something to the Republicans, and that is not something they want to do.  We could argue all day about which side is more stubborn when it comes to compromise, and you could probably make a good argument for either, but while those eggheads in D.C. fight over every little thing, who pays the price?  We do.  :tdwn :tdwn


Nothing in the proposal forces anyone to change the insurance they have.  Period.
Technically this is correct. The bill doesn't mandate anybody dump their insurance. What's actually happening (IIRC) is that the insurance companies are dumping people rather than bringing their policies up to standard.

Okay, but who didn't see that coming?  Same thing with corporate businesses cutting hours of full-timers down to high 20s so they wouldn't be eligible for insurance anymore?  Things like that shouldn't have surprised anyone.  Sure, it's dirty pool, but who expects anything more from insurance companies and big corporations?

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17763
  • Bad Craziness
Re: ACA
« Reply #14 on: November 07, 2013, 01:46:01 PM »
Okay, but who didn't see that coming?  Same thing with corporate businesses cutting hours of full-timers down to high 20s so they wouldn't be eligible for insurance anymore?  Things like that shouldn't have surprised anyone.  Sure, it's dirty pool, but who expects anything more from insurance companies and big corporations?
Well, according to Republican dogma, shouldn't that be mitigated by supply and demand? If your employer cuts your hours down to something below what's sustainable then it's time for a new job. People with less need will take those shit jobs, and good jobs will have to compete by offering skilled employees benefits. Benefits are already a key perk in finding jobs, so slashing them doesn't necessarily help the companies.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6679
  • Gender: Male
  • I'M CAPTAIN KIRK!!!!!!!!!!!
    • The ANABASIS
Re: ACA
« Reply #15 on: November 07, 2013, 02:21:47 PM »
The gloating in the OP is a good example of what I've seen from the right thus far: lots of people don't want ACA to work, and *can't  wait* to point it out to all of their friends as soon as it fails. 

 ???

Gloating?

The right?  Jeez, how many times do I have to say that I am neither a Republican nor a conservative? 




But the fact is, when you make posts like the OP, you don't leave a whole heck of a lot of room for people to assume otherwise.  Did you ever wonder WHY you have had to remind the community that you don't consider yourself a Republican or a conservative? 


Walks like a duck....quacks like a duck.....must be...._______________?


I'm just sayin'  :)   Doesn't really matter to me either way.  But, you know, when one person says "you're a horse" you can probably ignore it.  When two people say, "you're a horse" it may be worthy of some thought.  When 3, 4, 5...etc people say "you're a horse," well, giddyup!   :lol    ;)    :P



Offline kirksnosehair

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6679
  • Gender: Male
  • I'M CAPTAIN KIRK!!!!!!!!!!!
    • The ANABASIS
Re: ACA
« Reply #16 on: November 07, 2013, 02:34:52 PM »
As far as the ACA goes, I live in Massachusetts where we have had state-mandated health insurance coverage for several years now.  You either get coverage or pay a fine.  And much like the ACA, when the MA law first went into effect there were all kinds of cries of gloom and doom from all over the political landscape, but mostly from DEMOCRATS because a REPUBLICAN had gotten it passed.  Same old same old. 


Since Governor Romney's plan (Romneycare) went into effect here, we've achieved about a 97% coverage rate here.  That's pretty damned good.  And for the first time in 14 years on this job, my health insurance premiums AND my copays actually went DOWN last year.


I think the book has yet to be written on the ACA.  Like a lot of major pieces of legislation, it needs adjustments.  And there are going to be bumps in the road, especially when the minority party has absolutely no interest in governing.   Most experts say repeal ain't gonna happen.  So why not try to fix it and make it work instead of rooting for its failure?








Offline theseoafs

  • When the lights go down in the city, and the sun shines on the bayyyyy
  • Posts: 5573
  • Gender: Male
  • Hello! My name is Elder Price
Re: ACA
« Reply #17 on: November 07, 2013, 05:46:11 PM »
to Obama lying his ass off while many are losing their previous insurance which he said would never happen.

How many people has this happened to?

Offline Jaffa

  • Just Jaffa
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 4575
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #18 on: November 07, 2013, 05:51:29 PM »
to Obama lying his ass off while many are losing their previous insurance which he said would never happen.

How many people has this happened to?

I don't know how many, but it's actually sort of happening to my family.  My parents have been told that their current plan will no longer be available. 
Sincerely,
Jaffa

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 18239
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #19 on: November 07, 2013, 05:52:39 PM »
to Obama lying his ass off while many are losing their previous insurance which he said would never happen.

How many people has this happened to?

I don't know how many, but it's actually sort of happening to my family.  My parents have been told that their current plan will no longer be available.

Less than 5%.

Offline j

  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #20 on: November 07, 2013, 05:57:00 PM »
I'm not opposed to people having to get rid of their rock bottom policies for Obamacare - in addition to all you mentioned, unpaid emergency room visits are also a big drain on the system, so I think people themselves are somewhat responsible to be covered adequetly. Also, people should be protected from being allowed to spend their money on policies that are still gonna stick them with a huge bill they won't be able to pay.

This philosophy is a little scary to me.

Although the last couple weeks are an amusing and frustrating microcosm of the ineptitude of our government, the jury is absolutely still out on Obamacare.  But it certainly doesn't seem to be addressing the underlying problems inherent to the system.  The goal of "getting everybody covered" by our current manifestation of health insurance was grossly misplaced to begin with, IMO.

-J

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: ACA
« Reply #21 on: November 07, 2013, 05:58:26 PM »
In today's climate, this country never would have won it's independence.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17763
  • Bad Craziness
Re: ACA
« Reply #22 on: November 07, 2013, 06:10:13 PM »
I'm not opposed to people having to get rid of their rock bottom policies for Obamacare - in addition to all you mentioned, unpaid emergency room visits are also a big drain on the system, so I think people themselves are somewhat responsible to be covered adequetly. Also, people should be protected from being allowed to spend their money on policies that are still gonna stick them with a huge bill they won't be able to pay.

This philosophy is a little scary to me.
Exactly how I felt when I read it. At the same time, I have a hard time disputing it. It seems like a situation where there are really only three options. 1: Force people to carry adequate insurance to protect society as a whole. 2: Go on the way it is and expect society to pay for treatment that others couldn't or just wouldn't pay for. 3: Let the financially insecure die. To be honest, the spooky option probably is the most palatable.


In today's climate, this country never would have won it's independence.
Now that would be a damned interesting thing to postulate in a different thread.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 24427
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #23 on: November 07, 2013, 09:35:27 PM »
to Obama lying his ass off while many are losing their previous insurance which he said would never happen.

How many people has this happened to?

I don't know how many, but it's actually sort of happening to my family.  My parents have been told that their current plan will no longer be available.

Less than 5%.

Where did you get that number?  I am genuinely curious and not being a smart ass. :)

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17763
  • Bad Craziness
Re: ACA
« Reply #24 on: November 07, 2013, 09:50:08 PM »
Actually, 5% is high. That's the percentage of people who are individual plans, which are the only people effected by this. Of that 5%, only a fraction of them will have their policies yanked. It's expected to be a rather large fraction, but that still means only 2.5-3% overall.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: ACA
« Reply #25 on: November 07, 2013, 10:42:28 PM »

Okay, but who didn't see that coming?  Same thing with corporate businesses cutting hours of full-timers down to high 20s so they wouldn't be eligible for insurance anymore?  Things like that shouldn't have surprised anyone.  Sure, it's dirty pool, but who expects anything more from insurance companies and big corporations?

I haven't seen anything that substantially backs up this claim. There are a few anecdotal stories out there that don't represent the full picture, nor does it deal with the fact that there's a constant shuffling of full time and part time positions. However, the September job report indicated that full time position were on the rise, and part time position were falling. You wouldn't expect to see that happening if a bunch of employers were rushing to kick people to part time jobs

The problem is people have been blaming everythign to happen on the ACA since it passed. If premiums went up, it's because of the ACA, not the long-term trend of rising premiums. If a plan gets cancelled, it's because of the ACA, not becuase plans get canceled from time to time. If your plan changes doctors, this is the ACA, and now the fact that insurances regularly switch which doctors they pay for you to see. If some position gets changed to a part time position, it's because of the ACA and the provision to provide health care. Sometimes, there might be a relationship between these events, but by and large, the connection is fallacious (post facto fallacy).

Most businesses who fall under the scope of this law already provide health benefits as a way of attracting employees.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17763
  • Bad Craziness
Re: ACA
« Reply #26 on: November 07, 2013, 10:50:54 PM »
I have read of some large employers cutting back on full time positions. It's not a myth, although I'm sure it's being overstated quite a bit.

I agree with you completely on the second part, though. When you have a keen interest in making something seem like a failure, it's real easy to find things to blame it for.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #27 on: November 08, 2013, 12:56:35 AM »
In today's climate, this country never would have won it's independence.

Yeah, because France is no longer a superpower.

You'd be surprised at how divided and downright apathetic the Colonies were during the Revolution.  Really not much different than today.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: ACA
« Reply #28 on: November 08, 2013, 08:48:32 AM »
In today's climate, this country never would have won it's independence.

Yeah, because France is no longer a superpower.

You'd be surprised at how divided and downright apathetic the Colonies were during the Revolution.  Really not much different than today.

Actually, I wouldn't , and it's what I'm talking about. Fox News circa 1776 would be calling the movement a train wreck. Other "news" outlets would be citing polling information about how unpopular it was. As it was, it nearly collapsed, with 24 hour news, it would have imploded.

The point I was making is that good things dont come easy, and they rarely happen quickly or smoothly.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 24427
  • Gender: Male
Re: ACA
« Reply #29 on: November 08, 2013, 08:57:19 AM »
That might be true, but even the biggest Obama supporter has to admit that the roll-out of the website has been a total embarrassment.  Things always not running smoothly at first is one thing, but that has been another.  I actually feel bad for Obama in regards to that, as how he was supposed to know that the person he put in charge of that would be as inept as she has been. 

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: ACA
« Reply #30 on: November 08, 2013, 09:43:20 AM »
I don't have issues with employers scaling back, if it means more people get quality employment.

Like, instead of a a walmart employing 4 workers at 30 hours with no benefits, they do 3 workers at 40 hours with benefits. The former category of workers are usually grinding for minimum wage and practically wage slaves. The latter category actually have a chance at living a life that isn't all about scrambling from week to week.

Offline Prog Snob

  • Posts: 15502
  • Gender: Male
  • Resident Tolkien Geek
Re: ACA
« Reply #31 on: November 08, 2013, 09:49:29 AM »
Actually, 5% is high. That's the percentage of people who are individual plans, which are the only people effected by this. Of that 5%, only a fraction of them will have their policies yanked. It's expected to be a rather large fraction, but that still means only 2.5-3% overall.

Where are those numbers coming from...just out of curiosity...

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17763
  • Bad Craziness
Re: ACA
« Reply #32 on: November 08, 2013, 10:19:52 AM »
Actually, 5% is high. That's the percentage of people who are individual plans, which are the only people effected by this. Of that 5%, only a fraction of them will have their policies yanked. It's expected to be a rather large fraction, but that still means only 2.5-3% overall.

Where are those numbers coming from...just out of curiosity...
I got it from a CBS (I think) article about Obama's apology for mispeaking. That was last night, and I don't have the time to hunt it down right now.

Oh, and to Kev, I don't think it's been an embarrassment to Obama; that would be the bill itself. Like I said before, I think it's mostly just FOX and FOX minions picking at everything they can find to pick at.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Prog Snob

  • Posts: 15502
  • Gender: Male
  • Resident Tolkien Geek
Re: ACA
« Reply #33 on: November 08, 2013, 10:24:10 AM »
Actually, 5% is high. That's the percentage of people who are individual plans, which are the only people effected by this. Of that 5%, only a fraction of them will have their policies yanked. It's expected to be a rather large fraction, but that still means only 2.5-3% overall.

Where are those numbers coming from...just out of curiosity...
I got it from a CBS (I think) article about Obama's apology for mispeaking. That was last night, and I don't have the time to hunt it down right now.

Oh, and to Kev, I don't think it's been an embarrassment to Obama; that would be the bill itself. Like I said before, I think it's mostly just FOX and FOX minions picking at everything they can find to pick at.

So you are agreeing that it's alright if their plans are yanked for an inferior plan?

Offline yeshaberto

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8943
  • Gender: Male
  • Somebody Get Me A Doctor! - VH
Re: ACA
« Reply #34 on: November 08, 2013, 10:28:26 AM »
Our family has to buy our own insurance.

We had the cheapest stuff with the highest deductible - mostly for catastrophic.

I was surprised to find out that the Obama insurance (since mine is being dumped) is almost half, with a lower deductible and a better plan.

Nevertheless, after spending seven hours at DMV yesterday (for a friend) only to find out it was a complete waste (because the right hand didn't know what the left hand is doing), I am not a fan of government getting involved in insurance.