Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-24-2013, 03:38 PM  
Comrade Crapski Comrade Crapski is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sea of Green 23.4°
Casino cash: $5000
Obamacare is imploding

Obamacare—the Affordable Care Act—is both imploding from its own dead weight and conversely exploding in the face of the Democratic Party as we head toward the 2014 midterm elections. You remember the Democrats? They were the ones who, on Christmas Eve 2009 passed Obamacare in the late hours. It’s the bill Nancy Pelosi told us had to be passed “so we can find out what’s in it.”



The bad news for Democrats and worse news for Barack Obama is that, since it was signed into law on March 23, 2010, Americans have had three years to learn what a total socialist time bomb Obamacare is. If you wanted to destroy the nation’s economy, you could not have chosen a better way.

The crescendo of the backlash is slowly mounting. Writing in The Hill on April 6th, Sam Baker reported that “Delays in implementing popular pieces of Obamacare are hurting it with Democrats”, referring to policies they believe “could help build support for the unpopular bill.” Oh? It’s unpopular? Who knew?

For example, wrote Baker, a key program designed to “help small businesses…won’t be in place when voters head to the polls next year.” It would have allowed small businesses to choose from multiple policies for their workers. Obamacare, however, is really designed to ensure that the only party from whom you can get insurance is the government.



I guarantee you that no aspect of Obamacare is going to make it more popular with any but the brain-dead Democrats who remain clueless about Obamacare.

When 33 Senate Democrats cast a non-binding vote, as they did in March, to repeal the law’s tax on medical devices, you can be sure that piece of political theatre was to give them cover, particularly if they will be running for reelection in 2014. Any of the Senators who voted for Obamacare are already in serious trouble. No Republican Senators voted for it.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee noted that “People already don’t like Obamacare, but they’re really not going to like the tax hikes, mandates, fees, penalties, and added red tape bureaucracy that goes into effect over the next eight months. It goes from being an abstract discussion to a real life pain.”

One of my favorite pundits is Peter Ferrara, a senior fellow for entitlement and budget policy at The Heartland Institute, a national non-profit free market research organization headquartered in Chicago. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under the first President Bush. In early April, Forbes published an article of his, “Look Out Below, The Obamacare Chaos is Coming.”

Ferrara summed up the dark corner in which the Democrats painted themselves, writing that “The biggest political problem faced by so-called ‘liberals’ and so-called ‘progressives’ in President Obama’s second term is how to prevent voters from holding them politically responsible as the public comes to realize how badly they were lied to during the first Obama term to win passage of Obamacare.”

To call Obamacare “socialist” is to do it an injustice. It is pure communism. Liberals and progressives may not be communists (some are), but they are surely the most deluded political class on planet Earth. No nation that has embraced socialism has ever enjoyed anything close to the wealth generated by the capitalism that made the U.S. an economic colossus in the last century. Now, like much of Europe, we are all deep in debt thanks to socialist programs and policies.

I have previously written about Obamacare’s many pitfalls. What needs to be revisited are the many LIES that Obama told in order to get it passed. Indeed, passage required extensive arm-twisting and bribery among the Democrats who voted for it. Again, no Republicans voted for it.

Obama said, “If you like your health insurance, you can keep it. No one is going to take that away from you”; no one except the many companies who are cutting back on the number of their employees to avoid being ensnared by it. Others are simply not hiring for the same reason. Ferrara noted that “individuals as well could just skip the insurance and pay the penalty at a savings of at least 50% to 75% or more.”

Since millions are likely to pursue this option, that will leave millions more uninsured and, as a bonus for idiotic policy making, it will create what Ferrara calls “a financial death spiral for private insurers.” Progressives says Ferrara, will welcome this because it will leave “all health care to be paid for by the ‘single payer’ government.” This is the same government whose Medicare and Medicaid programs are going broke. That has already been hastened by the way “almost half of Obamacare is paid for over the next decade by draining $716 billion out of Medicare.”

Voters will be reminded that it is not Republicans who came up with this, but Democrats. The result according to the Medicare Office of the Actuaries is that “One out of seven hospitals will leave Medicare in the next seven years.”

Simple access to medical care will become a problem as more and more physicians decide to close their private practices.

About the only good news is a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation that contends that Obamacare is unconstitutional because the bill originated in the Senate, not the House. Under the Origination Clause of the Constitution, all bills raising revenue must begin in the House.” You’d think that Chief Justice Roberts would have known that when he cast a vote for it because he deemed Obamacare a tax. The Supreme Court needs to revisit Obamacare to redeem itself.

Obamacare is the “perfect storm” for the Democratic Party. It will swamp them in 2014.

© Alan Caruba, 2013

Posts: 3,833
Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 10:41 AM   #46
Comrade Crapski Comrade Crapski is offline
Banned
 

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sea of Green 23.4°
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlyonsd View Post
Unions are starting to realize how ****ed up Obamacare really is and are pushing back.

2014 could be ugly for democrats.
Dumbasses voted for him. I hope they all suffer.
Posts: 3,833
Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 12:53 PM   #47
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is offline
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $19924
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
So


I was referring to before 2013 from something read before then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
Nope sorry. Read about that about 3 years ago and don't remember where.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
What is so great about being in the Top Ten out of 50 states with people leaving, cosmos?

Mass is also the ninth worst in attracting residents from other states.
Immigrants are what's keeping the Bay State's population from declining. Only 64% of natives remain.
Many of the state's natives have gone to other states per this Boston Globe article that cites
a study.

High taxes, high cost of housing and its deep blue politics aka rude Progressive Massholes.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas.../18/at_a_loss/
Wow, really stretching. I'm not trying to defend Mass.--I wouldn't want to live there. I'm just calling out your bullshit claims. A huge proportion of your assertions on any given subject are simply made up based on something a relative told you that they read.
Posts: 20,139
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 01:14 PM   #48
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
Bless FSU!
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $18515
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
Wow, really stretching. I'm not trying to defend Mass.--I wouldn't want to live there. I'm just calling out your bullshit claims. A huge proportion of your assertions on any given subject are simply made up based on something a relative told you that they read.
Nope. No bullshit there. Your link proves it even. Swing and a Miss there, comrade (<---in place of the word buddy)
__________________
“The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature.” ~ James Madison, Father of the Constitution

“We do not believe in aggressive or preventive war. Such war is the weapon of dictators, not of free democratic countries like the United States.”~ Truman, Sept 1, 1950
Posts: 59,089
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 07:07 AM   #49
Aries Walker Aries Walker is online now
Back again.
 
Aries Walker's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Aspen Hill, MD
Casino cash: $9690
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
My point is that blaming members of a group today for what other members did in the past is a false sense of blame. They're not the same people. Mixing up categories is a point of logic.
I'm with you on this one. Both parties have radically changed since even 50 years ago. Remember the Dixiecrats? One of them was Strom Thurmond. Also, Rachel Maddow describes herself as an "Eisenhower-era Republican".
Posts: 4,891
Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 07:16 AM   #50
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $8810
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
Wow, really stretching. I'm not trying to defend Mass.--I wouldn't want to live there. I'm just calling out your bullshit claims. A huge proportion of your assertions on any given subject are simply made up based on something a relative told you that they read.

BEP doesn't understand correlation does not imply causation.
Posts: 4,176
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 07:18 AM   #51
Aries Walker Aries Walker is online now
Back again.
 
Aries Walker's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Aspen Hill, MD
Casino cash: $9690
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
What is so great about being in the Top Ten out of 50 states with people leaving, cosmos?

Mass is also the ninth worst in attracting residents from other states.
Immigrants are what's keeping the Bay State's population from declining. Only 64% of natives remain.
Many of the state's natives have gone to other states per this Boston Globe article that cites
a study.

High taxes, high cost of housing and its deep blue politics aka rude Progressive Massholes.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas.../18/at_a_loss/
I would say the top two reasons are the ridiculous cost of living (a plague which infects everything from Boston to DC) and congestion. Most of the top states for emigrants are also the most populous - California, New York, Texas, Florida, etc. As a DC area resident, I can attest to how quickly sitting in traffic sucks your life away. I'm making plans to move back to Indianapolis already.

Also, having a lot of people around who were born in another country is not necessarily a bad thing.
Posts: 4,891
Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.Aries Walker is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 07:35 AM   #52
blaise blaise is offline
Gonzo = Sexy Bitch
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plano, TX
Casino cash: $45
They might leave cities like NYC because of congestion, but that's not why they're leaving cities like Buffalo and Rochester. They leave those because they're turning into jobless dumps where people pay high taxes to support the unemployed.
Posts: 21,019
blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 09:29 AM   #53
Comrade Crapski Comrade Crapski is offline
Banned
 

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sea of Green 23.4°
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaise View Post
They might leave cities like NYC because of congestion, but that's not why they're leaving cities like Buffalo and Rochester. They leave those because they're turning into jobless dumps where people pay high taxes to support the unemployed.
Posts: 3,833
Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.Comrade Crapski is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 11:15 AM   #54
alanm alanm is online now
Incognito
 
alanm's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Nebraska/Wyoming/Colorado
Casino cash: $8066
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteWhale View Post
How does it feel blindly supporting the party that opposed civil rights and supported the enslavement of your ancestors?
They have a fantastic PR department.
Posts: 29,829
alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.alanm wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 12:24 PM   #55
LiveSteam LiveSteam is offline
All aboard the crazy train
 
LiveSteam's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: homeof43conferencetitles
Casino cash: $9816
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaise View Post
They might leave cities like NYC because of congestion, but that's not why they're leaving cities like Buffalo and Rochester. They leave those because they're turning into jobless dumps where people pay high taxes to support the unemployed.
Link : Jay Carney 20002
Posts: 17,258
LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.LiveSteam is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 12:50 PM   #56
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
Bless FSU!
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $18515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post
BEP doesn't understand correlation does not imply causation.
Actually, I do. But when people, such as you, are dishonest about this phrase by leaving out "when other factors are involved" well then we have another attempt at a strawman. Since, I am from Massachusetts as well as ALL of my large family...I assure you I have personal reality on the reasons for leaving. You need to learn some market research and listen to what people, who have left have said instead of what CosmicTroll alleges without any back-up.

Half my family went to the "Live Free or Die" state. Five have moved outside NewEngland. Those that have remained hate it and complain regularly about the increasing socialism in the state.

Anectdotal? Sure but it's backed by numbers and other statements, such as that link in the Boston Globe which happens to be liberal...opps I mean Progressive.

Meanwhile, your ability to rely on a cliche that doesn't apply and rely on strawmen, knows no bounds.
__________________
“The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature.” ~ James Madison, Father of the Constitution

“We do not believe in aggressive or preventive war. Such war is the weapon of dictators, not of free democratic countries like the United States.”~ Truman, Sept 1, 1950

Last edited by BucEyedPea; 05-30-2013 at 12:56 PM..
Posts: 59,089
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 03:14 PM   #57
Calcountry Calcountry is offline
Shoot the tube
 
Calcountry's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Where I am
Casino cash: $5555
I can't wait to sign up.
__________________
Amerika, Amerika, I shed my grace on Thee.
Posts: 26,870
Calcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliCalcountry 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 10:40 AM   #58
Stinger Stinger is offline
Bazinga
 
Stinger's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Springfield, MO
Casino cash: $7465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post
Obamacare premiums in California lower than predicted

http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/23/news...ums/index.html


"Health insurers in California will charge an average of $304 a month for the cheapest silver-level plan in state-based exchanges next year, according to rates released Thursday by Covered California, which is implementing the Affordable Care Act there. But many residents will pay a lot less than that for coverage.


Rates will vary by region, age and level of coverage, and many lower-income Californias will qualify for federal subsidies that will greatly lower the premiums. The plans will come in four tiers, ranging from bronze to platinum. The former will charge lower premiums, but carry higher out-of-pocket benefits, and the latter will have the highest premiums but have the lowest out-of-pocket costs."

/Romney;s plan seems to be working

Whoops.....

Rate Shock: In California, Obamacare To Increase Individual Health Insurance Premiums By 64-146%

Avik Roy, Contributor

One of the most serious flaws with Obamacare is that its blizzard of regulations and mandates drives up the cost of insurance for people who buy it on their own. This problem will be especially acute when the law’s main provisions kick in on January 1, 2014, leading many to worry about health insurance “rate shock.”

Last week, the state of California claimed that its version of Obamacare’s health insurance exchange would actually reduce premiums. “These rates are way below the worst-case gloom-and-doom scenarios we have heard,” boasted Peter Lee, executive director of the California exchange.

But the data that Lee released tells a different story: Obamacare, in fact, will increase individual-market premiums in California by as much as 146 percent.

Lee’s claims that there won’t be rate shock in California were repeated uncritically in some quarters. “Despite the political naysayers,” writes my Forbes colleague Rick Ungar, “the healthcare exchange concept appears to be working very well indeed in states like California.” A bit more analysis would have prevented Rick from falling for California’s sleight-of-hand.

Here’s what happened. Last week, Covered California—the name for the state’s Obamacare-compatible insurance exchange—released the rates that Californians will have to pay to enroll in the exchange.

“The rates submitted to Covered California for the 2014 individual market,” the state said in a press release, “ranged from two percent above to 29 percent below the 2013 average premium for small employer plans in California’s most populous regions.”

That’s the sentence that led to all of the triumphant commentary from the left. “This is a home run for consumers in every region of California,” exulted Peter Lee.

Except that Lee was making a misleading comparison. He was comparing apples—the plans that Californians buy today for themselves in a robust individual market—and oranges—the highly regulated plans that small employers purchase for their workers as a group
. The difference is critical.

Obamacare to double individual-market premiums

If you’re a 25 year old male non-smoker, buying insurance for yourself, the cheapest plan on Obamacare’s exchanges is the catastrophic plan, which costs an average of $184 a month. (That’s the median monthly premium across California’s 19 insurance rating regions.)

The next cheapest plan, the “bronze” comprehensive plan, costs $205 a month. But in 2013, on eHealthInsurance.com (NASDAQ:EHTH), the average cost of the five cheapest plans was only $92.

In other words, for the average 25-year-old male non-smoking Californian, Obamacare will drive premiums up by between 100 and 123 percent
.

Under Obamacare, only people under the age of 30 can participate in the slightly cheaper catastrophic plan. So if you’re 40, your cheapest option is the bronze plan. In California, the median price of a bronze plan for a 40-year-old male non-smoker will be $261.

But on eHealthInsurance, the average cost of the five cheapest plans was $121. That is, Obamacare will increase individual-market premiums by an average of 116 percent.

For both 25-year-olds and 40-year-olds, then, Californians under Obamacare who buy insurance for themselves will see their insurance premiums double.


Impact highest in Bay Area, Orange County, and San Diego

In the map below, I illustrate the regional variations in Obamacare’s rate hikes. For each of the state’s 19 insurance regions, I compared the median price of the bronze plans offered on the exchange to the median price of the five cheapest plans on eHealthInsurance.com for the most populous zip code in that region. (eHealth offers more than 50 plans in the typical California zip code; focusing on the five cheapest is the fairest comparator to the exchanges, which typically offered three to six plans in each insurance rating region.)

As you can see, Obamacare’s impact on 40-year-olds is steepest in the San Francisco Bay area, especially in the counties north of San Francisco, like Marin, Napa, and Sonoma. Also hard-hit are Orange and San Diego counties.

According to Covered California, 13 carriers are participating in the state’s exchange, including Anthem Blue Cross (NYSE:WLP), Health Net (NYSE:HNT), Molina (NYSE:MOH), and Kaiser Permanente. So far, UnitedHealthCare (NYSE:UNH) and Aetna (NYSE:AET) have stayed out.

Spinning a public-relations disaster

It’s great that Covered California released this early the rates that insurers plan to charge on the exchange, as it gives us an early window into how the exchanges will work in a state that has an unusually competitive and inexpensive individual market for health insurance. But that’s the irony. The full rate report is subtitled “Making the Individual Market in California Affordable.” But Obamacare has actually doubled individual-market premiums in the Golden State.

How did Lee and his colleagues explain the sleight-of-hand they used to make it seem like they were bringing prices down, instead of up? “It is difficult to make a direct comparison of these rates to existing premiums in the commercial individual market,” Covered California explained in last week’s press release, “because in 2014, there will be new standard benefit designs under the Affordable Care Act.” That’s a polite way of saying that Obamacare’s mandates and regulations will drive up the cost of premiums in the individual market for health insurance.

But rather than acknowledge that truth, the agency decided to ignore it completely, instead comparing Obamacare-based insurance to a completely different type of insurance product, that bears no relevance to the actual costs that actual Californians face when they shop for coverage today. Peter Lee calls it a “home run.” It’s more like hitting into a triple play.

Obama attacked insurers in 2010 for much smaller increases

That Obamacare more than doubles insurance premiums for many Californians is especially ironic, given the political posturing of the President and his administration in 2010. In February of that year, Anthem Blue Cross announced that some groups (but not the majority) would face premium increases of as much as 39 percent. The White House and its allies in the blogosphere, cynically, claimed that these increases were due to greedy profiteering by the insurers, instead of changes in the underlying costs of the insured population.

“These extraordinary increases are up to 15 times faster than inflation and threaten to make health care unaffordable for hundreds of thousands of Californians, many of whom are already struggling to make ends meet in a difficult economy,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “[Anthem’s] strong financial position makes these rate increases even more difficult to understand.” The then-Democratic Congress called hearings. Even California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, a Republican running for governor, decided to launch an investigation.

Soon after, WellPoint announced that, in fact, because of lower revenues and higher spending on patient care, the company earned 11 percent less in 2010 than it did in 2009. So much for greedy profiteering.

So, to summarize: Supporters of Obamacare justified passage of the law because one insurer in California raised rates on some people by as much as 39 percent. But Obamacare itself more than doubles the cost of insurance on the individual market. I can understand why Democrats in California would want to mislead the public on this point. But journalists have a professional responsibility to check out the facts for themselves.

Follow @Avik on Twitter and Google+, and The Apothecary on Facebook. Sign up to receive a weekly e-mail digest of articles from The Apothecary.

UPDATE 1: On Twitter, Jonathan Cohn of The New Republic argues that I’m being unkind to California (1) by not describing the mandates that Obamacare imposes on insurers in the individual market, and (2) not explaining that low-income people will be eligible for subsidies that protect them from much of the rate shock.

For an extensive discussion of Obamacare’s costly insurance mandates, such as its requirement that plans cover you whether you’re healthy or sick, read this post. For a discussion of how Obamacare’s insurance mandates dramatically increase the cost of insurance for younger workers, go here.

Jon is right that low-income individuals will be protected from these rate increases because of Obamacare’s subsidies, but if you’re not low-income, you face a double-whammy: higher taxes to pay for those subsidies, and higher indvidual-market insurance costs for yourself. A better approach would be to offer everyone access to low-cost consumer-driven health coverage.

UPDATE 2: A number of writers did call out California for the apples-to-oranges comparison last week, including David Freddoso, Philip Klein, and Lanhee Chen.

Lanhee, writing in Bloomberg View, does the useful exercise of showing that even for plans with the same generous benefit package that Obamacare requires, eHealthInsurance is significantly cheaper:

To put it simply: Covered California is trying to make consumers think they’re getting more for less when, in fact, they’re just getting the same while paying more.

Yet there are many plans on the individual market in California today that offer a structure and benefits that are almost identical to those that will be available on the state’s health insurance exchange next year. So, let’s make an actual apples-to-apples comparison for the hypothetical 25-year-old male living in San Francisco and making more than $46,000 a year. Today, he can buy a PPO plan from a major insurer with a $5,000 deductible, 30 percent coinsurance, a $10 co-pay for generic prescription drugs, and a $7,000 out-of-pocket maximum for $177 a month.

According to Covered California, a “Bronze” plan from the exchange with nearly the same benefits, including a slightly lower out-of-pocket maximum of $6,350, will cost him between $245 and $270 a month. That’s anywhere from 38 percent to 53 percent more than he’ll have to pay this year for comparable coverage! Sounds a lot different than the possible 29 percent “decrease” touted by Covered California in their faulty comparison.

While Covered California acknowledges that it’s tough to compare premiums pre- and post-Obamacare, at the very least, it could have made a legitimate comparison so consumers could fairly evaluate the impacts of Obamacare.

UPDATE 3: Yuval Levin at National Review further addresses Jonathan Cohn’s argument that people should be ok with these rate increases, because the Obamacare insurance plans are more financially generous:

Some people will receive subsidies to help cover that cost, some won’t, but whether it’s taxpayers or beneficiaries paying the premiums those premiums will be significantly higher than they are now.

The comparison offered in the California press release helps make it clear why that is: Obamacare’s new insurance rules. Those rules would certainly help some people—people with pre-existing conditions in the individual market will find it easier to buy coverage for instance—but they will also raise premium costs very significantly.

Obamacare’s defenders can certainly point to the former fact, but they cannot deny the latter one and insist the new California data show there will be no rate shock, as many tried to do over the past week.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth...ums-by-64-146/
Posts: 8,359
Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.Stinger would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 10:49 AM   #59
RINGLEADER RINGLEADER is offline
RING****ER
 
RINGLEADER's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Confusion, USA
Casino cash: $12135
People don't seem to realize that all of the supposed "benefits" of this terrible law were constructed as Trojan horses designed to fail.

- Keep your kids on your policy until age 26? This is required because the authors of the bill know there is no way the engagement from this group will be anywhere near where it has to be. This "benefit" will eventually morph into another obligation that parents will have to fund.

- Want your exemptions on your taxes? Better be able to show you've paid your dependents' health care obligation.

- Think it didn't make sense to have the penalty for participation be higher than the insurance itself? Well, if you're trying to take over the health care industry can you think of a better way to entice market forces to achieve your goal?

- Looking for states to offload their citizens to federal oversight? Make sure that access to certain benefits and certain obligations are only realized if you're a state that has set up its own exchange.

I think this law is doing exactly what it's authors intended.
Posts: 24,087
RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.RINGLEADER Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 01:07 PM   #60
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
Bless FSU!
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $18515
Quote:
Originally Posted by RINGLEADER View Post
People don't seem to realize that all of the supposed "benefits" of this terrible law were constructed as Trojan horses designed to fail.

- Keep your kids on your policy until age 26? This is required because the authors of the bill know there is no way the engagement from this group will be anywhere near where it has to be. This "benefit" will eventually morph into another obligation that parents will have to fund.

- Want your exemptions on your taxes? Better be able to show you've paid your dependents' health care obligation.

- Think it didn't make sense to have the penalty for participation be higher than the insurance itself? Well, if you're trying to take over the health care industry can you think of a better way to entice market forces to achieve your goal?

- Looking for states to offload their citizens to federal oversight? Make sure that access to certain benefits and certain obligations are only realized if you're a state that has set up its own exchange.

I think this law is doing exactly what it's authors intended.
Of course this is the case. I see leftists on facebook calling this a stepping stone to a full govt takeover. Nothing a leftists claims can be taken at face value. They're consummate liars. They lied back in the early 20th century and they're still lying now.
__________________
“The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature.” ~ James Madison, Father of the Constitution

“We do not believe in aggressive or preventive war. Such war is the weapon of dictators, not of free democratic countries like the United States.”~ Truman, Sept 1, 1950
Posts: 59,089
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:48 AM.


This is a test for a client's site.
A new website that shows member-created construction site listings that need fill or have excess fill. Dirt Monkey @ https://DirtMonkey.net
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.