The Affordable Care Act is Coming Home to Roost

[Nanker]

No subsidy for YOU! The reality:

 

CNN analysis shows that in the largest city in nearly every state, many low-income younger Americans won't get any subsidy at all. Administration officials said the reason so many Americans won't receive a subsidy is that the cost of insurance is lower than the government initially expected.

 

In Chicago, a 27-year old will receive no subsidy to help offset premiums of more than $165 a month if he makes more than $27,400 a year.

In Portland, Oregon, subsidies for individuals making just $28,725 a year phase out for those younger than 35 years old.

 

The sales pitch:

Back in April, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a congressional subcommittee that any individual making under that $45,960 threshold -- or four times the poverty level of $11,490 for an individual -- would qualify for "an upfront tax subsidy."

"Somebody who's making $25,500 would definitely qualify for a subsidy if he or she is purchasing coverage in the individual market," Sebelius added.

 

Again, the reality:

Despite the secretary's assurance, a 25-year-old living in Nashville, Tennessee, making $25,500 will not qualify for a subsidy, for example.

[B-Man]

http://roanoke.com/opinion/commentary/2389210-12/give-back-my-health-care-policy.html

 

by Sharon B. Ingerson . . . .(Ingerson has worked as a Registered Nurse in Salem for fifteen years.)

 

Her column tells a story that has by now become familiar. Mrs. Ingerson liked her health care plan but, President Obama’s oft repeated assurances to the contrary notwithstanding, she is not going to be able to keep her health care plan. Familiarity should not dull the outrage the story elicits. Sharon Ingerson writes:

 

 

I am a registered nurse and I buy my individual policy with Optima Health. I love it.

 

However, seeing all the reports about canceled plans, I called them to ask if I would lose my policy. They said that next year I will.

 

My plan does not qualify under the Affordable Care Act because it does not include maternity coverage. I am a 41-year-old woman with three children (one with moderate-severe autism and mental retardation). I am not having any more children.

 

This is ridiculous. However, it gets worse. Optima gave me my options. Now I have a $2,500 deductible with 100 percent coverage after the deductible is met. The family deductible is $5,000. The plan costs $209 per month. This is not a substandard plan.

 

I have a health savings account where I have saved more than $12,000, so if my family needs health care, I can provide for them.

 

The new Obamacare plans are worse in every regard. They are not better and I do not save $2,500, as President Obama promised so many times.

 

Here is the closest plan to mine: $3,250 deductible (worse), $6,500 family deductible (worse), and the premium is an outrageous $674 per month (far worse). Essentially, I will pay $465 a month or $5,580 a year more for insurance. Obama promised the average family (I’m a nurse; we’re average) $2,500, but I will pay $5,580 more?

 

I’ve tried to log onto healthcare.gov, but it is a total disaster. I have called other insurance companies in Virginia and the plans are worse than Optima. The closest plan was a $4,000 deductible/$8,000 family deductible for nearly $600. That is not a better plan. It is far worse.

 

This will ruin my family’s health care options. I will lose the ability to save any money in my health savings account. Instead of saving for my family’s needs, I will have to give that money to an insurance company.

 

I will have higher out-of-pocket costs and worse coverage.

 

Anger doesn’t begin to describe how I feel. I urge my congressional representatives to support the president’s other promise, that “If you like your plan, you can keep it.”

 

This has to be changed.

[Koko78]

http://roanoke.com/o...are-policy.html

 

by Sharon B. Ingerson . . . .(Ingerson has worked as a Registered Nurse in Salem for fifteen years.)

 

Her column tells a story that has by now become familiar. Mrs. Ingerson liked her health care plan but, President Obama’s oft repeated assurances to the contrary notwithstanding, she is not going to be able to keep her health care plan. Familiarity should not dull the outrage the story elicits. Sharon Ingerson writes:

 

I wonder who she voted for in 2008 and 2012.

[B-Man]

New Republic Editor: Obamacare ‘Is a Threat to Liberalism’

 

The Left is splintering. Not necessarily politically yet, but intellectually at least. One group continues to sell Obamacare as a success-in-waiting; the other is worrying aloud about the potentially deleterious effects that failure could have on the wider progressive movement.

 

The editor of the New Republic, Franklin Foer, is in the latter camp. In a piece simply titled, “Obamacare’s Threat to Liberalism,” Foer yesterday outlined the case. Rejecting the derisive term that the Obama administration has contrived for dissenters — “bed-wetters” — Foer explains that “two months into the dysfunctional life of healthcare.gov. . . that seems a perfectly appropriate physiological reaction.” With the disastrous launch,

the administration has badly injured that cause, confirming the worst slurs against the federal government. It has stifled bad news and fudged promises; it has failed to translate complex mechanisms of policy into plain English; it can’t even launch a damn website. What’s more, nobody responsible for the debacle has lost a job or suffered a demotion

.

 

This is not merely a problem for this president, Foer explains, as, say, Katrina was for President Bush. Nor it is it just a temporary threat to the perceived competency of the Democratic party. Instead, the whole progressive project is on the block. Why? Because:

Liberalism has spent the better part of the past century attempting to prove that it could competently and responsibly extend the state into new reaches of American life.

 

And now it looks as if it can’t.

more at link..............

 

 

 

Re: New Republic Editor: Obamacare ‘Is a Threat to Liberalism’

 

There are two crucial points to make about this.

 

First, the “50-state public-private hybrid” represents the compromise that was necessary to get enough Democratic votes to pass the bill. Not even with the largest Democratic congressional supermajority you will ever see in your lifetime were there enough Democratic votes for the progressives’ fantasy of universal, single-payer health care. But, as the experience of Massachusetts’s 1990s-era reforms suggests, when the partial socialization of medicine fails, the socialists will cry out for more socialism. That’s why many Democrats, and perhaps the president himself, may seem relatively unconcerned by Obamacare’s disastrous rollout. They don’t want a hybrid solution to succeed completely. They would much rather capitalize on its failure — or at least its problems — to make the case for universal, single-payer healthcare.

 

Second, Foer laments that, “fortunately for the New Deal, Twitter didn’t broadcast every farmer’s sad encounter with the Agriculture Adjustment Act.” Well, the real problem with the Agricultural Adjustment Act was not its impact on farmers, who benefited from the cartels created by the Act, but rather its impact on everyday American consumers, who had to pay much more for food than necessary during very hard times, and never even realized that they were being gouged by one of the New Deal’s many disguised forced-transfer schemes.

 

And here’s the cardinal point. The main problem with progressive policies is not that they end up hurting their intended beneficiaries, which they usually do, but rather that they impose massive, hidden social losses on everyone else. And Twitter still doesn’t broadcast those sad losses, which is why Americans still support so many of these terrible policies.

 

 

.

Edited November 26, 2013 by B-Man

[OCinBuffalo]

I assume you follow mw through this thread because what I post is reality and factual, and you don't care for that since it threatens your position. I do enjoy the discussion, even if we rarely agree.

Threaten? Dude come now, you are talking to me here. Threaten? IF you can destroy my position? Go ahead. Perhaps I will learn something. But...threaten?

 

You want factual? Getting Medicaid reimbursement, but paying full cost of care(which you still don't actually know, because you don't collect the data to know)...for a brand new 20-30% increase in your patient day? That runs your hospital( 3% margins on average), right into the ground. And, the age-old release valve? "Charge the private pay more, and offset our losses in Medicaid!" Nowhere near enough this time. Factual.

 

Dude! It runs the Cleveland Clinic into the ground. See Here. Hey, if you're better than these guys? I will learn something. Do tell.

We know we're going to get paid differently and reimbursed less to do more,

At least before, you could grumble, and call your state association. Now? Every day you're going to learn what BOHICA means = Bend Over, Here It Comes Again.

 

Here's the best part: If I wasn't so stupid-averse, I'd be supporting Obamacare all day. That's because I've lucked into having the only antidote for the Obamacare disease. The antidote was done on purpose, and the fact that it is applicable is no accident. The luck part? Spreading the disease to the whole country.

 

In the entire history of disruptive change to regulation causing massive software demand: Obamacare is bigger than the de-regulation of Utilities.

 

So, why should I complain? Easy: it's still stupid.

[OCinBuffalo]

Apparently, OFA is telling it's drones to discuss Obamacare at Thankgiving. Many are all over this, including The Onion

 

I think this is abhorrent. Especially because my liberal aunt/uncle and my cousins are better than this: they don't need to be told by OFA to attempt to dominate the discussion and shout down dissent, personalize every issue, and offer more non sequitur than there is mashed potatoes.

 

They've been doing this on their own. I resent that OFA thinks they need to be told to do it.

 

So, they play their games? And, I play mine. Here's some one liners/short stuff that might come in handy this week....

 

Arts and Crafts:

"Obamacare should have been written in crayon.(pregnant pause...don't say anything if they don't ask...it's great if that just hangs out there like a bad fart) Why? Because creating it required a child's understanding of health care, health insurance, business, and big systems..." You gotta giggle at the end = daggers.

 

Uncle Joe:

"The 4 little kids from the commercial sat around the table for 4 days with Joe Biden(or Max Bachus if they know who he is), and they made the transcript of that into Obamacare......Grapes!" ("Grapes" has the added benefit of being a "say at random times for the rest of the day, just to piss them off" candidate.)

 

Bloatware:

"Obamacare is exactly like you forcing your technically challenged (insert person X here) to buy Microsoft Word, when all they need is email."

 

(Continuation if necessary)

"And, to make it worse, you threaten (X) that unless he overpays for what he doesn't need, it's the IRS? Meanwhile, this was all supposed to help (person Y), but (Y) doesn't qualify for subsidies, and rather than let him sign up for something actually affordable, he either pays the danegold(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danegeld) for Obamacare, or pays the relatively miniscule fine? Honestly, what do you think is going to happen? Who pays the danegold when they can pay a parking ticket instead? (The Danegold will throw them off, because it sounds weird, and then it's just landing your punches...)

 

Liberals love to help:

Who exactly are you "helping" in this? 2 million people(whatever they use)? So the other 348 million don't matter, and screwing them over is fine, as long as 2 get what you want. Genius. I didn't realize Absurdity Appreciation was part of the core curriculum at (your college). Was that your minor?"

 

Money:

"Oh so now 100k(whatever # they say for pre-existing) are now on insurance, because they extended Medicaid. If that's what this thing accomplished, why not just extend Medicaid to (number) people? That could have been done in a day. No. Your clowns bought an entire car, just to use the cigarette lighter and listen to the radio some days?"

 

The Trap:

"Young millenials are not refusing to sign up for Obamacare because they don't like it, there's plenty to like. It's also not because they see it as an awful value for their money. I'm so tired of people saying that. The plans haven't even started yet. (Get the heads nodding...wait for it...)

 

....they are refusing to sign up because they are racist. I mean, that's what this is about, it's what it's always been about. These millenials are no different than anyone else who has obstructed this President. They are only doing it because they don't want to see a black man succeed, and I'm tired of it!"

 

(Requires skill and situation to pull off properly. Know your audience. Works great if nobody knows your political stripe.)

 

I am sure you guys have more...all ready to go.

 

These are my drafts. If I'm missing something, say something.

Edited November 26, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[B-Man]

 

Today's screw-up.............

 

ID Verification Lagging on Health Care Website

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/26/us/id-verification-lagging-on-health-care-website.html?hp&_r=1&

 

 

 

The Fallout of Obamacare's Rollout

 

http://spectator.org/articles/56764/fallout-obamacares-rollout

[IDBillzFan]

Today's screw-up.............

 

ID Verification Lagging on Health Care Website

 

http://www.nytimes.c...e.html?hp&_r=1

 

Impossible to say how much of a full-blown kool-aid drinking fool you must be to upload your driver's license and social security card to a website roundly reported as one of the most embarrassing federal failures in decades.

 

And as a side note, welcome to the stupidity of liberal thinking: you must produce verifiable ID to buy a government product, but to require a verifiable ID to vote disenfranchises minorities.

[B-Man]

 

“Sellin’ hope’s like sellin’ soap, son I’ll tell you why — you can’t make either one without a little bit of lye.”

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kodcKUkd2Rg

[Joe Miner]

 

Impossible to say how much of a full-blown kool-aid drinking fool you must be to upload your driver's license and social security card to a website roundly reported as one of the most embarrassing federal failures in decades.

 

And as a side note, welcome to the stupidity of liberal thinking: you must produce verifiable ID to buy a government product, but to require a verifiable ID to vote disenfranchises minorities.

 

I eagerly await the ACLU's intelligent opinion on this.

[Chef Jim]

And as a side note, welcome to the stupidity of liberal thinking: you must produce verifiable ID to buy a government product, but to require a verifiable ID to vote disenfranchises minorities.

 

Because the IRS isn't involved in elections.

[IDBillzFan]

Because the IRS isn't involved in elections.

 

It is with this administration.

[IDBillzFan]

Here's some good news for progressives: According to Paul Krugman, Obamacare is a lot like Benghazi in that the only people who care about its problems are the GOP.

 

The party of delusion. :lol:

 

New York Times columnist Paul Krugmaninformed his audience on Tuesday that the problem-plagued Affordable Care Act has turned a corner. Based on “upbeat” statements from the White House and a shift in the media’s coverage of the implementation of the ACA, Krugman sees the law’s roll-out evolving from a failure into an unmitigated success.

 

Krugman added that the problems will continue, but not in their present form. “Obamacare will turn into a Benghazi-type affair where Republicans are screaming about a scandal nobody else cares about,” Krugman predicts.

 

“White House officials are sounding increasingly upbeat,” Krugman wrote on Tuesday, linking to aWashington Post summary of Tuesday’s update from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. “They could be deluded or spinning; but after what happened two months ago one suspects that the last thing they want is to inflate expectations unduly.”

Edited November 26, 2013 by LABillzFan

[Joe Miner]

Here's some good news for progressives: According to Paul Krugman, Obamacare is a lot like Benghazi in that the only people who care about its problems are the GOP.

 

The party of delusion. :lol:

 

That line of thinking will serve them well come midterms.

 

Most people didn't like obamacare before it was law, hence Scott Brown.

 

Now that those 60% who were initially against it are being validated, and the people undecided are being swayed against it by the bumbling and lying during the rollout, the bar for political incompetence will be raised to unprecedented levels when the GOP !@#$s up the upcoming midterms.

[B-Man]

Apparently, OFA is telling it's drones to discuss Obamacare at Thankgiving. Many are all over this, including The Onion

 

I think this is abhorrent. Especially because my liberal aunt/uncle and my cousins are better than this: they don't need to be told by OFA to attempt to dominate the discussion and shout down dissent, personalize every issue, and offer more non sequitur than there is mashed potatoes.

 

They've been doing this on their own. I resent that OFA thinks they need to be told to do it.

 

 

 

 

In response to the Obama Healthcare Talking Points for Thanksgiving,....................................... Ace Of Spaces offers an alternative set.

 

Sample: “Hey remember when you said that Obamacare was going to work great, and then, when people asked you how it actually worked, you sort of implied they were stupid for not knowing, and yet you never provided any evidence that you had any idea of how it was supposed to work yourself? Yeah, you were wrong to do that.”

 

 

 

Still, it makes sense people would talk about ObamaCare at Thanksgiving — it’s the biggest legislative turkey of the century!

 

.

Edited November 26, 2013 by B-Man

[Keukasmallies]

Man walks into a bar and says to the bartender, "My company just dropped our health care benefits, so now I have to get my own insurance for more money!"

Bartender says, "Obamacare?"

Man says, "Not that I can tell!"

[B-Man]

Spending tax (re: people's) money to influence the media to influence the people....makes perfect leftist sense.

 

 

‘Non-partisan’ group paid $1 million to produce positive Obamacare stories

 

With the roll out of Obamacare being as disastrous as possible for the Obama administration, one group was given a $1 million grant to help lead a rebranding effort with hopes of salvaging the law in the eyes of the American people.

 

Families USA (FUSA) — an organization that describes itself as a “national nonprofit, non-partisan organization dedicated to the achievement of high-quality, affordable health care for all Americans” — was given a $1.1 million grant by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation on October 4, 2013, to gather “success stories” of Americans dealing with Obamacare and distribute them to the media who often refer to them as an “independent” group. This is part of a greater upcoming effort to bolster the perception of the lowly health care law.

 

 

 

.http://capitolcitypr...enroll-america/

 

 

 

 

 

JAMES TARANTO: Excuses, Excuses: The dog ate Obama’s health-care reform.

Who Will Treat Those New Medicaid Patients From the Obamacare Exchanges?

“Health care providers are showing a certain lack of enthusiasm about the Affordable Care Act. Because of low reimbursement and bureaucratic headaches, both state and national surveys showing physicians unenthusiastic about seeing patients who get coverage through the Obamacare exchanges. And that’s for private insurance.

But Healthcare.gov and the state exchanges have been more successful so far at signing people up for Medicaid than private plans—and many Medicaid patients are already having trouble finding doctors.

So…Who is going to see these new Medicaid enrollees?”

[DC Tom]

Spending tax (re: people's) money to influence the media to influence the people....makes perfect leftist sense.

 

 

 

 

.http://capitolcitypr...enroll-america/

 

Where does it say they're not an independent group? And where does it say they received tax dollars?

 

They're partisan, yes. And they're shilling for the ACA. But the only scandal there is that they get tax-exempt status without the IRS crawling up their ass like they would for a Tea Party organization.

[B-Man]

 

Texas Enroll America official resigns after proclaiming Obama loyalty in video

 

The Texas communications director for Enroll America has resigned after a conservative watchdog group posted a video of him discussing his Democratic leanings.

 

A spokesman for the self-proclaimed non-profit, non-partisan group, which is leading efforts to enroll Americans in ObamaCare, confirmed to FoxNews.com Chris Tarango has resigned after the video by

was posted online.

 

In the video, Tarango tells an actor posing as a Democratic operative that he is helping out with a Texas House race on the side, “so that’s about as partisan as it gets.” He says that many people who worked for Organizing for America, the grassroots arm of Obama for America during the 2012 campaign, ended up working for Enroll America.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/11/26/texas-enroll-america-official-caught-suggesting-involvement-in-partisan/

 

 

and yes..we all know that "thats the way it works", but it needs to be pointed out once in a while to the L.I.V..

[OCinBuffalo]

OMG!!

 

Now, it's "workaround" time? http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/healthcaregov-tech-team-scrambling-to-create-workaround-for-site-before-deadline/2013/11/27/f5affc7c-577c-11e3-ba82-16ed03681809_story.html

 

Summary:

They couldn't get the main component to work, so they threw up a quick hack to basically fake like it's working.

 

This isn't really a workaround at all. A workaround delivers the same functionality, but, it deviates from the intended design, and the assumption is that you will go back and correct it later. Think: a temporary bridge, while the main one is being worked on. You still get from one side to the other. It may take longer, but the basic function is identical.

 

That's not what is happening here. Instead, this EZApp thing will NOT get you from one side to the other. Instead, it takes you from one side....to the "estimated" other side.

 

Would you put your car anywhere near that bridge?

 

(EZApp? Wow, what a name. They spent 5 whole minutes on coming up with a name that is countered not only by its own reason for existing, but by it's own dubious functionality. Irony. I bet they think they are being clever, and "helping" the less than informed, with this. None of that will end up being true.)

 

Obama's team of fools is dreaming if they think this hack is going to work, or solve any of the political problems. It's only going to expose them to further ridicule.

 

The insurance companies will REFUSE to take EZApp enrollments, once they get burned by the first one that overstates the subsidy. Who can blame them? You are asking them to essentially sign, not a blank check, but one with ($(<X),(>Y)0,000.00) on it, representing the yearly premiums they will get for the policy. Where X and Y are variables to be determined later.

 

The day the insurance company says "no mas", is the same day that EZApp dies.

 

What's the O/U on how many days from today that will be? 60?

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

The "FIX" is here...........................

 

 

 

As if the web site failure was the biggest problem with the ACA.....................................lol

 

 

.

[IDBillzFan]

As if the web site failure was the biggest problem with the ACA.....................................lol

 

 

Probably the most interesting part of this website issue right now is that once it's actually fixed, all it will do is give millions of Americans a chance to see how horribly bad their options are for overpriced insurance and ridiculously high deductibles.

[ExiledInIllinois]

http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Krugman-Obamacare-already-having-effect-on-5022395.php

 

"...Still, the facts are striking. Since 2010, when the act was passed, real health spending per capita - that is, total spending adjusted for overall inflation and population growth - has risen less than a third as rapidly as its long-term average. Real spending per Medicare recipient hasn't risen at all; real spending per Medicaid beneficiary has actually fallen slightly.

What could account for this good news? One obvious answer is the still-depressed economy, which might be causing people to forgo expensive medical care. But this explanation turns out to be problematic in multiple ways. For one thing, the economy had stabilized by 2010, even if the recovery was fairly weak, yet health costs continued to slow. For another, it's hard to see why a weak economy would have more effect in reducing the prices of health services than it has on overall inflation. Finally, Medicare spending shouldn't be affected by the weak economy, yet it has slowed even more dramatically than private spending.

A better story focuses on what appears to be a decline in some kinds of medical innovation - in particular, an absence of expensive new blockbuster drugs, even as existing drugs go off-patent and can be replaced with cheaper generic brands. This is a real phenomenon; it is, in fact, the main reason the Medicare drug program has ended up costing less than originally projected. But since drugs are only about 10 percent of health spending, it can only explain so much.

So what aspects of Obamacare might be causing health costs to slow? One clear answer is the act's reduction in Medicare "overpayments" - mainly a reduction in the subsidies to private insurers offering Medicare Advantage Plans, but also cuts in some provider payments. A less certain, but likely, source of savings involves changes in the way Medicare pays for services. The program now penalizes hospitals if many of their patients end up being readmitted soon after being released - an indicator of poor care - and readmission rates have, in fact, fallen substantially. Medicare is also encouraging a shift from fee-for-service, in which doctors and hospitals get paid by the procedure, to "accountable care," in which health organizations get rewarded for overall success in improving care while controlling costs..."

[B-Man]

Lol, still regurgitating Mr. Obama's (disproved) September claim, I see. Yes healthcare spending continues up (albeit at a slower rate)experts agree that the slowdown is largely due to the economy and a contraction of spending during the recession.

 

 

you can browse to any number of news and media websites today and see the one story that is at the top of the list.

 

Today is November 30th, the day President Obama said the ObamaCare website would be back up and running full steam.

 

Actually, that’s what he said originally, but he has backed off on that claim, somewhat. The story line we have heard all week is the website would be much improved by the end of the month (remember, that’s today), but bugs may still remain.

 

The most important thing to remember is ObamaCare is more than just a website.

 

The failures of the ObamaCare website have nothing to do with the millions of Americans who have received cancellation notices from their insurance companies.

 

Those failures have nothing to do with cancer patients losing their health insurance.

 

There is no correlation between the website crashing and the number of doctors who are leaving the field of medicine.

 

When many Americans are greeted with prices for health insurance that far surpass what they have previously paid for similar coverage, the website is only returning the information it has been fed.

 

The website failures have been the focal point, but the failures of ObamaCare are rooted in something worse than a multi-million dollar website that doesn’t work properly.

 

Even if the ObamaCare website is magically repaired, we are still faced with this one singular fact. ObamaCare is a plan by an overgrown federal government to take over the health care system of the United States of America.

 

It was designed to fail, with one purpose in mind. When it fails, and it surely will, the federal government will be in the perfect position to offer the solution the progressive liberals have wanted from the beginning.

 

.

[OCinBuffalo]

http://www.chron.com...-on-5022395.php

 

"...Still, the facts are striking. Since 2010, when the act was passed, real health spending per capita - that is, total spending adjusted for overall inflation and population growth - has risen less than a third as rapidly as its long-term average. Real spending per Medicare recipient hasn't risen at all; real spending per Medicaid beneficiary has actually fallen slightly.

What could account for this good news? One obvious answer is the still-depressed economy, which might be causing people to forgo expensive medical care. But this explanation turns out to be problematic in multiple ways. For one thing, the economy had stabilized by 2010, even if the recovery was fairly weak, yet health costs continued to slow. For another, it's hard to see why a weak economy would have more effect in reducing the prices of health services than it has on overall inflation. Finally, Medicare spending shouldn't be affected by the weak economy, yet it has slowed even more dramatically than private spending.

A better story focuses on what appears to be a decline in some kinds of medical innovation - in particular, an absence of expensive new blockbuster drugs, even as existing drugs go off-patent and can be replaced with cheaper generic brands. This is a real phenomenon; it is, in fact, the main reason the Medicare drug program has ended up costing less than originally projected. But since drugs are only about 10 percent of health spending, it can only explain so much.

So what aspects of Obamacare might be causing health costs to slow? One clear answer is the act's reduction in Medicare "overpayments" - mainly a reduction in the subsidies to private insurers offering Medicare Advantage Plans, but also cuts in some provider payments. A less certain, but likely, source of savings involves changes in the way Medicare pays for services. The program now penalizes hospitals if many of their patients end up being readmitted soon after being released - an indicator of poor care - and readmission rates have, in fact, fallen substantially. Medicare is also encouraging a shift from fee-for-service, in which doctors and hospitals get paid by the procedure, to "accountable care," in which health organizations get rewarded for overall success in improving care while controlling costs..."

Holy Black Box Batman! Mr. Krugman? We don't do "stories that focus on what appears to be" in BPR/BPM. We do processes, rules, and, properly collected data.

 

That whole article = black box thinking. "Let's put something in one end of the black box, and see what comes out the other side, while never looking into the box, or understanding what is actually happening inside it".

 

The medicare readmit problem...was a problem. But, "bad care" had little to do with it. Again, bad process was the culprit. Paul Krugman doesn't have a clue. I'd love to debate this clown. He is so far removed from what it takes to actually understand what is happening, and the tactics we use to really find out...that reading his "work" just makes me laugh.

 

I can tell you why it was the process, in excruciating detail, as I run into this constantly. Or, I can tell you that it was bad process, that would have been fixed with or without Obamcare, and be done.

 

Thus, the inference that Obamcare "fixed" this is patently retarded. That is correlation = causation, a "favorite" here at PPP.

 

I was running into the causes of this long before Obamcare, in many industries, not just health care, and I will be running into it long after it's gone. Meanwhile, Krugman was black boxing his way through the Tech Bubble long before Obamacare, and he will be black boxing his way through whatever is next.

 

Paul Krugman : health care :: Drupal "consultant" : programming.

Edited November 30, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[B-Man]

ObamaCare's Plans Are Worse: How the Affordable Care Act raises prices and limits medical choices.

Nov. 29, 2013

 

Even as President Obama reluctantly granted Americans thrown off their health plans quasi-permission to possibly keep them, he called them "the folks who, over time, I think, are going to find that the marketplaces are better." He means the ObamaCare exchanges that are replacing the private insurance market, adding that "it's important that we don't pretend that somehow that's a place worth going back to."

 

Easy for him to say. The reason this furor will continue even if the website is fixed is that the public is learning that ObamaCare's insurance costs more in return for worse coverage.

 

Mr. Obama and his liberal allies call the old plans "substandard," but he doesn't mean from the perspective of the consumers who bought them. He means people were free to choose insurance that wasn't designed to serve his social equity and income redistribution goals. In his view, many people must pay first-class fares for coach seats so others can pay less and receive extra benefits.

 

Liberals justify these coercive cross-subsidies as necessary to finance coverage for the uninsured and those with pre-existing conditions. But government usually helps the less fortunate honestly by raising taxes to fund programs. In summer 2009, Senate Democrats put out such a bill, and the $1.6 trillion sticker shock led them to hide the transfers by forcing people to buy overpriced products.

 

This political mugging is especially unfair to the people whose plans on the current individual market are being taken away. The majority of these consumers are self-employed or small-business owners. They're middle class, rarely affluent. They took responsibility for their care without government aid, and unlike people in the job-based system, they paid with after-tax dollars.

 

more at link: http://online.wsj.co...192081764514664

Edited November 30, 2013 by B-Man

[ExiledInIllinois]

Holy Black Box Batman! Mr. Krugman? We don't do "stories that focus on what appears to be" in BPR/BPM. We do processes, rules, and, properly collected data.

 

That whole article = black box thinking. "Let's put something in one end of the black box, and see what comes out the other side, while never looking into the box, or understanding what is actually happening inside it".

 

The medicare readmit problem...was a problem. But, "bad care" had little to do with it. Again, bad process was the culprit. Paul Krugman doesn't have a clue. I'd love to debate this clown. He is so far removed from what it takes to actually understand what is happening, and the tactics we use to really find out...that reading his "work" just makes me laugh.

 

I can tell you why it was the process, in excruciating detail, as I run into this constantly. Or, I can tell you that it was bad process, that would have been fixed with or without Obamcare, and be done.

 

Thus, the inference that Obamcare "fixed" this is patently retarded. That is correlation = causation, a "favorite" here at PPP.

 

I was running into the causes of this long before Obamcare, in many industries, not just health care, and I will be running into it long after it's gone. Meanwhile, Krugman was black boxing his way through the Tech Bubble long before Obamacare, and he will be black boxing his way through whatever is next.

 

Paul Krugman : health care :: Drupal "consultant" : programming.

 

And someone like Paul Krugman developed a huge resume while Cap't Smiley (OC) is still posting for the conservative retards on The Two Bills Drive/Stadium Wall PPP forum!

 

ROFLMAO... You are on the fast track OC! Hey Cappy Emoticon, when is your delusions of grandeur train due in @ the station? 2049?

 

Pick up the horn, Nate Silver is giving you are jingle!

Edited November 30, 2013 by ExiledInIllinois

[OCinBuffalo]

Yeah...you're on target.

 

Show me how this isn't "black box" nonsense....or STFU.

 

I doubt you are even capable of understanding that abstraction.

 

But, prove me wrong. Let's see you try....

[ExiledInIllinois]

Yeah...you're on target.

 

Show me how this isn't "black box" nonsense....or STFU.

 

I doubt you are even capable of understanding that abstraction.

 

But, prove me wrong. Let's see you try....

 

No. It is you, crazy nobody dude vs. against Krugman. You are the one that needs to STFU... You are a nobody. A loser.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The "FIX" is here...........................

 

 

 

As if the web site failure was the biggest problem with the ACA.....................................lol

 

 

.

 

Funny how with anything, people feel they are being thrown off the cliff and that things are broken. Such is life and such is life especially w/change. People hate change. Especially, if that change is worse off for some.

 

Yet, we ALL keep looking for the perfect solution.

[B-Man]

No. It is you, crazy nobody dude vs. against Krugman. You are the one that needs to STFU... You are a nobody. A loser.

 

 

 

Funny how with anything, people feel they are being thrown off the cliff and that things are broken. Such is life and such is life especially w/change. People hate change. Especially, if that change is worse off for some.

 

Yet, we ALL keep looking for the perfect solution.

 

Sorry sir.

 

I have been a Registered Nurse from 1979

 

I have more experience with grieving families and the care delivery problems than most of the posters on the board.............combined.

 

 

 

Change was needed.

 

Pointing out that this "affordable" plan is garbage and will make matters worse is not your short-sighted "fear of change"

 

 

It is experience.

 

it is knowledge.

 

 

it is common sense.............................

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

.

Edited November 30, 2013 by B-Man

[IDBillzFan]

Revised website is up with a new home page.

 

 

 

[B-Man]

As I posted yesterday.................."THE FIX" is in.......................

 

 

 

9:00 a.m. Sunday Morning Press Conference to release more data on ObamaCare site´s progress

 

Washington Post: Administration will announce web site is fixed. WaPo also says that is nowhere near true

 

 

NPR Reporter Frustrated by WH’s Transparency: ‘Have to Take Their Word’ on Obamacare Site Fixes

 

http://www.mediaite....are-site-fixes/

 

 

 

Inside the Race to Rescue a Health Care Site, and Obama

 

http://www.nytimes.c..._20131201&_r=1

 

 

 

Let's Talk Turkey

 

By Clarice Feldman

 

Elect a Chicago community organizer (twice) as your president and you should not be surprised to find that all he is capable of is spewing propaganda and dividing us by personalizing attacks on those who oppose his grandiose, wildly impractical efforts at reshaping our lives to suit his sophomoric view of the good life.

 

As the obvious failure of ObamaCare has become evident to all but his most blinkered cultists, Obama fell back this week on upping the propagandizing and deflecting attention from his failures with even more lies.

Read more: http://www.americant...l#ixzz2mENvMx6d

 

 

.

Edited December 1, 2013 by B-Man

[B-Man]

Repeat after me: The disastrous website launch was a metaphor for the problem. It was not the problem.

 

 

 

 

WILL OBAMACARE destroy the home health care industry? “The clear conclusion is that saving money is more important to CMS than serving those who are so sick they cannot leave home without assistance. . . . It is obvious that they turned a deaf ear to our pleas on behalf of aged, infirm, disabled, and dying Americans.”

 

 

 

 

 

[Joe Miner]

So is it actually secure now, or does it just load up when you enter the url?

 

What does "fixed" mean?

[TheMadCap]

So is it actually secure now, or does it just load up when you enter the url?

 

What does "fixed" mean?

 

It means that when you log in, you go to a fake exchange they built to "estimate" your premiums and subsidies that the Insurance companies would be crazy to accept since they don't know what they are responsible for, so the blame can be placed on them, and the WH can say, See, it works!

[boyst]

 

 

It means that when you log in, you go to a fake exchange they built to "estimate" your premiums and subsidies that the Insurance companies would be crazy to accept since they don't know what they are responsible for, so the blame can be placed on them, and the WH can say, See, it works!

so, it works, right?

[keepthefaith]

I just had an employee walk into my office and say he wants to discontinue his health insurance because he's eligible for about $250 per month in a subsidy. He'll save money by doing this. Looks like Obamacare is working. He gets part of his premium paid for and he'll keep voting for the guys and gals that provide that for him.

[3rdnlng]

I just had an employee walk into my office and say he wants to discontinue his health insurance because he's eligible for about $250 per month in a subsidy. He'll save money by doing this. Looks like Obamacare is working. He gets part of his premium paid for and he'll keep voting for the guys and gals that provide that for him.

 

Won't he be surprised if the site isn't accurately quoting his monthly premium?

[DC Tom]

I just had an employee walk into my office and say he wants to discontinue his health insurance because he's eligible for about $250 per month in a subsidy. He'll save money by doing this. Looks like Obamacare is working. He gets part of his premium paid for and he'll keep voting for the guys and gals that provide that for him.

 

Isn't the exchange for people that don't have employer-provided insurance available? Not for people that have it but simply don't want it?

[TheMadCap]

Isn't the exchange for people that don't have employer-provided insurance available? Not for people that have it but simply don't want it?

 

Not always. Some employer plans are "junk" plans that don't pay for anything, according to the F-In-L.

 

All in all, he was fairly well behaved this holiday. As much as an Obama bot can be. Some of the few gems from this holiday:

 

"The website failed because they had to dumb it down for the illiterate Americans to be able to use it, have you seen how big the fonts are"?

 

"One party is this country is against healthcare"

 

However, his older brother came by on Saturday. BTW, no one likes him at all, not even his family, because he's a douche. Brother says that he had a good Thanksgiving, but was informed by HIS in laws not to startu up with the usual BS political discussion and specifically not Obamacare, whom his 90 year old father in law was very upset about because his insurance was cancelled. He proudly relayed to us how he "broke it down for the old guy, why he's better off now". Yeah, pick on a 90 year old when they asked you nicely not to. This is what I'm dealing with...

Edited December 2, 2013 by TheMadCap