18 Reasons the Affordable Care Act Is the Greatest Achievement for the Middle Class

[Clip-Clop]

Insurance companies are evil. Therefore we insist you buy their product.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Insurance companies are evil. Therefore we insist you buy their product.

lol kudos.


http://hosted2.ap.org/apdefault/3d28...6940497f5a80b9 saw this article earlier...

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by paulo537

You seem to think that being in the health insurance business is just a racket for price-gouging, unethical evil doers. If it was so easy, why have all but 5 major comanies stopped writing group health insurance nationwide?

With your logic, we should be surprised that there are not 20 or 30 doing so, like there was 25 years ago.

By the way, there is absolutely nothing in the new law that insurance companies cannot manage. No annual maximums?.... ok, raise rates. No rating up for pre-ex conditions? .... no problem, raise rates. "Free" PReventive Care? ... sure, ... raise rates.

Health insurance rates are going to skyrocket. The pool of all insured people
through commercial carriers is going to deteriorate, health-wise. It has to.

The only question is whether the modest number of positives in the bill outweigh the higher cost for every person who is insured. Maybe that happens.

This is what is happening now:

1. Small Employer (<51 emps) plans will drop like flies. The penalties are just too soft. 2. Nothing has been reformed in health care. Just health care insurance has been reformed.

If you think that increased screening during preventive care and covering the kids until they are closer to an AARP card than their first birthday outweighs the unadressed reasons why HC itself costs so damn much then you should be a very happy person.

If you think insurance companies are shaking with fear at the new law, think again.

that's the big question right now, who will drop coverage? the answer is most, if not all, small groups will. if it's cheaper to pay the fine than continue to carry the coverage, and knowing employees can get it thru exchanges, why would any small employer keep their current plan? if you can save money by dropping and paying the fee, why wouldn't you? and that's the first budget breaker, as the cbo planned on only a few million losing small group coverage. in fact, most will. 'they' said it could be as low as 3 million people, but....it could be as high as 30 million. when they did the figuring back when members of congress said it 'must cost less than a trillion' they lowballed the number used to figure people losing coverage.


and yes, they will have to raise rates. how could they not? insurance companies have to pay out 85% in claims-but watch the claims come pouring in.
like i said, at least it'll be interesting to see how it all plays out. wonder when we get downgraded again.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Danzig

that's the big question right now, who will drop coverage? the answer is most, if not all, small groups will. if it's cheaper to pay the fine than continue to carry the coverage, and knowing employees can get it thru exchanges, why would any small employer keep their current plan? if you can save money by dropping and paying the fee, why wouldn't you? and that's the first budget breaker, as the cbo planned on only a few million losing small group coverage. in fact, most will. 'they' said it could be as low as 3 million people, but....it could be as high as 30 million. when they did the figuring back when members of congress said it 'must cost less than a trillion' they lowballed the number used to figure people losing coverage.


and yes, they will have to raise rates. how could they not? insurance companies have to pay out 85% in claims-but watch the claims come pouring in.
like i said, at least it'll be interesting to see how it all plays out. wonder when we get downgraded again.

Health care "exchanges" are just orbitz for insurance companies, there to help you shop.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Health care "exchanges" are just orbitz for insurance companies, there to help you shop.

yep, i know it. and many states are opting not to set them up. the work involved is astronomical. the amount of info that will have to be available is mind-boggling.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yep, i know it. and many states are opting not to set them up. the work involved is astronomical. the amount of info that will have to be available is mind-boggling.

States can use those funds to set up whatever state-specific type of exchange they want. Oregon and Vermont, for example, are going full-on single payer via the ACA in their states.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

that's the big question right now, who will drop coverage? the answer is most, if not all, small groups will. if it's cheaper to pay the fine than continue to carry the coverage, and knowing employees can get it thru exchanges, why would any small employer keep their current plan?

The program has been designed specifically to increase coverage among small business people and their employees. There are significant new tax credits for companies with less than 50 employees, that provide health insurance through purchase on the exchanges (which makes it less expensive, too)

And if an employer choses to dump his employees off insurance entirely, they will not be left out to dry, they will be able to find individual insurance on the exchanges at the same price and coverageas their previous group rates.

In fact, aside from the huge small business benefits, the entire ACA is a very large middle class tax credit - not a fantasy "huge tax hike".

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

States can use those funds to set up whatever state-specific type of exchange they want. Oregon and Vermont, for example, are going full-on single payer via the ACA in their states.

With who as the provider?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

With who as the provider?

Regular physicians, hospitals, etc. The ususal.

[bigrun]

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Regular physicians, hospitals, etc. The ususal.

Coverage provider for the single payer. Is it the state? Is it the Federal Gov't? Is it medicare? Is it a private company signed up to take in the huddle masses and already sick of Oregon and Vermont?
Or is it more of the same like physicians and hospitals?
Smilie all you like, being vague about something so revolutionary as single payer should really be accompanied by a detail or two about the system that will one day save America and put us on the level of all the other world class countries like Spain, Italy and France...

[Riot]

Attention, residents of:

Georgia
Wisconsin
Iowa
South Dakota
Kansas
Louisiana
Florida
South Carolina
Indiana
New Jersey

Your House of Representatives, your Senate, your President, and your Supreme Court has given you an expansion of healthcare in your state under the Affordable Care Act.

While every other Republican-lead state will, of course, follow the law to help their citizens, your governor has personally decided he's not gonna let you get the healthcare you are now legally entitled to, that everyone else in the country will be getting.

Sorry. Sucks for you

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012...ans-uninsured/

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Coverage provider for the single payer. Is it the state? Is it the Federal Gov't? Is it medicare? Is it a private company signed up to take in the huddle masses and already sick of Oregon and Vermont?
Or is it more of the same like physicians and hospitals?
Smilie all you like, being vague about something so revolutionary as single payer should really be accompanied by a detail or two about the system that will one day save America and put us on the level of all the other world class countries like Spain, Italy and France...

Have you paid zero attention at all to the discussion of the Affordable Care Act on this board?

What you just said, above, makes no sense at all

To help you: "providers" are the ones that provide the health care. You asked who would be the providers: that would be private doctors and hospitals, as are providers now.

Perhaps what you want to know who is going to administer a single payer program in those states? The state would.

Where does the money come from for the new state insurance exchanges? The federal government, via the ACA.

Again, to repeat a basic benefit of the Affordable Care Act, because clearly you've been paying zero attention for the past three years, or the past week: Each state gets to set up state insurance exchanges, where citizens of the state can purchase insurance. Those two states will set up single payer exchanges, where the state will be the payer.

[paulo537]

Originally Posted by Riot

Have you paid zero attention at all to the discussion of the Affordable Care Act on this board?

What you just said, above, makes no sense at all

To help you: "providers" are the ones that provide the health care. You asked who would be the providers: that would be private doctors and hospitals, as are providers now.

Perhaps what you want to know who is going to administer a single payer program in those states? The state would.

Where does the money come from for the new state insurance exchanges? The federal government, via the ACA.

Again, to repeat a basic benefit of the Affordable Care Act, because clearly you've been paying zero attention for the past three years, or the past week: Each state gets to set up state insurance exchanges. Those two states will set up single payer exchanges, where the state will be the payer.

Miss Marple,

It's Payor.

[paulo537]

Originally Posted by Riot

Attention, residents of:

Georgia
Wisconsin
Iowa
South Dakota
Kansas
Louisiana
Florida
South Carolina
Indiana
New Jersey

Your House of Representatives, your Senate, your President, and your Supreme Court has given you an expansion of healthcare in your state under the Affordable Care Act.

While every other Republican-lead state will, of course, follow the law to help their citizens, your governor has personally decided he's not gonna let you get the healthcare you are now legally entitled to, that everyone else in the country will be getting.

Sorry. Sucks for you

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012...ans-uninsured/

The law does nothing to "get you healthcare."

The law reforms insurance and healthcare financing. That should have come to you through you dozens of posts.


When you need a break from teacing here, study a little about the tendency for Health Insurer profitability to run in interesting cycles in terms of profit and loss.

Should the people in those single-payor state feel good about what will happen when the state take a loss , say 2-3 years in a row? It happens.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by paulo537

Miss Marple,

It's Payor.

So sorry. Please, everybody read the last word in the above paragraph to be "payor"

[Riot]

Originally Posted by paulo537

The law does nothing to "get you healthcare."

Actually, yes, the law indeed expands the eligibility for Medicaid. Which is exactly what these governors are refusing to extend to the class of eligible citizens.

Which means that although these citizens were indeed given access to healthcare by the ACA Medicaid expansion, these governors have decided they don't get it.

The law reforms insurance and healthcare financing. That should have come to you through you dozens of posts.

You might want to read up on the law a little more, so you can learn what else it does.

Should the people in those single-payor state feel good about what will happen when the state take a loss , say 2-3 years in a row? It happens.

See, I just have to laugh when some get on their high horse, but are facing the horses azz. You might want to realize that the term is "single-payer", not single payor. A payor is the person who writes the check. The system is "single-payer". Yes, the person who writes the check would be the "payor".

Should the people in those single-payor state feel good about what will happen when the state take a loss , say 2-3 years in a row? It happens.

The states are not paying completely for the first five years of coverage, are they? If states cannot administer the program to run without loss over the initial five years of test program, financed by the federal government, they can adjust it. Don't you think? Why would that be any valid reason to not implement the program? A program proven already to work in Mass?

[Rileyoriley]

Yes, it's working so well for the "working poor" in Massachusetts.






Open enrollment for Health Insurance
July 1st through August 15th

Updated: Monday, 02 Jul 2012, 8:52 PM EDT
Published : Monday, 02 Jul 2012, 5:44 PM EDT

* Ryan Walsh

FLORENCE, Mass. (WWLP) - The Supreme Court's ruling on health care continues to dominate the headlines.

Massachusetts began its health care reform law six years ago. Open enrollment for health insurance begins on Monday and there are still close to four-hundred thousand uninsured people in Massachusetts.

"It seems to me as what kind of health insurance plan someone selects is a really critical, critical decision", says Leslie Laurie, the President and CEO of Tapestry Health.

For first timers it can be tricky and if you aren't insured, you could owe the IRS money.

"There is a penalty it is a dollar penalty and it is based upon how much you earn", says Tax Attorney Paul Mancinone.

If you make less than $16,000 you do not get penalized. Make more than that, you could owe anywhere from $19 a month, up to $101 dollars a month if you make $33,000 or more.

"Potentially husband and wife... so we have seen penalties as high as $2400 dollars", says Mancinone.

Having a plan could help you avoid tax penalties, but picking the wrong plan could end up costing you more money in the long-run."

"The individual mandate requires people to have insurance, but in order to meet that mandate some can only afford health insurance where a deductible is thousands and thousands of dollars", says Laurie.

Massachusetts does have the lowest percentage of uninsured people in the United States and it had the 7th lowest percentage before the law was implemented. Researchers at the Harvard Medical School revealed in a study that most of the uninsured in Massachusetts are the working poor.

"While we celebrate the fact that all of us in Massachusetts have access to health insurance that doesn't necessarily translate into the important care that individuals need", says Laurie.

The state's health insurance website is mahealthconnector.org.

The open enrollment period is from July 1st through August 15th.

If you don't have health insurance and want to try to avoid paying tax penalties. Mancinone recommends appeal it. "You can appeal, in order to appeal, you have to make sure your tax return does not show the penalty, if your tax return does show the penalty it becomes a collection matter with the Department of Revenue, because you admitted to owing the penalty. It gives you an opportunity to have your case heard, if it's as high as $2400 in the balance and there are extenuating circumstances, why volunteer the penalty. Try to have your issue addressed and hope for the best with the Commonwealth."



All content © Copyright 2000 - 2012 – LIN Television Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

[Riot]

Mass is working very well. Thousands have been insured and now get health care that could not before it was implemented. You might listen to Mass ex-gov. Mitt Romney, who has spoken for years on how well it's worked in detail, and how it's a model for the entire country to follow.

If there are problems that develop, you change your laws to adjust to them as it goes. Here's a good discussion of the pros and cons of the Mass law http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle...161248535.html

[Clip-Clop]

Stop reading opinion pieces on the law and start reading the actual law, something I am beginning to think I am the only person that has actually done so anywhere in the world.
Making someone buy something is not "providing" them with same. Forcing others (not wealthy either, almost all are middle class) to pick up the tab for those that cannot afford this product is inappropriate and irresponsible.