ADVERTISEMENT

Don't look now, study shows Obamacare succeeding so far

L

lbodel

All-American
Jul 15, 2006
12,088
6,688
113
-The uninsured rate has dropped significantly in 6 months

-9.5 million people gained insurance through the health exchanges or expanded Medicare

-60% of Obamacare participants have visited a doctor already

-Study found no "waiting to see a doctor" problems and 2/3 were able to schedule an appointment within 2 weeks. 75% said it was easy to find a primary care doctor.

-74% of Republicans said they were happy with their plans

Still a long ways to go, but so far....the doom and gloom predicted hasn't come close to materializing. Meh.



http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2014/jul/health-coverage-access-aca
 
Then why does Obama keep issuing waivers, exemptions, and delays?

So, if its working as well as you claim, we can expect to see Democrats in swing districts campaigning on their support for Obamacare, right?

Think of how well Obamacare is going to work once we add all the millions of illegal immigrants invading this country.
 
I think you need to be careful quoting information from an organization which has a stated mission of:

"The Commonwealth Fund is a private foundation that aims to promote a high performing health care system that achieves better access, improved quality, and greater efficiency, particularly for society's most vulnerable, including low-income people, the uninsured, minority Americans, young children, and elderly adults."

This group has a vested interest in seeing Obamacare succeed, because they have been big proponents of this kind of government program for years. It fits their liberal-leaning agenda.
 
Gee, I wonder why they didn't ask if people in, for example, Indiana, were happy only having a 'choice' of HMO's to 'choose' from?

Most everyone would agree that the definition of 'freedom' is to 'have choice' or 'the ability to choose', or be a liberty to determine one's own path.

I'm assuming you, and all readers of this post, know the differences between an HMO, a POS-HMO, PPO and PFFS systems. In case that is not accurate, here is a brief sketch, as I understand them:

PFFS- Private Fee For Service. No networks, no referrals necessary to see specialists, but the doctor, before treating or performing services for the patient, must be 'deem' himself to accept the insurance carrier's schedule of reimbursement. By simply treating the patient, he is 'deeming' himself.

PPO- Preferred Provider Organization. Networks, but members do not need referrals from Primary Care Physicians ('PCP's') to see a specialist, and they can use in-network providers to have the best pricing or cost-share, but they also have the freedom to use out of network providers, but it will cost a few dollars more.

HMO-POS- Health Maintenance Organization. A sort of hybrid in that members must use in-network services except for certain circumstances to go outside the network, and in that event, but pay substantially higher cost-sharing percentages, almost to the point of being prohibitive and beyond reasonable expectations.

HMO- Health Maintenance Organization. Use our network providers or you have no coverage and will pay the maximum amount, usually 15-30x as much as a simple co-pay through a PPO, and btw, screw you.


Through the exchange, in most states, including Indiana, there are nothing but HMO's to 'choose' from, more or less meaning there is a high probability that you will have to switch doctors and/or be severely limited in your access / choices.
 
Boiler20, this is kind of a basic question, but I'm wondering does one have to purchase insurance through the exchange?

The easy answer is no. We have a PPO plan in Indiana that we recently purchased outside of the exchange. But that's not really my question.

My basic question that I don't know the answer to which is under what circumstances would one have to purchase insurance through the exchange? For example, we are not receiving a subsidy; is an exchange purchase required in order to get the government subsidy on the (high) premiums?

OK, I found the answer, see the link. The link says "generally" you need to purchase through the exchange in order to get the subsidies.

I would vote that as a dumb component of Obamacare...one of many, even though I'm happy Obamacare exists. I hope the blowhards in Washington will soon stop wailing about the law and start tuning it to make it better.


Insurance FAQ
 
That's the thing. This is a law that affect many people, even though it doesn't affect most people. Of course it's an organization that would probably support Obamacare, but it is funny that no one disputes the actual findings, just that's it's some biased survey automatically. I also find it funny that all of the doomsday predictions have not come true, but it's ok for them to be wrong about that.


Health care is also a complex subject. I posted this more for fun than anything as I know people would come back and freak out.

I don't really understand the complaining about issuing exemptions/waivers/extensions. Do you know how many times social security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. have had adjustments? You're not going to have a perfect system from the first day. You're going to have to adjust things.

In addition, maybe if members of Congress were actually trying to FIX issues, versus just rail on it for political gain, Obama wouldn't have to make the changes himself. Anyone with a brain could tell you Republican members of Congress are not out to improve the law, they're out to destroy it. You can't work with people if that's your mindset.

It's actually funny because there are several Republican governors that have learned to like what's offered to them and are more supportive of it than Congressional Republicans.
 
Don't forget that health insurance costs only increased by 7% this year. That is a definite decrease from the previous years increases of 18% in 2012 and 14% last year. So Obama Care proponents can say see health care costs are going down. LOL. These are actual figures from my Indiana based plan.
Sooo the cost of health insurance has gone up 39% in the last 3 years.
Prior to ACA the average annual increase was 5%-7%. Around 3% above inflation.
The real picture is has the cost to society as a whole. IE those who pay their bills have absorbed the cost for those who haven't. The problem is the costs of treatment has not gone down. So now we also have to pay for insurance administration fees. Competition for services can drive health care costs down, this isn't happening.
 
The hell it "doesn't affect most people". Almost everyone I know was lied to when Obama said "If you like your insurance, you can keep it". Dozens of friends from all over the country have had their coverage canceled and replaced by high deductible plans with health savings accounts.

The coverage is not better, and the new plans foisted on us carry much higher deductibles than before (like 2-4x higher). These deductibles will continue to go up over time, I believe. Many friends had to change doctors because their old doctors didn't accept the new plans.

From my point-of-view, Obama totally effed up a system that didn't need to be fixed in the extreme way it was. People with insurance through their employer have gotten screwed. It is a sham, meant to get the 85% of people with coverage prior to Obamacare being implemented to pay for healthcare for people, who in some cases, didn't even want it to begin with.

Basically, as the Supreme Court ruled, Obamacare is a tax on people who work to pay for healthcare mostly for people who don't work. Without the government subsidies, most of the new enrollees would not be able to afford Obamacare.
This post was edited on 7/11 9:27 PM by SDBoiler1
 
Why are you giving stats over the last 3 years?

So you're complaining about 2 years worth of stuff that has nothing to do with the subject?

"This isn't happening"....it's been 6 months basically that the additional people have been enrolled. And a lot of them have only been enrolled 3-4 months.

It cracks me up when people were complaining that some plans on the exchanges weren't cheap! Like suddenly the cost of health care was discounted 50% because of the bill? Or that health care was even cheap. Yes, you could pay $50/month for a health care plan - too bad it covered practically nothing other than if something catastrophic happened).

Health care costs are not cheap and they aren't going to be stagnant.
 
Re: of course it is.

How?

Other than using buzz words, how is it? The plans being bought are plans from private companies, offered at prices the private companies come up with. States are open to operating their own systems separate from the federal government. States have the option to opt in or out of the expanded Medicaid.

Why are you so against Obamacare, but you don't sit here and call for the destruction of Social Security, Medicare, etc.? Those are MUCH more "socialized" programs than Obamacare - Obamacare doesn't even change a single thing for the majority of Americans because they can keep their employer's coverage.

I'm really interested in hearing an actual, thought out answer that uses facts....instead of buzz words, scare tactics, etc.

This post was edited on 7/11 5:48 PM by lbodel
 
I would absolutely be in favor of disposing of Medicare and Social Security. Give me my money to manage, thanks.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
 
Re: of course it is.


Originally posted by lbodel:
How?

Other than using buzz words, how is it? The plans being bought are plans from private companies, offered at prices the private companies come up with. States are open to operating their own systems separate from the federal government. States have the option to opt in or out of the expanded Medicaid.

Why are you so against Obamacare, but you don't sit here and call for the destruction of Social Security, Medicare, etc.? Those are MUCH more "socialized" programs than Obamacare - Obamacare doesn't even change a single thing for the majority of Americans because they can keep their employer's coverage.

I'm really interested in hearing an actual, thought out answer that uses facts....instead of buzz words, scare tactics, etc.

This post was edited on 7/11 5:48 PM by lbodel
Click to expand...
Because he's SAID as much.

Good grief, man, WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?

This clown has telegraphed exactly what his intentions are, and unless you've had your head in the sand you're the last one to know exactly what the plans are.

I'm not "against Obamacare", I'm against gubmint run health care.

You say you're "really interested in hearing an actual, thought out answer that uses facts....instead of buzz words, scare tactics, etc."...

Well... If you're not interested in Obama's own words about socialized medicine, about taking a pain pill instead of real treatment, HOW ABOUT THE FRIGGIN' VA??! That's Obamacare. That's socialized medicine. That's your future.

Sure... bury your head in your arse and tell us how great "The One" is... "The One" who brought about this illegal immigrant crisis... yes, the Empty Suit. He's incompetent, and he's destroying this great country.
 
7% is not true. Our plan went up 40% and actually is a slightly worse plan than last year, same insurance company. For 50 employees, there was a $100,000 increase to provide the same coverage as last year. Our company also has a profit sharing program. $100,000 less profit to share, so employees each get less profit sharing since an additional $100,000 was eaten up by insurance costs. Dear employee: you got a $2000 raise, unfortunately you get none of it since it was all given to your insurance company.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
 
Re: of course it is.

Your response shows exactly that it's just a personal vendetta.

I don't care who the President was or is, and I'm not using his words. This was practically the same concept Republicans championed in the 90s. I can think for myself, thanks.

You can't even put together one sane paragraph in response and then immediately change the subject to other things. I love how it's a "grand scheme", just like the death panels, pulling Grandma's life support, waiting years to see a doctor, etc. were going to be issues. Get a grip.

If you think the VA suddenly became messed up under Obama, you're insane. Obama has actually done a lot to improve it by providing additional funding. Were you not around the internet when the Walter Reed VA Hospital scandal happened when Bush was President? But I'm sure that just happened cause Obama was possibly going to be the next President. And yes, illegal immigration just recently became a problem, I forgot.

Geesh.
 
wait you mean every last person didn't get exactly 7%?!
 
Re: of course it is.

the 90s? Heck, there were people championing it on the right during Romney's first run for the nomination.

If Romney had been nominated and beat Obama in 08, and had proposed this plan, conservatives would be saying what a great plan it was...but it's Obama so it can't be anything but communism or "straight from Saul Alinsky" who apparently has replaced Satan as the worst scourge of man.
 
Re: of course it is.


Originally posted by lbodel:
Your response shows exactly that it's just a personal vendetta.

I don't care who the President was or is, and I'm not using his words. This was practically the same concept Republicans championed in the 90s. I can think for myself, thanks.

You can't even put together one sane paragraph in response and then immediately change the subject to other things. I love how it's a "grand scheme", just like the death panels, pulling Grandma's life support, waiting years to see a doctor, etc. were going to be issues. Get a grip.

If you think the VA suddenly became messed up under Obama, you're insane. Obama has actually done a lot to improve it by providing additional funding. Were you not around the internet when the Walter Reed VA Hospital scandal happened when Bush was President? But I'm sure that just happened cause Obama was possibly going to be the next President. And yes, illegal immigration just recently became a problem, I forgot.

Geesh.
Click to expand...
Your retorts will make more sense and have more credibility when you take off the blinders... or pull your head out of the sand.

"Get a grip"? You're presented with Obama's own thoughts, and you're off on a rant. Get a grip is right.

Here's a clue: It doesn't matter one d@mn bit if "the VA suddenly became messed up under Obama". It's government run health care, and it's representative of the incompetent, unaccountable government.

And the current illegal immigration problem is on Obama's shoulders.

Don't like all that? I can't help you. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

"Geesh".
 
Re: of course it is.


Originally posted by qazplm:
the 90s? Heck, there were people championing it on the right during Romney's first run for the nomination.

If Romney had been nominated and beat Obama in 08, and had proposed this plan, conservatives would be saying what a great plan it was...but it's Obama so it can't be anything but communism or "straight from Saul Alinsky" who apparently has replaced Satan as the worst scourge of man.
Click to expand...

Really? Which "conservatives"??
 
Re: of course it is.

Originally posted by Purdue85:


Originally posted by qazplm:
the 90s? Heck, there were people championing it on the right during Romney's first run for the nomination.

If Romney had been nominated and beat Obama in 08, and had proposed this plan, conservatives would be saying what a great plan it was...but it's Obama so it can't be anything but communism or "straight from Saul Alinsky" who apparently has replaced Satan as the worst scourge of man.
Click to expand...

Really? Which "conservatives"??
Click to expand...
Does the Heritage Foundation count?

Praise from the HF
 
Re: of course it is.

Originally posted by Purdue85:


Originally posted by lbodel:
Your response shows exactly that it's just a personal vendetta.

I don't care who the President was or is, and I'm not using his words. This was practically the same concept Republicans championed in the 90s. I can think for myself, thanks.

You can't even put together one sane paragraph in response and then immediately change the subject to other things. I love how it's a "grand scheme", just like the death panels, pulling Grandma's life support, waiting years to see a doctor, etc. were going to be issues. Get a grip.

If you think the VA suddenly became messed up under Obama, you're insane. Obama has actually done a lot to improve it by providing additional funding. Were you not around the internet when the Walter Reed VA Hospital scandal happened when Bush was President? But I'm sure that just happened cause Obama was possibly going to be the next President. And yes, illegal immigration just recently became a problem, I forgot.

Geesh.
Click to expand...
Your retorts will make more sense and have more credibility when you take off the blinders... or pull your head out of the sand.

"Get a grip"? You're presented with Obama's own thoughts, and you're off on a rant. Get a grip is right.

Here's a clue: It doesn't matter one d@mn bit if "the VA suddenly became messed up under Obama". It's government run health care, and it's representative of the incompetent, unaccountable government.

And the current illegal immigration problem is on Obama's shoulders.

Don't like all that? I can't help you. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

"Geesh".
Click to expand...
As I understood the VA matter, one of the problems stemmed a lot from a performance based bonus plan for certain administrators and the resulting cover up that was used to make these bonuses. Why the VA would have performance bonuses is beyond me and I am guessing that practice will be stopped if it hasn't already. It sounds more like what one would expect from a privately run healthcare organization with incentives and bonuses. Without that bonus incentive, I would guess that the problems in the VA would have seen daylight a lot sooner and they could have been addressed in real time instead of putting it off until a day of reckoning which was bound to come.

As far as the illegal immigration problem, when is Boehner going to bring to a vote in the House the bi-partisan plan the Senate approved quite some time ago? Obama's shoulders indeed. You make it sound like it just started once Obama took office, but its roots go back decades. Here is a link to a pretty good summary of what has caused it which includes trade agreements, foreign policy initiatives, etc....

Link
 
of course

Obamacare isn't actually, you know, "government-run healthcare."
 
Re: of course it is.


Originally posted by TheCainer:
Originally posted by Purdue85:


Originally posted by qazplm:
the 90s? Heck, there were people championing it on the right during Romney's first run for the nomination.

If Romney had been nominated and beat Obama in 08, and had proposed this plan, conservatives would be saying what a great plan it was...but it's Obama so it can't be anything but communism or "straight from Saul Alinsky" who apparently has replaced Satan as the worst scourge of man.
Click to expand...

Really? Which "conservatives"??
Click to expand...
Does the Heritage Foundation count?
Click to expand...

So, they hold that position? Or did? Or ...? I don't follow them, so you'll have to provide some reference.

Is that all? Anyone else?
 
Re: of course it is.


Originally posted by TheCainer:
Originally posted by Purdue85:


Originally posted by lbodel:
Your response shows exactly that it's just a personal vendetta.

I don't care who the President was or is, and I'm not using his words. This was practically the same concept Republicans championed in the 90s. I can think for myself, thanks.

You can't even put together one sane paragraph in response and then immediately change the subject to other things. I love how it's a "grand scheme", just like the death panels, pulling Grandma's life support, waiting years to see a doctor, etc. were going to be issues. Get a grip.

If you think the VA suddenly became messed up under Obama, you're insane. Obama has actually done a lot to improve it by providing additional funding. Were you not around the internet when the Walter Reed VA Hospital scandal happened when Bush was President? But I'm sure that just happened cause Obama was possibly going to be the next President. And yes, illegal immigration just recently became a problem, I forgot.

Geesh.
Click to expand...
Your retorts will make more sense and have more credibility when you take off the blinders... or pull your head out of the sand.

"Get a grip"? You're presented with Obama's own thoughts, and you're off on a rant. Get a grip is right.

Here's a clue: It doesn't matter one d@mn bit if "the VA suddenly became messed up under Obama". It's government run health care, and it's representative of the incompetent, unaccountable government.

And the current illegal immigration problem is on Obama's shoulders.

Don't like all that? I can't help you. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

"Geesh".
Click to expand...
As I understood the VA matter, one of the problems stemmed a lot from a performance based bonus plan for certain administrators and the resulting cover up that was used to make these bonuses. Why the VA would have performance bonuses is beyond me and I am guessing that practice will be stopped if it hasn't already. It sounds more like what one would expect from a privately run healthcare organization with incentives and bonuses. Without that bonus incentive, I would guess that the problems in the VA would have seen daylight a lot sooner and they could have been addressed in real time instead of putting it off until a day of reckoning which was bound to come.

As far as the illegal immigration problem, when is Boehner going to bring to a vote in the House the bi-partisan plan the Senate approved quite some time ago? Obama's shoulders indeed. You make it sound like it just started once Obama took office, but its roots go back decades. Here is a link to a pretty good summary of what has caused it which includes trade agreements, foreign policy initiatives, etc....
Click to expand...
The VA is government run healthcare. Period.

Illegal immigration is on Obama's shoulders right now. He's politicized it, he's exacerbating the problem, he's not interested in any "compromise", and the only play he's interested in is amnesty. You can dress it up any way you like, but that's the end game.
 
Re: of course it is.

A plan was introduced by Republican Senator John Chaffee of Rhode Island that included an individual mandate, creating purchasing pools, standardized health plan benefits, vouchers for the poor to buy health plans and a ban on denying coverage for pre-existing conditions.

You may say that sounds an awfffful lot like the ACA, right? But I guess since it was a "Republican" governor from Rhode Island, it must be a fake conservative.

But it was also supported by other fake conservatives like Bob Dole, Orrin Hatch, Chuck Grassley, etc.

Let me guess, you don't know much about them either.
 
Re: of course it is.


Originally posted by lbodel:
A plan was introduced by Republican Senator John Chaffee of Rhode Island that included an individual mandate, creating purchasing pools, standardized health plan benefits, vouchers for the poor to buy health plans and a ban on denying coverage for pre-existing conditions.

You may say that sounds an awfffful lot like the ACA, right? But I guess since it was a "Republican" governor from Rhode Island, it must be a fake conservative.

But it was also supported by other fake conservatives like Bob Dole, Orrin Hatch, Chuck Grassley, etc.

Let me guess, you don't know much about them either.
Click to expand...
So... you're equating "Republican" approval with "Conservative".

By that logic, Democrat approval equals radical left wing extremist policy.

Standing by.... (but holding out little hope there will be intellectually serious conversation)

This post was edited on 7/14 8:18 PM by Purdue85
 
Re: of course it is.

Heritage has been around for quite a while and it's fair to say that they are a prominent voice in politics, mainly for conservative points of view. Check out their history; they played a huge part in Reagan's vision for the country. They have supported mandates before. They do not support Obamacare.

Dan Quayle and Newt Gingrich seemed okay with mandates to go with the other names mentioned earlier.
 
Re: of course it is.


Originally posted by BoilersRock:
Heritage has been around for quite a while and it's fair to say that they are a prominent voice in politics, mainly for conservative points of view. Check out their history; they played a huge part in Reagan's vision for the country. They have supported mandates before. They do not support Obamacare.

Dan Quayle and Newt Gingrich seemed okay with mandates to go with the other names mentioned earlier.
Click to expand...
...and....?
 
Re: of course it is.

The point is that you don't have to AGREE with them because they are Republicans. The point is you're going about ripping apart Obama and calling him all of these things, but don't put the same label on others. You accuse me of "blind loyalty"....even though I certainly don't agree with everything anyone does....but you clearly have blind hatred. It's not like I've reversed position to love something Obama does that Republicans have loved as well.

I just find it hilarious the personal hatred people have for Obama. It started before he was even President. The scare tactics, accusations of being a Muslim, not an American, etc. It's just absurd. The Republicans/Conservatives...whatever you'd like to call them never did anything to put a stop to the ridiculousness that ensued except for John McCain when he got so uncomfortable with the rhetoric, he finally said something one time.

When you finally answer a question and say you wish social security and medicare would be dismantled, I don't see you constantly railing on those 2 programs. And nobody mainstream does. But they're against big government programs. Ok. Makes no sense.

The personal insults, insinuations, etc. are pathetic. You can't have a logical discussion without throwing out scare tactics and buzz words.

On that note, I should go check on my grandma cause Obama's death panels could have pulled her plug by now!
 
Re: of course it is.

> ...and....?

You said, "So, they hold that position? Or did? Or ...? I don't follow them, so you'll have to provide some reference", and was provided a bit about Heritage and their influences.

In addition to Quayle or Gingrich, Paul Ryan supported a form of mandate via tax credits.
 
how exactly would

healthcare that you have to buy from private companies "turn into" government-run healthcare?
 
They came up

with "Obamacare" it was just called Romneycare. They, and others, touted it as something Romney could bring to the nation when he ran his first campaign.

Then, once everyone pointed this all out, they came out and said, oh, wait, no we don't support Obamacare.
 
so basically

whomever we say supported this, you'll just say, well they aren't a REAL conservative.

got it.
 
7% is not true. Our plan went up 40% and actually is a slightly worse plan than last year, same insurance company. For 50 employees, there was a $100,000 increase to provide the same coverage as last year. Our company also has a profit sharing program. $100,000 less profit to share, so employees each get less profit sharing since an additional $100,000 was eaten up by insurance costs. Dear employee: you got a $2000 raise, unfortunately you get none of it since it was all given to your insurance company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total premium increased by 7%. But we changed insurance companies and have a $3500.00 deductible. We pay the first $1000 and employees pay the balance. So if you figurei in the total out of company pocket costs of a 7% increase in premium and an additional $1000 the REAL increase is more like 12%
40% is pretty excessive CW. This years increase has tapered off since ACA was first brought into fruition.
Don't get me wrong I'm dead set against the ACA.
 
Re: of course it is.

Originally posted by lbodel:
Your response shows exactly that it's just a personal vendetta.

I don't care who the President was or is, and I'm not using his words. This was practically the same concept Republicans championed in the 90s. I can think for myself, thanks.

You can't even put together one sane paragraph in response and then immediately change the subject to other things. I love how it's a "grand scheme", just like the death panels, pulling Grandma's life support, waiting years to see a doctor, etc. were going to be issues. Get a grip.

If you think the VA suddenly became messed up under Obama, you're insane. Obama has actually done a lot to improve it by providing additional funding. Were you not around the internet when the Walter Reed VA Hospital scandal happened when Bush was President? But I'm sure that just happened cause Obama was possibly going to be the next President. And yes, illegal immigration just recently became a problem, I forgot.

Geesh.
Click to expand...
Geesh. What kind of memory do we have? Lets see. Republicans championed in the 90's? Lets see, who ran the WH for 8 of those years and "Championed" universal healthcare? Hint: Hillary's pet project! You see, I don't like either party but, lets get our facts straight!

Healthcare is messed up for sure but, I don't want it this way/
 
Re: of course it is.

After 9,723 posts, I can't recall a single one you've made that moved any thread in the direction of "intellectually serious" conversation.

You've devolved into 100% name-calling responses, 100% of the time. As if that makes you seem somehow "clever."

I'm surprised these other earnest folks are wasting their time trying to have rational discourse with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tjreese

This can't be true or we would have heard about it on CNN, MSNBC, CBS and ABC or other media. Besides,

Replies
15
Views
5K
Free Board: General Discussion Forum
purdave
P
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back