0
lawrocket

7 million Americans sign up for the ACA.

Recommended Posts

Quote

I guess "if at first you don't succeed, try and try again" doesn't apply in your world? Can you honestly say that everything you have ever done has been a resounding success, that you have never failed at anything or tried a single thing that didn't work brilliantly the first time?



Absolutely not, but I was smart enough to not keep trying it for 50 years.
Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm pretty sure it's less expensive to feed a family of four at the drive thru than the meat and produce departments.

Not to mention that the drive-thru is generally a whole lot closer and easier to get to.

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon

Quote

I was just informed I will now be required under the ACA to see my Dr 4 times a year

Unless you can show that in the actual law, I'm going to call BS on this. If it is in the law, then it would apply to everyone, and I have received no such notice.

Don



All I can tell you is what the Dr told me last thursday during my apointment
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh oh.....

Quote

Latest ObamaCare surprise: Most won't be able to buy health insurance until end of year



Quote

There is yet another ObamaCare surprise waiting for consumers: from now until the next open enrollment at the end of this year, most people will simply not be able to buy any health insurance at all, even outside the exchanges.

"It's all closed down. You cannot buy a policy that is a qualified policy for the purpose of the ACA (the Affordable Care Act) until next year on January 1," says John DiVito, president of Flexbenefit which has 2,500 brokers.

John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas adds, "People are not going to be able to buy individual and family policies, and that's part of ObamaCare. And what makes it so surprising is the whole point of ObamaCare was to encourage people to get insurance, and now the market has been completely closed down for the next seven months."

That means that with few exceptions, tens of millions of people will be locked out of the health insurance market for the rest of this year.



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/09/latest-obamacare-surprise-most-wont-be-able-to-buy-health-insurance-until-end/?sc=711578774735426773
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
airdvr


Let me give you an example; Head Start.

Quote

We spend more than $7 billion providing Head Start to nearly 1 million children each year. And finally there is indisputable evidence about the program's effectiveness, provided by the Department of Health and Human Services: Head Start simply does not work.




Yes, it appears that Head Start, or private jump start problems for preschoolers has delivers benefits in the short term. But that has nothing to do with the topic.

an uneducated brain doesn't lose it's potential. It is not a disease that is destroying brain function. The brain continues to develop well into the teen years - there are many subjects that can't be groked until that occurs. (In contrast, language acquisition appears to be much easier early. But that isn't part of the Head Start program or evaluation)

I don't think you'll find any other aspect of public health where preventative care pays as high a dividend as prenatal care. Minor changes have substantial impact, and not doing them leads to horrendous costs at birth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>I didn't realize the ACA came with a cure for SB.

It can indeed get you that cure - folate, present in all prenatal vitamins, which are the first things an OB/GYN will tell you to start taking when you're pregnant. (Of course, this has nothing to do with the ACA "curing" spina bifida. The ACA only helps get you in to see the doctor, who already knows what to do to greatly reduce the odds of getting SB.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>And this is called "success?"

Some more success - even companies claiming that Obamacare will be the end of the world as we know it are taking full advantage of it.

=============
Many 'Obamacare' Critics Accepted Its Subsidies
WASHINGTON April 8, 2014 (AP)
By CHARLES BABINGTON Associated Press
Associated Press

Several big corporations have reaped millions of dollars from "Obamacare" even as they support GOP candidates who vow to repeal the law. This condemn-while-benefiting strategy angers Democrats, who see some of their top congressional candidates struggling against waves of anti-Obamacare ads partly funded by these companies.

Among the corporations is a familiar Democratic nemesis, Koch Industries, the giant conglomerate headed by the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch. They and some conservative allies are spending millions of dollars to hammer Democratic senators in North Carolina, Alaska, Colorado, Iowa and elsewhere, chiefly for backing President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., renewed his criticisms of the Kochs this week. In a Senate chamber speech, Reid noted that Koch Industries benefited from a temporary provision of the health care law.

The Early Retiree Reinsurance Program, Reid said, "helped the company pay health insurance costs for its retirees who are not covered by Medicare." Reid asked sarcastically: "So it's OK for Koch Industries to save money through Obamacare" even as Koch-related groups seek the law's repeal.

When Congress enacted the health care law in 2010, it appropriated $5 billion for the temporary reinsurance program. The goal was to subsidize employers' costs for workers who retire before they become eligible for Medicare. Hundreds of employers applied — many were corporations, cities and public universities — and virtually all the money was soon distributed.

"If the Affordable Care Act is so awful," Reid asked, "why did Koch Industries use it to their advantage?"

Federal records show that Koch Industries received $1.4 million in early retiree subsidies. That's considerably less than the sums many other employers received. A Koch Industries spokesman said he had no comment on Reid's latest criticisms.
=================

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rushmc

Oh oh.....

Quote

Latest ObamaCare surprise: Most won't be able to buy health insurance until end of year



***There is yet another ObamaCare surprise waiting for consumers: from now until the next open enrollment at the end of this year, most people will simply not be able to buy any health insurance at all, even outside the exchanges.

"It's all closed down. You cannot buy a policy that is a qualified policy for the purpose of the ACA (the Affordable Care Act) until next year on January 1," says John DiVito, president of Flexbenefit which has 2,500 brokers.

John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas adds, "People are not going to be able to buy individual and family policies, and that's part of ObamaCare. And what makes it so surprising is the whole point of ObamaCare was to encourage people to get insurance, and now the market has been completely closed down for the next seven months."

That means that with few exceptions, tens of millions of people will be locked out of the health insurance market for the rest of this year.



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/09/latest-obamacare-surprise-most-wont-be-able-to-buy-health-insurance-until-end/?sc=711578774735426773More right wing hyperbole. Anyone with a change-of-life situation (get a job, lose a job, get married, get divorced, have a kid, age out of coverage on your parent's plan) will be able to buy insurance. The only people who will be affected are people who don't have insurance, who did not have any change in their circumstances, and who didn't bother to get insurance before the deadline. If they didn't bother to get insurance before, and their circumstances have not changed, what do you think the chances are that they will suddenly decide out of the blue to get insurance now?

Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If they didn't bother to get insurance before, and their circumstances have not changed, what do you think the chances are that they will suddenly decide out of the blue to get insurance now?

Well, duh -- if they get sick or injured, they want their Obamacare!!!
Just like before, when they wanted the same level of care from the county/charity ER that anyone else would get who'd paid insurance up front.

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am really not trying to be obtuse. Where does the money come from and does everyone honestly think that this program is going to sustain? I got it that preventive medicine may be cheaper in the long run but if there is no money, there is no money.

If it isnt sustaining how is it any better than any other failing program. Docs and hospitals have to be paid right? Is there a system or statisitc that shows this as sustainable?

I have scoured around and have yet to find any. If they are out there would someone post it up becasue even the governments own documents dont seem to show this as a sustainable system.

From a purely systems standpoint it already looks broken. Id like to see the hard evidence that says it isnt.
Propblast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
> Where does the money come from and does everyone honestly think that this
>program is going to sustain?

From the premiums that people pay for their insurance.

> Docs and hospitals have to be paid right?

EXACTLY! Which is why this is better than the current program, which is "go to the ER and don't pay." I've known several skydivers who have done that because they didn't have health insurance. They preferred to spend their money on new rigs, mains, jumpsuits etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

> Docs and hospitals have to be paid right?
EXACTLY! Which is why this is better than the current program, which is "go to the ER and don't pay." have the government pay the reduced bills from tax monies they've stolen from the citizenry. W/Obamanos Care, the government gets to keep all the monies they steal, & pass the health care expenses back to the citizenry to pay. Plus, the Hospitals will get to inflate their bills, as an added bonus. Isn't this GREAT?!?!



There, FIFY :S...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon

******>I guess the realist in me says no. Preventative or ER it still costs money. I just
>can't logically see where the numbers work. Can you show me?Like with Math
>numbers.

Cost of standard prenatal care over the course of a pregnancy: $2000 average
Cost of care for spina bifida over one child's lifetime: $532,000 average

Which would you rather pay?



I didn't realize the ACA came with a cure for SB. Bravo!It's remarkable that the concept that prevention is less expensive than treating a life-long incurable condition is too much for some people to understand.

Don

Abortion is much cheaper than that.

Lets require abortions.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtlespeed

*********>I guess the realist in me says no. Preventative or ER it still costs money. I just
>can't logically see where the numbers work. Can you show me?Like with Math
>numbers.

Cost of standard prenatal care over the course of a pregnancy: $2000 average
Cost of care for spina bifida over one child's lifetime: $532,000 average

Which would you rather pay?



I didn't realize the ACA came with a cure for SB. Bravo!It's remarkable that the concept that prevention is less expensive than treating a life-long incurable condition is too much for some people to understand.

Don

Abortion is much cheaper than that.

Lets require abortions.If you say so.

We'll start with the turtles. Also let's not forget the cost savings that euthanasia could bring. A bit of CO2 gas is surely a lot cheaper than a lifetime supply of surgical glue to hold a cracked shell together, never mind the turtle wax to buff out the dings and scrapes.

:S

Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon

************>I guess the realist in me says no. Preventative or ER it still costs money. I just
>can't logically see where the numbers work. Can you show me?Like with Math
>numbers.

Cost of standard prenatal care over the course of a pregnancy: $2000 average
Cost of care for spina bifida over one child's lifetime: $532,000 average

Which would you rather pay?



I didn't realize the ACA came with a cure for SB. Bravo!It's remarkable that the concept that prevention is less expensive than treating a life-long incurable condition is too much for some people to understand.

Don

Abortion is much cheaper than that.

Lets require abortions.If you say so.

We'll start with the turtles. Also let's not forget the cost savings that euthanasia could bring. A bit of CO2 gas is surely a lot cheaper than a lifetime supply of surgical glue to hold a cracked shell together, never mind the turtle wax to buff out the dings and scrapes.

:S

Don

Incorrect. The liberals would be all over you for animal cruelty.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtlespeed

***************>I guess the realist in me says no. Preventative or ER it still costs money. I just
>can't logically see where the numbers work. Can you show me?Like with Math
>numbers.

Cost of standard prenatal care over the course of a pregnancy: $2000 average
Cost of care for spina bifida over one child's lifetime: $532,000 average

Which would you rather pay?



I didn't realize the ACA came with a cure for SB. Bravo!It's remarkable that the concept that prevention is less expensive than treating a life-long incurable condition is too much for some people to understand.

Don

Abortion is much cheaper than that.

Lets require abortions.If you say so.

We'll start with the turtles. Also let's not forget the cost savings that euthanasia could bring. A bit of CO2 gas is surely a lot cheaper than a lifetime supply of surgical glue to hold a cracked shell together, never mind the turtle wax to buff out the dings and scrapes.

:S

Don

Incorrect. The liberals would be all over you for animal cruelty.

Not really, some animals are too annoying to let live.

Most liberals have no problem with killing a cockroach or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

******************>I guess the realist in me says no. Preventative or ER it still costs money. I just
>can't logically see where the numbers work. Can you show me?Like with Math
>numbers.

Cost of standard prenatal care over the course of a pregnancy: $2000 average
Cost of care for spina bifida over one child's lifetime: $532,000 average

Which would you rather pay?



I didn't realize the ACA came with a cure for SB. Bravo!It's remarkable that the concept that prevention is less expensive than treating a life-long incurable condition is too much for some people to understand.

Don

Abortion is much cheaper than that.

Lets require abortions.If you say so.

We'll start with the turtles. Also let's not forget the cost savings that euthanasia could bring. A bit of CO2 gas is surely a lot cheaper than a lifetime supply of surgical glue to hold a cracked shell together, never mind the turtle wax to buff out the dings and scrapes.

:S

Don

Incorrect. The liberals would be all over you for animal cruelty.

Not really, some animals are too annoying to let live.

Most liberals have no problem with killing a cockroach or two.

I didn't realize they hated Canadians that much. Who knew?
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

Canadians aren't a recognized animal...turtles are.

I thought you were smart enough to understand the difference between human and animal. Sorry for giving you that much credit. I keep thinking you have some level of education.



Humans are not animals?

That is a new one on me
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[Reply]EXACTLY! Which is why this is better than the current program, which is "go to the ER and don't pay." I've known several skydivers who have done that because they didn't have health insurance. They preferred to spend their money on new rigs, mains, jumpsuits etc



And to think that government policy made it so that hospitals had to treat without regard to ability to pay. (EMTALA).

I find it odd that government seeks to solve a problem by creating a bigger one and then people look to the government to fix that problem.

It's a masterful step by the government to create an unfunded mandate and let the country know that any ER is good for treatment. Then point to what a big problem it is that there are all these people who aren't paying for healthcare.

Government soluton to a problem: solve it by creating a bigger one, thereby creating need for more government involvement.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lawrocket

[Reply]EXACTLY! Which is why this is better than the current program, which is "go to the ER and don't pay." I've known several skydivers who have done that because they didn't have health insurance. They preferred to spend their money on new rigs, mains, jumpsuits etc



And to think that government policy made it so that hospitals had to treat without regard to ability to pay. (EMTALA).

I find it odd that government seeks to solve a problem by creating a bigger one and then people look to the government to fix that problem.

It's a masterful step by the government to create an unfunded mandate and let the country know that any ER is good for treatment. Then point to what a big problem it is that there are all these people who aren't paying for healthcare.

Government soluton to a problem: solve it by creating a bigger one, thereby creating need for more government involvement.



Exactly!!!

Would be so much better if doctors didn't have to treat patients. Can't afford it, fuck em.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>And to think that government policy made it so that hospitals had to treat
>without regard to ability to pay. (EMTALA).

So. 12 year old girl comes in; motor vehicle accident. Parents are unconscious as well. She's going to die without basic care; with it she will almost certainly recover. No one can find ID or medical insurance.

You really OK with a hospital that just lets her die because she cannot demonstrate ability to pay? I'm not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lawrocket

[Reply]EXACTLY! Which is why this is better than the current program, which is "go to the ER and don't pay." I've known several skydivers who have done that because they didn't have health insurance. They preferred to spend their money on new rigs, mains, jumpsuits etc



And to think that government policy made it so that hospitals had to treat without regard to ability to pay. (EMTALA).

I find it odd that government seeks to solve a problem by creating a bigger one and then people look to the government to fix that problem.

It's a masterful step by the government to create an unfunded mandate and let the country know that any ER is good for treatment. Then point to what a big problem it is that there are all these people who aren't paying for healthcare.

Government soluton to a problem: solve it by creating a bigger one, thereby creating need for more government involvement.



THis is how it appears to me and no one has made a convincing counter argument in this thread. The straw man of this is better than that still doesn't pay for it. I really would like to see the data that the proponents use to state this is going to be a success.
Propblast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0