- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/14/14 at 12:24 pm to Eurocat
quote:
The number of uninsured would fall well below 30 million of 24 states expanded their Medicaid programs. That was the plan all along to get the unisured number of folks really down. Texas alone could get one million people insured if they just expanded like 26 other states have done.
Then the cost matrix would sky rocket... The whole premise is a lose lose..
Posted on 4/14/14 at 12:26 pm to udtiger
quote:
They also said that Medicare would only cost $10 billion by 1990.
Also, in 1935 they passed the 37 page Social Security Act and everyone agreed that a 2% tax on income to "keep old people out of the poor house" was just fine and dandy...
Posted on 4/14/14 at 12:26 pm to Eurocat
quote:
The number of uninsured would fall well below 30 million of 24 states expanded their Medicaid programs. That was the plan all along to get the unisured number of folks really down
HOLY frick!!
1) CBO says it will cost lots of money to the Fed Gov
2) CBO says it will not cost as much to Fed Gov as we projected..and we will still have 30 Million uninsured
3) YOU say "those 30 million would go away if they could get on the MEDICAID rolls...planned all along.
Do you not see that you are crowing that the Fed Gov has lower costs...and then saying there was supposed to be more people on MEDICAID?
Do you see NO connection between "savings" and "fewer than projected on MEDICAID"? Really?
Posted on 4/14/14 at 12:26 pm to Eurocat
quote:
The number of uninsured would fall well below 30 million of 24 states expanded their Medicaid programs. That was the plan all along to get the unisured number of folks really down. Texas alone could get one million people insured if they just expanded like 26 other states have done.
...and the cost in that scenario?
Posted on 4/14/14 at 12:27 pm to Eurocat
quote:
The number of uninsured would fall well below 30 million of 24 states expanded their Medicaid programs.
i'm still blown away that we count Medicaid as "insurance"
quote:
That was the plan all along to get the unisured number of folks really down.
this is a hilarious statement
Posted on 4/14/14 at 12:28 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i'm still blown away that we count Medicaid as "insurance"
Do they count people receiving UI Benefits as "Employed"?
Posted on 4/14/14 at 12:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That was the plan all along to get the unisured number of folks really down.
No its not. Thats the plan they stated, though..
Posted on 4/14/14 at 12:37 pm to Eurocat
quote:Incredibly interesting.
CBO: Obamacare will have lower premiums, insure more, and cost government less than projected.
Literally just saw the United CEO discussing 2015 premium increases. Actuary calculations are very difficult d/t remaining confusion about demographics, numbers of actual signees, and when payments will come thru. He thinks premiums will rise next year.
Amazing that the CBO could work numbers more accurately than Insurance Companies.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 1:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i'm still blown away that we count Medicaid as "insurance"
This is what we have come to.
Medicaid and other similar programs was never meant to be something that you can depend on your whole life. It was supposed to be a temporary stop gap measure to get you out of a rut and on the fast track to being a productive citizen that pays its own bills.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 1:14 pm to Eurocat
quote:
ACA’s coverage provisions will result in lower net costs to the federal government:
quote:
Health insurance premiums are lower than CBO originally projected, saving the government $190 billion;
This is such bullshite! They tout lower costs compared to the super high costs that were also estimated. So they claim savings by comparing new estimates to old estimates? WTF
Yes, it MAY cost the government less that they first thought, but it is still costing the government billions and billions each year.
And stupidly people won't realize how many of the people being counted as insured are actually part of the medicaid expansion which is a 100% cost to the government.
This post was edited on 4/14/14 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 4/14/14 at 1:28 pm to Eurocat
This may have been stated already....
But title is misleading.
this article is saying that ACA will have lower premiums, insure more, and cost gov less...... Than the CBO projections previously indicated.
That is a major distinction here.
This article is not saying premiums will go lower. It is saying they are projection premiums to be lower than the previously projected increases.
The only figure that doesn't appear to be based on relation to a previous projection is " 12 million more nonelderly people will have health insurance in 2014 than would had it in the absence of the ACA"
So basically all this tells us is that 12 million new enrolles in insurance.
So for all the people who lost coverage they had because it was no longer offered, for all the premiums hikes, for all the hikes in out of pocket expenses and deductible.......... we will have 12 million more non elderly signed up for insurance.
So the government is spending 36 billion for 2014, plus all the premiums increasing for average folks... thats the cost of 12 million newly insured.
But title is misleading.
this article is saying that ACA will have lower premiums, insure more, and cost gov less...... Than the CBO projections previously indicated.
That is a major distinction here.
This article is not saying premiums will go lower. It is saying they are projection premiums to be lower than the previously projected increases.
The only figure that doesn't appear to be based on relation to a previous projection is " 12 million more nonelderly people will have health insurance in 2014 than would had it in the absence of the ACA"
So basically all this tells us is that 12 million new enrolles in insurance.
So for all the people who lost coverage they had because it was no longer offered, for all the premiums hikes, for all the hikes in out of pocket expenses and deductible.......... we will have 12 million more non elderly signed up for insurance.
So the government is spending 36 billion for 2014, plus all the premiums increasing for average folks... thats the cost of 12 million newly insured.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 2:02 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:Not at all. We did it to buy democrats votes.
We did all of this horseshite and still end up with a perpetual 30 million uninsured?
Posted on 4/14/14 at 2:13 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
Do you not see that you are crowing that the Fed Gov has lower costs...and then saying there was supposed to be more people on MEDICAID?
Do you see NO connection between "savings" and "fewer than projected on MEDICAID"? Really?
BHP, why are you being so selfish? Why do you want to kill people? Why do you want everyone to die because of your selfishness? How do you sleep at night?.................
Posted on 4/14/14 at 2:31 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Incredibly interesting. Literally just saw the United CEO discussing 2015 premium increases. Actuary calculations are very difficult d/t remaining confusion about demographics, numbers of actual signees, and when payments will come thru. He thinks premiums will rise next year. Amazing that the CBO could work numbers more accurately than Insurance Companies.
Isn't it? That said, still waiting for someone to produce a CBO prediction for 2013/2014 from back in 2010/2011 that is accurate. Otherwise it is just a forecast with zero track record.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 2:37 pm to Eurocat
the official enrollment number won't be known until the end of 2014, CBO said.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 2:38 pm to Eurocat
quote:
The number of uninsured would fall well below 30 million of 24 states expanded their Medicaid programs.
Medicaid is NOT insurance. It's welfare. There are no actuarial calculations, there's no risk analysis, and it has nothing to do with INSURANCE. It's strictly a give-a-way. More disguised welfare and massive wealth redistribution for Obama voters.
What is it about the demented mind of a liberal that it refuses to recognize the obvious.
Posted on 4/14/14 at 2:46 pm to MMauler
quote:
MMauler
Agreed, but here's the kicker. It is NOT insurance, you are right, but when a person enrolls in Medicaid, Obama's idiots mark them off of the uninsured list!
It's the same moronic thought process that they use to tell us someone is not unemployed, because they stopped looking for work!
Posted on 4/14/14 at 2:57 pm to Eurocat
quote:
* Health insurance premiums are lower than CBO originally projected, saving the government $190 billion;
It's b/c the plans suck.
I have NEVER seen a $2000 CO-PAY until this year. THink about that...a $0 deductible with a $2000 copay for any ambulatory procedure. $200 copay for office visits.
These plans have patients paying OOP for everything until their $15,000 OOP max is hit. It's nothing but catastrophe insurance disquised as medical coverage. And people wonder why they can't find physiicans and hospitals to take them.
Hey...but at least they are "covered", right?
This post was edited on 4/14/14 at 2:59 pm
Posted on 4/14/14 at 3:10 pm to MSMHater
quote:
It's b/c the plans suck.
When I was in my 30's, I was healthy and I was working for myself. I didn't need a Cadillac or Gold plan. So, I went and spoke with my local BC/BS agent. We went through the different plans and, given my health and age, I decided to go with BC/BS's least expensive plan. It was only $50/month, but it had a $5,000 deductible.
It was referred to as a "Catastrophic Plan". The idea was that I was basically self-insured for all the "little" nagging illnesses, BUT, if I got cancer or something like that, I would have coverage.
It was all I needed.
NOW, under Obozocare, $5,000 deductibles are common place. I looked on a local exchange and the only "affordable" coverage has deductibles of $12K-20K. And, the premiums were upward of $1,000/month.
That's not "good" insurance. That's worse that the CHEAP "catastrophic" insurance that I used to have. And, this is the insurance that Obozo is saying is "affordable" and "quality" health insurance. The reality is it's clearly not affordable. And, we're finding out that the quality is pure, grade-A, SH!T. Doctors will not accept it. Hospitals will not accept it. Just like Obozo himself, it's an unmitigated FAILURE.
This post was edited on 4/14/14 at 3:12 pm
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News