- 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
re: Dem's say 7.1 million have signed up for Obamacare...actually it's 858,000
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:09 pm to Edearl Watson
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:09 pm to Edearl Watson
Doesn't matter.
The media carried Obama's claim to the idiots and I'm sure they bought it.
That's all that matters.
The media carried Obama's claim to the idiots and I'm sure they bought it.
That's all that matters.
1
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:10 pm to Scoop
quote:
Doesn't matter. The media carried Obama's claim to the idiots and I'm sure they bought it. That's all that matters.
Yep. Throw out some bullshite "fact". Let the media run with it in bold print front page. Then bury in the sales papers the one line correction later.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:15 pm to SmackoverHawg
The thing is Obama and the Media are mocking the American people. To get out there today of all days April Fools and tell us that 7.1 million have signed up they must think we're all fools.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:36 pm to constant cough
Remember during the election Obama's goal was to get the unemployment rate below 8.0
Then the much anticipated labor report just weeks before the vote came out and said:
7.8
7.9 would be too obvious. So they had to make it 7.8
Just like this. 7 million would be too obvious. So they made it 7.1
It's all bullshite.
Then the much anticipated labor report just weeks before the vote came out and said:
7.8
7.9 would be too obvious. So they had to make it 7.8
Just like this. 7 million would be too obvious. So they made it 7.1
It's all bullshite.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 11:07 pm to PrimeTime Money
Bingo
He has a wizard behind the curtain.
The magic pencil
He has a wizard behind the curtain.
The magic pencil
Posted on 4/2/14 at 7:59 am to dr smartass phd
Medical insurance bail out
Posted on 4/2/14 at 8:01 am to SmackoverHawg
quote:
Bout time too!! Damn. I was a doctor by the time I was 26 and had been self insured for some time. Maybe that'll get him off mama's tit.
subtle brag
Posted on 4/2/14 at 8:18 am to AlexLSU
quote:
I know a healthy, soon-to-be 26 yr old guy with an engineering degree from A&M that signed up for Obamacare this week. Cited "getting kicked off his parent's plan" as the reason.
why the frick wouldn't he just buy a normal insurance plan?
Posted on 4/2/14 at 8:20 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
why the frick wouldn't he just buy a normal insurance plan?
Well he did say he is an A&M grad... That is all the info you should need.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 8:33 am to Edearl Watson
quote:
7.1 million
quote:
858,000
Both numbers could be somewhat accurate if you think about it. It depends upon what you are referring to. Policies purchased through an exchange or newly insured. I'm not taking a position, I'm just thinking about a discussion I heard yesterday among some people from the Wharton School, Princeton and some health insurance gurus.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 8:37 am to VOR
quote:
Both numbers could be somewhat accurate if you think about it.
7.1 "Put a plan in their cart" is realistic...
858k being newly insured who have paid their first premium is realistic.
The latter is the only number that really matters in the scheme of things. The whole point was to insure people who weren't insurable before, or that is what the public was sold.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 8:45 am to Lsut81
quote:
Percentages from a hush-hush RAND Corporation study suggest barely 858,000 previously uninsured Americans have enrolled and paid premiums
These are 2 different metrics. 858,000 is based on a study measuring the previously uninsured who have enrolled. 7.1m is number of total sign-ups. Apples and oranges.
These are metrics, guys. They're abstractions. They aren't supposed to tell the whole story.
Honestly, if the ACA had 14 million sign-ups in the first month and 100% of enroll-ees had paid would you change your opinion on Obamacare? This sign-up drama is a side show. Nobody will remember or care in 1,2 or 10 years. The efficacy of the program is what matters.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 8:48 am to a want
quote:
These are 2 different metrics. 858,000 is based on a study measuring the previously uninsured who have enrolled. 7.1m is number of total sign-ups. Apples and oranges.
Yes they are, but the only number that truly matters is the 858k...
Everything else is just a smokescreen and a shuffling of people who already had insurance.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 8:56 am to Lsut81
quote:
the 858k...
Does not include "newly insured" through Medicaid expansion under the Act. To be honest, those numbers should be included in that total, as well. I'm sure that makes you happy.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 8:56 am to a want
quote:
Honestly, if the ACA had 14 million sign-ups in the first month and 100% of enroll-ees had paid would you change your opinion on Obamacare?
Yes, yes I would, but this is a pointless argument. Its much like asking if you would change your mind on the war in Iraq if they really did find WMDs along with Bin Laden staying at Saddam's palace.
The "sign up drama" certainly matters because it means the plan is not working for even those it was most intended to help. If it was economically feasable, people would sign up in droves.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 9:00 am to VOR
quote:
Does not include "newly insured" through Medicaid expansion under the Act. To be honest, those numbers should be included in that total, as well. I'm sure that makes you happy.
Sweet, so lets include them and have it financially make sense... I would LOVE to hear your insight on how this works.
So using that, we have now added 4.8m people to insurance who previously didn't have insurance, yet only 800k of those are actually paying. So 20% of people who are newly insured are paying their way.... And this is financially feasible how???
Oh yeah, the piece of shite in the Whitehouse LIED and everyone else's premiums will have to skyrocket to subsidize these people.
ETA: Not to mention that the % of young and healthy to old and sick is WAY off of the original assertions given out.
This post was edited on 4/2/14 at 9:02 am
Posted on 4/2/14 at 9:06 am to Lsut81
quote:
So 20% of people who are newly insured are paying their way.... And this is financially feasible how???
I dunno.
quote:
everyone else's premiums will have to skyrocket to subsidize these people.
I suppose that's one way.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 9:09 am to Lsut81
quote:
everyone else's premiums will have to skyrocket to subsidize these people
We have been subsidizing these people for decades.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 9:20 am to a want
quote:
We have been subsidizing these people for decades.
If we've already been subsidizing these people for decades, why the catastrophic impact on premiums? If we were already doing this, it should be figured in and nobody's premiums should be rising.
Posted on 4/2/14 at 9:24 am to a want
quote:
We have been subsidizing these people for decades.
But I thought there was 40 million or whatever uninsured who weren't being subsidized?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News