More Americans Lose Health Insurance Than Sign Up for ObamaCare Plans
Since August, more than half a million Americans have received notices from the health insurers that their existing policies are being canceled because they don’t comply with the Affordable Care Act, reports Kaiser. And that’s just for a handful of insurers in a handful of states. Florida Blue has canceled 300k policies in Florida, or about 80 percent of its individual policies in the state, and Kaiser Permanente has canceled 160k policies in California, about half of its individual policies there. On Bloomberg, Megan McArdle asks, “Is ObamaCare in a Death Spiral?” And Politico reports the WH has called a quick meeting with the nation’s top health insurance executives.
So, will Obama finally agree that the American people and the Republican's were correct...do pigs fly?
1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Sebelius: "Obama Did Not Know About Obamacare Website Glitches"
Do you notice a pattern...a problem is either someone else's fault or the President knows nothing. I would be ashamed to back any person who responded that way, and of course it is showing an illness and he needs medical help.
2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Today's Headlines...what do you think?
"TAX DOLLARS FOR NFL TEAM TO PROMOTE OBAMACARE"...
"Man Spends 4.5 Hours on Phone But Still Can't Sign Up"...
"Iowan Enrolls After Over 100 Attempts"...
"Spanish website completely down"...
"HHS Finds TWO Enrollees for Ads"...
0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
True, concerned...just trying to keep it as simple as possible.
Kozy your figures on ss are correct if the average worker made $30,000 but the fact most haven't. I remember back in the 60's when $5 an hr that GM was paying was big bucks. I agree though if the fund would have been left alone it would be much more solvent today. I think the COLA's that were instituted sometime in the 60's was something else that accelerated the depletion of the ss fund. In fact cola's for all government wage earners are adding to the spending of money that the government don't have and it just fans inflation, which I have said countless times, that inflation is the poor man's biggest enemy.
Obamacare is forcing insurance carriers to cover things that some people don't want covered,starting next year. Add to that that they will have to accept people that they normally would not have to take and it spells considerable rate increases. Then to add insult to injury the law brings all kinds of taxes on people that buy health insurance, the companies that sell ins. and health providers and manufacturers of medical supplies and that just adds more cost to the consumer to get coverage. The cost increase are just starting wait till this thing gets into full swing. It may mean a fatal blow to the health care industry as we know it.
And after the election and the budget fights...
It took a while, but NBC has finally admitted what has been obvious to millions of us for a couple of years now: Obamacare causes people to lose their health insurance.
From NBC: Health plans are sending hundreds of thousands of cancellation letters to people who buy their own coverage, frustrating some consumers who want to keep what they have and forcing others to buy more costly policies.
…the cancellation notices, which began arriving in August, have shocked many consumers in light of President Obama’s promise that people could keep their plans if they liked them.
“I don’t feel like I need to change, but I have to,” said Jeff Learned, a television editor in Los Angeles, who must find a new plan for his teenage daughter, who has a health condition that has required multiple surgeries.
An estimated 14 million people purchase their own coverage because they don’t get it through their jobs. Calls to insurers in several stat
I think one could safely say playing the role of the policeman of the world, is what has put this country in the tank. You would think we would learn our lesson and mind our own business.
BTW, to answer my own question:
In 1969 the Johnson admin. began counting Social Security funds in the federal budget. This was done for political purposes.
By adding Social Security funds into the federal budget instead of keeping those funds separate as per the original legislation in 1935 the deficit spending on the very unpopular Vietnam war could be made to appear less troubling. Wars cost money & Vietnam was costing a bunch. Traditionally taxes or a special tax would be levied to pay for war expenses. But because Vietnam was so unpopular Johnson & the democrats didn't dare propose a war tax on anybody. Instead he borrowed the money to support the war & ran high deficits which were added directly to the National Debt. In other words, he ran up the balance on the nation's credit card & made the cost of the war appear to be less by adding into the budget the Social Security collections.
3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Gallup...PRINCETON, NJ -- President Barack Obama averaged a 44.5% job approval rating during his 19th quarter in office, a decline of more than three percentage points from his 18th quarter. That is one of the largest quarter-to-quarter declines of his presidency, behind a nine-point drop in his third quarter and a six-point drop in his 11th quarter.
Any wonder why, considering the scandals and lies...?
...(Continued)...Entitlement my foot, I paid cash for my social security insurance! Just because President Johnson and the democrats borrowed the money for other government spending, doesn't make my benefits some kind of charity or handout!
Remember Congressional benefits? --- free healthcare, outrageous retirement packages, 67 paid holidays, three weeks paid vacation, unlimited paid sick days. Now that's welfare, and they call social security retirement payments entitlements?
Why did the Johnson and the democrats borrow from it in the first place? Did they do it because it was good for us? It was never supposed to be part of the general fund...now, anyone want to discuss Medicare?
...(Continued)...If you calculate the future invested value of $4,500 per year (yours & your employer's contribution) at a simple 5% interest (less than what the Government pays on the money that it borrows), after 49 years of working you'd have $892,919.98.
If you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive $26,787.60 per year and it would last better than 30 years (until you're 95 if you retire at age 65) and that's with no interest paid on that balance after each payout is made! If you bought an annuity and it paid 4% per year, you'd have a lifetime income of $2,976.40 per month...(Continued)...
Yesterday, I heard "AGAIN" from a liberal member of congress how we recipient's of social security were getting entitlements...well, lets do some math:
Not only did you and I contribute to Social Security but your employer did, too. It totaled 15% of your income before taxes. If you averaged only $30K over your working life, that's close to $220,500.
Read that again. Did you see where the Government paid in one single penny? We are talking about the money you and your employer put in a Government bank to insure we would have a retirement check from the money we put in, not the Government.
Now they are calling the money we put in an entitlement when we reach the age to take it back...(Continued)...
notSocialist, You have been drinking too much of the koolaide. I never heard of Saul Alinski until the right wing tried to use it to smear the President. The irony is that even the right wing has no idea who Saul Alinski was. They just like using the sound of his Russian name even though he was born in Chicago, Illinois in 1909 to Russian Jewish immigrant parents.
Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) was an American community organizer and writer. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing. The man was not a communist much to the disappointment of the right wing.
0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Hey, someone at Salem News:
I'm gonna echo Grant here. The word in that website is okay, but h e r o i n gets bleeped?
TripleD: "." You mean like the rabid nonsense you posted in reference to god,"
My friend, God just loves you and whether you choose to believe or not is up to you. The Bible is clear that those who do not believe do not understand...so you are right when you say to you it makes no sense. I will just keep praying that one day, you will understand.
questioner, "I guess when logic fails, you throw crap and hope it sticks." You mean like the rabid nonsense you posted in reference to god, in between your rabid nonsensical posts on the affordable care act?
0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Hey, notSocialist, at least 3D is no longer trying to say Obamacare is going to work.
Hopefully there won't be any more statements showing a misunderstanding about S.S., etc. either. (Altho I'm not sure how he got to that particular place after your last 2 posts anyway--but I guess when logic fails, you throw crap and hope it sticks.)
Make sure you give back your Social Security check and please do not apply for Medicare. Actually please disregard that last sentence, go ahead and enjoy the benefits of Socialism.
Oops, from Wall St Journal.
Some states have so few carriers offering plans in the marketplaces that the lack of competition has kept rates high. West Virginia and New Hampshire, for example, currently have only one carrier for their entire states, respectively. Wyoming only has two, after most of the state’s insurers skipped the exchange, and has the highest rates in the country.
Large insurers like Cigna and UnitedHealth have abstained from many states’ exchanges this year; Aetna has backed out of seven exchanges it originally applied to.
In Mississippi, 36 counties would not have had any plan options if Humana had not joined at the 11th hour.
An analysis of exchange plans in 13 states by McKinsey & Co. found that nearly half of them had limited networks. Some people who currently have individual insurance and stick with their current policy may find that it becomes more restrictive after the insurer enters the exchange. Wellpoint’s Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield has been criticized by state senators and consumers in New Hampshire, Indiana and Maine for excluding major hospitals from coverage, but a spokesman says the “narrower network” products, available on exchanges in 14 states, meet or exceed the ACA’s standards for “convenient access,”
The more I learn the more I hate it.
Yikes, I didn't know this: A lesser-known ACA provision requires employers to pay fees that will go toward the cost of covering Americans who were previously uninsured.
***That tax is known as the Transitional Reinsurance Program, and will charge health insurers and self-insured employers (that is, companies that provide their own insurance) $63 per person covered on their plans.
Employers and insurers, already saddled with their own rising health care costs, are likely to pass those fees on to consumers in the form of rate increases.
So, companies with their own health insurance will pay a tax to cover the uninsured. Is this true???
The new ACA exchanges are run either by states or the federal government and cater to individuals.
Employers, in contrast, are using private exchanges operated by benefits firms like Towers Watson and Aon Hewitt, which serve employee groups. Williams, who runs Extend Health, an exchange that has been selling Medigap plans for seven years and will host IBM’s retirees. Sears Holdings and Darden Restaurants already moved active employees to Aon Hewitt’s health exchange in 2013, long before the rollout of the public exchanges.
the trend is spreading...In the next three to five years, 44% of employers plan to offer health insurance through a corporate exchange, giving workers a fixed dollar amount to spend on coverage, up from 4% today, according to Aon Hewitt.
So how will this affect Obamacare? Not in a positive way.
UnitedHealth Investors, Buckle Up: Obamacare Has Come
Wall Street Journal headline
161 North Lincoln , Salem, OH 44460 |