It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Study shows just 858,000 newly insured Americans have paid up!

page: 2
31
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 10:11 AM
link   

tinner07
So almost 4 years, untold millions of dollars putting this all together, time spent with like 50 votes to try to repeal it all so that 7 million people can get health care insurance?

Surely some people got into the expanded medicaid programs? or signed up on state exchanges so are not included in that 7 million.

I think the real statistic would be along the lines of how many people did not have any health care coverage before this went into effect vs. how many do not today.




Here you go. . .




posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 10:13 AM
link   

butcherguy

LDragonFire
Here is the link to the RAND Corporation let me know if you find it??

RAND Corp....

So you are denying that it exists because the LA Times is sitting on the story?

Do you believe that the other outlets that are quoting from it are all lying?

And you accuse me of zealotry?

BTW.... Where are the figures from the Obama Administration regarding how many have paid, if they were previously insured or not.... etc?


I was able to find this so far....


The RAND study hasn’t yet been published, but its contents were made available to Noam Levey of the Los Angeles Times. RAND also estimates that 9 million individuals have purchased health plans directly from insurers, outside of the exchanges, but that “the vast majority of these people were previously insured.”

The RAND report appears to corroborate the work of other surveys. Earlier this month, McKinsey reported that 27 percent of those signing up for coverage on the individual market were previously uninsured.


Sourc e

I highly doubt this reporter would be putting themselves out there by making up this kind of story.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


If you are poor for various reasons and playing the system is part of your coping mechanism, then you are going to do the obvious thing. You will sign up for Obamacare but not pay the premium because you can't/won't and figure that the government, in its wisdom, will excuse you from paying. After all, you did, with honest intentions, sign up for it. So you deserve free insurance, right?



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by seeker1963
 


You didn't add this from your link:


Two caveats. First, we know little about RAND’s survey methodology at this time; we’ll have to see the actual study to see the details of what they did. Second, we don’t know how many previously uninsured people signed up for off-exchange coverage, above and beyond the normal rate of churn that this market would traditionally see.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Do we even know if the 7 million number excludes those who were referred to Medicaid? If the RAND numbers are correct about the percentage of people who had some type of insurance previously, there is no way the program will remain solvent. If those numbers are correct then less than 2 million previously uninsured have insurance now. Plus 2 million minus those who lost there plans and your are at best at break even position on numbers of people insured if not a net loss.

April 1st seems to me to be the most appropriate day for the Administration, and its enablers in the media, to be taking their victory lap. I believe that as time goes along those celebrating will be seen as the fools that they are.

You'll not here me say a word in defense of the insurance/pharma/hospital/device maker Cabal, and I think ObamaCare might prove to be slightly better than the status quo pre ACA. Congress had the opportunity to actually drive down the cost of healthcare in the US, but did absolutely nothing to reign in the costs of healthcare.

The medical industry is able to conduct business in ways that would be felonious in any other industry in the US. Opaque pricing, monopolies,barriers to entry, protection from competition, and re-import bans all make healthcare prohibitively expensive. Notice I didn't mention tort reform, if you were to eliminate all lawsuits and the pre-emptive medicine to avoid them, you'd knock less than 5% off the cost of healthcare.Any law that fails to drive the cost of healthcare down is a failure. I think you could drive the cost of healthcare down by at least 60% and maybe as much as 80% if you address the issues i listed above. That would be to the level that Silver plans charge in co-pays and co-insurance, without monthly premiums and yearly deductibles. Drive the cost of healthcare down that much ( and that is what it costs in places like India and Mexico) and then people only need insurance for the catastrophic and chronic conditions. Routine medical treatment should be affordable to most anyone either out of pocket in cash or over 90-180 day terms. Broken bones, routine illness, common outpatient surgeries, and up to uncomplicated childbirth should be affordable out of pocket to most people. ObamaCare did not even try to make healthcare affordable, it instead created a captive population for the healthcare to continue to extract as much as possible from the American people through taxation and forced participation in a system that didn't do a single thing to drive down costs.

In closing I'd like to say to those celebrating on April Fools, Enjoy it. I can't wait until we see the real numbers and effects. I just hope they manifest as much as possible before November.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 10:27 AM
link   

LDragonFire
reply to post by seeker1963
 


You didn't add this from your link:


Two caveats. First, we know little about RAND’s survey methodology at this time; we’ll have to see the actual study to see the details of what they did. Second, we don’t know how many previously uninsured people signed up for off-exchange coverage, above and beyond the normal rate of churn that this market would traditionally see.

All we need if for the transparent Obama Administration to supply all the numbers and then we can see for ourselves. They haven't yet.

If they don't have the numbers to give us... which has been the excuse that they have used so far, they are grossly inept and we should all be ashamed that they are handling the affairs of our government.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 10:34 AM
link   

butcherguy

LDragonFire
reply to post by seeker1963
 


You didn't add this from your link:


Two caveats. First, we know little about RAND’s survey methodology at this time; we’ll have to see the actual study to see the details of what they did. Second, we don’t know how many previously uninsured people signed up for off-exchange coverage, above and beyond the normal rate of churn that this market would traditionally see.

All we need if for the transparent Obama Administration to supply all the numbers and then we can see for ourselves. They haven't yet.

If they don't have the numbers to give us... which has been the excuse that they have used so far, they are grossly inept and we should all be ashamed that they are handling the affairs of our government.


If they don't have the numbers, then how do they know the 7.1 million is accurate?



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 10:37 AM
link   

LDragonFire
reply to post by seeker1963
 


You didn't add this from your link:


Two caveats. First, we know little about RAND’s survey methodology at this time; we’ll have to see the actual study to see the details of what they did. Second, we don’t know how many previously uninsured people signed up for off-exchange coverage, above and beyond the normal rate of churn that this market would traditionally see.


So let me ask you this. "What methodology did the Whitehouse use to come up with their numbers?". I find amazing that Sebelious hasn't been able to provide any numbers to Congress when she is asked for them, but miraculously they came up with their magic number when it suited their agenda? Yea right!

Funny how we choose to believe what we want to believe isn't it?



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 10:38 AM
link   
The Obama administration tries to show off and say seven million are signed up.
But what about the six million who lost their insurance because of Obamacare?
That leaves a net gain of one million.

The entire system was destroyed and billions upon billions spent just to gain one million people
buying into their health insurance scam?

Gads ...



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 11:28 AM
link   


Obama has been touting the 7+ million number.


Yep the Obama administration, and it's pundits and been touting 7.1 'million' signups'.

As if it was some 'raging' success !

SIGNUPS!

Like the 800 billion dollar stimulus was some raging success.

Like the 'Saving' of the auto industry was some raging success( read latest news about GM).

What a joke.

The Obama administration is telling the blind that 2+2=5

Seriously, and they believe.

I wonder when critical thinking skills will ever been shown for the current administrations defenders.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 11:38 AM
link   

beezzer

butcherguy

LDragonFire
reply to post by seeker1963
 


You didn't add this from your link:


Two caveats. First, we know little about RAND’s survey methodology at this time; we’ll have to see the actual study to see the details of what they did. Second, we don’t know how many previously uninsured people signed up for off-exchange coverage, above and beyond the normal rate of churn that this market would traditionally see.

All we need if for the transparent Obama Administration to supply all the numbers and then we can see for ourselves. They haven't yet.

If they don't have the numbers to give us... which has been the excuse that they have used so far, they are grossly inept and we should all be ashamed that they are handling the affairs of our government.



Oh please, spare us the daily drama routine.

Do you or Butcherguy have access to the analytics?

Do you know how long it takes to sift through all the data from over 50 websites?

The vague nature of the current big picture is not due to incompetence, it is natural given the scoop of this endeavor, Republican or Democrat.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 11:48 AM
link   

spurgeonatorsrevenge

beezzer

butcherguy

LDragonFire
reply to post by seeker1963
 


You didn't add this from your link:


Two caveats. First, we know little about RAND’s survey methodology at this time; we’ll have to see the actual study to see the details of what they did. Second, we don’t know how many previously uninsured people signed up for off-exchange coverage, above and beyond the normal rate of churn that this market would traditionally see.

All we need if for the transparent Obama Administration to supply all the numbers and then we can see for ourselves. They haven't yet.

If they don't have the numbers to give us... which has been the excuse that they have used so far, they are grossly inept and we should all be ashamed that they are handling the affairs of our government.



Oh please, spare us the daily drama routine.

Do you or Butcherguy have access to the analytics?

Do you know how long it takes to sift through all the data from over 50 websites?

The vague nature of the current big picture is not due to incompetence, it is natural given the scoop of this endeavor, Republican or Democrat.

I already asked another Obamaphile/Obamapologist... whatever, why can't we just get the real numbers from the Obama Administration? Those transparent bastards are the ones that have the access to the numbers.... OR SHOULD HAVE IT.... if they don't, which they have previously told Congress.... they are totally inept.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


We have had 6 years of them manipulating facts, and figures, and burying anything that casts a bad light on it.

They only release numbers they can spin to their benefit.
edit on 2-4-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
What really cracks me up about all the "official" conflicting statistics and reports is why they simply don't tell us the actual numbers.

Daily bank card-credit card-snap card etc. etc. transactions amount to billions daily worldwide and at any given time, any customer service rep can get current information in a few seconds.

Banks, big businesses etc. etc. all have accounts and auditors that monitor numbers all day long and with no errors.

These Obama.Care website transactions are small compared to daily worldwide commerce transactions on computers.

They can easily click and come with current numbers any time.

I think we are being hoodwinked.


How To Lie With Statistics -- Again


48 Million Americans Are Uninsured Ahead Of Obamacare Changes



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Saying that 7.1 million is success is a joke. It's like the gov putting a gun to your head and saying sign this or else and then they say, "Look at all these signatures! We are benevolent and successful!"

I had to sign up for Obamacare, else face the fine. I didn't want to sign up and it's pointless that I did. I make near poverty level wages and have no healthcare offered at work. My deductible through Obamacare is $6,300. I haven't spent that much on healthcare in ten years. The system is a joke and an utter failure.

The only reason for it's existence is to force the will of the people. Resistance is met with fines, failures to pay fines with imprisonment. Obamacare is evil incarnate and helps absolutely no one. I'm poor and cannot afford healthcare in the US but it was shoved down my throat regardless. The deductible might as well be $1,000,000.00 because $6,300.00 is more than I make in three months at full time work. That's more than I've ever had in the bank at one time. I won't be spending that on health care, ever.

# this country and # anyone who supports this #.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Is anyone else getting a wee sick of this game?

We've had polls this week come out..not different..but OPPOSITE along strict political lines. We now have numbers coming out of the White House that they can't support when asked to, cannot explain when called to and won't try to substantiate when shown conflicting ones.

Those conflicting ones..themselves..are coming from sources who are relying on other sources who may or may not have any actual work with the base data. It may be a few levels further down the sourcing another source tree.

If this last week or so has shown me anything? It's that the White House is putting out whatever they can get subordinates to tell them is valid enough for release...while the far right is running anything that sounds equally solid (like jello in a bowl) to attack and offer another set of numbers on.

Meanwhile..us normal folk are in another battle royale across the nation and up and down Main st. over something we can neither change or control.

Anyone else get the impression...maybe THIS outcome is the whole point? We're too mad and focused on "those lying bunch of (insert opposing party name here)" to look at those who carry BOTH party affiliations in working together, daily, to generate all this.

Sometimes I feel like we're the sideshow, playing for the VIP section's personal amusement.
edit on 2-4-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 04:11 PM
link   
In my case, I ended up filing for state medicaid. (Met the basic criteria at least, hope it's approved since the monthly rates I was quoted for insurance are 1/3 of my monthly pay. Not exactly "affordable".) So other than the people that can afford it, a large part of the tab will end up going to the states with what may be an underfunded mandate. (It appears there is money set aside initially, but some states are uncertain whether money will continue come from the federal gov't. in the long term.)

Of course the states have different standards of who qualifies for what. So depending on where you live, you might end up on the hook for it anyways.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


I am not defending it.. but I dont see why a jump in the number just before the deadline is hars to believe? That is exactly when I would expect a jump in the numbers.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Good point on timing. This would be the time that those who are intimidated by deadlines or the 'BOOMING' authority we've been hearing for months about 'Thou SHALL sign up', would finally cave and do it. 7m sounds within a reasonable figure to account for that % which always exists in any group, too.

Looking at it that way for signups as an isolated figure? yeah..I can see that logic.



posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


Well we need to understand that people that had paid for insurance and have it in the budgets and were dropped by their old insurance will get and paid for the insurance the government exchanges are giving, so I can understand that the President will use this data to made a statement, for those that rather take the propaganda without doing the math will believe anything the president say.

Still from the so call 7 million newly insured I can not wait how many truly will pay any dues anytime soon, if most Americans can barely pay for credit cards and are behind in mortgage payment ACA is nothing but another bill that will be shoved in the forgotten pay bill drawer, with the rest of the none pay bills.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join