It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 04:37 PM
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

I guess I should have said that I don't trust the numbers since they came from the Obama Administration. The point of the thread still stands though, they can have 300 million 'sign up', but if only 10 million pay their premiums.... the system will not work.

posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 04:40 PM
reply to post by butcherguy

And from those 10 percent they have to be within the pool of the hard working productive class that will not be draining tax dollars in order for the big insurance to get any profits and the government to claim that they are saving money.

edit on 2-4-2014 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 04:50 PM
reply to post by butcherguy

You bring it back to an interesting point and it is a very big one. This isn't strictly insurance, as we've ever known that word to define something. At the deductibles and limitations? It's membership to a club with health benefits at some future point of additional personal investment.

If enough members don't join the club, the club can either exist on Uncle Sams money ..which will collapse this nation outright..or the health system can collapse to leave us rebuilding something from the ashes.

It had slipped my mind on what the general math had been on just Missouri and the other states like us, refusing all cooperation or any form of financial support toward the whole. That, alone, sinks it on math.'s not a score to rally on seeing go higher, but an end result that must be met or the system is destroyed. Pretty simple there, I guess.

posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 05:08 PM
OK we go. I've got nothing up my sleeves. I'm going to fire 100,000 people from their jobs. Yup...but keep watching. I'm then going to offer jobs to anyone who wants them. Yeah, that is correct. AND...if you don't fill out an application, I'm going to fine you. Ah ha...That is what I will do. Then...I'm gonna hire 100,000 people and claim I created 100,000 jobs. Aren't I great. And tomorrow...I'm going to do it all over again and create another 100,000 jobs.

Aren't I the best! I can create 100,000 jobs a day...forever. Maybe I should be President.

posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 05:38 PM
reply to post by beezzer

Hey you guys want to ease up a bit..................I'm having a hard time starring all this common sense. I almost threw up listening to Obama speaking. A true leader doesn't gloat.

posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 06:18 PM
Here's some more quirky things to consider....

..... in selling the bill to the American people in a nationally televised September 2009 address, President Obama said the need for ObamaCare was urgent precisely because “there are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage.”

Now the CBO is saying that in 10 years about the same number of people will lack insurance as before. This, after new expenditures of as much as $2 trillion and a colossal disruption of the US medical system.

If that’s not startling enough, there’s also the telling projection about ObamaCare’s affect on employment — “a decline in the number of full-time-equivalent workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about 2.5 million in 2024.”

Congressional Budget Office sends death blow to ObamaCare

Perhaps this Administration is grabbing at the (created) low hanging fruit?

Maybe the delays and added exemptions are just a tactic to bring that low hanging fruit lower to the ground and easier to grab and exemplify and sensationalize ?

“there are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage.” (Obama from September 2009 address)

Notice Obama's "selling point" is not necessarily focusing on "not insured", but rather on "who cannot get coverage".

Who exactly ARE those people? and why aren't they included in the alleged "new" sign-ups ?

Strange indeed.

Implementing failure is easier than creating success it seems.

posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 06:46 PM


Personally, I find the huge jump in numbers at the deadline date very hard to believe anyway.

Oh I never doubted they could either get the numbers they were after or make it look like they did. My opposition to this law never had anything to do with whether or not people are foolish enough to buy into it. After all, lots of people have been foolish enough to do all kinds of stupid things. I wouldn't be surprised if we have 8 million morons in this country. I'd be surprised if we didn't have at least 40 million more of them. Obama did get himself elected twice, after all. Well, OK. He didn't get himself elected. He was pretty much installed.
edit on 2-4-2014 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 07:56 PM
Anytime a government says a number or statistic you can bet its taken out of context or skewed in some way.

posted on Apr, 2 2014 @ 09:00 PM
Yea, I was going to get coverage and then a few things came to pass that caused me to cancel. I paid the first bill. First, as a man I have pregnancy and birth control coverage I don't need. That is beside the point though. After I got the card and information in the mail, they do not cover pain management, weight loss programs, and something else I don't recall right now. Right now and for the last many years, my outlay for medical every year is $5K. That is my pain management doctor and my regular family physician that treats my high blood pressure, etc. Fortunately, I have a couple of good doctors and they give me great deals for cash.

So, the insurance would take the first payment by credit or debit card, however, you had to put in your banks routing number and account number for subsequent payments. I knew it was a bad idea to go on, but at the time I thought my doctors would be covered because they were listed in the network they showed online. The monthly cost was $367 with a $1,500 deductible. Not too bad considering I would meet my deductible rather quickly. The monthly cost with subsidy was $128. So, it was going to be good for me. I am single and children are grown and have their own children. However, after giving them my bank info, they wasted no time (10 days) in snaking out the full $367 out of my account. Yea, I get a tax credit to offset my taxes at the end of the year. I don't like having things deducted out of my account because I am a contractor and work on a 1099 basis. I don't get paid until the house is built and closed. So, although I make enough to make the payments, sometimes my account gets low do to late closures, etc. So, there are times I need to wait a few days to make my bills. Fortunately they are staggered through the month which also helps that work out.

Bottom line, I can't afford to pay my doctors and pay for the insurance at the same time that won't cover me. I thought everything was covered, including pre-existing conditions. So, I called the insurance company about them not covering my doc even though he was in their network for pain management. The guy told me they don't cover any pain management. I asked if any of their plans do and he said no. He told me if I went into my family physician and he gave me something for short term pain they would cover that, but not a pain management doctor. I asked why because he was listed and was told that the in network providers were in there for policies that are still covered by large companies that have insurance programs for their employees. So, no way, even buying a more expensive policy (mine was Silver btw) could I get coverage for my pain management doctor. So much for that promise. Basically, I get coverage I will never use as a male, and not get coverage for problems I have to live with, pain management, a preexisting condition.

So, even the numbers that the government is claiming will probably be changing drastically as people realize the load of crap they have been sold. Most people I know are living paycheck to paycheck and can't afford to pay an additional payment, like a new car payment, and hope to get it back at the end of the year. I can't do it and then have to pay out of pocket for my meds and doctors, diagnostics, etc. It would be one thing if they covered the money that was going out for medical care (current spending for pain management, etc.) and you had to pay some additional to have a better situation with insurance in case you get sick or have an accident not covered by other insurance. I believe that in a few months, once the things are shaken out, the numbers will be much worse than the government is claiming now. Anyway, that was my surprise experience after trying to do the right thing and get insurance.

edit on 2/4/14 by spirit_horse because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 07:16 AM
I read in another thread that this study from RAND has been 'debunked'.
Link to ATS thread

Even though the other thread was quickly debunked. The one that incorrectly is titled "only 800,000 have paid for Obamacare" I thought I would put the fork in it and post facts as news that should settle this. Instead of using some third hand source (and this time not a defense contractor) as a source I decided to use the actual insurance companies themselves, the ones who actually know the numbers and not just read rumors.

I would like to see some confirmation of that!
edit on b000000302014-04-03T07:18:52-05:0007America/ChicagoThu, 03 Apr 2014 07:18:52 -0500700000014 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 12:04 PM

reply to post by butcherguy

That's what I didn't understand also, signing up is different then making a selection.
I didn't do it so now I guess I have to pay the $100 monthly fine out of my tax return, which is BS.

I don't need insurance right now, my dad is a doctor and I don't expect to get descending bowel cancer anytime soon but if it happens so be it, I gambled, I lost. Key word in that is 'I', as in, I made the decision, not the government.

I'd like to learn more about the procedures of this new health format though. Then I can deliberately try to circumvent it as best I can.
I'm as far as an expert on this subject as one could get, but why didn't they just do it like Canada does? I always thought this health law was like socialized medicine with a different name. Are there really that many angry lobbyist doctors ready to storm Washington if they just tax everyone and treat everyone medically the same?? I just don't get this whole thing, it is a sore spot on my rather bright and happy life. . .

edit on 4/2/2014 by AnteBellum because: punctuation

But we the public needs to be protected from our irrational decisions to buy food and shelter instead
of making the fat cat insurance industry rich for something that may never happen!

I understand more then most how important it is to have insurance because when my sister got sick the bills
came to well over a million dollars and all the treatments did was to destroy her body much faster then the
disease itself! but she was desperate to live so we tried anything the blood sucking medical industry suggested!
For me the decision would be simple if I get an aggressive cancer I will not fight natures coarse and put myself
into unnecessary discomfort to possibly extend my life for a half a year! This time frame is not something I would
consider living because she had no quality of life! The last year of her life drove her insane between the immense
amount of pain meds and the concept of dying! She was truly delusional during this time! Maybe it was for the
best but it did not make it any easier!

The truth is even after all this I still believe that insurance is necessary for the times when we just may need it
to save our lives. This includes our ability to live but how can it help us if it's taking away our ability to live in the
first place? If we can't afford insurance it makes no difference the penalty inflicted by the state! All the ACA did
IMO is to increase the monies required to be able to survive by imposing either another 6 to 10 thousand dollars
a year with or another 1.2 to 1.7 thousand without! This is just more excessive taxation! This is not a national
healthcare system it's a fascist Imposed directive through penalization! The only way government can help us
is by reducing the size of itself and it's burden on the American taxpayer! Until that day comes we will never be
free from the tyrannical state! For sure we wont ever be united! If we are none of these things then what the
hell are we?

posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 02:07 PM
Very difficult to believe any information coming from Obama administration or MSM. The ACA is just another example of intentionally dividing the country and creating giant cash windfall for insurance companies.

posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 02:54 PM
reply to post by butcherguy

In the insurance industry, you are not considered enrolled until you have made a payment. Obamacare is changing the definition of enrollment to suit their political motives. Many people are signed up, but not enrolled by the much more reasonable and normal definition of enrollment. I don't know of any organization that includes non-paying customers as enrolled outside the federal government.

That said, according to Blue Cross and Blue shield they are getting at least an 80% payment rate (as quoted by That is a more believable number in my book. But still, 80% of 7 million is 5.6 million.

And furthermore, the number of youth enrolling in Obamacare needs is supposed to be 40% to avoid cost increases for 2015. The latest figures are 27% of people enrolled are young people. That means 2015 rates will go up significantly. The youth enrollment is a much more important figure to keep an eye on.

posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 04:47 PM
reply to post by nosacrificenofreedom

I tend to agree with what I think your hinting at.
I don't want to be a burden to my family if something catastrophic happens, to which I know my father would spare no expense in trying to save my life, even if I refused treatment.

Maybe there should be a system in place that treats injuries differently than diseases. I'm sure there are some ramifications to this idea but if everyone was covered 'socially' for personal injury (gunshots, stabbing, falls, car accidents) and the rest being natural diseases and such (cancer, diabetes, alzheimer's) were in a different category.

posted on Apr, 3 2014 @ 04:51 PM
Why are there so many topics about this one Rand thingy?

And at exactly what point when you are paying a monthly premium is something considered "paid." At death?

posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 09:14 AM

Why are there so many topics about this one Rand thingy?

And at exactly what point when you are paying a monthly premium is something considered "paid." At death?

I do know this much... If you don't pay your premium.... you are not covered.

It usually works in a certain time frame. If you pay your insurance premium on time, you are covered by the insurance policy until the date that the next premium is due. So are paid until the next due date.

One thing is pretty certain though, if you never pay to begin with... you haven't paid and you are not covered.

But you might be 'signed up', at least by the Obama Administration's standards (which change daily).

posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 10:50 AM

reply to post by butcherguy

I'm as far as an expert on this subject as one could get, but why didn't they just do it like Canada does? I always thought this health law was like socialized medicine with a different name. Are there really that many angry lobbyist doctors ready to storm Washington if they just tax everyone and treat everyone medically the same?? I just don't get this whole thing, it is a sore spot on my rather bright and happy life. . .

edit on 4/2/2014 by AnteBellum because: punctuation

And that's what we told Canadians and people who touted the Canadian system would happen.

Americans : No insurance is hard.

Obama : that's what she said.

Obama supporters : hahaha that was funny.

Yes, it was a bad joke, but we told people the punchline long ago.

But let's look at it this way, health LAW. And LAWS are enforced through TAXES. So what this means is YOU, taxpayer, are REQUIRED by LAW to be TAXED for health services.

Therefore, you, TAXPAYER, have NO choice to pay TAX on insurance. Now would it make you feel more comfortable if you were paying the auto insurance for someone else? After all, they are required to have auto insurance to drive.

It's not about affordable care, it never has been, it has always been about taxes. But put this in perspective, would you pay auto insurance or life insurance for someone else? And if people truly want a Socialist society, then no one should even be paid in the first place, you don't get a paycheck, just let the government tell you where to live and where to work, and the government keeps the profit off your labor. That's how Socialism works.

Someone is going to get the profit from labor, but it's not the laborer, it's the who? The government. And people had a problem with Capitalism who says the government isn't going to get the profit, we pay the laborer and they can live where they want. But think about it, who is going to get the profit from the laborer?

In the world of international trade, who is going to get the profit? You, the taxpayer? Nope, you live where the government tells you and go visit the doctor the government tells you and drive the car the government will eventually allow you to have, but in order to keep pollution low but profit high, you are going to have to take public transportation. You won't even get a paycheck, but you will get rations for ration approved stores. This happened in WWII under Franklin Roosevelt's administration, because we were in a Great Depression and then a war.

Gas had gone to war. Sugar had gone to war. Beer cans had gone to war. Everything had gone to war and people bought War Bonds for the War Effort and suddenly we had enough money to pay for war. But you want to know how we had enough money? Franklin Roosevelt had the Federal Reserve change the rates daily. Capitalism worked, but still, who is going to get the profit? The government.

Affordable Care Act is not free market, it is LAW. Government mandated LAW is not free market, and when there is no free market, then there is no choice. We have been saying this all along. Health care is not going to be more affordable, only more taxed.

posted on Apr, 6 2014 @ 08:53 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Apr, 6 2014 @ 09:10 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Apr, 6 2014 @ 09:27 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in