Under Obamacare, People Must Be Broken of their Preference for Choice

This wild opinion sounds like the end goal of Obama.Care exposed.

The PPACA was designed by engineers of a Left-Wing Fascist/Corporatist - social/economic complex to re-define "Single-Payer" as collective policy holders and larger consolidated provider networks.

The illusion of the (Obama-Pelosi-Harry Reid) Democrats in 2009 wanting a Medicare style single payer system was cleverly knocked down by a few (non Republicans) who said they wouldn't vote for PPACA if that precious "Public Option" was amplified in the legislation.

That's all they needed to pass exactly what they wanted.

Now we have people exposing the agenda to actually steer people away from "Choice" !!!

This is *Phase III* of the master plan.

Phase III will begin the consolidation of doctors and facilities into larger corporations as they swallow up the small time operations.

It will become harder and harder to "see" small independent providers as they get limited by networks and not-so-competing corporate providers.

The insurance companies are at the helm of the "steering" committee.

We have a new contender for most-telling-ever Obamacare quote this morning: “We have to break people away from the choice habit that everyone has.” That’s Marcus Merz, head of Minnesota health insurer PreferredOne, in a New York Times report on the increasing prevalence of narrow network health plans.

Merz is basically stating openly what the Obama administration won’t, which is that Obamacare is intentionally designed to narrow consumer choice and plan design within the health insurance market.

Under Obamacare, People Must Be Broken of their Preference for Choice

a reply to: xuenchen

I really hope this isn't true.

It would be just one more reason to be disgusted by Obama and the PTB.

The true scumbags of society run amuk. As time goes on people will find out the truth. People that still have employer coverage due to Obama putting it off for election reasons will all be waking up over the course of the next three years. This administration knows that if they all found out this year, not only would Democrats be thrown out of office, but their socialist medicine plan would come crumbling down. People say they won't be able to repeal the law. Does anyone remember the 55MPH speed limit? Yea, well this may be one of the first, but I have no doubt it will be replaced by something else. After all, they could have just insured the 30,000,000 people they were wanting insurance for instead of spending more money on implementation of a disaster very few want. And I question just how many of those realize the problems they will have down the road when they start actually using it. There are stories everywhere of no doctor coverage anywhere near their place of residence. Driving 100 miles to see a doctor. Crushing CHOICE is what CHANGE and HOPE is all about for the Left, unless it comes to them. What they will find out is that they too will be under the thumb of an out of controll Federal Government.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: xuenchen

I really hope this isn't true.

It would be just one more reason to be disgusted by Obama and the PTB.

Sadly I believe it is true!

Just wait! The Republicans already slit their throat and when the people realize just how bad this so called ACA is, the Dems will bleed out quickly as well!

I see martial law as their answer! Unfortunately for the American people whom bought into the two party system and their tactics to divide the nation, they won't willingly give up their control!!

I saw an article that was saying that everyone whom signed up for Obamacare that come 2015 their rates were to go up 30%!!!

If that has any truth to it, we are done!

Wasn't this obvious? Whenever government gets involved with anything, choice disappears. Hence the term "SINGLE-payer" and we don't even have that system.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Wasn't this obvious? Whenever government gets involved with anything, choice disappears. Hence the term "SINGLE-payer" and we don't even have that system.

I think the better statement would be anytime the government gets involved with anything it ends up bankrupt and functions poorly at the expense of the people. Obama Care is just another to add to the list of government failures.
Since I do a little webdesign I can't imagine spending almost a billion dollars on 4 states exchanges to have them abandoned. A quick list that comes to mind of major losers.

1. Social Security
2. United States Postal Service
3. Medicare
4. Obama Care
5. War On Drugs
6. War On Terror
7. War On Poverty
8. Cash For Clunkers (24K Per Car)
9. Potus Stimulus (800b) (2.3K Per Person)
10. FHA Foreclosure Rate

We could go on here but I think everyone gets the picture, and since nothing they do seems to work they keep throwing money at it until we are 17T in debt. Oh and don't say anything to try to stop it or you will be branded a bad right wing racist hater, religious zealot who doesn't care about old people, children, the poor, and loves the rich fat cats, while you make your way through life on the backs of others.

Phase III will begin the consolidation of doctors and facilities into larger corporations as they swallow up the small time operations.

That's already been done. Ask Rick Scott, he made hundreds of millions of dollars doing just that? Looking at the bigger picture, consolidation is a fact of life in a "free market."

Let's talk about how much choice people really had pre-ACA. According the KFF, the percentage of non-elderly people covered by private, non-group insurance plans was 5.8%. How many choices did the other 94.2% have? Most employers (57% of us having employer-sponsored plans) give a choice between 2-3 plans from a single company.

Is the ACA perfect? Faaaaaar from it (what do you expect from a rebranded GOP plan?) but this is a pretty weak argument to justify your daily Obamacare rant.

originally posted by: theantediluvian

Phase III will begin the consolidation of doctors and facilities into larger corporations as they swallow up the small time operations.

That's already been done. Ask Rick Scott, he made hundreds of millions of dollars doing just that? Looking at the bigger picture, consolidation is a fact of life in a "free market."

Let's talk about how much choice people really had pre-ACA. According the KFF, the percentage of non-elderly people covered by private, non-group insurance plans was 5.8%. How many choices did the other 94.2% have? Most employers (57% of us having employer-sponsored plans) give a choice between 2-3 plans from a single company.

Is the ACA perfect? Faaaaaar from it (what do you expect from a rebranded GOP plan?) but this is a pretty weak argument to justify your daily Obamacare rant.

Your seriously going to bring up how much of a "Choice" people have or had???

Now I guess they have NO CHOICE! Buy it or get on Medicaid(which means OTHER PEOPLE PAY), OR PAY A FINE!

Gotta love Authoritarians!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Wasn't this obvious? Whenever government gets involved with anything, choice disappears. Hence the term "SINGLE-payer" and we don't even have that system.

Sounds good but in reality, where we live, the overwhelming majority of mature markets have three dominant competitors. There's a well known economic rule of thumb for this phenomena called, "The Rule of Three."

a reply to: seeker1963

Your seriously going to bring up how much of a "Choice" people have or had???

How did I bring up the issue of how much choice people had? Isn't that the topic? From the OP:

Now we have people exposing the agenda to actually steer people away from "Choice" !!!

Gotta love people who think that fighting for corporate control is fighting for liberty!

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Wasn't this obvious? Whenever government gets involved with anything, choice disappears. Hence the term "SINGLE-payer" and we don't even have that system.

Sounds good but in reality, where we live, the overwhelming majority of mature markets have three dominant competitors. There's a well known economic rule of thumb for this phenomena called, "The Rule of Three."

How much of that is through natural supply and demand vs government interference? Even Wal-Mart receives subsidies. From what I understand, there aren't many if any TRUE free supply and demand markets left in the world. So the question is, can we connect the rule of three to government intervention?

“The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular
representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.”
― Karl Marx

People didn't have a choice in the past - usually it was just the employers HMO (Health Management Organization), and they would decide the doctor who you would see. HMO's were formed when the insurance companies decided that they could save money by forming a collective with selected groups of doctors who would offer reduced prices in return for guaranteed work.

originally posted by: stormcell
People didn't have a choice in the past - usually it was just the employers HMO (Health Management Organization), and they would decide the doctor who you would see. HMO's were formed when the insurance companies decided that they could save money by forming a collective with selected groups of doctors who would offer reduced prices in return for guaranteed work.

HMO's, PPO's, odd hybrid plans that depended on FSA's, HSA's, etc… with each plan offering varied benefits in network and out of network related to the plan it self. Some plans were better than others, but they would cost you, some networks were better than others, some companies offered multiple insurer options related to who would insure you based on your choices (which allowed you to customize your own health insurance based on your own situation (your choice)). Even companies that stuck with one provider more often than not offered different options related to the level of coverage at your discretion, to say nothing of the fact the you could choose to go without insurance if you were so inclined (given your employer didn't mandate it as a part of your employment (once again your choice)).

In addition to that each company had a choice in who they would select to contract with for insurance services which drove, competition, better networks, better service, etc.

In short, get out of here with that.