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.

 

HHS contemplating rule allowing them to choose your Obamacare plan for you

page: 2
26
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

It makes sense if single payer was their goal all along.




posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
Weird that they would want to pick our plans for us now...
Seems like only yesterday that we could keep our doctor we we liked him.


Weird that you would actually think the same without anyone actually citing the document where it says that?

Actually...not so weird. Usual BS/



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5


Usual BS/


I would expect nothing less.

Why wouldn't you take it up with the OP....
when you can single me out?

edit on b000000302014-11-23T11:43:47-06:0011America/ChicagoSun, 23 Nov 2014 11:43:47 -06001100000014 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 12:14 PM
link   
6 page snapshot from HHS.....



Default Re-Enrollment:

Under current rules, consumers who do not take action during the open enrollment window are re-enrolled in the same plan they were in the previous year, even if that plan experienced significant premium increases. We are considering alternative options for re-enrollment, under which consumers who take no action might be defaulted into a lower cost plan rather than their current plan. We are considering allowing states to pursue these sorts of re-enrollment alternatives for coverage in 2016. The FFM is exploring such an approach for coverage in 2017.


Proposed HHS Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters for 2016
Fact Sheet





posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 12:14 PM
link   
they should just implement single payer health care.

and quit beating around the bush. so-to-speak.



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 03:21 PM
link   
As if the original bill wasn''t enough! But now they can just keep adding more layers of bureaucratic management, and say it's within the scope of the law.

More Nanny Statism. Of course some people want this kind of government taking care of business. I prefer less government care myself.
But now we can say we told you so.(Those of us who knew it was Nanny Statism from the start).
edit on 23-11-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2014 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Anytime and everytime the government gets involved with taking our money, and redistributing it in some manner...all the people lose. It is simple. The middleman takes a cut and in the case of government, that means buildings, employees, etc. For every dollar they take, I'll bet we get 10 cents in health care. That is assuming they don't just take the money and spend it elsewhere and then "finance" the health care.

The vultures are picking at the corpse of America. And I'm not surprised WHO they are.



posted on Nov, 24 2014 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Not even sure how to comment on this but......

Wake me when this "Twilight Zone" episode is over. smh



posted on Nov, 24 2014 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: ATSAlex
I'm still waiting for the "affordable" in the affordable care act...


I don't mean to be rude, but...

Haven't you learned, yet, that our government names bills to be the exact *opposite* of what they do?



posted on Nov, 24 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
Anytime and everytime the government gets involved with taking our money, and redistributing it in some manner...all the people lose. It is simple. The middleman takes a cut and in the case of government, that means buildings, employees, etc. For every dollar they take, I'll bet we get 10 cents in health care. That is assuming they don't just take the money and spend it elsewhere and then "finance" the health care.

The vultures are picking at the corpse of America. And I'm not surprised WHO they are.


Many forget that we now live in a fascist country, with oligopolies running it behind the scenes.

What that means is, the "owners of capital" will "legislate" mandatory purchases, in the future, and are beginning to do so now, IF and WHEN, revenue does not match their expectations or projections. So for example, if someone chooses not to buy these goods, they will simply pay a "penalty" at tax time. When the "owners of capital" run out of consumer good that they can force people to buy in order to go to work like gasoline, internet connection, car insurance, bus/subway fare, cell phones, suits/uniforms, soap, deodorant, razors, etc, they will simply make it law that you have to buy them, in certain quantities before tax season. You will not be allowed to be frugal in the future because the "owners of capital" will take close to the same amount back in the form of "penalties", when you choose to "not buy" and then don't have the proper "coupon" to prove you bought these items, in the required quantities, when taxes come due.

The "Owners of Capital" are VERY worried about the participation of Millennial in our culturally accepted "indentured slavery". While some of these young people have certainly taken out too much college loan money and also pay too much for cellular services, most are giving up things with monthly payments, tied to interest growth, that boomers paid without question, such as cars, homes, various types of insurance, children, etc. The ONLY choice the big Corps and government have left is to "legislate purchases", for goods and services that the younger generations would have not purchased in the first place. These kids buying habits are terrifying to the "incumbents" running the corporations and government in this country.

AGAIN, the USA is NOT socialist, NOT communist and not even a Republic, but in reality a Reactionary, Fascist State, engulfed in Protestant religious dogma.

So my question is, When are people going to STOP calling the United State economy "capitalism"? WE HAVE FASCISM in the United States NOW! It should be very clear that we now live in a fascist country,with oligopolies running it behind the scenes. If people would just accept this FACT en-mass, we could then move forward to change it. We can't currently because some people keep on insisting that we live in "the Greatest Nation on Earth" and that it is somehow a functioning democracy. Nothing will change for the better until these people start realizing the truth or are forcefully condemned to fall with the Fascists they have blindly supported.



posted on Nov, 24 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
6 page snapshot from HHS.....



Default Re-Enrollment:

Under current rules, consumers who do not take action during the open enrollment window are re-enrolled in the same plan they were in the previous year, even if that plan experienced significant premium increases. We are considering alternative options for re-enrollment, under which consumers who take no action might be defaulted into a lower cost plan rather than their current plan. We are considering allowing states to pursue these sorts of re-enrollment alternatives for coverage in 2016. The FFM is exploring such an approach for coverage in 2017.


Proposed HHS Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters for 2016
Fact Sheet






hmmm


Except...everything in your OP claim is BS?
(a) Consumers CHOOSE whether they want the default lower cost option.
(b) The options are amongst the same tier of coverage...no one chooses a "Plan Level" for you




The current re-enrollment provisions codified at §155.335(j) prioritize re-enrollment with
the same issuer in the same or a similar plan with the goal of maximizing continuity of coverage
and care.

However, because premiums may change significantly from one year to the next, the
plans that are most competitively priced in one year may not continue to be the most
competitively priced in subsequent years. For this reason, default enrollment in the same or
similar plan may sometimes encourage consumers to remain in plans that are significantly more
expensive than the lowest cost plans in the market. Because we believe that many consumers
place a high value on low premiums when selecting a plan, we believe that consumers could
benefit from alternative re-enrollment hierarchies.

In particular, we are exploring implementing in the FFE an approach under which an
enrollee, at the time of initial enrollment, would be offered a choice of re-enrollment hierarchies
and could opt into being re-enrolled by default for the subsequent year into a low-cost plan (such
as the QHP of the same metal level with the lowest premium in the enrollee’s service area
, or
one of the three such QHPs with the lowest premiums by random allocation), rather than his or
her current plan or the plan specified in the current re-enrollment hierarchy. This alternative
enrollment hierarchy could be triggered if the enrollee’s current plan’s premium increased from
the prior year, or increased relative to the premium of other similar plans (such as plans of the
same metal tier), by more than a threshold amount, such as 5 percent or 10 percent. As is the
case under the existing approach, a consumer would retain the option to take action to enroll in a
different plan during open enrollment if he or she wished to do so. We are considering applying
an alternative hierarchy for the first time when re-enrolling consumers for the 2017 coverage
year. On this timeline, consumers could opt in to the alternative hierarchy during open
enrollment in 2015 (or during special enrollment periods occurring during 2016).

Page 120
ofr.gov...

Thanks for yet more lies and confusion...

edit on 24-11-2014 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2014 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5
Agree.

I really, really hate to say anything good about unACA....because it truly sucks premium and deductible wise.
But, it seems to me that if a consumer goes to their ACA website and updates/makes changes/verifies their info once a year, the government would have NO reason to make any changes for the consumer.

So, tin foil hat stuff aside.
Dislike of the whole snafu aside.
If you don't want the government to make any changes....do them yourself.

FWIW....I just updated for 2015....seems to run smoothly....I did need to talk to someone, but there was no wait time and the adviser was helpful and friendly.



posted on Nov, 24 2014 @ 11:24 AM
link   
I am not sure why anyone is paying for these crappy plans. For me it is $9400 a year plus a $10,000 deductible. They cannot deny you for pre existing conditions so why not just pay the penalty and wait to sign up if you get cancer or some other serious illness. $20k will go a long ways towards paying for any routine sick care.



posted on Nov, 24 2014 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

If there is one truth about Insurance companies (including ACA since it is Private plans offed through the exchange)...is that they make money through laziness. Ditto cable...cell phones etc. You start out with a great price and forget about it and two years later you wonder what the eff happened to your bill...and it's a pain in the butt to have to SHOP and change...your cell phone, cable, insurance providers etc. etc. every year...and they KNOW it. You get penalized financially for loyalty. It frustrates me often, but any regular bill will continue to grow unless I carve out time and energy to shop around on a regular basis...still frustrated that my 99 dollar internet+phone+cable somehow turned into a $200+ bill on a monthly basis...Penalized for being a long term customer...Just a rant. Everyone has to "ride" their bills and shop around on a regular basis, otherwise you will get screwed. The exchange at least makes it possible to compare and choose in one place, vs. having to apply and call a dozen places to find out what is reasonable...which is what I used to have do.


edit on 24-11-2014 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe
Everyone has to "ride" their bills and shop around on a regular basis, otherwise you will get screwed. The exchange at least makes it possible to compare and choose in one place, vs. having to apply and call a dozen places to find out what is reasonable...which is what I used to have do.


I'm not so sure, thats a real solution. Government and Big Business knew the Millennial Generation was going to do just that with car insurance, health insurance, student loans and cable TV subscriptions, so how did they decide to stop it, effectively, nipping it in the bud?

Mandatory purchases, enforced through fines, if the "mandatory purchase quota" is not met. The other way was though the brute force of cultural pressure. For example, people whom don't have smart phones are deemed "less employable and up to date" than people whom do have smart phones with expensive data subscriptions, in some rare cases the job application can only be accessed through a smart phone or tablet app.

Resistance to the accumulation of debt and dropping out of the system is not going to work, as many here keep preaching. There is some truth to the thought that Americans citizens are a form of "asset" for the credit worthiness/evaluation of the USA. Mandatory Purchases are a hint to the reality of such a possibility. Government and Big Business WILL make people buy things though legislation eventuality, Obamacare is just the pilot study.

Hence the need for ALL Americans to start recognizing that we are now a Fascist nation, where business tells the people what to do and buy, with government and Law Enforcement acting as the enforcement "muscle".

No, Actually, This Is What a Fascist Looks Like
edit on 25-11-2014 by boohoo because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1   >>

log in

join