The Harsh!! Reality of Obamacare

Remember when Obama was stumping for his fantasy healthcare agenda? I do and I also remember that he told the nation on multiple occasions that those who wished to keep their insurance through their employer would be able to do so. Obama said "if you have health insurance and you like it, and you have a doctor that you like, then you can keep it. Period" I also remember the heated debate on ATS regarding that very specific claim. Many of us said that Obama's claim was nothing more than lip service. We were right and so was Nancy Pelosi.

Obamacare is a disaster. Plain and simple.

In the following article you will read that 840,000 people have lost their employer provided insurance coverage. 840,000!!

The Principal Financial Group announced on Thursday that it planned to stop selling health insurance, another sign of upheaval emerging among insurers as the new federal health law starts to take effect.

The company, based in Iowa, provides coverage to about 840,000 people who receive their insurance through an employer.

Principal’s decision closely tracks moves by other insurers that have indicated in recent weeks that they plan to drop out of certain segments of the market, like the business of selling child-only policies. State regulators say some insurance companies are already threatening to leave particular markets because of the new law. And some regulators in states like Maine and Iowa have asked the Obama administration to give insurers more time to comply with some of the new rules.

“What you’re seeing is the beginning of some serious math and some posturing,” said Len Nichols, a health economist and policy expert at George Mason University. While some insurers, like Principal, are choosing to leave the business rather than make the necessary investments to stay, others may be simply trying to delay some of the new rules or overturn them, he said.

Principal focused on selling insurance plans to SMALL BUSINESSES.

At the Principal Financial Group, the company’s decision reflected its assessment of its ability to compete in the environment created by the new law. “Now scale really matters,” said Daniel J. Houston, a senior executive at Principal, which is headquartered in Des Moines. “We don’t have a significant concentration in any one market.”

Because Principal Financial is primarily in the business of asset management, it decided not to make the investments needed to remain competitive as a health insurer, Mr. Houston said. The company, which focused on plans sold to small businesses for their employees, does not participate in other markets, like selling policies to individuals or for people enrolled in Medicare or Medicaid.

What about the children Obama?

Other aspects of the health care regulations are worrying some state insurance commissioners, who fear that insurers are going to stop selling policies in some areas of coverage. For example, in the case of child-only policies, the new rules require insurers to offer coverage to even those children who are seriously ill, leading some insurers to balk at the idea that they will be forced to cover too many sick children. Aetna, Cigna and WellPoint, among others, have said they will stop selling new policies in some states.

The 840,000 got lucky and they were picked up by United Health Group. However, we are just seeing the tip of the iceberg here. This is the reality...

More insurers are likely to follow Principal’s lead, especially as they try to meet the new rules that require plans to spend at least 80 cents of every dollar they collect in premiums on the welfare of their customers. Many of the big insurers have been lobbying federal officials to forestall or drastically alter those rules.

“It’s just going to drive the little guys out,” said Robert Laszewski, a health policy consultant in Alexandria, Va. Smaller players like Principal in states like Iowa, Missouri and elsewhere will not be able to compete because they do not have the resources and economies of scale of players like UnitedHealth, which is among the nation’s largest health insurers.

Mr. Laszewski is worried that the ensuing concentration is likely to lead to higher prices because large players will no longer face the competition from the smaller plans. “It’s just the UnitedHealthcare full employment act,” he said.

www.nytimes.com...

We will all be forced, one way or another, into the laps of the big dogs. Thanks! Obama, Reid and Pelosi. Let's hope we can repeal this beast and tackle our healthcare problems one at a time.

Wow, the poor insurance companies. They must have horrible profit margins and be really struggling to do good work for sick people. Thank goodness there are voices out there to speak out for the poor insurance companies. We need to rally behind them so they can raise rates over 120% in the next 10 years.

Family premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance in the U.S. increased 119% between 1999 and 2008, far, far higher than any increase in wages, according to a new survey. If current trends continue, premiums are on course to increase another 94% by 2020, to an average of $23,842 per family. Employees pay on average about 30% of this amount.

source

It breaks my heart to see them suffer so.

reply to post by Curiousisall


You make a good point. However, what happens when insurers begin to drop out in ever increasing numbers? We'll be steered into the hands of one or two insurance giants or the govt. No more choices. Period. How is that for your big corporate slam? The big get bigger and the small close up shop.

Why not allow people to purchase healthcare insurance across state lines? Increase competition and drive rates down. There are many ways to improve the industry. Congress and the president CHOSE not to listen.

The healthcare insurance market is about to collapse.

This is working out just as the regime planned. Their rules were written so the commercial insurance companies cannot run by them without going bankrupt, so they are dropping out of the losing markets. That's because the government rules redefine insurance from the traditional definition. Traditionally you do not buy insurance to treat an illness after being diagnosed. Any company that willingly takes $400/month to immediately start paying out 100 to 1,000+ times that amount for an unknown period of time is a company that will not be in business very long. Unless of course that 'business' is the federal government with a 'bottomless' pool of money provided by the taxpayers they rule over. Then it's just called redistribution of wealth.

this was all part of the master plan to impliment universal healthcare ie single payer healthcare

and what people fail to see is free healthcare as it as sold to the blind masses isnt free they will end up paying for it

and what they will end up paying for will be worse that medicare and mediciaid......

private healthcare beats anything the government does or will ever do..

competition does bring lower cost government interventon breeds higher cost and crappy quality of care..

i dont want my life in the power of the government ever only a fool would.

redistribution of wealth is exactly right redistribution of peoples lives is exactly right..........

and think on this if that day comes if you dont vote for them whose to say you will get healthcare.

they can and will use that power to keep themselves in power

you want to live vote democrat---------nah i pass keep it private and leave them alone.

Originally posted by Curiousisall
Wow, the poor insurance companies. They must have horrible profit margins...

Actually they have horrible profit margins. Not even breaking 4%, which is may sounds like a lot, but that is the money that is after all claims are paid, all employees are paid, all benefits are paid, all taxes are paid.

I do not like the way insurance is handled in the United States, but get your facts right. Drug companies on the other hand...they pull in 15+% profit margin.

And the FDA is withholding approving drugs based on cost now.

FDA Delays Rationing Decision on Avastin

Late Friday, the FDA announced it had postponed for 90 days — and until after the Election — a decision whether to ration the later stage cancer drug Avastin based on cost. With poll numbers that 60 Plus rolled out earlier in the week this is not a shock.

For the first time, an FDA sub-panel used cost as a factor in consideration of drug approval — opening the door to rationing for Avastin and other cutting edge drugs. The American people reject rationing. They do not want doctor’s choices limited by cost — undermining the basic premise of ObamaCare and when drugs are rejected because of their price tag, that is rationing.

It's going to get bad, folks.

“It’s just the UnitedHealthcare full employment act,”


All regulation is designed by the large corporate interests to cartelize the markets.

Regulation serves NO OTHER PURPOSE THAN THIS.

Regulations are NOT REQUIRED TO PROSECUTE FRAUD OR THEFT.

Regulations order business to conduct business a certain way or report certain things, this has NOTHING to do with fraud or theft at all.

Regulations are what mega-corporations use to drive out smaller competitors.

reply to post by jibeho


Once insurance companies realize that they can no longer reap huge profits off of scamming people, they will balk.

Insurance in itself is nothing more than a scam. You pay for it and then when you really need it, they won't cover your medical ailment, etc.

reply to post by neo96


Private healthcare is an absolute failure in this country. Wake up and smell the bacon. We're the richest country in the world and yet, we have terrible healthcare standards. We can't take care of our veterans. We can't take care of our poor. We can't even take care of ourselves!

The fact that our tax dollars are thrown away on mindless defense spending instead of healthcare is an insult.

reply to post by The Sword


Like I have said before I do not like the scheme of insurance, but what are these 'huge' profits you speak of?

They make 3.4% profit margin. Yes, they do make a lot of money but they do not have some crazy windfall profits that are through the roof. That business is a really tight business that is complicated and complex.

Does it all need to change, yes. Are we getting it with the pile of crap they passed? No way in hell.

reply to post by The Sword



really now absolute failure eh i am living proof that this country healthcare private healthcare is the best in the world

simple fact i almost died and had it not been for my healthcare i would have died so no not hardly

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by neo96

 

Private healthcare is an absolute failure in this country. Wake up and smell the bacon. We're the richest country in the world and yet, we have terrible healthcare standards. We can't take care of our veterans. We can't take care of our poor. We can't even take care of ourselves!

The fact that our tax dollars are thrown away on mindless defense spending instead of healthcare is an insult.

Not exactly. You specifically mention veterans and the poor. Ask yourself who manages the healthcare for those individuals? BIngo The government. We all know about how well the VA system runs in this country. So, what makes you think they can effectively handle insurance and healthcare for the rest of the nation?

Also, do you ever wonder why so many people travel from abroad to seek healthcare here in the US. I live in Cleveland and we are fortunate to have two of the best hospitals in the world at our fingertips. The Cleveland Clinic and University Hospital treat people from all over the world. The talented experts in the Cleveland Clinic saved my life 20 years ago.

Good luck to you when the govt. makes the call on the treatment of your ailment. Yes, the govt. will guide your physicians decision making process.

Yes, our system has its faults and those need to be addressed on an individual basis. Under Obamacare, the mega insurance carriers and Pharma companies will only get bigger. Just wait until they start cherry picking their customers out of the pools of millions dropped by their employers insurance carriers. All of the rest will just end up in the govt. red tape.

I'll just keep this thread going as more people are dropped from their healthcare plans.

Remember when Barack Obama repeatedly promised that no one’s current coverage would have to change if Congress approved the health-care overhaul he demanded? When the ObamaCare bill passed, the Associated Press suddenly discovered that the change of tax law that would supposedly generate billions of dollars to pay for the costs of the bill would also drive companies to dump retirees from their existing drug coverage and push them into Medicare. Minnesota-based 3M became one of the first large corporations to do just that — and push retirees off of all their plans as well:

citing new federal health laws, said Monday it won’t cover retirees with its corporate health-insurance plan starting in 2013.

Instead, the company will direct retirees to Medicare-backed insurance programs, and will provide reimbursement for that coverage. It’ll also reimburse retirees who are too young for Medicare; the company didn’t provide further details.

The company made the changes known in a memo to employees Friday; news of the move was reported in The Wall Street Journal and confirmed Monday by 3M spokeswoman Jackie Berry.

3M has 23,000 employees

Democrats that crafted the legislation say they tried to incentivize companies to keep their retiree coverage intact, especially until 2014. The law creates a $5 billion fund for employers and unions to offset the cost of retiree health benefits. More than 2,000 entities, including many large public companies, have already been approved to submit claims for such reimbursement. 3M did not apply.

How did Democrats come up with the $5 billion figure for subsidies to protect retirees from losing their plans? From the looks of it, they simply made it up. They also didn’t do much calculation to determine whether the subsidies would actually incentivize employers into rejecting this strategy for cost savings. To some extent, they may not have been able to make that calculation, because thanks to the massive amount of ambiguity in the bill, no one can really say for sure what the future costs would be. And of course, that’s why 3M chose now to dump the retirees.

Did you catch that last line?? Uncertainty of future costs prevails with 3M and rest assured that more companies will certainly follow their lead.

hotair.com...