"You Might Hate Obamacare, But It's Saved These People's Lives "

reply to post by NightFlight


The only thing that Obamacare make sure is that you will have to buy by mandated AKA taxed and that you can not be denied, but when it comes to pre existing conditions insurance can add extra charges without braking the law, in out of pocket expenses and deductibles (already happening).

Still under the Obamacare, taxes surges on the working class will be the ones paying for the extra expenses that insurance companies will incur when they can not deny any longer long term care, is call subsidies.

Savings to the tax payers? no a darn thing

In 2010, the Obama Administration estimated that 375,000 people would enroll in the PCIP. But as of January 2013, over two-and-a-half years since the plan began, only 107,139 were enrolled—less than 29 percent of original projections.

Despite such low enrollment, the PCIP is running out of money. By nature, the enrollees in this insurance pool are high-cost because they are already sick, but government cost projections were way off, as is typical for government-run health care programs. In a 2012 report, the Administration conceded that claims’ costs had been 2.5 times greater than they had anticipated.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has thus suspended enrollment in the plan last month, leaving many people with pre-existing conditions out of luck. For instance, a woman with breast cancer learned of the suspended enrollment and tried to apply as quickly as she could but is unsure if her application was accepted, stating, “I feel like the rug has been pulled out from under me. On every level, this is just beyond discouraging.”

The very poor and elderly will still be receiving Medicaid and medicare only on the states that will expand Medicaid for those that will need it.

But is a big thing about that, Most of the people that actually will benefit from the "pre exisiting" condition clause are actually in the elderly and very poor group.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has thus suspended enrollment in the plan last month, leaving many people with pre-existing conditions out of luck. For instance, a woman with breast cancer learned of the suspended enrollment and tried to apply as quickly as she could but is unsure if her application was accepted, stating, “I feel like the rug has been pulled out from under me. On every level, this is just beyond discouraging.”

Because those very poor can not be mandated and neither taxed serve no purpose in the Obamacare mandated AKA taxed part of the program

In addition to suspending enrollment, CMS made major benefit adjustments in an effort to control program costs—mainly by increasing enrollee cost-sharing requirements. These changes included the consolidation of three plan options into one, increased co-insurance, and increased maximums for out-of-pocket costs (a 56 percent increase for in-network services and a 42 percent increase for out-of-network services).

blog.heritage.org...

What this tells is that it was no necessary to take over the nations population to fix a problem that it was not affecting most of the population, the reason for the take over is to tax to death or mandate the working class population into supporting the insurance business.

The poor with pre existing conditions will still not be covered most of the time with Obamacare.

reply to post by Willtell


These are drowned out by elitist lobbyists...

Its funny people are claiming the health insurance industry is the proponent of obamacare; nothing could be further from the truth

s&f

Is there some reason that very same wall posting appears twice?

Willtell
reply to post by ThichHeaded

 

The IRS has no enforcement authority. The fines likely will be unenforced, I hear.

You Heard Wrong! Or your Obama Talking Points on your tablet needs to be updated, call your Supervisor to your work cubical there in the Obama Support Center.

Try reading,

When Obamacare’s individual mandate takes effect in 2014, all Americans who file income tax returns must complete an additional IRS tax form. The new form will require disclosure of a taxpayer’s personal identifying health information in order to determine compliance with the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate.
As confirmed by IRS testimony to the tax-writing House Committee on Ways and Means, “taxpayers will file their tax returns reporting their health insurance coverage, and/or making a payment”.

This new tax information document must, at a minimum, contain: the name and health insurance identification number of the taxpayer; the name and tax identification number of the health insurance company; the number of months the taxpayer was covered by this insurance plan; and whether or not the plan was purchased in one of Obamacare’s “exchanges.”

As a service to the public, Americans for Tax Reform has released a projected version of this tax form to help families and tax specialists prepare for this additional filing requirement. Taxpayers may view the projected IRS form at www.ObamacareTaxForm.com or see below. On the form, lines 3-4 show where taxpayers will disclose their personal identifying health information.

Read more: atr.org...
Follow us: @taxreformer on Twitter

www.atr.org...
Take a Close look at the questions in Part III, especially question # 10.
Are you an illegal immigrant and therefore exempt from the personal mandate? (See Instruction I)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Yes No
www.ObamacareTaxForm.com
As usual someone is getting special treatment!

reply to post by reject


probably because they didn't think anyone would read them and the large CHANGE is pleasing to see more than once.

reply to post by kdyam


I don't even know what to say to the people that keep posting that this can't be true because Obamacare hasn't taken affect yet. The portion that this is about, the pre-existing condition portion, went into affect in 2010. Where have you all been the past 3 years? Have you even paid attention to the news or what is happening to your fellow Americans? I will of course agree that is marketing, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

I, personally, was able to finally get insurance (a few years back) because this portion took effect in 2010. Before that I was denied, just for taking synthroid every day (after getting my thyroid removed years ago).

reply to post by abecedarian


I worked full time, being from a poor family, from 1968 to 2007, until my husband became disabled. Now I am his care taker. I am sorry if that life did not fulfill your expectations and quotas.

These people are sharing success stories only 6 days after Obama Care opens up... the question is what will happen in the long run, I m open to it working, although I'm not sure if we will get to see if it works or not if (thinking of who to hold accountable) congress drives us off a cliff by defaulting.

Realistically, if we default, the U.S. government will be left with $50 billion dollars and it costs $100 billion dollars a day to run the government, so, well, I'm not sure how Obama Care works still, if it is just the government running private corporate exchanges or what, but it would all shut down.

Strakha
reply to post by Daedalus

 

I understand that much but what I don't understand is why they have to force people to buy it to regulate the insurance companies and force them to cover pre-existing conditions. Can't the government just say if you want to do business in America these are the rules to the company? There are rules for most business without needing to force people to buy services from those businesses. That's what doesn't make sense to me. Well that is my biggest question and there seems to be conflicting information in this thread about whether or not its possible. I don't see why it wouldn't be personally.

Though when I think about it I could see how forcing everyone to get healthcare would make covering people with pre-existing conditions cheaper because some people would just wait until they had a condition before bothering to get healthcare and that would drive costs for everyone up. I don't think there is ever going to be a solution everyone is happy with. There is just so many issues for and against and things to consider.

edit on 7-10-2013 by Strakha because: (no reason given)

no, it absolutely IS possible....but you see, politicians like money. if they were to pass a bill on it's own that makes them cover preexisting conditions, without price-gouging us in retaliation, they would lose tons of money in campaign contributions..

it's all about bribes....most politicians aren't in it for us, they're in it for themselves..

reply to post by MOMof3


wait until we hit the debt ceiling....you won't get your check anymore.

the ss fund is empty, and has been for a while..your checks are being issued from the GOB...

you do understand the difference here, right?

searching411
reply to post by Willtell

 

How can it have saved these people's lives when we are only in the "sign up" phase of the ACA? The enforcement stage is now, the available coverage surfaces next year.

i'll clear this up...

the bit that "saved these people" is the preexisting conditions provision of the ACA...this component passed into law, two or so years ago....

this component made it so that insurance companies couldn't refuse to cover sick people for being sick...sounds like common sense, i know, but we ARE talking about mindless greedy corporations here.....

anyway, THIS specific component probably did make it so that a lot of people could get business taken care of, that they couldn't before....so, that specific component helped them....

the ONLY reason they're trotting this propaganda crap out now, is because now people are starting to see how absolutely s**tty the rest of the bill is, and they don't like it, so now we have a propaganda campaign to try and make us believe that it's not all bad at all.....it's to make us feel better about the individual mandate ass-raping we're all about to receive...

bjax9er
Government can't make products or services less expensive.
It can only take from one, and give to another.

Obamadontcare is nothing more than a massive top down, iron fisted,redistribution SCAM.

not entirely true....

they CAN make laws that protect consumers from price-gouging...

the last line though...mostly agreed...

beezzer
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

You and I don't agree much, but there should already be laws avaliable that would prevent price gouging, profiteering, or coercive monopolies.

The problem is enforcing them, lobbyists, and lawyers.

that's where you pass bills that do away with the idiotic notion that corporations are people, and that money is speech....that fixes a lot of the problems right there...

reply to post by Daedalus


Frankly, I don't care. I know how to live poor. We will all go down together because that seems to be the objective of power players and extremists. My husband and I are in our 60's, my husband and brothers went to Viet Nam, worked hard, raised three responsible kids, paid our taxes, no criminal record at all, paid into our own private retirement plan since 1972 plus soc sec. If our system fails, look in the mirror. And I believe you are just another person who thinks he is a prophet. That is wall street types are anymore, prophets of a future that might come or not.

reply to post by MOMof3


i'm honestly not sure what in the blue hell you're on about...

i never claimed to be a prophet, i'm DEFINITELY not one of those "wall street types", and why would i look in the mirror if the system fails?

the people responsible for the system failing are the wall street guys, and the greedy corporations, and their lobbyists, and the masses of dumb people who live here, who don't pay attention to what's happening around them, and don't care, when they're told what's up.

i pay attention, i speak out, i do whatever i can....problem is there's not enough like me, and nobody wants to hear it...

Has anybody noticed that the aca fees and whatnot all kicked in after the election. I wonder if the results would have been different if people saw the effects on their pocketbooks before they voted. Romney would be getting beat to hell right now even though he would have had nothing to do with it.

Here's a real comparison for anyone who thinks the ACA is actually affordable.

I am about as middle class as you can get. I live in Knoxville, TN and work as a design technician for a large E&C firm. I make a little over $60k a year and have a wife (stay at home) and 3 kids. Financially we are okay, but due to our oldest childs medical issues things are tight (we had to file chapter 13 in 2009 and are working our way through that). So we are not destitute, but there's not a lot of wiggle room and we pretty much live check to check. Currently the medical only portion of our medical insurance is $130 every two weeks ($281.67 a month) through my employer. My current coverage is $3k family deductible, $9k family out-of-pocket max (in-network) with 20% coinsurance.

I have no reason to believe my employer is going to drop coverage (although I'm sure it will get worse/more expensive) but just to compare lets assume they do and I have to get family coverage through the exchange. I could not find a policy with a comparable deductible/OOPM in the silver plans so I jumped to the gold plans and found this;

home.comcast.net...

This policy gives me the exact same coverage as far as deductible, OOPM & coinsurance, cool. So what will the same coverage cost me on the exchange?

home.comcast.net...

Uh, what? I thought this was the AFFORDABLE Care Act? I don't see a 289% increase in my premium as affordable.

Yes, I wish everyone that couldn't get coverage could have it, but it doesn't seem like this is the best way to accomplish that.

The figures I have shown were found using www.valuepenguin.com....

Ummm, no one is insured yet.
It went into effect a week ago. I think even after you pay premiums it takes at least a month to go into affect.
Half the sign ups didn't go through properly. So people who think they are covered aren't.

How has it saved anyone's life, in seven days?
Talk about propaganda.

Excuse me while I roll my eyes for ten minutes over this one.
Can't be helped

A post from the Obamacare website page.

"I actually made it through this morning at 8:00 A.M. I have a preexisting condition (Type 1 Diabetes) and my income base was 45K-55K annually I chose tier 2 "Silver Plan" and my monthly premiums came out to $597.00 with $13,988 yearly deductible!!! There is NO POSSIBLE way that I can afford this so I "opt-out" and chose to continue along with no insurance. I received an email tonight at 5:00 P.M. informing me that my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax return. Then you make it to the "REPERCUSSIONS PORTION" for "non-payment" of yearly fine. First, your drivers license will be suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with "Non-Payment" and you happen to be a home owner, you will have a federal tax lien placed on your home. You can agree to give your bank information so that they can easy "Automatically withdraw" your "penalties" weekly, bi-weekly or monthly! This by no means is "Free" or even "Affordable

So just a bit more information about enforcement begins to creep out.

reply to post by MsAphrodite


This is why I have a strong feeling the mandate will be overturned when the first few cases of non-payment of taxes hit the Supreme Court. Just for the simple fact that this bill is forcing people to buy a private product so I believe Justice Kennedy will rule with the other conservative justices.

If this was something like your taxes paying for the program and nothing coming out of pocket, I'm not sure how Kennedy would vote.

I almost don't want to see what some of these premiums are going to be for people with preexisting conditions, even for the Bronze plans. The insurance companies might not be able to turn you away if you have a preexisting condition, but you that doesn't mean you won't be paying for it.

reply to post by Timing


I think you mean Justice Roberts. This already went to the Supreme Court and it was ruled constitutional as a tax (not a penalty) so I don't see how it would get back in front of the Supreme Court again.