Lower Health Insurance Premiums to Come at Cost of Fewer Choices

[Redress]

and many many companies are dropping there company provided health care and forcing the employees into the exchanges

Home Depot 20,000
Home Depot Drops Big Obamacare Surprise on 20,000 Employees | TheBlaze.com

UPS 15,000 spouses
UPS to drop 15,000 workers' spouses from insurance, blames Obamacare - Aug. 21, 2013

Walgreen’s decision affects about 160,000 current employees and follows similar action this year by Sears Holdings Corp. (SHLD) and Darden Restaurants Inc. (DRI) As an alternative to administering a traditional health plan, all three will send their employees to an exchange run byAon Plc. (AON) Fourteen more companies will join in 2014 when 600,000 people will participate, Aon said.
Video: Walgreens to dump employee coverage for 160,000 « Hot Air



22,000 senior citizens just lost their health plan with Harvard Pilgrim Health Care
22,000 lose their health insurance due to Obamacare, as healthcare costs rise - Washington DC SCOTUS | Examiner.com


Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The CBO published an entire report dedicated to estimating the loss of employer-sponsored insurance (ESI). Attempting to model employer behavior, its low-end projection was that 5 million people will lose ESI. Under a different scenario, as many as 20 million fewer Americans could have ESI by 2019.
McKinsey and Company. McKinsey, another consulting firm, found that “30 percent of employers will definitely or probably stop offering ESI in the years after 2014.”
American Action Forum. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former CBO director and president of the American Action Forum, estimated that Obamacare “provides strong incentives for employers—with the agreement of their employees—to drop employer-sponsored health insurance for as many as 35 million Americans.”
What Are the Odds Your Employer Will Drop Health Coverage? | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation

Moving the goalposts already I see.

And LoLz @ your sources.

 

[trfjr]

The story is about the insurance exchanges, and because of those(see, that would be, you know, the topic of the thread) no one is being rationed or forced to change doctors.

are you blind? have you not read the any of the post in this thread burring your head in the sand or running around with your fingers in your ears will not make the truth go away

 

[Harshaw]

So you have seen all the insurance companies terms and conditions in all 50 states?

Even with exceptions, it obliterates your absolute statement.

No I said that the insurance company defined who you had access to.. on their dime.

No, you didn't. And you KNOW you didn't.

I am not the one backpedaling

Indeed you are.

It still is not what you said. You thought it was actually going to be cheaper.

I did? Where did I write that..or can you read my thoughts? Nothing gets cheaper, especially in a private run healthcare system in the most capitalistic egocentric country on the planet.

:roll:

so how is this any different other than it is now cheaper?

Why did you bother? Do you not remember what you write from post to post?

Or do you really think that the GOP has a plan or any idea on brining DOWN the cost of healthcare? hahahahaha yea right.

Funny; I didn't say a word about "the GOP."

 

[trfjr]

Moving the goalposts already I see.

And LoLz @ your sources.

didn't move the goal post an inch did I

dispute that facts then if you don't like the source

 

[Helix]

Hey liberals what was it your messiah promised us again "You can keep your doctor" "you can keep your insurance plan"

this train wreck was sold to the American Public on a lie. If a company would have done the same you could return the product for a full refund or sue and win

if you're referring to me specifically, i've always thought that the PPACA was a POS. i supported single payer like most other first world countries have already. i think we'll get there eventually, but now we have to let this stupid compromise plan waste time and money until we come to our senses and put something into place that might actually work.

 

[rocket88]

if you're referring to me specifically, i've always thought that the PPACA was a POS. i supported single payer like most other first world countries have already. i think we'll get there eventually, but now we have to let this stupid compromise plan waste time and money until we come to our senses and put something into place that might actually work.

Just because it's indistinguishable from Romneycare doesn't mean it's a compromise...

 

[Helix]

How is this a response?

did you read the link? it outlines exactly how health care is currently rationed in the US.

 

[rocket88]

.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/h...s-to-come-at-cost-of-fewer-choices.html?_r=2&

Can you say Rationed Care boys and girls

Hey liberals what was it your messiah promised us again "You can keep your doctor" "you can keep your insurance plan"

do you ever get tired of being lied to by your POS

You do know liberals when you have lost the NYT when they actually start telling the truth you are in deep ****

See, if only Romney had won the election....we'd have Romneycare instead (which is basically the same as Obamacare).

 

[trfjr]

The story is about the insurance exchanges, and because of those(see, that would be, you know, the topic of the thread) no one is being rationed or forced to change doctors.

President Obama’s health care law will push 7 million people out of their job-based insurance coverage — nearly twice the previous estimate, according to the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday.

Read more: Seven million will lose insurance under Obama health law - Washington Times



is this source more to your liking

 

[Helix]

Just because it's indistinguishable from Romneycare doesn't mean it's a compromise...

cutting the public option out was a big mistake. it would have put more people under Medicare, and would have given Medicare more leverage to force prices down. the bill lost my support when they did that.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

OK, so there's one example. No insurance plan I've been on has been that way, though. It's always been mainstream providers like Aetna and Blue Cross.

I wouldn't know - I've been military insurance for a decade, now. I think what you're dealing with is that your insurance is just widely accepted. Oddly - military insurance is not, it is extremely limiting.

 

[Harshaw]

did you read the link? it outlines exactly how health care is currently rationed in the US.

Had nothing to do with my post, which was about very specific things.

 

[Redress]

are you blind? have you not read the any of the post in this thread burring your head in the sand or running around with your fingers in your ears will not make the truth go away

No I am not blind. In fact I read your source and understand what the exchanges do. That makes one of us.

 

[Samhain]

People who have insurance that is no longer allowed will lose that option, so its true that some will lose their plans.

Its also true that some who cannot afford insurance currently, will also still not be able to afford insurance with subsidies.

 

[Redress]

President Obama’s health care law will push 7 million people out of their job-based insurance coverage — nearly twice the previous estimate, according to the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday.

Read more: Seven million will lose insurance under Obama health law - Washington Times



is this source more to your liking

It is wrong.

PolitiFact Texas | Cruz claim about fewer Americans with employer-backed health plans cherry-picks and misinterprets Congressional Budget Office figure

Here is the CBO report: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43907-BudgetOutlook.pdf

Here is the chart that 7 million comes from: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43900_ACAInsuranceCoverageEffects.pdf

Lets look at a couple key things from that chart. Currently, 154 million get insurance through employer. Next year, 155. Then 157, then 160. In point of fact, more people will be getting insurance through their employer than currently. What the chart shows is that by 2021 7 million fewer people will get insurance through an employer than if the law had not been enacted. So, more people getting insurance through employer than now, and the 7 million is the difference between the law currently and if ACA had not been enacted, over 10 years. Note that in fact the chart does not say people will lose their insurance from an employer.

 

[Samhain]

It is wrong.

PolitiFact Texas | Cruz claim about fewer Americans with employer-backed health plans cherry-picks and misinterprets Congressional Budget Office figure

Here is the CBO report: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43907-BudgetOutlook.pdf

Here is the chart that 7 million comes from: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43900_ACAInsuranceCoverageEffects.pdf

Lets look at a couple key things from that chart. Currently, 154 million get insurance through employer. Next year, 155. Then 157, then 160. In point of fact, more people will be getting insurance through their employer than currently. What the chart shows is that by 2021 7 million fewer people will get insurance through an employer than if the law had not been enacted. So, more people getting insurance through employer than now, and the 7 million is the difference between the law currently and if ACA had not been enacted, over 10 years. Note that in fact the chart does not say people will lose their insurance from an employer.

Will the CBO re-score the law in regards to the 30-hr work week requirement?

 

[Bronson]

Yea let's have the Government run and ration your HC

What could possibly go wrong?

Kathleen Sebelius: some will live and some will die - Baltimore Political Buzz | Examiner.com

NHS millions for controversial care pathway - Telegraph

The majority of NHS hospitals in England are being given financial rewards for placing terminally-ill patients on a controversial “pathway” to death, it can be disclosed

 

[Ockham]

Yea let's have the Government run and ration your HC

What could possibly go wrong?

Kathleen Sebelius: some will live and some will die - Baltimore Political Buzz | Examiner.com

NHS millions for controversial care pathway - Telegraph

Government's historical track record isn't very good that's true. Which is why I would rather any other healthcare system than a Federally mandated one, but, it's the law so now we all have a **** sandwich to eat until the system (hopefully) fails which will require a full overhaul. Until then, unfortunately many thousands will be hurt at no fault of their own. When Europeans said American's were stupid in the past, I always defended my fellow countrymen - I now must retreat from that defense and seriously consider American's and specifically politicians who supported the (non) Affordable Care Act as being very stupid as are the people who support those politicians.

 

[Fisher]

That is incorrect. Out-of-network doctors generally carry a larger copay, but you have access to any doctor you want.

And if you just want to pay cash for a visit, there is no problem at all.




Who told you it was "now cheaper"? "Less than expected" merely means not as much MORE EXPENSIVE as thought.

One of my kids had a fall on vacation and went to a doc in the box to make sure nothing was broken. We were out of state. We had to pay cash and we could then submit it to our insurance for possible reimbursement. My wife was going to do it, but I told her it was pointless since we have a high deductible and won't likely meet it anyway this year. Otherwise we would have been reimbursed part of the out of pocket cash and carry at whatever rate they otherwise would have paid less our co-pay had we been in state. It isn't a fight worth having sometimes for $50 or whatever.

 

[Harshaw]

One of my kids had a fall on vacation and went to a doc in the box to make sure nothing was broken. We were out of state. We had to pay cash and we could then submit it to our insurance for possible reimbursement. My wife was going to do it, but I told her it was pointless since we have a high deductible and won't likely meet it anyway this year. Otherwise we would have been reimbursed part of the out of pocket cash and carry at whatever rate they otherwise would have paid less our co-pay had we been in state. It isn't a fight worth having sometimes for $50 or whatever.

I certainly don't find $50 out-of-pocket for an office visit outrageous, especially considering it's not something you need to do very often. That's an oil change, or a family dinner out.

That stuff shouldn't even be covered under insurance, IMO, any more than the oil change is covered under car insurance. That it is drives the cost up.

 

[Fisher]

I certainly don't find $50 out-of-pocket for an office visit outrageous, especially considering it's not something you need to do very often. That's an oil change, or a family dinner out.

That stuff shouldn't even be covered under insurance, IMO, any more than the oil change is covered under car insurance. That it is drives the cost up.

Oh no, it was a lot more than that. $50 is what we may have been reimbursed had we not had a high deductible policy. The actual bill for the visit was like $485 or so because of the X-rays. Had we gone to an ER, we would have submitted it because the bill would probably have been closer to $2500-$3K

 

[Harshaw]

Oh no, it was a lot more than that. $50 is what we may have been reimbursed had we not had a high deductible policy. The actual bill for the visit was like $485 or so because of the X-rays. Had we gone to an ER, we would have submitted it because the bill would probably have been closer to $2500-$3K

Then I misunderstood.

 

[Fisher]

Then I misunderstood.

The last person I knew who had that fight with an insurance company ended up spending 6 months of frustration only to get chump change because their emergency wasn't an insurance company emergency. Not worth it to me when all we would get is credit toward a deductible anyway this late in the year.

 

[tererun]

.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/h...s-to-come-at-cost-of-fewer-choices.html?_r=2&

Can you say Rationed Care boys and girls

Hey liberals what was it your messiah promised us again "You can keep your doctor" "you can keep your insurance plan"

do you ever get tired of being lied to by your POS

You do know liberals when you have lost the NYT when they actually start telling the truth you are in deep ****

Just a small bit of logic, when the lowest health plans are there to get people without health care an affordable alternative so they have health care 1 option is better than nothing. This is part of the republican lie about obamacare. People are not stuck on the low end plan if they have money and can have a choice for higher end coverage. So the people you aere whining about having minimal choices will be the ones who had no choices before. One must also note that when bargain hunting for insurance for lower income people who had it before they often selected plans which did not cover every doctor so this is nothing new.

It is one thing to say this system sucks because it does not address the problems of for profit health care which puts things like executive bonuses and shareholders before the patient and therefor it seeks to coat the stench of ****ty american health insurance with some bargain basement febreeze, but you do not have to make stuff up about it. Going from nothing to something is a gain. Going down in cost even though you cannot go to donald trump's doctor is lower costs. Enjoy your obamacare, and if it sucks next time you might want to take your healthcare out of the hands of greedy people who feel profit is more important than you are.

 

[trfjr]

Just a small bit of logic, when the lowest health plans are there to get people without health care an affordable alternative so they have health care 1 option is better than nothing. This is part of the republican lie about obamacare. People are not stuck on the low end plan if they have money and can have a choice for higher end coverage. So the people you aere whining about having minimal choices will be the ones who had no choices before. One must also note that when bargain hunting for insurance for lower income people who had it before they often selected plans which did not cover every doctor so this is nothing new.

It is one thing to say this system sucks because it does not address the problems of for profit health care which puts things like executive bonuses and shareholders before the patient and therefor it seeks to coat the stench of ****ty american health insurance with some bargain basement febreeze, but you do not have to make stuff up about it. Going from nothing to something is a gain. Going down in cost even though you cannot go to donald trump's doctor is lower costs. Enjoy your obamacare, and if it sucks next time you might want to take your healthcare out of the hands of greedy people who feel profit is more important than you are.

I'm talking about the millions who and or spouse/family are losing their employer provided heath care and are being forced into the exchanges at a higher cost and or co-pay and Rationed Care