• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ten States wiped out by Obummercare

Do you want to know why he makes that kinda cashola?
Do you wanna make that kinda bank?
Or do you think your opinion that he isn't supposed to make that kinda money has any bearing on the situation?
What?
 
I haven't had medical insurance for over two decades Why am I still alive?
(guess how much my current premium is)
 
Some of the DISASTROUS RESULTS of ObummerCare:

Daily Caller News Foundation:
Ten states where Obamacare wipes out existing health care plans

President Barack Obama famously promised, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” He later got even more specific.

“If you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have,” Obama said.

But as Obamacare’s rollout approaches, we have learned this is not true. Here are the ten states where consumers may like their health care plans, but they won’t be able to keep them.

1) California: 58,000 will lose their plans under Obamacare. The first bomb dropped in California with a mass exodus from the most populated state’s Obamacare exchange. Aetna, the country’s third largest insurer, left first in July and was closely followed by UnitedHealth. Anthem Blue Cross pulled out of California’s Obamacare exchange for small businesses as well.

Fifty-four percent of Californians expect to lose their coverage, according to an August poll.

2) Missouri: Patients of the state’s largest hospital system — which spans 13 hospitals including the St. Louis Children’s Hospital — will not be covered by the largest insurer on Obamacare exchanges, Anthem BlueCross BlueShield. Anthem covers 79,000 patients in Missouri who may seek subsidies on Obamacare exchanges, but won’t be able to see any doctors in the BJC HealthCare system.

3) Connecticut: Aetna, the third largest insurer in the nation, won’t offer insurance on the Obamacare exchange in its own home state, where it was founded in 1850. The reason? “We believe the modification to the rates filed by Aetna will not allow us to collect enough premiums to cover the cost of the plans and meet the service expectations of our customers,” said Aetna spokesman Susan Millerick.

4) Maryland: 13,000 individuals covered by Aetna and its recently-purchased Coventry Health Care won’t be able to keep their insurance plans if they want Obamacare subsidies on the exchanges. Aetna and Coventry canceled plans to offer insurance in the exchange when state officials wouldn’t allow them to charge premiums high enough to cover costs.

5) South Carolina: 28,000 people were insured by Medical Mutual of Ohio, SC’s second-largest insurance company, until it decided to leave the state entirely in July due to Obamacare’s “vast and quite complex” new regulations. Company spokesman Ed Byers said Medical Mutual’s patients would be switched over to United Healthcare plans instead.

6) New York: Aetna pulled out of New York’s exchange in late August in an effort to keep their plans “financially viable,” said Aetna spokeswoman Cynthia Michener.

7) New Jersey: 1.1 million Aetna customers are at risk in New Jersey, where the leading insurer also won’t be a part of the exchange. Just 2,600 patients purchase individual plans with the company, but any looking to take advantage of subsidies on the exchange for unaffordable employer-based insurance won’t be able to do with Aetna.

8) Iowa: Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Iowa’s largest health insurer, decided not to offer plans in the Obamacare exchange. It sells 86 percent of Iowa’s individual health insurance plans.

9) Wisconsin: Two of the three largest insurers in the state won’t offer plans on the exchange. United Healthcare and Humana patients will have to get a new health insurer to buy insurance on Obamacare exchanges.

10) Georgia: Just five insurers are participating in Georgia’s Obamacare exchange. Medical Mutual of Ohio left Georgia and Indiana as well as South Carolina, due to Obamacare regulations. Aetna, along with Coventry, also decided against participating in the George health exchange.

Follow Sarah on Twitter

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Read more: Ten states where Obamacare wipes out health care plans | The Daily Caller

There is no absolute proof to the claim. The Daily Caller is a mouthpiece of the extremist republicans so whatever is claimed must be viewed with lots of grains of salt and suspicion.
 
When Social Security was enacted, the Republicans at that time said the same thing. But look at Social Security today which is embraced by as many Republicans as not.

Social security is a fine example of a well intended program run foul. In economic terms it should not be handled by government as it is the type of good the private sector does better. Also it is presently running on borrowed time and will become quite a headache, when demographic or economic fundamentals change as they are in Europe presently. It is underfunded and comparable to a Ponzi Scheme since the even then very limited funds were extracted. As far as I know it is pretty much pay as you go now.
 
Simple question: if you add up all the taxes pay your paystub what does it equal?
Should nearly 50% of every dollar you make be given over involuntarily to the regime?
Wait until you are only getting 30 cents on the dollar like the socialized nations in Europe?
 
During an interview by one of the authors of Romneycare, he indicated that criteria where put
in place to weed out "sham policies" that were nothing more than cash cows for the insurance providers.
Any CEO that pulls his company out of large markets like California and New York under the ACA
should be fired. Once the dust settles these companies will re-enter the markets.
... AND FOX NEWS WILL NOT REPORT IT!

Fired...? Sounds like a dictatorship to me. Nobody wanted this monster. Derived by liberals, never voted on in it's current state by the House which defiles the constitution, wimped out by a whipped SCOTUS....

Why should any insurance company want to participate when they cannot cover claim expenses and their other customers will have to shoulder the weight of it all?

If it's such a good meal, let congress eat it first.
 
Are only wage slaves are unable to grasp the concept of profit?
Why continue to run something if all you can do is lose money
unless of course you are the government which it seems IS their mission statement?
 
There is no longer anything new being said on this subject. Both sides have their talking points and the truth is only now becoming clear. Months from now the discussion will change dramatically.

There are a few things I find curious about it. First, people are insisting that the plans offered are "free market". But how can that be when I am forced to carry a policy that must include pregnancy and prenatal care for myself, my 12 year old son and my wife who does not have a uterus? That doesn't sound like free market to me. I'm being forced to pay for something I will never use.

Ok, let's consider the proponents of it. A lot of them are kids. By that I mean up to 26 years old, where the government seems to have somehow accurately reset the age of maturity. Do they not understand that they are the ones who are going to pay the majority of the expenses for the old? Liberals have shielded themselves somewhat here instituting a policy that allows parents to carry their old teenagers until they are 26, but it doesn't mean they have to. Doesn't it seem strange that so many are supporting a plan they assume their parents are going to pay for? If this provision were not made, the base of the Democrat party would be shouldering the majority of the costs, and eventually would figure it out. Hopefully. They do seem to be pretty dumb, it might take a while, which is actually the point. The Democrat party is specifically allowing an out for their increasingly selfish and clueless voting base. It seems the new age of becoming a conservative will be 27 when people go out to get health insurance and get sticker shock.

Possibly a bit off subject, but I read an article the other day talking about increased unemployment for the younger people and possible causes. One of them was lack of responsibility, which of course the less responsible here will decry as false while expecting their parents to pay for their new more expensive health care. It occurred to me that we are seeing the connecting of the points now, for instance programs like Common Core, which will teach the " concept" of math, where the the overall image of math is more important than results, as though numbers have feelings. I found this utterly disturbing. But in a world where we are taught that there are no winners and losers and nobody keeps score, the very idea of personal responsibility fades away. And with that comes the need for a nanny state to take care of those who can not or will not care for themselves. Eventually they lack the ambition to ask if it is worth it or the ability to quantify it. The end result: Consumers, not Citizens.

And here we are, sliding in to our positions as cogs in the wheel of a government that was once for us but is now over us. And they didn't even have to disarm us. All they had to do was to take away the ability to mentally get up off the floor and question it. The funny thing is, the younger generation does not even seem to be aware of what has happened to them. They were told they HAD to have a college education in order to get a job. Except they have no jobs because the market has been purposely suppressed. But what they DO have is impending debt from that student loan. Do they not understand that their "education" was never the goal? That the student loan was less about job skills and more about being a future revenue stream for someone else later on down the road? That student loans are bundled and sold just as home mortgages are? If they can't see that, why are we to believe that discussions of the long term effects of this health insurance law ( because that is what it is, and health insurance never cured anyone) will be? They are unable to quantify it. They have been taught to gauge it on feelings. And for now, they get to pass their costs on to their parents. It will be years before they experience direct effects, and by then they will lack the ability to question it or do anything about it.
 
26 years old, where the government seems to have somehow accurately reset the age of maturity
My son IS 26 years old (he's been on his own since he was 18 the old measure of adulthood?) He says that the younger generation thinks they will refuse to pay for this crap. I can imagine a time in the future where the under 30 crowd wakes up to reality and sez: oh hell no! Why pay into this when a blind man can see it will not be around by the time you are old?
 
Why should anyone care what the far right losers at at The Daily Caller think about anything?
 
My son IS 26 years old (he's been on his own since he was 18 the old measure of adulthood?) He says that the younger generation thinks they will refuse to pay for this crap. I can imagine a time in the future where the under 30 crowd wakes up to reality and sez: oh hell no! Why pay into this when a blind man can see it will not be around by the time you are old?

My stepson is 21. He moved in with us a couple of months ago ostensibly to go to school. His grandfather was going to pay for school and we weren't charging him rent. My only stipulation was that he needed to have at least a part time job. He never got one. My wife was adding him to our health insurance. Pretty sweet deal huh? Problem is at 21 he has the maturity level of a 15 year old and all he knows how to do is play video games because of his POS lazy father who's plan for his future is to outlive his parents.

So a couple of weeks ago he went to visit his girlfriend who is in college and decided he was just going to get a part time job and hang out with her. Great plan. So I dropped him from the insurance. His Dad is a deadbeat so he will not be covering this kid's insurance either. Time to grow up kid.
 
My stepson is 21. He moved in with us a couple of months ago ostensibly to go to school. His grandfather was going to pay for school and we weren't charging him rent. My only stipulation was that he needed to have at least a part time job. He never got one. My wife was adding him to our health insurance. Pretty sweet deal huh? Problem is at 21 he has the maturity level of a 15 year old and all he knows how to do is play video games because of his POS lazy father who's plan for his future is to outlive his parents.

So a couple of weeks ago he went to visit his girlfriend who is in college and decided he was just going to get a part time job and hang out with her. Great plan. So I dropped him from the insurance. His Dad is a deadbeat so he will not be covering this kid's insurance either. Time to grow up kid.

Hope he doesn't have to reach bottom to wise up, Tech. I also hope that he knows how babies are not made. Sigh.
 
"Ten States wiped out"

What is this Nagasaki?
 
Hope he doesn't have to reach bottom to wise up, Tech. I also hope that he knows how babies are not made. Sigh.

Well it's out of my hands now. He is an "adult", or so he tells me, except his wooden sword and plastic shield left over from Dragoncon is still in our spare room.
 
Some of the DISASTROUS RESULTS of ObummerCare:

Daily Caller News Foundation:
Ten states where Obamacare wipes out existing health care plans

President Barack Obama famously promised, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” He later got even more specific.

“If you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have,” Obama said.

But as Obamacare’s rollout approaches, we have learned this is not true. Here are the ten states where consumers may like their health care plans, but they won’t be able to keep them.

1) California: 58,000 will lose their plans under Obamacare. The first bomb dropped in California with a mass exodus from the most populated state’s Obamacare exchange. Aetna, the country’s third largest insurer, left first in July and was closely followed by UnitedHealth. Anthem Blue Cross pulled out of California’s Obamacare exchange for small businesses as well.

Fifty-four percent of Californians expect to lose their coverage, according to an August poll.

2) Missouri: Patients of the state’s largest hospital system — which spans 13 hospitals including the St. Louis Children’s Hospital — will not be covered by the largest insurer on Obamacare exchanges, Anthem BlueCross BlueShield. Anthem covers 79,000 patients in Missouri who may seek subsidies on Obamacare exchanges, but won’t be able to see any doctors in the BJC HealthCare system.

3) Connecticut: Aetna, the third largest insurer in the nation, won’t offer insurance on the Obamacare exchange in its own home state, where it was founded in 1850. The reason? “We believe the modification to the rates filed by Aetna will not allow us to collect enough premiums to cover the cost of the plans and meet the service expectations of our customers,” said Aetna spokesman Susan Millerick.

4) Maryland: 13,000 individuals covered by Aetna and its recently-purchased Coventry Health Care won’t be able to keep their insurance plans if they want Obamacare subsidies on the exchanges. Aetna and Coventry canceled plans to offer insurance in the exchange when state officials wouldn’t allow them to charge premiums high enough to cover costs.

5) South Carolina: 28,000 people were insured by Medical Mutual of Ohio, SC’s second-largest insurance company, until it decided to leave the state entirely in July due to Obamacare’s “vast and quite complex” new regulations. Company spokesman Ed Byers said Medical Mutual’s patients would be switched over to United Healthcare plans instead.

6) New York: Aetna pulled out of New York’s exchange in late August in an effort to keep their plans “financially viable,” said Aetna spokeswoman Cynthia Michener.

7) New Jersey: 1.1 million Aetna customers are at risk in New Jersey, where the leading insurer also won’t be a part of the exchange. Just 2,600 patients purchase individual plans with the company, but any looking to take advantage of subsidies on the exchange for unaffordable employer-based insurance won’t be able to do with Aetna.

8) Iowa: Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Iowa’s largest health insurer, decided not to offer plans in the Obamacare exchange. It sells 86 percent of Iowa’s individual health insurance plans.

9) Wisconsin: Two of the three largest insurers in the state won’t offer plans on the exchange. United Healthcare and Humana patients will have to get a new health insurer to buy insurance on Obamacare exchanges.

10) Georgia: Just five insurers are participating in Georgia’s Obamacare exchange. Medical Mutual of Ohio left Georgia and Indiana as well as South Carolina, due to Obamacare regulations. Aetna, along with Coventry, also decided against participating in the George health exchange.

Follow Sarah on Twitter

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Read more: Ten states where Obamacare wipes out health care plans | The Daily Caller

When ever new laws are passed, they usually need some tweeking. Sometimes they need a complete overhaul. I always said the fate of the ACA will be decided by those who already have insurance before this new law took effect. Whether they are better off under the new law or not. Whether insurance is costing them more or less, better or worse coverage. Whether or not they can continue to get coverage from the place they work or if that employer dropped health coverage and forced them into the exchanges.

The fact is most people do not like their routine interrupted or changed. Time will tell how this all works out. As of today, no one can say with any certainty. We have seen some reaction to the law, but more is to come.
 
You do a disservice to 15 years olds ;) A that age my kid was makin' the grade in prep school which isn't much different than college, had a part time job and a GF. I didn't have to tell him anything at that age he knew what was what. It was funny I was chatting online with him on his last day at his summer internship I asked: so how much did you pay in taxes on the money they paid you during that 12 weeks. He said 6,600 bucks. yeah I think some of the younger generation is going to realize being a slave to the government prolly isn't a good thing.
 
When ever new laws are passed,
NO Perotista this isn't merely a law it is a fundamental change in the relationship between the citizen and the government. In fact it is blatantly unConstitutional Regardless of what anyone says. Sadly America has become a buncha limp wristed panty waisted metro-sexual pansies. All hail Socialism !
 
When ever new laws are passed, they usually need some tweeking. Sometimes they need a complete overhaul. I always said the fate of the ACA will be decided by those who already have insurance before this new law took effect. Whether they are better off under the new law or not. Whether insurance is costing them more or less, better or worse coverage. Whether or not they can continue to get coverage from the place they work or if that employer dropped health coverage and forced them into the exchanges.

The fact is most people do not like their routine interrupted or changed. Time will tell how this all works out. As of today, no one can say with any certainty. We have seen some reaction to the law, but more is to come.

I have BC/BS and my premiums have doubled, with higher co-pays and initial out-of-pocket baseline expense added to the mix! :shock: :thumbdown:.

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:
 
My son IS 26 years old (he's been on his own since he was 18 the old measure of adulthood?) He says that the younger generation thinks they will refuse to pay for this crap. I can imagine a time in the future where the under 30 crowd wakes up to reality and sez: oh hell no! Why pay into this when
a blind man can see it will not be around by the time you are old?




How many blind men do you know who can see?

I don't know any. But I do know some people with good eyesight who are blind to reality.




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
 
If you choose to purchase something that even a blind stupid person can see is being misrepresented then OK fine.
But this is being foisted on an entire country at the point of a gun and those who are opposed are being called naughty names?
I'd think a real human wouldn't allow their futures to be destroyed simply out of fear of being called names?
 
I have BC/BS and my premiums have doubled, with higher co-pays and initial out-of-pocket baseline expense added to the mix!
Wait whoah hold up there young Missy? Are you telling me that has occurred already and this monstrosity hasn't even gone into effect yet?
Years from now when all the things we Right-Wing nutjobs are saying will happen have already occurred what difference will it make? :tongue4:
 
Wait whoah hold up there young Missy? Are you telling me that has occurred already and this monstrosity hasn't even gone into effect yet?
Years from now when all the things we Right-Wing nutjobs are saying will happen have already occurred what difference will it make? :tongue4:

This is from the booklets BC/BS have sent, telling me what things will cost starting in 2014, if I elect to stay with them. Ohio's site is not up yet...as of a few days ago... so you can be sure I'll be shopping to compare plans when it does! This is unbelievable! :shock:

Greetings, AngryOldGuy. :2wave:
 
I have BC/BS and my premiums have doubled, with higher co-pays and initial out-of-pocket baseline expense added to the mix! :shock: :thumbdown:.

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:

I won't be around long for now. But I have always figured those who already had insurance would see added expenses to foot the bill for those who didn't. It is simple math. Whether the added cost was met from increased premiums, increased taxes, from the young being forced now to buy insurance, and more. The money has to come from someplace. Then when you throw in the additional mandates added to all insurances policies, the cost is bound to rise. Will this great experiment work out, I do not know. But I think the dissatisfied people will be those who already had insurance and seen their costs increase for that insurance and have to pay additional taxes.
 
Well there you go. The purpose is to force as many people as possible into the State exchanges. I'm uninsured, my premium is zero. I'm not going to pay the fine so my cost increase is zero. What will America do? Whatever the One decrees? That's my guess... Just remember you can live without insurance getting by without money now that's a whole nuther kettle o fish eh?
 
I won't be around long for now. But I have always figured those who already had insurance would see added expenses to foot the bill for those who didn't. It is simple math. Whether the added cost was met from increased premiums, increased taxes, from the young being forced now to buy insurance, and more. The money has to come from someplace. Then when you throw in the additional mandates added to all insurances policies, the cost is bound to rise. Will this great experiment work out, I do not know. But I think the dissatisfied people will be those who already had insurance and seen their costs increase for that insurance and have to pay additional taxes.

:agree: I am very concerned with the apparent shortage of doctors they are predicting. How are we going to take care of millions of people being added, while at the same time doctors are leaving leaving the profession? :eek:
 
Back
Top Bottom