Mirror Finish Polishing ~ 1-816-529-6089 ~ sales@mirrorfinishpolishing.com ~ mirrorfinishpolishing.com For the best rate on home, auto, life or business/commercial insurance call me at 888-959-0955, cell 636-734-1310 or bricehazelwood@weiss-ins.com. Never Done Garage - donewhenimdead.com Peerless Automotive Reconditioning - 1155 W. Dennis Ave, Olathe Ks, 66061 - 913-893-1201 Mark H. Epstein ~ The Epstein Law Firm, LLC ~ 913-396-5123 Wilkes Automotive ~ wilkesautomotive.com ~ 246 Marion St, Olathe, KS 66061 ~ 913-254-7171 Skandalous Inc ~ www.skandalousinc.com DIY Auto Repair Inc ~ www.diyautorepairkc.com ~ 11509 Strangline Rd, Olathe KS 66062 ~ 913-226-3806 Your advertisement here! The Law Offices of Jeremiah Johnson, LLC ~ 104 E. Poplar, Olathe, KS 66061 ~ (913)764-5010 ~ www.kcatty.com - www.johnsoncountydui.com ~ jeremiah@kcatty.com Santa Fe Body, Inc ~ 8717 Lenexa Drive, Overland Park, KS 66214 ~ (913) 894-6090 House of Boost LLC Nude? HouseofHID.com - The #1 source for HID The Print Shop KC 816.200.6694 or Ryan@RMD-Photography.com the art of tyleR ~ http://tyleR.bigcartel.com ~ TYLERcoey.com ~ MUTTtoy.com ~ MUTTtoy@gmail.com W-K Chevrolet Buick Pontiac Cadillac GMC ~ 3310 W. Broadway, Sedalia, MO 65301 ~ 800-382-5088 ~ Cell 660-553-8928 ~ dustin@wkchevy.com ~ www.wkchevy.com

Go Back   KCSR - THE Kansas City Forum > General Forums > Politics, Religion, Current Events

Reply
Thread Tools
Unread 2013-10-11, 03:30 PM   #101
phreakdna
 
phreakdna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Leawood
Posts: 6,687
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 157
Thanks (Received): 115
Likes (Given): 381
Likes (Received): 629
Dislikes (Given): 8
Dislikes (Received): 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FOACAD View Post
Complaining about insular reporting while citing insular reporting groups.

To you, anything that has even the slightest hint of a slant away from the far left is wrong and far right. Its comical.

Now you will use my post and flip the words around to say I do the same, also comical.
no, I'm just going to marvel at you calling Bloomberg and the NY Times insular...

the insular part is more about how people that consume information from right-wing sources exclusively are some of the most misinformed people polled on a consistent basis. the 50k number for instance (which is why I brought it up). it was reported by Fox & Friends after being cherry-picked out of the Daily Mail and its now 'fact' for many on the right (some in my family included... I've got an email from an uncle gloating about how it shows people hate Obamacare already) - with the only problem being that the information, as reported, is incomplete and therefore inaccurate.

I had actually read this about an hour before OneType posted that so it was funny to me how clairvoyant it was and how it was a good example of the phenomenon that still has Saddam with WMDs that the US later found after he helped bin Laden plan 9/11 for far too many people... people can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions about what it means to them but when one group is looking at photographs of an event and the other is looking at an artist's rendition of what happened, there is an issue. that's why I harp on sources, etc. I get that it annoys you but if we can't agree on what's actually happening/happened in the world, what's the point in discussing how to deal with it?
__________________
Hamilton on requiring Congressional supermajorities "...its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice, or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority." - Federalist No. 22
phreakdna is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-11, 03:34 PM   #102
brveagle
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northland
Posts: 10,828
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 4
Thanks (Received): 26
Likes (Given): 16
Likes (Received): 149
Dislikes (Given): 4
Dislikes (Received): 4
Default

amazing how quickly this thread got derailed. I enjoy reading PERSONAL experiences about obamacare, not reading far left wing publications on how obamacare has cured AIDS.

thanks phreak!
__________________
"The People" in the 1st, 4th, 9th, and 10th Amendments means the people, but "The People" in the 2nd Amendment means only the Military.
brveagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-11, 04:14 PM   #103
FOACAD
الكافر المشرف
 
FOACAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Blue Springs
Posts: 73,834
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 10
Thanks (Received): 570
Likes (Given): 36
Likes (Received): 3830
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 148
Default

He has to help keep the marketing campaign and media blitz going anyway he can.

Haven't read his last post replying to me yet. On my phone and don't feel like wasting time reading it right now.
FOACAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-12, 05:12 PM   #104
Onetype
 
Onetype's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 543
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 2
Thanks (Received): 5
Likes (Given): 63
Likes (Received): 62
Dislikes (Given): 0
Dislikes (Received): 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phreakdna View Post
no, I'm just going to marvel at you calling Bloomberg and the NY Times insular...

the insular part is more about how people that consume information from right-wing sources exclusively are some of the most misinformed people polled on a consistent basis. the 50k number for instance (which is why I brought it up). it was reported by Fox & Friends after being cherry-picked out of the Daily Mail and its now 'fact' for many on the right (some in my family included... I've got an email from an uncle gloating about how it shows people hate Obamacare already) - with the only problem being that the information, as reported, is incomplete and therefore inaccurate.

I had actually read this about an hour before OneType posted that so it was funny to me how clairvoyant it was and how it was a good example of the phenomenon that still has Saddam with WMDs that the US later found after he helped bin Laden plan 9/11 for far too many people... people can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions about what it means to them but when one group is looking at photographs of an event and the other is looking at an artist's rendition of what happened, there is an issue. that's why I harp on sources, etc. I get that it annoys you but if we can't agree on what's actually happening/happened in the world, what's the point in discussing how to deal with it?
That was just a number presumed at the time I imagine, as no one knows the real number of actual enrollments (not just traffic, or account's made). Why? Because the Obama admin says it's not fair to ask, even though they have the information. I think it's very fair, considering the U.S. taxpayers footed the $643 million dollar bill for healthcare.gov - And on a large scale, Americans are rejecting The Affordable Healthcare Act, with no help from the GOP. My .02, back on topic.
__________________
http://www.kcsr.org/signaturepics/sigpic30003_1.gif
Onetype is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-14, 01:22 PM   #105
babymobilss
Information Police
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: the gas station
Posts: 21,554
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 39
Thanks (Received): 145
Likes (Given): 236
Likes (Received): 818
Dislikes (Given): 34
Dislikes (Received): 23
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by babymobilss View Post
While I don't have all the details yet, but we were warned today that HR lady is flying out to be here this afternoon due to healthcare changes. We were pretty much warned due to serious changes. We have 2 plans a free one for employee on health, vision, and dental or a plan that offers all 3 with lower deductible, copays etc for ~$150 a month for all 3 policies for single person, obviously for married people or families cost is little higher but lower than anywhere I've ever worked. Free healthcare was a big reason why I took this job. Sounds like we are losing the free coverage and will have 3 new choices at a much higher rate and assuming less coverage. I have a question if you sign up for one of these exchanges are you billed monthly, what happens if can't afford one month but pay next? For the lady in Corners post that's going to save $500 a month on the exchange vs current policy, I'd like to know if its comparable coverage or did she pick for lowest or one of the lower priced options to say hey I saved money. But in reality her out of pocket costs throughout the year will increase erasing some or all of savings monthly.
Forgot to update. So my free plan went from $0 deductible, 100% payout, 100% coverage lab work, xray, MRI etc, $300 out of pocket inpatient stay, $150 outpatient etc etc to a $4k deductible, only cover 80% of shit ill have to pay other 20%, same with lab work, xray, MRI only cover 80%, copays have doubled on prescription and pcp/specialist, prescription copay up 50%+ depending on tier of medication, don't even think about having surgery or getting admitted to hospital max out of pocket is damn near 4 months take home pay. I guess they can drop the bullshit lower salary excuse because of our "outstanding and comprehensive benefits packag" street pharmacist don't tax like this. I would of got buyup plan, but my work does this strange benefits month in advance bs, which means even though benefits start November 1 you have to pay for them in October even though signup period ends half way through month and how do they know what to charge you first pay period already happened? They don't so they double or triple hit insurance charge on 2-3 checks in a row starting in November. So if you went from single free employee plan to full family coverage you'd probably owe them money for 1-1.5 months of work.
__________________
babymobilss is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-14, 04:19 PM   #106
Corners
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: JoCo
Posts: 10,351
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 111
Thanks (Received): 185
Likes (Given): 530
Likes (Received): 1138
Default

Obamacare's Website Is Crashing Because It Doesn't Want You To Know How Costly Its Plans Are

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth...rtner=yahootix

Quote:
A growing consensus of IT experts, outside and inside the government, have figured out a principal reason why the website for Obamacare’s federally-sponsored insurance exchange is crashing. Healthcare.gov forces you to create an account and enter detailed personal information before you can start shopping. This, in turn, creates a massive traffic bottleneck, as the government verifies your information and decides whether or not you’re eligible for subsidies. HHS bureaucrats knew this would make the website run more slowly. But they were more afraid that letting people see the underlying cost of Obamacare’s insurance plans would scare people away.

HHS didn’t want users to see Obamacare’s true costs

“Healthcare.gov was initially going to include an option to browse before registering,” report Christopher Weaver and Louise Radnofsky in the Wall Street Journal. “But that tool was delayed, people familiar with the situation said.” Why was it delayed? “An HHS spokeswoman said the agency wanted to ensure that users were aware of their eligibility for subsidies that could help pay for coverage, before they started seeing the prices of policies.” (Emphasis added.)

As you know if you’ve been following this space, Obamacare’s bevy of mandates, regulations, taxes, and fees drives up the cost of the insurance plans that are offered under the law’s public exchanges. A Manhattan Institute analysis I helped conduct found that, on average, the cheapest plan offered in a given state, under Obamacare, will be 99 percent more expensive for men, and 62 percent more expensive for women, than the cheapest plan offered under the old system. And those disparities are even wider for healthy people.

That raises an obvious question. If 50 million people are uninsured today, mainly because insurance is too expensive, why is it better to make coverage even costlier?

Political objectives trumped operational objectives

The answer is that Obamacare wasn’t designed to help healthy people with average incomes get health insurance. It was designed to force those people to pay more for coverage, in order to subsidize insurance for people with incomes near the poverty line, and those with chronic or costly medical conditions.

But the laws’ supporters and enforcers don’t want you to know that, because it would violate the President’s incessantly repeated promise that nothing would change for the people that Obamacare doesn’t directly help. If you shop for Obamacare-based coverage without knowing if you qualify for subsidies, you might be discouraged by the law’s steep costs.

So, by analyzing your income first, if you qualify for heavy subsidies, the website can advertise those subsidies to you instead of just hitting you with Obamacare’s steep premiums. For example, the site could advertise plans that “$0″ or “$30″ instead of explaining that the plan really costs $200, and you’re getting a subsidy of $200 or $170. But you’ll have to be at or near the poverty line to gain subsidies of that size; most people will either not qualify for a subsidy, or qualify for a small one that, net-net, doesn’t make up for the law’s cost hikes.

This political objective—masking the true underlying cost of Obamacare’s insurance plans—far outweighed the operational objective of making the federal website work properly. Think about it the other way around. If the “Affordable Care Act” truly did make health insurance more affordable, there would be no need to hide these prices from the public.

Subsidy verification created a traffic bottleneck

Comparable private-sector e-commerce sites, like eHealthInsurance.com, allow you to shop for plans and compare prices simply by entering your age and your ZIP code. After you’ve selected a plan you like, you fill out an on-line application. That substantially winnows down the number of people who rely on the site for network-intensive tasks.

The federal government’s decision to force people to apply before shopping, Weaver and Radnofsky write, “proved crucial because, before users can begin shopping for coverage, they must cross a busy digital junction in which data are swapped among separate computer systems built or run by contractors including CGI Group Inc., the healthcare.gov developer, Quality Software Services Inc., a UnitedHealth Group Inc. unit; and credit-checker Experian PLC. If any part of the web of systems fails to work properly, it could lead to a traffic jam blocking most users from the marketplace.”

Jay Angoff, a former federal official at the agency that oversees the exchange, told the Journal that he was surprised by the decision. “People should be able to get quotes” without entering all of that information upfront.

Weaver and Radnofsky say that the core problem stems from “the slate of registration systems [that] intersect with Oracle Identity Manager, a software component embedded in a government identity-checking system.” The main Healthcare.gov web page collects information using the CGI Group technology. Then that data is transferred to a system built by Quailty Software Services. QSS then sends data to Experian, the credit-history firm. But the key “identity management system” employed by QSS was designed by Oracle, and according to the Journal’s sources, the Oracle software isn’t playing nicely with the other information systems.

Oracle hotly denies these claims. “Our software is the identical product deployed in most of the world’s most complex systems…our software is running properly,” said an Oracle spokeswoman in a statement.

‘It’s awful, just awful’

Robert Pear and colleagues at the New York Times have a piece up today detailing the serious problems with the federal exchange, problems that may get worse, not better. They confirm what we already knew: that the Obama administration refused to delay the implementation of the exchanges, despite the well-known problems, because they were afraid of the political blowback. “Former government officials say the White House, which was calling the shots, feared that any backtracking would further embolden Republican critics who were trying to repeal the health care law.”

As I documented last week, IT and insurance experts have been saying for at least eight months that implementation of the exchanges was going badly, that as early as February officials were warning of a “third world experience.” The Times’ sources are just as blunt. “These are not glitches,” said one insurance executive. “The extent of the problems is pretty enormous. At the end of our [conference calls with the administration], people say, ‘It’s awful, just awful.’”

“We foresee a train wreck,” said another executive in a February interview with the Times. “We don’t have the IT specifications. The level of angst in health plans is growing by leaps and bounds. The political people in the administration do not understand how far behind they are.” Richard Foster, the former chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said last week that “so much testing of the new system was so far behind schedule, I was not confident it would work well.”

Henry Chao, the deputy chief information officer at CMS who made the “third world experience” comment, was told by his superiors that failure to meet the October 1 launch deadline “was not an option,” according to the Times.

White House knowingly chose to court disaster

Think about it. It’s quite possible that much of this disaster could have been avoided if the Obama administration had been willing to be open with the public about the degree to which Obamacare escalates the cost of health insurance. If they had, then a number of the problems with the exchange’s software architecture would have been avoided. But that would require admitting that the “Affordable Care Act” was not accurately named.

They knew that their people on the front lines, people like Henry Chao, were worried that the exchanges would get botched. They saw the Congressional Research Service memorandum detailing that the administration has missed half of the statutory deadlines assigned by the law. But they were more afraid of the P.R. disaster of crashing websites than they were of the P.R. disaster of disclosing Obamacare’s high premiums. What you see is the result.
__________________
"Go that way, really fast. If something gets in your way, turn." - Charles De Mar.
"We must love each other, show affection for each other and unite together in condemnation of hatred, bigotry and violence. We must rediscover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans" - President Trump
Corners is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-14, 05:03 PM   #107
kcstreeter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: grain valley
Posts: 4,492
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 1
Thanks (Received): 12
Likes (Given): 0
Likes (Received): 86
Dislikes (Given): 0
Dislikes (Received): 16
Default

Got insurance through wifes work. Thanks to Obama care the price went up $80 a month. Thats what it said in her work email.
kcstreeter is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 01:26 PM   #108
Onetype
 
Onetype's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 543
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 2
Thanks (Received): 5
Likes (Given): 63
Likes (Received): 62
Dislikes (Given): 0
Dislikes (Received): 0
Default

Really good article, bias aside on how everyone feels about Natural News. Liberals are now realizing the scam that is The Affordable Healthcare Act (aka Obamacare)

http://www.naturalnews.com/042527_ma...ate_shock.html

From a far left liberal site:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/0...nthly-premium#
__________________
http://www.kcsr.org/signaturepics/sigpic30003_1.gif
Onetype is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 01:41 PM   #109
Scooby24
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 51,683
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 49
Thanks (Received): 691
Likes (Given): 343
Likes (Received): 3964
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 40
Default

Saw a video with Dave Ramsey describing how the math is inescapable with regards to increased premiums.

Something went wrong. Please make sure you added the video correctly.

Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsVqOe07cdY#t

What's interesting to me is he's describing this as clear cut mathematically issue when it's anything but.

To use his example. Overweight uninsured person that requires more than your average insured now is getting a premium that is the same rate for them as it is healthy person. Healthy person bears the burden on the premium. Yes. Easy math there.

But, what are the ramifications of overweight uninsured if they didn't have an inusrance premium at all? They still need the healthcare. They still receive the healthcare. However, they don't get their healthcare preventatively because they don't have insurance. They only make trips to the ER, which is the most expensive service you can receive.

Because they are uninsured the hospital has to write off the bills because this person isn't realistically going to pay. That write off inflates the price of care for the insured. Their current premium reflects that inflated healthcare cost.

The initial premiums are going to be higher. It's unavailable, because the current healthcare costs are so high. However the net long term results in lower cost of care because write offs are less. Providers get paid, which reduces premiums for everyone. That will take time, but the system is so fucked up right now, there is no way to fix it without drastically upsetting the current fragile balance.

I just attended the Cerner Health Conference where there were some good topics on this subject from health care providers all across the country and the focus is really going to start shifting to preventative care as a means of reducing ER visits and you can't do that with uninsured.
__________________
-Greg
'17 Tacoma TRD Off-Road
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Thanks shaun y thanked for this post
Likes shaun y liked this post
Scooby24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 02:05 PM   #110
Go4Broke
 
Go4Broke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Overland Park,Ks
Posts: 4,188
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 29
Thanks (Received): 30
Likes (Given): 765
Likes (Received): 148
Dislikes (Given): 9
Dislikes (Received): 2
Default

I went online over the weekend and tried to enroll. Filled everything I could. I had zero issues do this and after waiting maybe 5 minutes got an email saying I was enrolled. I didn't sign up for anything at this time since I could get insurance through my work and I have to check some things out to make sure but the price for almost the same plan is about $10-20 cheaper than what I would be through work.
__________________
2013 Lincoln MKZ AWD 3.7L
1988 Mustang GT convertible
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Likes shaun y liked this post
Go4Broke is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 02:05 PM   #111
Karlen
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 32,552
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 887
Thanks (Received): 482
Likes (Given): 4078
Likes (Received): 4370
Dislikes (Given): 99
Dislikes (Received): 169
Default

Yea, I'll believe that premiums are going to drop when I see a pig fly over the moon.

Shit. Is. Not. Going. To. Happen.
__________________
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 0 Likes, 1 Dislikes
Dislikes shaun y disliked this post
Karlen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 02:15 PM   #112
Scooby24
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 51,683
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 49
Thanks (Received): 691
Likes (Given): 343
Likes (Received): 3964
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karlen View Post
Yea, I'll believe that premiums are going to drop when I see a pig fly over the moon.

Shit. Is. Not. Going. To. Happen.
I don't like government regulation on much, but this is one area where regulation would mandate that the insurance industry abide by certain profit margins and the premiums would have to drop as the cost to care drops.

The industry is desperately trying to find a way to fix the mess. The providers are finally looking at common sense alternatives to routine high cost visits.

I wasn't aware of this but one presentation illustrated how geriatrics is seeing an alarming cycle in "end of life" care in which case chronically ill patients such as those with COPD get routinely checked into inpatient after ER visits and don't receive legitimately significant care. They rack up 200k in visits just to get back to a baseline all because the chronic condition flares up time after time again. Instead of treating it as a chronic condition with home health, they treat it as valid inpatient visit.

Insurance can help push providers to start trending towards these sort of realizations because those insurances have the ability to compare care provided against ICD codes which are essentially standardized values for reasons for visit. If they say the CPT code which is standardized care codes aren't applicable for this ICD code, insurance won't pay for it. Push this out nationwide for all or most recipients of care and you greatly reduce the amount of waste that drives up all our costs.
__________________
-Greg
'17 Tacoma TRD Off-Road
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 2 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Thanks shaun y thanked for this post
Likes ForcFed93, shaun y liked this post
Scooby24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 03:39 PM   #113
Karlen
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 32,552
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 887
Thanks (Received): 482
Likes (Given): 4078
Likes (Received): 4370
Dislikes (Given): 99
Dislikes (Received): 169
Default

I'll put money on it that premiums don't see a significant reduction in 5 years.
Karlen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 03:53 PM   #114
Scooby24
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 51,683
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 49
Thanks (Received): 691
Likes (Given): 343
Likes (Received): 3964
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karlen View Post
I'll put money on it that premiums don't see a significant reduction in 5 years.
I don't think we'll see pre ACA premiums in 5 years, but I do think we'll see reductions. Unfortunately moving anything in the healthcare industry is like steering a big ship. It takes time and a lot of input to get it to change direction, but once it starts to change, it will gain momentum.

Just to use meaningful use as an example. I forget when that first came about now...2008, 2009...but we have hospitals that are just now implementing their initiatives with attaining stage 1 meaningful use.

People bitched up a storm when Obama presented the plan in his first term to incentivise hospitals implementing EHRs to hit meaningful use but that's been the best motivation in this industry to get the ball rolling on improving healthcare. It's only just now starting to show the benefits as more hospitals are adopting the requirements, so short term results will pale in comparison to long term once EHR's are a standard in every hospital and practice.
__________________
-Greg
'17 Tacoma TRD Off-Road
Scooby24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 04:09 PM   #115
HiLandR
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northland
Posts: 13,091
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 149
Thanks (Received): 121
Likes (Given): 828
Likes (Received): 726
Dislikes (Given): 11
Dislikes (Received): 14
Default

I just finished a meeting with some of our senior staff. Our monthly expenditure for health insurance will go up 85% in January for doing nothing but complying with the Affordable Care Act. Now some people may say, "Big Fucking Deal"! That number goes into our budgeting. that number is approximately one person's salary. One of our options to help resolve our upcoming shortfall is by letting one person go. Small business is getting fucked in this deal thank you president Obama.
__________________
HiLandR is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 04:22 PM   #116
JohnnyBravo
**Sponsor**
 
JohnnyBravo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bravo Land
Posts: 4,922
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 32
Thanks (Received): 389
Likes (Given): 207
Likes (Received): 1740
Dislikes (Given): 3
Dislikes (Received): 3
Default

Just got my letter from BCBS.

Basically it says, "Thank you for being a loyal customer in excellent health with a family plan. Because of Obama and his retarded ACA, your rate is going up. No real reason. No claims made by you or your children. But just because. Unfortunately, lube is not provided under the ACA, you so you will just have to take it up the chute dry."

Guess the term "affordable" under the "affordable care act" is relative.
__________________
Are you ready for the MAYHEM?!
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Likes YourWorstNightmare liked this post
JohnnyBravo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 04:24 PM   #117
HiLandR
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northland
Posts: 13,091
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 149
Thanks (Received): 121
Likes (Given): 828
Likes (Received): 726
Dislikes (Given): 11
Dislikes (Received): 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBravo View Post
Just got my letter from BCBS.

Basically it says, "Thank you for being a loyal customer in excellent health with a family plan. Because of Obama and his retarded ACA, your rate is going up. No real reason. No claims made by you or your children. But just because. Unfortunately, lube is not provided under the ACA, you so you will just have to take it up the chute dry."

Guess the term "affordable" under the "affordable care act" is relative.
Truth!
__________________
HiLandR is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 04:27 PM   #118
69Mach351
 
69Mach351's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NE KS
Posts: 8,476
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 262
Thanks (Received): 234
Likes (Given): 1794
Likes (Received): 1701
Dislikes (Given): 37
Dislikes (Received): 44
Default

I have a feeling it is going to get a lot worse before (if) it gets any better.
69Mach351 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 04:30 PM   #119
HiLandR
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northland
Posts: 13,091
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 149
Thanks (Received): 121
Likes (Given): 828
Likes (Received): 726
Dislikes (Given): 11
Dislikes (Received): 14
Default

There is supposed to be some sort of sliding scale where it gets worse after the first year and then levels off after 5. By that time, we could have to lay off 3 people to pay for our health care. That is just complete bullshit!
__________________
HiLandR is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 04:31 PM   #120
69Mach351
 
69Mach351's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NE KS
Posts: 8,476
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 262
Thanks (Received): 234
Likes (Given): 1794
Likes (Received): 1701
Dislikes (Given): 37
Dislikes (Received): 44
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiLandR View Post
There is supposed to be some sort of sliding scale where it gets worse after the first year and then levels off after 5. By that time, we could have to lay off 3 people to pay for our health care. That is just complete bullshit!
I wonder if it would just be cheaper to have the government pay for people with pre-existing conditions.
69Mach351 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 04:35 PM   #121
HiLandR
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northland
Posts: 13,091
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 149
Thanks (Received): 121
Likes (Given): 828
Likes (Received): 726
Dislikes (Given): 11
Dislikes (Received): 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 69Mach351 View Post
I wonder if it would just be cheaper to have the government pay for people with pre-existing conditions.
We are all very healthy people, that is where our problem lies!
__________________
HiLandR is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 04:46 PM   #122
phreakdna
 
phreakdna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Leawood
Posts: 6,687
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 157
Thanks (Received): 115
Likes (Given): 381
Likes (Received): 629
Dislikes (Given): 8
Dislikes (Received): 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiLandR View Post
I just finished a meeting with some of our senior staff. Our monthly expenditure for health insurance will go up 85% in January for doing nothing but complying with the Affordable Care Act. Now some people may say, "Big Fucking Deal"! That number goes into our budgeting. that number is approximately one person's salary. One of our options to help resolve our upcoming shortfall is by letting one person go. Small business is getting fucked in this deal thank you president Obama.
I'm sorry but wtf? you're seeing an 85% increase in cost? something is either up with the information they're giving you now or you guys were in some kind of a system glitch/sweetheart deal before.

and that's not even getting into the fact that small businesses (sub 50 full time employees) aren't subject to the ACA mandated coverage and large businesses got a waiver for this coming year as well.

Occam's razor says something is up with this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JB
Just got my letter from BCBS.

Basically it says, "Thank you for being a loyal customer in excellent health with a family plan. Because of Obama and his retarded ACA, your rate is going up. No real reason. No claims made by you or your children. But just because. Unfortunately, lube is not provided under the ACA, you so you will just have to take it up the chute dry."

Guess the term "affordable" under the "affordable care act" is relative.
you're smart enough to know that despite not having any past claims to justify a rate increase, you're set to receive an additional benefit this coming year and into the future: no more lifetime caps, pre-existing conditions, etc along with mandated preventative care changes that are better than status quo for most.

you still may not feel like the increase is justified based on those additional benefits, but they aren't made up whole cloth like they used to be. companies are now required to use 85% on care and each year since that went into effect my company has gotten a refund on premiums... maybe yours hasn't but its a very real control on increases not connected to coverage/expenditures.
__________________
Hamilton on requiring Congressional supermajorities "...its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice, or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority." - Federalist No. 22
phreakdna is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 04:51 PM   #123
HiLandR
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northland
Posts: 13,091
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 149
Thanks (Received): 121
Likes (Given): 828
Likes (Received): 726
Dislikes (Given): 11
Dislikes (Received): 14
Default

LOL really? I am just telling you exactly what our carrier is telling us. Carriers are kindly passing the challenges on to the consumer (which is me, regardless of the size of my firm) they still have a bottom line. I wish I could tell you I'm making this up.
__________________
HiLandR is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-16, 05:20 PM   #124
shaun y
Mr 49er
 
shaun y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: الكافر المشرف
Posts: 15,774
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 164
Thanks (Received): 142
Likes (Given): 3417
Likes (Received): 1009
Dislikes (Given): 187
Dislikes (Received): 144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiLandR View Post
There is supposed to be some sort of sliding scale where it gets worse after the first year and then levels off after 5. By that time, we could have to lay off 3 people to pay for our health care. That is just complete bullshit!
How many people in your company?
__________________
shaun y is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2013-10-17, 09:14 AM   #125
Scooby24
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 51,683
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 49
Thanks (Received): 691
Likes (Given): 343
Likes (Received): 3964
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 40
Default

Just an interesting illustration of the ridiculous cost of care.

A suture at one of our hospitals has a cost to the hospital of 20 bucks. That's a piece of thread and a needle sterilized in a paper bag that costs the hospital 20 dollars.

How much would you think the hospital charges for that suture? 20% markup? 25 bucks or so?

Nope. 100 dollars. That's a 400% markup. That's what they have to do to make a reasonable profit when averaged out across all the times it's used and isn't able to be reimbursed for it.

So if you have insurance, your insurance gets to pay for that (or perhaps negotiate down some) highly inflated cost due to other non-insured folks.

Yes your premiums will go up to support other folks premiums. But when that suture gets reimbursed for the majority of patients, the cost will go down. It's not going to go down until the majority of patients are insured. It's a cause an effect. Premiums will be up high for awhile. The cause is folks will then be insured. The effect is the prices in hospitals can go down, the insurances will pay less and the effect is your premiums will eventually go down.

It might not ever be pre-aca again....but if the endgame is to reduce the overall cost of care to the point MOST people can afford health insurance and MOST people are able to get healthcare, I consider it a win. Yeah, more might come out of my pocket. But if we can advance the industry, that will benefit me in the long term. So is it really a bad thing?
__________________
-Greg
'17 Tacoma TRD Off-Road

Last edited by Scooby24; 2013-10-17 at 09:17 AM..
Scooby24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:05 AM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.13.37
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright (c) 1993-2012, KCSR.org