How Obamacare affects you in 2014 and Beyond

[FayeforCure]

How anyone can honestly see PIGPACT as anything more than forced servitude to an already corrupt health insurance/health care industry is remarkable.

...."But there's good stuff in the bill too!"

I agree with you buckethead and progressives were disappointed with Obama's silence on the obviously better single payer system that would have greatly dimished the role of the for-profit insurance middleman.

Instead we have increased the pool of customers for the for-profit insurance industry and only given them a few rules to work by.........no annual or life-time caps. Pre-existing conditions cannot be charged more than 3 times the average rate, and 85% of premiums should go to direct health care provision.

But who is going to police them?

I know I'm supposed to get my refund check from Humana in August because they broke the last rule:

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/blog/business/2012/06/aetna-blue-cross-humana-among.html

Progressive states would have hailed the Supreme court rejection of Obamacare because they would have proceeded with their single-payer system........CA stood ready to go that route.

[fsquid]

Why do you want to get rid of the insurance companies?  Make it so they have to compete for business. I'd much rather have that then just a federal bureaucracy.

When you have more than one corporation competing for business, you have a choice. There's only one federal government. That's not a choice.

I'm pro choice.

[finehoe]

When you have more than one corporation competing for business, you have a choice.

True enough.  But how many people actually have a choice in who their insurer is?  My company offers one insurance plan.  Take it or leave it.  Where's the choice?

"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.  Monopolists, by keeping the market constantly under-stocked, by never fully supplying the effectual demand, sell their commodities much above the natural price, and raise their emoluments, whether they consist in wages or profit, greatly above their natural rate." -Adam Smith

[fsquid]

When you have more than one corporation competing for business, you have a choice.

True enough.  But how many people actually have a choice in who their insurer is?  My company offers one insurance plan.  Take it or leave it.  Where's the choice?

Bingo.

This does point out one problem with the current system. When insurance is tied to employment, you often end up with only one choice, whatever the employer chooses. If we had a French or German type system, you could give everyone a voucher and he or she could take that voucher to any insurance company for a basic plan. Then he or she could "top up" that basic plan to provide better coverage of more advanced needs. Employers could provide "top ups" as employee benefits. And the insurance companies would compete very aggressively for the basic plan business, in order to get the cash flow and the upselling potential.

[FayeforCure]

When you have more than one corporation competing for business, you have a choice.

True enough.  But how many people actually have a choice in who their insurer is?  My company offers one insurance plan.  Take it or leave it.  Where's the choice?

Bingo.

This does point out one problem with the current system. When insurance is tied to employment, you often end up with only one choice, whatever the employer chooses. If we had a French or German type system, you could give everyone a voucher and he or she could take that voucher to any insurance company for a basic plan. Then he or she could "top up" that basic plan to provide better coverage of more advanced needs. Employers could provide "top ups" as employee benefits. And the insurance companies would compete very aggressively for the basic plan business, in order to get the cash flow and the upselling potential.

Ah, the way Medicare supplemental insurance plans work...........too much choice becomes a complicated headache.

[fsquid]

I like choices.

[FayeforCure]

Why do you want to get rid of the insurance companies?  Make it so they have to compete for business. I'd much rather have that then just a federal bureaucracy.

When you have more than one corporation competing for business, you have a choice. There's only one federal government. That's not a choice.

I'm pro choice.

If the federal government can do it cheaper and better, I want THAT choice.

I want to choose Medicare, regardless of my age.

Republicans want to take away my choice for the cheaper and better health care plan.

[Doctor_K]

When you have more than one corporation competing for business, you have a choice.

True enough.  But how many people actually have a choice in who their insurer is?  My company offers one insurance plan.  Take it or leave it.  Where's the choice?

The choice is take it or leave it.  If you leave it, you can go out and buy your own.

I don't understand why everyone seems to be missing this.

[carpnter]

When you have more than one corporation competing for business, you have a choice.

True enough.  But how many people actually have a choice in who their insurer is?  My company offers one insurance plan.  Take it or leave it.  Where's the choice?

Bingo.

This does point out one problem with the current system. When insurance is tied to employment, you often end up with only one choice, whatever the employer chooses. If we had a French or German type system, you could give everyone a voucher and he or she could take that voucher to any insurance company for a basic plan. Then he or she could "top up" that basic plan to provide better coverage of more advanced needs. Employers could provide "top ups" as employee benefits. And the insurance companies would compete very aggressively for the basic plan business, in order to get the cash flow and the upselling potential.

Ah, the way Medicare supplemental insurance plans work...........too much choice becomes a complicated headache.

Why does too much choice cause a headache?  People don't seem to have problems making a choice looking at a menu in a restaurant.  Did you not shop around when you purchased a car, or insurance for your car or home? 
It sounds more like people who don't want the choices are too lazy to educate themselves on their available choices and do the necessary research to make an educated decision.  People need to learn that having choices allows them to select what best fits their needs and is at the price point they are willing to pay.  What works for you most likely does not work for me and I would not want to get stuck in that type of plan just like you would not want to get stuck in a plan that works for me. 

[bill]

Why do you want to get rid of the insurance companies?  Make it so they have to compete for business. I'd much rather have that then just a federal bureaucracy.

When you have more than one corporation competing for business, you have a choice. There's only one federal government. That's not a choice.

I'm pro choice.

If the federal government can do it cheaper and better, I want THAT choice.

Yes the Federal Government is known for cheaper and better. Go back to la la land and it will all be OK.

[JeffreyS]

Talking to someone who works for the accounting department of HCA hospital group yesterday and she said their analysis is that Obamacare is going to save them much of the 17million they have to write off from care they give the uninsured that is never payed for.

[Ralph W]

The stated accounting practice is to "write off" the "losses" caused by the non-payment of charges for service.

Just like any other expense incurred by the corporations of this country, the so-called losses are always recovered by inflating the cost to the consumer who does pay.

[JeffreyS]

The stated accounting practice is to "write off" the "losses" caused by the non-payment of charges for service.

Just like any other expense incurred by the corporations of this country, the so-called losses are always recovered by inflating the cost to the consumer who does pay.

Yes but expenses are not always easy to pass down the line. More exciting is if many of the non payers become payers a business owner won't lower the prices dollar for dollar of the new income. As a business owner I personally have seen that it is hard to pass on 100% of any new expense and I never give back 100% of new savings.

[finehoe]

Yes the Federal Government is known for cheaper and better. Go back to la la land and it will all be OK.

You would appear to be the one in la la land: 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/may/30/barbara-boxer/barbara-boxer-says-medicare-overhead-far-lower-pri/

[buckethead]

Yes the Federal Government is known for cheaper and better. Go back to la la land and it will all be OK.

You would appear to be the one in la la land: 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/may/30/barbara-boxer/barbara-boxer-says-medicare-overhead-far-lower-pri/

I've seen this defense multiple times. It is misinformed.

Medicare outsources administration, then administrates the administrators. Each state has a private firm who pays medicare claims. There is a competitive bid to win the contract. (BCBS had held the FL contract for quite some time. Info available at cms.gov)

http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/2052-12.pdf
According to Kaiser, in 2009, 22% of medicare beneficiaries were enrolled in MA plans (private medicare plans where private insurers are paid per member/per month far in excess of premiums taken in by cms). These beneficiaries do not count as administered by CMS.
Claims disputes are generally handled at the private sector level with those remaining unresolved escalating to CMS.
Credentialling (providing documentation which proves a provider to be qualified and eligible to provide to medicare beneficiaries) is outsourced.

The claim is disengenuous.

I'm not opposed to Medicare. I support single payer. Facts need to be truthfully presented.

I am not saying you are intentionally presenting misinformation, but a Senator should know better.