(03-27-2016 02:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 12:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 12:04 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  You are trying too hard. We are never going to agree. The guy said his premium are now 3 times what they were in 2013. I said premiums have been going up for at least 2 decades. That is all we were talking about. He had insurance three years ago and still has it today.

Well of Of COURSE we aren't going to agree when I have decades of experience in higher finance and numerous years now in healthcare specifically addressing the issue, while you slept at a holiday Inn last night.

What you say above isn't consistent, nor is it 'what you said'... and once again, the only portion you ADMIT to saying above, I agreed with.

Costs HAVE been going up for decades as we measure them, but that is a misleading stat. The rate of increase has been SLOWING SUBSTANTIALLY for decades as well, and the ACA has reversed that trend by your own admission.

I don't care if you want to correct the comment that his costs haven't tripled (though you admit you don't really know that... and you're talking about the 'cost of healthcare' and not 'his premiums' which MAY WELL have tripled)...

What I care about is that you don't know how healthcare or healthcare finance is working and you use misleading statistics to imply things that simply aren't true... Your 2000-2008 and 2009-2015 is the perfect example. This IMPLIES that since Obama has taken office, the rate of increase has been cut in half... but the reality is that costs don't change overnight because policies don't change overnight.... and the trend of increases HAS been down for decades... but is now reversing.... by your own admission. The ACA wasn't even signed until 2010.. and many of its 'costs' don't even go into effect until 2017 or even 2021 (The 'cadillac' tax the left is already distancing itself from) It wasn't until 2015 when penalties forn non-compliance began, and as you admit... costs are up substantially, clearly reversing this decades log trend..


it seems you repeatedly want to make a meaningless correction, and then expand on that correction by adding on something that you know is false or at least misleading... sort of the 'now that i've corrected you, I will speak with authority about something else that you can't argue with because i was able to correct you'... and when I call you on that, you claim you were only making a simple correction and that i'm 'thinking too hard'

Your biases occasionally come out in your various posts so don't even try to present yourself as some sort of fair minded expert that offers the real story to the ignorant masses on some obscure general interest message board. You do try way to hard.

Pot. Kettle.

(03-27-2016 04:02 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 02:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 12:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 12:04 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  You are trying too hard. We are never going to agree. The guy said his premium are now 3 times what they were in 2013. I said premiums have been going up for at least 2 decades. That is all we were talking about. He had insurance three years ago and still has it today.

Well of Of COURSE we aren't going to agree when I have decades of experience in higher finance and numerous years now in healthcare specifically addressing the issue, while you slept at a holiday Inn last night.

What you say above isn't consistent, nor is it 'what you said'... and once again, the only portion you ADMIT to saying above, I agreed with.

Costs HAVE been going up for decades as we measure them, but that is a misleading stat. The rate of increase has been SLOWING SUBSTANTIALLY for decades as well, and the ACA has reversed that trend by your own admission.

I don't care if you want to correct the comment that his costs haven't tripled (though you admit you don't really know that... and you're talking about the 'cost of healthcare' and not 'his premiums' which MAY WELL have tripled)...

What I care about is that you don't know how healthcare or healthcare finance is working and you use misleading statistics to imply things that simply aren't true... Your 2000-2008 and 2009-2015 is the perfect example. This IMPLIES that since Obama has taken office, the rate of increase has been cut in half... but the reality is that costs don't change overnight because policies don't change overnight.... and the trend of increases HAS been down for decades... but is now reversing.... by your own admission. The ACA wasn't even signed until 2010.. and many of its 'costs' don't even go into effect until 2017 or even 2021 (The 'cadillac' tax the left is already distancing itself from) It wasn't until 2015 when penalties forn non-compliance began, and as you admit... costs are up substantially, clearly reversing this decades log trend..


it seems you repeatedly want to make a meaningless correction, and then expand on that correction by adding on something that you know is false or at least misleading... sort of the 'now that i've corrected you, I will speak with authority about something else that you can't argue with because i was able to correct you'... and when I call you on that, you claim you were only making a simple correction and that i'm 'thinking too hard'

Your biases occasionally come out in your various posts so don't even try to present yourself as some sort of fair minded expert that offers the real story to the ignorant masses on some obscure general interest message board. You do try way to hard.

Pot. Kettle.

Not really since I don't present myself as anything but a layman that supports the implementation of the ACA.

(03-27-2016 04:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:02 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 02:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 12:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 12:04 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  You are trying too hard. We are never going to agree. The guy said his premium are now 3 times what they were in 2013. I said premiums have been going up for at least 2 decades. That is all we were talking about. He had insurance three years ago and still has it today.

Well of Of COURSE we aren't going to agree when I have decades of experience in higher finance and numerous years now in healthcare specifically addressing the issue, while you slept at a holiday Inn last night.

What you say above isn't consistent, nor is it 'what you said'... and once again, the only portion you ADMIT to saying above, I agreed with.

Costs HAVE been going up for decades as we measure them, but that is a misleading stat. The rate of increase has been SLOWING SUBSTANTIALLY for decades as well, and the ACA has reversed that trend by your own admission.

I don't care if you want to correct the comment that his costs haven't tripled (though you admit you don't really know that... and you're talking about the 'cost of healthcare' and not 'his premiums' which MAY WELL have tripled)...

What I care about is that you don't know how healthcare or healthcare finance is working and you use misleading statistics to imply things that simply aren't true... Your 2000-2008 and 2009-2015 is the perfect example. This IMPLIES that since Obama has taken office, the rate of increase has been cut in half... but the reality is that costs don't change overnight because policies don't change overnight.... and the trend of increases HAS been down for decades... but is now reversing.... by your own admission. The ACA wasn't even signed until 2010.. and many of its 'costs' don't even go into effect until 2017 or even 2021 (The 'cadillac' tax the left is already distancing itself from) It wasn't until 2015 when penalties forn non-compliance began, and as you admit... costs are up substantially, clearly reversing this decades log trend..


it seems you repeatedly want to make a meaningless correction, and then expand on that correction by adding on something that you know is false or at least misleading... sort of the 'now that i've corrected you, I will speak with authority about something else that you can't argue with because i was able to correct you'... and when I call you on that, you claim you were only making a simple correction and that i'm 'thinking too hard'

Your biases occasionally come out in your various posts so don't even try to present yourself as some sort of fair minded expert that offers the real story to the ignorant masses on some obscure general interest message board. You do try way to hard.

Pot. Kettle.

Not really since I don't present myself as anything but a layman that supports the implementation of the ACA.

But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:02 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 02:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 12:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Well of Of COURSE we aren't going to agree when I have decades of experience in higher finance and numerous years now in healthcare specifically addressing the issue, while you slept at a holiday Inn last night.

What you say above isn't consistent, nor is it 'what you said'... and once again, the only portion you ADMIT to saying above, I agreed with.

Costs HAVE been going up for decades as we measure them, but that is a misleading stat. The rate of increase has been SLOWING SUBSTANTIALLY for decades as well, and the ACA has reversed that trend by your own admission.

I don't care if you want to correct the comment that his costs haven't tripled (though you admit you don't really know that... and you're talking about the 'cost of healthcare' and not 'his premiums' which MAY WELL have tripled)...

What I care about is that you don't know how healthcare or healthcare finance is working and you use misleading statistics to imply things that simply aren't true... Your 2000-2008 and 2009-2015 is the perfect example. This IMPLIES that since Obama has taken office, the rate of increase has been cut in half... but the reality is that costs don't change overnight because policies don't change overnight.... and the trend of increases HAS been down for decades... but is now reversing.... by your own admission. The ACA wasn't even signed until 2010.. and many of its 'costs' don't even go into effect until 2017 or even 2021 (The 'cadillac' tax the left is already distancing itself from) It wasn't until 2015 when penalties forn non-compliance began, and as you admit... costs are up substantially, clearly reversing this decades log trend..


it seems you repeatedly want to make a meaningless correction, and then expand on that correction by adding on something that you know is false or at least misleading... sort of the 'now that i've corrected you, I will speak with authority about something else that you can't argue with because i was able to correct you'... and when I call you on that, you claim you were only making a simple correction and that i'm 'thinking too hard'

Your biases occasionally come out in your various posts so don't even try to present yourself as some sort of fair minded expert that offers the real story to the ignorant masses on some obscure general interest message board. You do try way to hard.

Pot. Kettle.

Not really since I don't present myself as anything but a layman that supports the implementation of the ACA.

But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:02 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 02:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Your biases occasionally come out in your various posts so don't even try to present yourself as some sort of fair minded expert that offers the real story to the ignorant masses on some obscure general interest message board. You do try way to hard.

Pot. Kettle.

Not really since I don't present myself as anything but a layman that supports the implementation of the ACA.

But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

and that's the problem....it's a shittttty plan that has impacted many other hard working americans in a negative fashion....

how you don't understand that is NOT amazing to me.....

if you like socialism, have at it.....

I'm not convinced it's a net positive.

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:02 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 02:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Your biases occasionally come out in your various posts so don't even try to present yourself as some sort of fair minded expert that offers the real story to the ignorant masses on some obscure general interest message board. You do try way to hard.

Pot. Kettle.

Not really since I don't present myself as anything but a layman that supports the implementation of the ACA.

But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

Please list the ways that Obama care is 'much better'.

(03-27-2016 07:12 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:02 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Pot. Kettle.

Not really since I don't present myself as anything but a layman that supports the implementation of the ACA.

But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

Please list the ways that Obama care is 'much better'.

Again, we are just spinning our wheels here. You will never be convinced of that regardless since you haven't benefited in any obvious way.

(03-27-2016 10:31 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 07:12 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Not really since I don't present myself as anything but a layman that supports the implementation of the ACA.

But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

Please list the ways that Obama care is 'much better'.

Again, we are just spinning our wheels here. You will never be convinced of that regardless since you haven't benefited in any obvious way.

what you aren't seeing is how the smarties don't give a fk anymore.....

they are 'why' line 1b...

you don't understand how you guys need 'em.....

oh wellzy.....

(03-27-2016 10:31 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 07:12 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Not really since I don't present myself as anything but a layman that supports the implementation of the ACA.

But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

Please list the ways that Obama care is 'much better'.

Again, we are just spinning our wheels here. You will never be convinced of that regardless since you haven't benefited in any obvious way.

Bottom line....Those that now have insurance...benefit... and everyone else that already had insurance is paying for it through much higher premiums, especially if you have to pay for this nonsense yourself. It is an undeniably bad piece of boiler plate legislation that was shoved down the throats of the American public without due diligence while one gang had total control. Be prepared for it to be undone or fixed if the other gang gains the same control. Hopefully it can be fixed. I have my doubts.

(03-27-2016 10:31 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 07:12 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 04:10 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Not really since I don't present myself as anything but a layman that supports the implementation of the ACA.

But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

Please list the ways that Obama care is 'much better'.

Again, we are just spinning our wheels here. You will never be convinced of that regardless since you haven't benefited in any obvious way.

I didn't ask you to convince me. I'm trying to understand why you think it is 'much better'

(03-28-2016 07:14 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 10:31 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 07:12 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

Please list the ways that Obama care is 'much better'.

Again, we are just spinning our wheels here. You will never be convinced of that regardless since you haven't benefited in any obvious way.

I didn't ask you to convince me. I'm trying to understand why you think it is 'much better'

No preexisting conditions exclusion, tax credits so working class can afford coverage, no rate hikes based on preexisting condition, no yearly or lifetime max., minimum coverage standards, and record % of population with insurance.

(03-28-2016 05:37 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 10:31 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 07:12 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

Please list the ways that Obama care is 'much better'.

Again, we are just spinning our wheels here. You will never be convinced of that regardless since you haven't benefited in any obvious way.

Bottom line....Those that now have insurance...benefit... and everyone else that already had insurance is paying for it through much higher premiums, especially if you have to pay for this nonsense yourself. It is an undeniably bad piece of boiler plate legislation that was shoved down the throats of the American public without due diligence while one gang had total control. Be prepared for it to be undone or fixed if the other gang gains the same control. Hopefully it can be fixed. I have my doubts.

Fixed is the key. Trying to kill it would be a total disaster. There are plenty of changes that need to be made as is true with most any major legislation. When the GOP accepts that there is no turning back and starts down that course of action we will be getting somewhere and everyone will benefit from a better functioning system.

(03-28-2016 09:13 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-28-2016 07:14 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 10:31 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 07:12 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

Please list the ways that Obama care is 'much better'.

Again, we are just spinning our wheels here. You will never be convinced of that regardless since you haven't benefited in any obvious way.

I didn't ask you to convince me. I'm trying to understand why you think it is 'much better'

No preexisting conditions exclusion, tax credits so working class can afford coverage, no rate hikes based on preexisting condition, no yearly or lifetime max., minimum coverage standards, and record % of population with insurance.

The % with insurance is achieved largely by expanding Medicaid - that could have been done without wrecking the system that was in place.

I would argue (and it has been argued) that a working class that can afford coverage via subsidies, but can't afford the deductibles didn't make healthcare affordable. All it's done has taken taxpayer money to pay for their insurance they can't use because they can't afford the deductibles.

With that said - the lines were long ago drawn - you love ACA because it has been a boon for your family - lots of other folks hate it because it's made insurance way for expensive for them AND some of their taxes go to providing subsidized (cheaaper) coverage for others.

(03-28-2016 09:13 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-28-2016 07:14 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  I didn't ask you to convince me. I'm trying to understand why you think it is 'much better'

No preexisting conditions exclusion, tax credits so working class can afford coverage, no rate hikes based on preexisting condition, no yearly or lifetime max., minimum coverage standards, and record % of population with insurance.

I can see how some people would consider a few of those items 'much better' than before Obamacare. Some a valid points, but others aren't exactly as important as we were made to believe. There's also the cost benefit analysis of those 'much better' items. From a macro point of view, are we really better off? Are costs down or up? What happens once the law fully goes into effect? Are the cost saving measures accurate? The list of questions goes on and on and it may be many more years or even a decade before we have a clear view of what Obamacare really accomplishes.

- Did you know 35 states had a high-risk pool prior to Obamacare?
- Did you know another 5 states were straight issue mean that pre-existing conditions didn't matter?
- Did you know another 5 states were conditional issue meaning you could switch jobs with proof of continuous coverage?
http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/high...erage.aspx

So how do we know that Obamacare was worth it if pre-existing conditions were considered a primary driver? Would it have been cheaper to have the 5 states that had no high-risk pool implement one? Considering many were limited to charging 150% of the standard risk, the point could be made that Obamacare has put undo burden on the majority since in many cases their premiums now exceed the pre-Obamacare high risk pool rates.

What good are tax credits for the insurance premiums if the insured can't afford the deductible and other out of pocket expense? How many of the working class didn't have insurance through their employer?
http://www.newsweek.com/many-americans-i...are-334624

Minimum coverage standards are a matter of choice. Why make a young person pay for services they will not use for years? Why make a male share the cost of a woman's maternity insurance and other sex-specific services?

What percentage of the increased coverage are purchasing insurance versus being enrolled in Medicaid? What was the cost analysis of just expanding Medicaid and leaving the rest of the insurance market alone or having less intrusive reforms?


These are just some of the questions that arise from your list. You are right, we will probably never agree, and I'm not trying to convince you that Obamacare is terrible. I trying to get you to question common perceptions and the standard talking-points memos put out by the administration.

(03-28-2016 05:37 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 10:31 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 07:12 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:29 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 06:11 PM)dfarr Wrote:  But your support, aside from your personal benefit, is based on misinformation.

I'm glad the law helped you, I truly am. However to say that the law has lowered premiums for families by $2500 like Obama said it would is pure poppycock.

I never said it lowered premiums by any amount. The lifetime max. helped my family. My wife is on Medicare now so it isn't really providing any major benefits to us anymore. The fact that 9 out of 10 now have insurance is something we should all be happy about. The people that have been helped by having insurance never seem to be considered by many when they complain. There are lots and lots of people that now have it when they need it most and they would have been shut out under the broken system we had until the ACA. That of course isn't to say that everything is just perfect now. It is far from that, but the constant insistence that it is failing to have positive benefits to our society is the problem. We would all be better off if we worked together to improve the ACA rather than constantly fight it. It isn't going away and it is much better that what we had before or anything proposed as an alternative to it.

Please list the ways that Obama care is 'much better'.

Again, we are just spinning our wheels here. You will never be convinced of that regardless since you haven't benefited in any obvious way.

Bottom line....Those that now have insurance...benefit... and everyone else that already had insurance is paying for it through much higher premiums, especially if you have to pay for this nonsense yourself. It is an undeniably bad piece of boiler plate legislation that was shoved down the throats of the American public without due diligence while one gang had total control. Be prepared for it to be undone or fixed if the other gang gains the same control. Hopefully it can be fixed. I have my doubts.

Not necessarily are even those newly insured benefiting...not if they can't pay their deductibles. They used to be the "uninsured" group that received services and left the service provider with the bill unpaid. Those unpaid costs from treating the uninsured were then passed on to the insured due to padded bills on their hospital stays/doctor visits.

That same uninsured group who now have ACA health insurance (through heavily subsidized premiums) is likely still leaving the service provider holding the bag because they can't pay their $5731 per person/$11,601 average deductible on the ACA Bronze plan.

The Silver plans that are touted as the best choice due to higher premiums but lower deductibles...

how affordable is an on average $3,177 per person deductible and a $6480 family deductible? How many low income Americans have a spare $6K laying around?

https://www.healthpocket.com/individual-...vk9OnCzg0I

I have a high deductible and have had a high deductible long before the ACA started. When I've had a huge bill, I talk to the hospital and arrange a payment agreement that I can afford as I've never had enough money laying around to pay my high deductible.

(03-27-2016 02:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Your biases occasionally come out in your various posts so don't even try to present yourself as some sort of fair minded expert that offers the real story to the ignorant masses on some obscure general interest message board. You do try way to hard.

Exactly what biases are those, Dawg? I am certainly biased against bad policies, as EVERYONE should be. I am also biased against lies and gross over-statements intended to create false impressions... as EVERYONE should be.

I'm glad the ACA helped you... That's not what we're talking about and NEVER have I said that the ACA didn't help anyone... in fact I specifically mentioned someone for whom the ACA was beneficial (the guy paying 10k who now pays 8)

You said his premiums didn't triple, and then pointed to 'costs' that haven't tripled... but that doesn't mean that HIS PREMIUMS didn't triple. A friend of mine (29 and healthy) WAS paying 180, now he pays 520. HIS costs (essentially) HAVE tripled, though I'm sure the overall cost of his healthcare did not.

You mislead.

You also implied that the ACA had lowered costs, while admitting that the decades long trend has just recently reversed.... and you chose 2008 as a 'break point' in your measures, which is absolutely meaningless in any way to the ACA since it wasn't even signed, much less implemented for more than a year after. That isn't me bringing in new facts, it is merely pointing out the misinformation you are spreading.

I'm glad the ACA is working for you.... but it's your own measures and not 'my bias' that shows your overall impressions to be false. I didn't produce conflicting data... which I obviously could... I used yours.

By the way....

You have 18 posts in this thread, most of them 'correcting' others... and I NOW have 5.

I think we ALL know which of us is trying too hard.

(03-28-2016 10:46 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  By the way....

You have 18 posts in this thread, most of them 'correcting' others... and I NOW have 5.

I think we ALL know which of us is trying too hard.

Here are a couple of other corrections. I never said the guy's premiums didn't triple. I said that on the average that wasn't the case and without a lot more information it would be hard to understand what happened in any one particular case. I've never said the the ACA has lowered premium costs or implied anything. I simply noted that historically premiums have gone up both before and after the ACA. The numbers I gave and years I used were based on the figures I was able to pull up easily from a google search. I'm unclear why you and some others harp on any benefit my family has had as a result of the ACA. The only major direct benefit we have enjoyed that lots of other families don't also enjoy has been the lifetime max. My wife would probably have reached that max. sometime in the future based on the major medical issues we have dealt with over the last few years, but I haven't crunched the numbers to see if or when that would have happened. Regardless, she now is covered by Medicare so that possible benefit is no longer in place for us.