changing minds, and changing parties

[callmeslick]

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show ... _fb_maddow

[woodchip]

Wow, another single source example that shows we were all wrong.

[callmeslick]

it's pretty easy to show that you were always wrong, Woody. Thought you'd enjoy the read. Now, anyone else wish to comment on this story of one family who FINALLY realized the folks they'd been voting for don't exactly have their back?

[woodchip]

Shall I find examples of people who lost their doctors or don't they count.

[callmeslick]

Shall I find examples of people who lost their doctors or don't they count.

come on, now, Woody. You've been trying to do so for 4 years, at least. Every one of them turns out to be a self-inflicted horror story, or worse, completely bogus. Face it, you've made a boogeyman out of a Law that is working, and will continue to work.

[Foil]

Rather than you boys going round and round about anecdotal stories, how 'bout someone post some statistics? Now that it's been around for a year or so, is Obamacare/ACA gaining or losing customers?

[callmeslick]

those stats were posted here, by me, over the course of the past year, at least twice. The ACA expanded coverage by about 10 million people last year, and expanded further by about 6 million in the current year. All the while lowering hospital payments from the government. As I replied in another thread, I am starting to pack for my big annual fishing trip, so am not going to dredge up easily located data again. The point of the post was a story about someone who was rabidly opposed to the ACA because of what he'd been led to believe by the party he had supported for years. When it all turned out to be BS, he both wised up about the ACA, and later he and his wife came to the conclusion that their party had let them down. I am willing to bet that quite a few Americans have been coming to similar conclusions, and that it will be reflected in the campaign in 2016. ie-Any fool running against Obamacare is facing issues, even in some very red states.

[Spidey]

Well, you always have the counter to that, in the way of believing that the Democrats let people down by passing a bill that does nothing to make health care affordable, and should have been called the insurance reform act, because affordable health care is a lie.

Still rising faster than inflation…no affordable health care in sight…..

[Ferno]

I'm just happy to see someone getting the healthcare they needed instead of.. you know, dying.

[Top Gun]

"If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population!"

[Spidey]

One of your basic ACA lies…

“All the while lowering hospital payments from the government”
(you know, those nasty evil people who were using the ER for care)

The difference…

The government now pays fat profit laden insurance companies who pay hospitals to treat the same people.

[woodchip]

Shall I find examples of people who lost their doctors or don't they count.

come on, now, Woody. You've been trying to do so for 4 years, at least. Every one of them turns out to be a self-inflicted horror story, or worse, completely bogus. Face it, you've made a boogeyman out of a Law that is working, and will continue to work.

The only thing bogus is your comment. Tell me slick, when are you going to stop making ignorant claims as though we all think you are infallible:

"Jerry Flanagan, lead attorney for the Consumer Watchdog group in California, says hundreds of thousands of people lost their doctors when insurers sold narrow networks without notice."

"Consumers here were told that networks are going to be the same as they were before Obamacare ... and those are flat out lies," Flanagan said."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/patients-ou ... obamacare/

Your ongoing story telling leads me to wonder if your whole persona you present here isn't a fabrication also.

[callmeslick]

I love how you all conveniently leave out that virtually ALL of the folks who 'lost' coverage regained it, and in most cases it was superior coverage. But, that would blow the whole narrative. There is a reason that support for the ACA rises every month in national polls. Well, on that note, I am off to the woods of Central PA for a week with a few dozen friends from around the planet. Tout alors!

[Spidey]

Losing a doctor and losing coverage are two different things.

[Tunnelcat]

The elephant in the room.

http://fortune.com/2015/05/22/obamacare ... oo_fortune

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... ation-rate

[woodchip]

Heh, this is so like gasoline. Govt urges everyone to get fuel efficient cars. They do and then the govt realizes that they are not taking in enough gas taxes and wants to institute a scheme to raise taxes by how many miles a vehicle travels.

So now the govt has a scheme where health insurance is based on younger people buying in. When they don't, premiums are raised. I have to wonder how much tax dollars are now being paid out in subsidies. Will the subsidies increase as the premiums increase?

[woodchip]

I love how you all conveniently leave out that virtually ALL of the folks who 'lost' coverage regained it, and in most cases it was superior coverage. But, that would blow the whole narrative. There is a reason that support for the ACA rises every month in national polls. Well, on that note, I am off to the woods of Central PA for a week with a few dozen friends from around the planet. Tout alors!

We were discussing losing your doctor. Don't try a flim flam run around.

[Tunnelcat]

Heh, this is so like gasoline. Govt urges everyone to get fuel efficient cars. They do and then the govt realizes that they are not taking in enough gas taxes and wants to institute a scheme to raise taxes by how many miles a vehicle travels.

So now the govt has a scheme where health insurance is based on younger people buying in. When they don't, premiums are raised. I have to wonder how much tax dollars are now being paid out in subsidies. Will the subsidies increase as the premiums increase?

Was our pre-Obamacare system any better? Costs and prices were going up before Obamacare was even an idea. I think that no matter what happens with Obamacare, the way our health system is set up and run, prices will continue to rise and most people will be forced to quit using it. Then things will happen.

[woodchip]

Were the premiums going to rise at 50%?

[Lothar]

Was our pre-Obamacare system any better?

Nope. It was the same system. People talk about Obamacare like it's some revolutionary fix. But in reality it's basically the same system with more forced buyins. We're still getting our healthcare through our employer (an idea that only exists because companies used it to get around WWII-era compensation caps designed to keep key engineers from switching companies) and we're still paying for routine care through giant bureaucracies. Only now those giant bureaucracies are required to cover certain very-expensive patients at well below cost, and they're not allowed to price in risk in sensible ways, so they're jacking prices on everyone -- and there's a penalty if you try to get out of the system entirely.

[callmeslick]

Were the premiums going to rise at 50%?

they averaged 20% for two decades, on average. Every freaking year.

[Tunnelcat]

they averaged 20% for two decades, on average. Every freaking year.

Obamacare didn't change that one iota. The difference is now, we're being required to pay those higher premiums. The point will come soon, however, when people won't be able to afford those premiums and yet won't be poor enough for subsidies. Catch 22. How much of their wages and salaries are people going to give up just to pay for health care premiums?

[callmeslick]

TC, my premiums have DROPPED for two straight years. So, let's avoid the generalizations. Overall, the rate of increase has plummetted.

[Tunnelcat]

TC, my premiums have DROPPED for two straight years. So, let's avoid the generalizations. Overall, the rate of increase has plummetted.

My rates have gone UP ever since I can remember, NEVER dropped. In fact, if I'd dropped my grandfathered plan and went onto the Obamacare marketplace for my insurance, I would be paying even MORE than I do now per month. But that's because I have a higher deductible than most of those plans on the marketplace have. I WANT to be under-insured because my body is just not worth the expense of maintaining it like a Rolls Royce anymore. I want minimal medical care, period. Everyone dies at some point anyway. My monthly rates just to have insurance are still too high in my opinion. That may change however, and negate my attempts at monthly cost savings.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/democrats ... 29726.html

[Spidey]

When I made the point that there are people with insurance that aren’t getting care I was laughed at.

...............

So now it’s an issue for Democrats…and it doesn’t take much imagination to figure out the simplistic solution that they will come up with, meanwhile totally ignoring the actual problem with our system that the experts and non experts have been pointing out for decades.

[Tunnelcat]

It'll be interesting to see what happens once SCOTUS rules on the mandate in June. Either way they rule, the Republicans really stepped into a hot steaming pile with this one. That stink may linger long enough to affect the next presidential election.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/study-pou ... 00261.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/2 ... lp00000592