‘The Affordable Care Act: 5 Years Later’ (WH.gov)

If doctors, nurses and hospitals worked for free, the USA would not need Medicaid for the poor now would we?

Doctors, have to go through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, 3 plus years of residency training to specialize. Doctors want to GET PAID. There are millions of citizens on Medicaid. The state Kentucky alone had 300,000 citizens get the expanded Medicaid. You think doctors are going to treat all of them people for free, as a charity give back. You are just as crazy as Ron Paul if you do.

If having a fine to encourage people to buy health insurance is a boon to the insurance companies, then how did United Health Care lose 300 million dollars selling health insurance policies to policy holders who were "Already Sick" on the government exchanges in 2014.

Iffy, why don't you go ask Dr. Paul to explain that one. Ron Paul is quack who has no viable solution to increase the percentage of people who are insured.

No one in the republican party listens to Ron Paul. The republican party has TUNED him out a long time ago. The last time he ran for the republican nomination he got a Grand Total of 22 delegates. Originally Posted by flghtr65

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."
-- Ronald Reagan

TODAY IS NOT THE LAST DAY TO SIGN UP FOR OBAMACARE ....

.... the "deadline" will be extended ....

... just like the "deadline" for the Syrians to get rid of their chemical weapons.

There's a reason it's called a "Yellow Line in the Sand"!

#1, you might want to "revisit" Medicaid recipients and #2, you also might want to "revisit" the "backgrounds" of doctors who are "gravitating" to the ranks of those physicians who will accept Medicare and Medicaid patients.

The "list" of physicians and health care providers accepting Medicare and Medicaid is growing smaller and smaller. Originally Posted by LexusLover

LL, you made my point. Most doctors deem the payouts for Medicare and Medicaid unacceptable. Yet, Ron Paul and Iffy think doctors want to treat poor people for FREE as a charitable give back.

LL, you made my point. Most doctors deem the payouts for Medicare and Medicaid unacceptable. Yet, Ron Paul and Iffy think doctors want to treat poor people for FREE as a charitable give back. Originally Posted by flghtr65

So you want me to pay for more and more and more peoples "FREE" healthcare... frightr

http://benefitrevolution.blogspot.co...te-out-of.html

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2015
New Budget Deal Takes a Bite Out of Obamacare. Beginning of the End of the Cadillac Tax & Other Tax Moratoriums

After seeing what's in it, Congress began to change it.
Earlier this week, Republicans and Democrats in congress agreed to a new budget deal that will have significant impacts on PPACA. This is a quick rundown of how the the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 and the Orwellianly named, Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (I feel better already) will impact Health Reform.

The Cadillac Tax, set to begin in 2018, is now delayed to 2020. This tax is done. I've said that many times over the years and this was just the first official step in that process. President Obama was never going to sign a bill repealing it, but businesses began cutting back on health plans in preparation for it. In this compromise, President Obama can avoid the embarrassment of repealing it while businesses don't have to start making the unpopular cuts associated with it.

Every one of the three Democratic candidates for President and all of the 178 or so Republican candidates are against this tax. Soon after inauguration, a new President will officially repeal or further erode it. Perhaps we can engage in endless delays for a couple of decades before we repeal it - like lawmakers did on the Medicare "Doc Fix."

Just in case it is not delayed again or repealed, Republicans were able to get Democrats to agree to make the penalties associated with the tax deductible as business expenses. This alone substantially weakens the impact of the Cadillac Tax.

This two-year delay means that health plans (ultimately insureds) get to keep about $3 billion more of their money in 2018 and another $6 billion in 2019 according to the Congressional Budget Office. It also means that in order to keep Obamacare, we need to borrow that $9 billion from China, Japan and the Social Security Program. Go ahead and add it to our tab, we're good for it!

The Health Insurance Provider Tax and Medical Device Tax won't be collected in 2017 as part of a one year moratorium. This is just an odd compromise. These taxes have both been in effect since 2013. Again, I suspect the logic was that Obama would not sign a full repeal, but would sign off on a one year reprieve. Hence, the cost of family coverage will be about $530 less in 2017. Individuals will save about $170 in 2017. And the price of Obamacare goes up about $12 billion in return. That gets tacked onto our national debt.

Permanently nixing all three taxes (Cadillac, insurer and medical device) would save taxpayers at least $253 billion through 2025, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Rubio's "Truth in Government" Risk Corridor Funding Limits Remain in Place for Another Year. This spending bill will, once again, limit funding of the risk corridor program to the fees that the program collects from insurers that have excess profits. This was how Obamacare was originally sold to the public. In 2014 Senator Rubio insisted that the program retain that aspect of neutral funding in the face of an avalanche of changes to the law that threatened to increase the overall cost of PPACA.

His prognostication was correct. The government's projections were so far off that insurers got back less than 10% of the losses for which they anticipated reimbursement. Many assumed that federal bureaucrats would simply rob Peter to pay Paul and pay out these losses from other funds. Hence, this became known as an "insurer bailout" program. But thus far it has not been and won't be again in 2015.

No Unconstitutional IPAB "Death Panel" In 2016. The new budget bill also guts the Independent Payment Advisory Board temporarily in 2016. The IPAB was supposed to be a panel of "experts" (aka, unelected bureaucrats) who would recommend binding spending cuts in Medicare to help pay for PPACA. IPAB has not yet been established. And this bill makes it almost certain it will not be in 2016. PPACA does, however, give the HHS Secretary authority to take action for the IPAB if it cannot make recommendations so this battle is not yet over.

PPACA is changing as rapidly as ever. More importantly, the recent changes are legislative as opposed to many of the extra-constitutional administrative and Presidential changes we saw in 2013 and 2014. Just yesterday, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said President Obama's healthcare is pushing people into part-time positions. She and many Republicans are eager to address that issue by redefining full-time to be 40 hours a week as opposed to 30 or some other significant change to the employer mandate. We will continue to see substantial uncertainty until we know who the President will be in 2017.

Well as an epileptic and 64 years old no one would touch me insurance wise. Yea thats a great system.

Well as an epileptic and 64 years old no one would touch me insurance wise. Yea thats a great system. Originally Posted by 12blue4u

Cuba, will give you a free sex change... but I'm sure we will pay for that too...

So you want me to pay for more and more and more peoples "FREE" healthcare... frightr

http://benefitrevolution.blogspot.co...te-out-of.html Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

You won't be paying more for other peoples healthcare. You don't manufacture medical devices and you do not have a Cadillac healthcare plan. It's impossible for you to have a Cadillac healthcare plan, you got the EXEMPTION last year dumbass.

You are saying 10 million of the same type of patients they have been getting will get them to profitability? Originally Posted by DSK

No, I am not saying that. The high risk people(those with pre-existing conditions who are already sick) are buying the health insurance in the individual market (government exchanges, other on-line brokers). The low risk people have not been buying the insurance in sufficient numbers. That's how UHG lost 300 million in the individual market last year. New signups for 2016 will come primarily from the low risk individuals. They were the ones who were staying out, the result was unbalanced risk pools, especially for UHG.

No, I am not saying that. The high risk people(those with pre-existing conditions who are already sick) are buying the health insurance in the individual market (government exchanges, other on-line brokers). The low risk people have not been buying the insurance in sufficient numbers. That's how UHG lost 300 million in the individual market last year. New signups for 2016 will come primarily from the low risk individuals. They were the ones who were staying out, the result was unbalanced risk pools, especially for UHG. Originally Posted by flghtr65

DSK, this from CNBC, you know the cable channel with the stock ticker running at the bottom, more young people are signing up for Obamacare. This will lead to balanced risk pools which is a good thing. Maybe Gadfly's health insurance premium will finally come down.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/22/obama...&doc=103260915

Well as an epileptic and 64 years old no one would touch me insurance wise. Yea thats a great system. Originally Posted by 12blue4u

That was true before the ACA was passed. Now health insurance companies can't deny someone a heath insurance policy because of a pre-existing condition. The only thing they can ask you about your medical history is do you smoke. When you turn 65 you will be eligible for Medicare, the single payer system for seniors.

IFFOB What the fuck you jerk. I have trigeminal neuralgia. I did not ask for this. Look it up if you know how. So just go ahead and pass on medicare when you turn 65. To quote bugs bunny "what a maroon".

LL, you made my point. Originally Posted by flghtr65

In reality I didn't.

Should we begin with your original "premise" and "assumption"?

To determine if something is successful if it is "sold" as an improvement one must begin at the time of the "sales pitch" to evaluate the status at the time of the representation. At the ORIGINAL point in time one must determine exactly what is going to be "improved" then determine by a "cost-benefit" analysis if the condition was "improved" ... how much "improved" and at what "cost"! The alleged "purpose" was to insure those who INVOLUNTARILY weren't.

The short answer is: A result that reduces the options for consumers both in product and providers is not an improvement, particularly when it increases their individual costs in premiums and out-of-pocket annual expenses.

Those persons in our society (like you) who believe in equalizing all products and services for all persons in our society by regulation and/or increased taxes on some with tax credits/grants to others while at the same time believing that making sure a relatively small minority of the society receives products and services they did not previously obtain while the vast majority ends up with less products and services are delighted with "INCOME REDISTRIBUTION" to "cure" the "ailment."

Communism/Socialism didn't work. So why do you wish to move in that direction?

IFFOB What the fuck you jerk. I have trigeminal neuralgia. Originally Posted by 12blue4u

Just how excruciating is the pain when you are performing DATY?

Probably a more important question would be for you: How much money do you want others to pay out of their pocket so you can "afford" medication that dulls the pain while you are getting your monthly fix of pussy eating?

And you call someone a "jerk"?

Just how excruciating is the pain when you are performing DATY?

Probably a more important question would be for you: How much money do you want others to pay out of their pocket so you can "afford" medication that dulls the pain while you are getting your monthly fix of pussy eating?

And you call someone a "jerk"? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Actually he should have called you a jerk, LLephantMan.

You've got to be the biggest, baddest, toughtest guy nobody has ever seen.

How dare you judge a hobbyist for hobbying, you Medicare leeching scumbag? Why are you on ECCIE anyway? You've NEVER posted a review. NEVER been part of a pussy related discussion. in fact all I've seen from you are your mindless posts here and the online fights you pick with Houston providers.

Are you really a shill for the church? Or LE, as others have suggested?

Whatever you are, you ain't a hobbyist.

You're a self loathing scumbag. But you're working hard and succeeding in adding new people to the ever growing list of people who also loathe you, LLephantShit.

Cuba, will give you a free sex change... but I'm sure we will pay for that too...


Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

What the fuck does that even mean?

Another bold statement from another ward of the fucking state,