80 Million With Employer Health Care Plans Could Have Coverage Canceled

[Matt1970]

Read the fine print, or better yet, read thru the hysterical hype in the article linked.
The key wording here: because they are not compliant with ObamaCare
So, what does that mean?

Well... if your employer insurance is "not compliant", then the question YOU should be asking your employer is WHY NOT?
Because, beyond the misleading hype tossed around in this article, "Obamacare compliant" is something you should demand with your employer based insurance.
I mean, lets get real here.
If your employer has been selling you, the employee, crap insurance then you damn well better demand that be changed ASAP.

If you read the facts and truth about Obamacare compliant, what that means, and you still rather prefer your non-Obamacare compliant employer insurance, then you might at least insist they add coverage for brain examinations to that non-Obamacare compliant employer based insurance offered by that employer.
Or in other words, you need your head examined.

Think of Obamacare compliant as with a new car.
You can either buy a new car with safety compliant airbags installed, or a new car with bozo balloons installed and thus labeled as... airbags.
Compliant? Or non-compliant.
Which would you rather spend your hard earned money on?

I kinda side with compliant airbags so that the wife head doesn't end up on the pavement, in several colorful chunks.
And I also side with Obamacare-compliant insurance. So if the wife should get, oh say, breast cancer, she would have that treatment cost covered with Obamacare-compliant insurance, rather than dropped like a hot potato with the bozo-compliant insurance.
I mean, just kinda makes sense.
Also, comparing compliant vs non-compliant, well, you get what you pay for in the end.

But the big question here is #1, obviously this article is against people having true meaningful healthcare coverage since the article uses the term Obamacare rather than ACA (one dead giveaway they print not in your best interest).
And #2, again you have to ask yourself just why the source of this article would wish to have less than the best when it comes to insurance?
Why would the source of this article attempt and convince you to prefer that car with bozo balloons airbags?
Obviously, again, not in your best interest. But its up to the reader to figure out why.
If you still can....

If you wanted to buy a minivan. Your dealer said they have them and you can buy one. When you get there, do you want them to tell you why a pickup is better for you?

This is what Obamacare is doing. To get even enough people on board to pass this turd, Obama and co had to lie their asses off about the fact that if you something that worked for you, you could keep it. Now, well, we lied about what you can keep, but here is why it is better for you...... If people had any inclination about what was going to be happening 2014 through 2015 they would be voting everyone who supported this monstrosity out of office.

 

[papadage]

Outrage all you want. It appeals to the idiot know nothings, but will not get any traction as people settle into better coverage, all thanks to the ACA.

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

That's true, except for:
Essential Health Benefits
No Annual Dollar Limits
No Lifetime Dollar Limits
Dependents to Age 26
Mental Health Parity (Small Group)
Actuarial Value
No Pre-Ex without Creditable Coverage
Deductible Limits
OOP Limits
Expansion of Eligibility to 30+ Hours/Week
Prohibition on Rescission
New Rules in re Wellness Programs
Medical Loss Ratio
Age Band Compression
Changes in Waiting Periods
Reinsurance Program Taxes
Risk-Adjustment Program Taxes
Plus many more, including, but not limited to, greatly expanded reporting requirements imposing an increased administrative burden.

But you're right, other than those few, insignificant things there's hardly any effect at all.

Shall I list all the changes I've suffered through PRIOR to the ACA?

I believe that was his point.

 

[Zodiark1593]

AS for the middle class, it will enhance coverage for everyone, but at the same time, young healthy people will be forced to participate, which is fair since the pre-existing conditions exclusions were banned. No free riding and getting care once you're sick. The majority of employer health plans will remain, with the small modifications yet to be implemented.

Being able to do my own taxes, I say Nay to participating. ()

 

[michal1980]

Yep.. completely ignoring the high income surtax.. which the wealthy will not feel.. but which will pay for the full Medicare expansion. So, misdirect and pretend the middle class are paying for it.

paying for medicare is not paying for obamacare, now is it?

Learn about how the law is structured and how its meant to destroy the middle class.

The subsidizes end at an income of 45k or less. While premiums will increase because old farts and people with preexisting conditions are no longer charge in relation to how much health care they consume.

So that only leaves one group off individuals who will be greatly effected by obamacare doesn't it? The middle class 45k+ earners until they reach about 50 years of age.

Sure the 'rich' will pay more, but healthcare insurance costs aren't progressive are they? On Obamacare, the cost of insurance is the same if you make 20k, or 500k. So the impact on income is far greater for the middle class.

 

[IGBT]

because they are not compliant with ObamaCare
So, what does that mean?

it means you have to purchase coverage you don't need and will never use so Obama can hand it off to parasites for near nothing or free. Income Redistribution. He said he was going to do it. And now it's public policy.

 

[sactoking]

Shall I list all the changes I've suffered through PRIOR to the ACA?

I believe that was his point.

Go check post #22, 23 and 25. Ironwing alluded to the point that changes during the Bush administration weren't attributed to Bush, so changes during the Obama administration shouldn't be attributed to Obama (which is a fallacious equivalency).

Doc Savage Fan replied sarcastically that of course the changes now aren't attributable to the largest private health insurance overhaul in American history.

Ironwing replied with the definitive statement that many of the changes "have nothing to do with Obamacare" and implied that they are in fact extensions of prior industry tinkering using the ACA as the boogeyman to get the blame.

Their discussion then devolved into (what I would deem) petty bickering.

I pointed out that the definitive statement, that many of the changes aren't related to the ACA, is false on its face.

 

[Matt1970]

Go check post #22, 23 and 25. Ironwing alluded to the point that changes during the Bush administration weren't attributed to Bush, so changes during the Obama administration shouldn't be attributed to Obama (which is a fallacious equivalency).

Doc Savage Fan replied sarcastically that of course the changes now aren't attributable to the largest private health insurance overhaul in American history.

Ironwing replied with the definitive statement that many of the changes "have nothing to do with Obamacare" and implied that they are in fact extensions of prior industry tinkering using the ACA as the boogeyman to get the blame.

Their discussion then devolved into (what I would deem) petty bickering.

I pointed out that the definitive statement, that many of the changes aren't related to the ACA, is false on its face.

Well sure, throw 11,000 pages of legislation at the health industry and then blame any negative outcomes on just the natural course of things.

 

[ivwshane]

Go check post #22, 23 and 25. Ironwing alluded to the point that changes during the Bush administration weren't attributed to Bush, so changes during the Obama administration shouldn't be attributed to Obama (which is a fallacious equivalency).

Doc Savage Fan replied sarcastically that of course the changes now aren't attributable to the largest private health insurance overhaul in American history.

Ironwing replied with the definitive statement that many of the changes "have nothing to do with Obamacare" and implied that they are in fact extensions of prior industry tinkering using the ACA as the boogeyman to get the blame.

Their discussion then devolved into (what I would deem) petty bickering.

I pointed out that the definitive statement, that many of the changes aren't related to the ACA, is false on its face.

True or false; consumers insurance plans were frequently cancelled or changed (on average, every year) prior to the ACA ever even before it was nothing other than a campaign promise?

 

[Matt1970]

True or false; consumers insurance plans were frequently cancelled or changed (on average, every year) prior to the ACA ever even before it was nothing other than a campaign promise?

That's like saying when being accused of murder "the guy might have died anyways".

 

[ivwshane]

That's like saying when being accused of murder "the guy might have died anyways".

No, it's nothing like that.

 

[dmcowen674]

True or false; consumers insurance plans were frequently cancelled or changed (on average, every year) prior to the ACA ever even before it was nothing other than a campaign promise?

Exactly, rates and deductibles would go up every year so it is really nothing different or new except it has been Politicized and Mediacized.

 

[papadage]

Also, in states that have implemented the exchanges, rates are way down..

That's an inconvenient fact for scare mongering liars.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Also, in states that have implemented the exchanges, rates are way down..

That's an inconvenient fact for scare mongering liars.

Rates are way down; because they have implemented a tier that used to be for catastrophic levels; they just wrapped in the bare minimums the ACA requires.

You have to pay $300-400 month with deductibles at the highest amount and the minimum coverage.

You are out $5000 up front and still have to make $4000 worth of payments.

Subsidize rates are a different story; but you are then asking the taxpayer to cover your share.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Exactly, rates and deductibles would go up every year so it is really nothing different or new except it has been Politicized and Mediacized.

Rates are higher than normal because of the subsidies required to others (again the middle/upper class are covering for the lower class); deductibles are higher; wasted services are now built into the polices.

 

[sactoking]

True or false; consumers insurance plans were frequently cancelled or changed (on average, every year) prior to the ACA ever even before it was nothing other than a campaign promise?

Irrelevant. "Every time I go to the gym I get stronger, so the fact that I'm taking HGH means my huge increases in strength are due to the gym and not the HGH."

Also, in states that have implemented the exchanges, rates are way down..

That's an inconvenient fact for scare mongering liars.

Really? Because that's not true at all. Rates are down in New York, but that's because their state laws were messed up to begin with. But in most other states, even the states with their own exchanges, rates are not "way down".

If you use the flawed Manhattan Institute data, of the 15 state-based individual exchanges 12 of them are experiencing average premium increases. Even trying to ballpark an allowance for their faulty methodology, it would be a fallacy to states that premiums are "way down" in any except maybe New York.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Really? Because that's not true at all. Rates are down in New York, but that's because their state laws were messed up to begin with. But in most other states, even the states with their own exchanges, rates are not "way down".

My neighbors that aren't lucky enough to work for a self insured employer are seeing their rates increase by $100 to $350 a month. These rate increases are making them redo their budgets and will decrease their disposable income. If others are experiencing the same increases no doubt this will have an impact on the economy.

 

[ivwshane]

Irrelevant. "Every time I go to the gym I get stronger, so the fact that I'm taking HGH means my huge increases in strength are due to the gym and not the HGH."



Really? Because that's not true at all. Rates are down in New York, but that's because their state laws were messed up to begin with. But in most other states, even the states with their own exchanges, rates are not "way down".

If you use the flawed Manhattan Institute data, of the 15 state-based individual exchanges 12 of them are experiencing average premium increases. Even trying to ballpark an allowance for their faulty methodology, it would be a fallacy to states that premiums are "way down" in any except maybe New York.

Lol! If you can't answer a simple question honestly then perhaps you've already become too jaded to be the guy everyone is looking to for non biased answers and information.

Your analogy seems to indicate that cancellations are happening at a higher rate than they normally would, do you have a source for that claim?

The fact is that some insurance companies are using the ACA as the reason to cancel their policies to get people to sign up for a higher costing plan (does Humana of Kentucky ring a bell?). The fact that some of the required changes went into affect several years ago and have already been in play and yet insurers are cancelling plans now should tell you who is really behind these cancellations.

It's the same old story, but the insurance companies have a new bag of tricks.

 

[IGBT]

in the case of Obama Care the cancellations are happening due to the imposition of the Gov.will on the people.