• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Americans to get $1.3 billion in health care rebates

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
Millions of consumers and small businesses will receive an estimated $1.3 billion in rebates from their health plans this summer under a provision of the health care law that effectively limits what insurers can charge for administration and profits, a new study projects.

Does that mean we will have to pay this back after the Supreme Court kills the ACA?

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/26/11410966-americans-to-get-13-billion-in-health-care-rebates?lite

If you don't believe this then go here for the report.

http://www.kff.org/healthreform/8305.cfm
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
Where are the ACA haters? I want to see them spin rebates as a bad thing.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Wait... $1.3B? The way insurance company waste and overhead was framed by Democrats I would have expected hundreds of billions to be returned. $1.3B is nothing compared to our total health care related expenditures. So apparently all of the overhead that Democrats claimed is driving up health care costs amounts to a rounding error.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
Wait... $1.3B? The way insurance company waste and overhead was framed by Democrats I would have expected hundreds of billions to be returned. $1.3B is nothing compared to our total health care related expenditures. So apparently all of the overhead that Democrats claimed is driving up health care costs amounts to a rounding error.
So since it's only 1.3B you consider it insignificant and what is the total amount spent in the U.S health industry?
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
So since it's only 1.3B you consider it insignificant and what is the total amount spent in the U.S health industry?
In the grand scheme of things, yes. It's insignificant. That's $4 per American.

Wow. Brilliant. You've fixed health care. :rolleyes:
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
In the grand scheme of things, yes. It's insignificant. That's $4 per American.

Wow. Brilliant. You've fixed health care. :rolleyes:
LMAO coming from a welfare sucking worthless lazy motherfucker like yourself color me impressed and also inherently predictable.

More saving due to the ACA for you to suck it welfare biotch... 6 Billion more saved here.

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2012pres/02/20120214a.html

http://www.healthcare.gov/blog/2010/09/donuthole-50percentdiscount.html

You got yourself an infraction for that tirade: Remember the new "no personal insult" rule?

Fern
Super Moderator
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,086
493
126
So this is supposed to be from excess administration costs? So much for that being a driving factor in the cost of health care in this country.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,324
4
0
So since it's only 1.3B you consider it insignificant and what is the total amount spent in the U.S health industry?
I find it interesting that this is material, but no amount of spending by your savior is material.
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,561
8
0
In the grand scheme of things, yes. It's insignificant. That's $4 per American.

Wow. Brilliant. You've fixed health care. :rolleyes:
At the very least its a start. Like most problems were facing to day health care doesnt have a quick fix. Aca is only a start.

I personally think decoupling health care from industry if done correctly would do alot for the economy and especially small business.
 

actuarial

Platinum Member
Jan 22, 2009
2,814
0
71
At the very least its a start. Like most problems were facing to day health care doesnt have a quick fix. Aca is only a start.

I personally think decoupling health care from industry if done correctly would do alot for the economy and especially small business.
UHC is by far the best thing that can happen to small businesses. Takes a big part of the risk of going out on your own out of the equation.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
6,839
1,597
136
Where are the ACA haters? I want to see them spin rebates as a bad thing.
If this were the only provision of the ACA then it would be successful but there are many other facets to that legislation which overshadow this. Hell, as of 1/1/14 the health insurance industry will be subject to $8,000,000,000 in "just for the hell of it" taxes that will get passed right along to you as a consumer. So..... save $1.3 billion on this hand and pay $8 billion on this hand, net loss of $6.7 billion thanks to the ACA.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,853
4,799
126
The only provision to be successful? Are you joking. Ask people under 26 who got health insurance through their parents. Ask kids with pre-existing conditions if that's the only successful provision.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
6,839
1,597
136
The only provision to be successful? Are you joking. Ask people under 26 who got health insurance through their parents. Ask kids with pre-existing conditions if that's the only successful provision.
Comprehension fail.

"If this were the only provision then it would be successful" =/= "this is the only provision that is successful".
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
LMAO coming from a welfare sucking worthless lazy motherfucker like yourself color me impressed and also inherently predictable.

More saving due to the ACA for you to suck it welfare biotch... 6 Billion more saved here.

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2012pres/02/20120214a.html

http://www.healthcare.gov/blog/2010/09/donuthole-50percentdiscount.html

You got yourself an infraction for that tirade: Remember the new "no personal insult" rule?

Fern
Super Moderator
Sorry Fern, freeloaders get on my nerves.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
6,839
1,597
136
You are making it sound like other provisions of ACA are not successful.
Not at all. The original post I quoted implied that the premium rebates by themselves made the ACA successful. I replied that would be true if the premium rebates were the only thing in the ACA, but they're not so they don't. Don't blame me for "conveniently" forgetting other beneficial aspects of the ACA when ACA backers also "conveniently" forget the many detrimental aspects of the ACA.

"You must:
1) provide rebates if loss ratio is less than 80%
2) insure pre-existing conditions
3) insure adults up to 26 years old as dependents
4) Pay a bajillion dollars in taxes which will get passed on in the form of rate increases"

"Rebates would be great if they were the only component"
"Pre-existing conditions coverage would be great if it were the only component"
"Insurance to age 26 would be great if it were the only component"

"The ACA sucks because the good components are overshadowed by the onerous rate increases due to taxes"

All of those are valid statements.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,853
4,799
126
Not at all. The original post I quoted implied that the premium rebates by themselves made the ACA successful. I replied that would be true if the premium rebates were the only thing in the ACA, but they're not so they don't. Don't blame me for "conveniently" forgetting other beneficial aspects of the ACA when ACA backers also "conveniently" forget the many detrimental aspects of the ACA.

"You must:
1) provide rebates if loss ratio is less than 80%
2) insure pre-existing conditions
3) insure adults up to 26 years old as dependents
4) Pay a bajillion dollars in taxes which will get passed on in the form of rate increases"

"Rebates would be great if they were the only component"
"Pre-existing conditions coverage would be great if it were the only component"
"Insurance to age 26 would be great if it were the only component"

"The ACA sucks because the good components are overshadowed by the onerous rate increases due to taxes"

All of those are valid statements.
They are not overshadowed. They are complemented. There is always bitter with the sweet in real life. Sorry Obama didn't give you a pony.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
78,608
11,535
126
Sorry Fern, freeloaders get on my nerves.
Stating an opinion doesnt automatically make him a freeloader.
And if it had been me, I woulda got banned. Be careful about the personal attacks here. They arent tolerated anymore.
 

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,956
1
81
The US healthcare market is around $2.5 trillion a year. $1.3 billion is 0.052% of that. I posted in a previous thread that the Senate new the average loss ratio in the industry was already above the targets set. This provision really only prevents insurance companies from having a windfall year, despite claims to the contrary by Obamacare advocates.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
6,839
1,597
136
They are not overshadowed. They are complemented. There is always bitter with the sweet in real life. Sorry Obama didn't give you a pony.
I'm sorry, but that's horse shit. They're complemented?!? Were the American people just screaming for $50+ billion in health insurance tax increases over 6 years (plus $16 billion in pharmaceutical tax increases, plus a 15% corporate tax increase) ALL of which will get passed on in the form of higher rates?

I thought the water was free; it said "complimentary" on the sign.

No, it was "complementary" with an e. The bottle complements the room.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,853
4,799
126
I'm sorry, but that's horse shit. They're complemented?!? Were the American people just screaming for $50+ billion in health insurance tax increases over 6 years (plus $16 billion in pharmaceutical tax increases, plus a 15% corporate tax increase) ALL of which will get passed on in the form of higher rates?
Many uninsured were screaming, in unnecessary pain. I am sure people who got rescinded once they got cancer were screaming too. Of course you don't care about them as much as the insurance companies "screaming." $50B over 6 years is nothing.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS