**UPDATE** New Obamacare Reality Setting in: 8M in exchanges, 35% are < 35 yrs old

[Matt1970]

2/10.

Btw, remember all those wasted posts about the web site being broken, or you downplaying December enrollment numbers or you not knowing what CPI was or how to calculate it? All in the same thread on the same page no less.

lulz

lulz? I guess the website was a smashing success. I must have been getting news feeds from a different dimension at the time.

 

[First]

lulz? I guess the website was a smashing success. I must have been getting news feeds from a different dimension at the time.

The web site fulfilled it's stated goal, an irrefutable fact. I'm sorry that no one can give you all those hours of your life back railing against the web site and ACA. Must suck to know how much time you wasted in hindsight despite people telling you at the time you were woefully, woefully misinformed. I guess it just takes time for people to see the light (well in your case, not see it).

I like the wimpout on the rest.

 

[Matt1970]

The web site fulfilled it's stated goal, an irrefutable fact. I'm sorry that no one can give you all those hours of your life back railing against the web site and ACA. Must suck to know how much time you wasted in hindsight despite people telling you at the time you were woefully, woefully misinformed. I guess it just takes time for people to see the light (well in your case, not see it).

I like the wimpout on the rest.

Yep, the website was perfect from day 1. The rest of it was you not even diverting well.

 

[First]

Yep, the website was perfect from day 1

lol read more closely.

The rest of it was you not even diverting well.

You sure do pussy out of posting relevant replies a lot.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

The web site fulfilled it's stated goal, an irrefutable fact.

Eh? And what "stated goal" was that?

 

[michal1980]

Eh? And what "stated goal" was that?

Whatever the number of actually sign ups was going to be, was the goal.

 

[Matt1970]

You sure do pussy out of posting relevant replies a lot.

Remember, your own stupidity is up for display in post 1 of this thread.

2. "If you like your insurance you can keep it." An undeniable fact that, of course, is proving to be utterly irrelevant with Rand Corp (and other studies) showing those with cancelled policies comprised less than 1M total persons, and that the net effect is still 9.3M were added since Sept. 2013 anyway (including many cancelled plans), making the point utterly moot. Will have much weaker legs by election day clearly, especially since it barely affects the overwhelming majority of voters personally to begin with. Note that conservatives routinely, some even to this day, throw around 6M as the total number of cancelled policies. We know it's not the case.

.

Learn to read.

 

[First]

Remember, your own stupidity is up for display in post 1 of this thread.



Learn to read.

lol, learn to read indeed; I corrected myself. You, on the other hand, routinely pussy out of admitting everything you got wrong on the ACA.

Meh. You'd be entertaining to laugh at in person.

 

[IGBT]

When asked how many have paid premiums, he says I don`t know. When asked how many have lost their insurance because of obamacare,he says i don`t know. When asked how many of those have been pushed to medicade, he says i don`t know. So many I don`t knows, but now 8 million have signed up. I don`t know, so many lies from this president and his faithful liberal media owner friends, what to believe. Not a word he says !!

 

[Matt1970]

lol, learn to read indeed; I corrected myself. You, on the other hand, routinely pussy out of admitting everything you got wrong on the ACA.

Meh. You'd be entertaining to laugh at in person.

Corrected yourself? It's rare you even get anything right. And I doubt you have anywhere close to the wit to debate anyone face to face. Man has go to know his limitations.

 

[werepossum]

Corrected yourself? It's rare you even get anything right. And I doubt you have anywhere close to the wit to debate anyone face to face. Man has go to know his limitations.

He screwed up, and he admitted it. Ain't been but one perfect man, and the best the rest of us can do is to admit it when we're wrong. He did.

 

[Matt1970]

He screwed up, and he admitted it. Ain't been but one perfect man, and the best the rest of us can do is to admit it when we're wrong. He did.

Oh there is a huge difference between a perfect man and what garbage spews out of him on a daily basis. Remember, he called me a liar for claiming millions got kicked off their insurance, lost their doctor and are paying more for premiums and that's well documented. That's just the BS from him today.

 

[First]

Oh there is a huge difference between a perfect man and what garbage spews out of him on a daily basis. Remember, he called me a liar for claiming millions got kicked off their insurance, lost their doctor and are paying more for premiums and that's well documented. That's just the BS from him today.

Oh sorry you're confused; people routinely had their insurance cancelled year-after-year before ACA was passed in 2010, so the question isn't actually who gets kicked off, the question is who gets kicked off that 1) isn't offered a reasonably affordable/comparable alternative plan by said insurance company and/or 2) of those kicked off who doesn't have access to a reasonably affordable/comparable replacement plan on the exchanges. You don't have access to that information of course, since it's too complicated for you and not known (yet) with any precision.

Losing doctors is something that is also not known with any precision but certainly has not happened on a large enough scale (millions for instance) to affect nearly enough people to warrant your harried screaming from the gallows. Paying more for premiums is not well documented, sorry; unless you're counting pre-ACA historical premium norms against ACA, which would be par for the course for you I suppose, lol.

See, this was a nuanced answer, one likely a little out of your depth.

 

[Matt1970]

Oh sorry you're confused; people routinely had their insurance cancelled year-after-year before ACA was passed in 2010, so the question isn't actually who gets kicked off, the question is who gets kicked off that 1) isn't offered a reasonably affordable/comparable alternative plan by said insurance company and/or 2) of those kicked off who doesn't have access to a reasonably affordable/comparable replacement plan on the exchanges. You don't have access to that information of course, since it's too complicated for you and not known (yet) with any precision.

Losing doctors is something that is also not known with any precision but certainly has not happened on a large enough scale (millions for instance) to affect nearly enough people to warrant your harried screaming from the gallows. Paying more for premiums is not well documented, sorry; unless you're counting pre-ACA historical premium norms against ACA, which would be par for the course for you I suppose, lol.

See, this was a nuanced answer, one likely a little out of your depth.

Nice try, but millions got kicked off receiving letters stating their policy was not compliant with the new ACA regulations after being repeatedly promised that wouldn't happen. If you want to try and sugar coat it by saying people get kicked off anyways, go ahead, but it only makes you look like a fool.

 

[Pens1566]

If you don't get that the "you can keep your plan" line didn't apply to plans that didn't meet the ACA minimums by now, you really shouldn't be discussing this topic. You should be wiping drool off your chin, or more likely having someone else do it for you.

 

[First]

Nice try, but millions got kicked off receiving letters stating their policy was not compliant with the new ACA regulations after being repeatedly promised that wouldn't happen.

I'll repeat it since you're confused; the vast majority of them either were able to keep their plans/had access to comparable plans on the exchanges and/or were offered another comparable plan directly through their insurer. I'm sorry this positive development hurts your talking points.

If you want to try and sugar coat it by saying people get kicked off anyways, go ahead, but it only makes you look like a fool.

You look foolish pushing a story you aren't even willing to quantify; of course the reason is you'd find out with a little Google'ing that it's simply not nearly as bad you want it to be.

 

[dawheat]

I don't disagree, but Obamacare made some winners and some losers. Rather than repeal it and once again make some winners and some losers, show me a proposed replacement that protects the Obamacare winners and makes whole the Obamacare losers. Otherwise, what's the point in repeating the massive societal disruption? Likewise, I'm fine with removing the requirement that all health insurance policies be all things to all people and everybody's Uncle Sugar to boot, but repeal seems to be a rather blunt instrument approach to that too.

+1

Anyone claiming that ACA did all things for all people clearly is wrong and I do agree many got more of the raw end of the stick. But it's also as impossible to deny it's done and doing a lot of good for those who are uninsured or with pre-existing conditions.

So how do we move forward from here to improve it and maybe even help those who got more of the raw end.

 

[hal2kilo]

So the bootom line in all of this politically for the Repubs is "We tried 50 + n times to get rid of this turkey" and then devolve into bu, but Bengazi.

Sounds like a winning strategy.

 

[Matt1970]

I'll repeat it since you're confused; the vast majority of them either were able to keep their plans/had access to comparable plans on the exchanges and/or were offered another comparable plan directly through their insurer. I'm sorry this positive development hurts your talking points.



You look foolish pushing a story you aren't even willing to quantify; of course the reason is you'd find out with a little Google'ing that it's simply not nearly as bad you want it to be.

That's right. This is what's better for you whether you like it or not. Sure it's not the plan you liked all theses years and were promised you could keep, sure you may have had to lose the doctor you have liked all these years, and sure it may cost you more, but come one, is it really THAT bad?

 

[First]

That's right. This is what's better for you whether you like it or not. Sure it's not the plan you liked all theses years and were promised you could keep, sure you may have had to lose the doctor you have liked all these years, and sure it may cost you more, but come one, is it really THAT bad?

Weak deflection, already addressed.

I feel sorry for you that after ACA completely exceeded your expectations that you're not man enough to admit it publicly. I'm sorry that you didn't have good foresight.

Let's review some of your bump lulz:

Congrats to the 2 million who got insurance. To the 10 million kicked off, sorry bout that.

A good start for Republicans would be to not kick 100 million people off of their insurance while simultaneously raising premiums.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...blems-persist/

[Web site] works 100% of the time for 80% of the population.

If you think that is fixed, I have some land I want to sell you.

Obamacare is supposed to get more people insured. - 10 million kicked off their insurance plans and 80 million more likely next year.

That's just 5 minutes of AT searching.

 

[SheHateMe]

The website was done by a contractor. The messups on the site had nothing to do with anything in the ACA other than being a frontend for people to see what was available. That company ended up losing the contract and it was given to another company (who fixed it). This was in Janurary. Why are you still talking about it? Its like some of these anti-obamacare people are running out of material.

 

[HomerJS]

Yet another obamacare thread. The website is a mess, still un-secure and the government cannot say how many people have actually paid premiums.

Premiums are rising across the country. http://www.unionleader.com/article/20140408/NEWS1201/140409269

Insurers cut the number of doctors in their plans...

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb/04/business/la-fi-obamacare-patients-20140205

and a lot of major hospitals are not accepting obamacare plans...

http://health.usnews.com/health-new...2013/10/30/top-hospitals-opt-out-of-obamacare

insurers are limiting the number of networked doctors...

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...complain-about-limited-doctor-choices-nearby/

And many doctors simply plan to opt-out...

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/...ccess-health-insurance-doctors-244415971.html

Links are just a sampling. Point is obamacare is sucking (but we must embrace the suck) and the o-zombies will go to their grave spouting the wonder of obamacare.

All conditions that were going on before the ACA. While you can always have individual cases so far the trend in all you mentioned as a whole, is improving.

I can point out a large single case Mitch McConnell's home state of Kentucky the number of uninsured is down 40%. Does that hold true in each state? No, but states that setup exchanges and allowed their people expanded Medicare expansion have # of uninsured going down at 4x of states that didn't.

 

[werepossum]

If you don't get that the "you can keep your plan" line didn't apply to plans that didn't meet the ACA minimums by now, you really shouldn't be discussing this topic. You should be wiping drool off your chin, or more likely having someone else do it for you.

If you don't get that the "you can keep your plan" line was nothing more than a bald-faced lie for political advantage, then the position of drool-wiper is above your level of competence.

+1

Anyone claiming that ACA did all things for all people clearly is wrong and I do agree many got more of the raw end of the stick. But it's also as impossible to deny it's done and doing a lot of good for those who are uninsured or with pre-existing conditions.

So how do we move forward from here to improve it and maybe even help those who got more of the raw end.

Pretty much. That's only fair to those who just got health insurance.

I'm even totally up for repealing Obamacare, but let's do it one state at a time to make sure we're replacing it with something better rather than just dumping the entire country into a different kind of bad. Got a better plan that is either lower cost with the same percent covered or a higher percent covered at the same or marginally higher cost? Great. Sell it to a state and we'll all pressure the federal bureaucracy to allow it. If it works better, more states can adopt it. If it works worse, we've limited the damage and societal disruption.

Personally I was better off before Obamacare, and my entire family and pretty much everyone I know were either better off before or unaffected. But I don't want to deprive people of newly obtained health insurance just to reduce my costs back to pre-ACA levels. We need to work to maximize the good and minimize the bad.

 

[Pens1566]

If you don't get that the "you can keep your plan" line was nothing more than a bald-faced lie for political advantage, then the position of drool-wiper is above your level of competence.

Keep telling yourself that. Maybe one day it will actually be true ... no, no it won't. Never mind.

 

[Matt1970]

Weak deflection, already addressed.

I feel sorry for you that after ACA completely exceeded your expectations that you're not man enough to admit it publicly. I'm sorry that you didn't have good foresight.

Let's review some of your bump lulz:


That's just 5 minutes of AT searching.

This are some of my better ones. You make this easy for me.