The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 84

Thread: Obamacare ... the legal stuff

  1. #31
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...nder-obamacare

    Premiums for these low-cost plans now run about $150/mo for a single male, age 25. It is anticipated that this cost will be 3-to-4X as much for the new plans that meet Obamacare minimum coverages. Guess who will be paying the penalty tax instead?
    Here is the original article written by Rutgers University's Center for State Health Policy director Joel Cantor, quoted by the author of your article. Reading both, I can't say that your author accurately portrayed what he was saying. Can you?

    http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/1...obamacare/?p=1

    Looking for the original, I sure did find a lot of breathless expression of outrage in conservative blogdom. If fact, there was so much of it, it overwhelms the google search results making it nearly impossible to find the original article published by the guy they were quoting to give themselves some degree of credibility.
    Last edited by Buzz; 08-19-2013 at 06:24 PM.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  2. #32
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,896

    Default

    From that article,
    A few features of the health reform law will (in some cases already have) also modestly increase the cost of employer-sponsored coverage, including the rule that family plans cover young adults up to age 26 and regulations making certain preventive benefits available with no cost sharing. There is no free lunch.
    That last sentence really is the bottom line. Someone always will have to pay for "the lunch". It just depends on who will end up paying the biggest part of the tab.

    Are these premiums going up or down? The difficulty answering this question is that the 2013 to 2014 comparison is not apples-to-apples. Health insurance premiums are driven by a complex mix of forces: who buys coverage (i.e., the risk pool), what is covered (i.e., the benefit package), and what factors may be used in setting premiums (e.g., age, sex, health).
    We do know that O-care will require coverages in ALL plans that were not necessarily a part of all plans before. From what I've read, O-care will NOT allow different premium rates based on age. That means that younger people will have to pay for some of the older people's "lunch". And healthier people will be paying for some of the "lunch" for those with pre-existing conditions.
    but caps on covered costs (like the “Basic and Essential” plans available in the New Jersey market until the end of this year) will no longer be permitted. But premiums for the newly available catastrophic plans will likely be similar. While comparable in price, catastrophic plans are quite different than bare-bones coverage. These plans will have more cost sharing up front, such as high deductibles, but will have good coverage for high-end expenses that come with major illness.
    I think this is what you are referring to, Buzz. This author says that the cost for the "new" coverage should be "similar" to the plans that will no longer be available.
    If B&E purchasers switch to a catastrophic plan, their premiums will not change much (although arguably they will have better coverage should they get very sick).
    Those who are ineligible for the catastrophic plan (i.e., over age 30) or prefer more comprehensive benefits will likely see somewhat higher costs. Current purchasers of standard plans, who currently number about 43,000, some of whom pay over $1,000 per month, will no doubt have a range of good plan options with much lower premiums.

    I agree with you Buzz, that the Townhall author extrapolated figures that are not mentioned in the original article that he cited.

    As I read the original article, the young people may pay more & get slightly better coverage in the event of serious illness. By requiring the higher front-end out-of-pocket, I'd guess the insurors' actuarial stats indicate that the occurrence of serious illness will be of minimal risk (as a group), so there is some actuarial basis for the serious illness coverage. The older, sicker people should expect to stay the same or pay less.

    It also does mention that there are 100,000 individuals involved in the "young" group, and a bit less than 1/2 that # in the "older" group, so those numbers also help balance the actuarial figures.

    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  3. #33
    Senior Member GaryJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    678

    Default

    I wonder if other companies will follow?

    http://www.humanevents.com/2013/08/2...15000-spouses/
    Hebrews 11:3 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

    What if all we have today is what we gave thanks for yesterday?

  4. #34
    Senior Member Uncle Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    4,289

    Default

    In addition to the UPS cut-back, other large corps are discovering their predicament too. The Delta unionistas are finding out what the bean counters have been warning about. When will the many others wake up and realize this newest Obama/Democrat scam will kill their companies/corporations/businesses.

    Elections have consequences. In your desire to elect the first black president, you closed your eyes to the baggage he and his Chicago hoods were moving into the WH, and causing the American people to succumb to. Sadly, most of you fools just can't admit you've been hoodwinked.

    You have only the 2014 elections to try to get your country back. If not, how will you explain to your offspring how America turned into a national Detroit? The Obamacare is just a start.

    UB

    It looks like Delta Airlines is bracing employees for health-insurance disruptions due to ObamaCare, by circulating copies of a letter it wrote to the Obama Administration in June, detailing the hundred million dollars in costs the Affordable Care Act would inflict on the company.

    This news comes as a Virginia management company reveals that nearly all of its major clients have switched full-time employees to part-time, because of ObamaCare. The University of Virginia just announced that it will drop coverage for spouses, much as United Parcel Service did yesterday.

    Insurance premiums are going up, plans are being canceled, full-time jobs are disappearing… and according to the Congressional Budget Office, it's all for nothing, because the number of uninsured Americans will barely change at all, at least not during the standard CBO ten-year forecast window.

    What a hideous waste. And then we must add the opportunity cost of wasting our national energies on trying to change America to suit ObamaCare, instead of implementing real reforms that would actually reduce costs and increase availability. Republicans determined to defund and repeal ObamaCare should get together and endorse a package of simple, solid reforms. Show the American people what they can have, once ObamaCare is gone… then ask President Obama and his party why they'll go to any lengths to keep us from having those desirable reforms.

    In his desperation to rally support for the deeply unpopular Affordable Care Act, President Obama likes to claim there are no Republican alternatives. That's never been true. Let's make it laughable.

    John Hayward
    Senior Writer
    On Twitter: Doc_0
    When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

  5. #35
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,896

    Default

    Did anybody else notice in the UPS article that the employer also had to pay a $63 fee for each "member" as a start-up fee for O-care? If they dropped 150,000 spouses, that could mean that there are at least 150,000 members to their plan. That works out to $9.45 million ... from UPS, alone!

    Since the whole deal with O-care was not supposed to cost more than $1 trillion in govt money (now estimated that it will be $2 trillion), these other taxes going into the kitty were not "transparent" when the law was voted on. Wonder what the cost of this law "really" is?
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  6. #36
    Senior Member luvmylabs23139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Here is the original article written by Rutgers University's Center for State Health Policy director Joel Cantor, quoted by the author of your article. Reading both, I can't say that your author accurately portrayed what he was saying. Can you?

    http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/1...obamacare/?p=1

    Looking for the original, I sure did find a lot of breathless expression of outrage in conservative blogdom. If fact, there was so much of it, it overwhelms the google search results making it nearly impossible to find the original article published by the guy they were quoting to give themselves some degree of credibility.
    BCBSNC already said I can't keep my plan (not what BUMFACE wants)
    BCBSNC said substantial increase (said BUMFACE's crap)
    Oh prior I have posted the screen prints when I follow their instructions.
    So he flat out LIED!!!!!!
    Hihope Hiland Heathen of Perth CD, RE, CGC, TDI

  7. #37
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,896

    Default

    Reuters first reported that the Department of Health and Human Services informed insurance companies Tuesday it is delaying signing the final agreements between the government and insurance providers whose plans will be sold on federal health insurance exchanges.


    The agreements were supposed to be signed between Sept. 5 and 9, but instead will be delayed until mid-September.


    The department did not give a clear-cut reason for the delay, but attributed it to the need to be flexible in working with the insurance companies and to resolve unspecified technical issues.


    “We remain on track to open the marketplace on time on October 1,” HHS spokeswoman Joanne Peters told Fox Business Network.
    However, some experts tell Reuters even a small delay could affect the Oct. 1 start of ObamaCare’s six-month enrollment period, and alter the timetable for the implementation as a whole.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2dJRMozf5
    It will be interesting to see if the exchange opening date is delayed ... and the enrollment period has to be similarly extended.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  8. #38
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,896

    Default

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/...and_means.html
    Interesting premise in this article.

    The Supreme Court is not always right. Laws are not always right. The SCOTUS upheld the "separate but equal" law. That didn't make the law "right". The Supreme Court was wrong in that judgment.

    The Supreme Court really ruled on one small portion of O-care. That doesn't mean the law is right. That also doesn't mean the Supreme Court was right ... since its decision was based on interpreting the word "penalty", verbatim, as written in the law, to actually mean "tax".
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  9. #39
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,896

    Default

    Another unintended consequence:
    Up until now professional organizations have worked with insurance providers to craft reduced-rate plans for their members. But thanks to the fine print in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), on January 1, 2014, many of these plans will fail to pass legal muster.

    The College Art Association website posted a notice this month: “The New York Life Insurance Company recently informed CAA that it will no longer offer catastrophic healthcare coverage previously available to CAA members.” Why? Because it “is no longer an option” for “associations whose members reside in different states” to provide such coverage. These members will have to seek help from their home states’ newly formed Obamacare exchanges. Plans offered to Modern Language Association (MLA) members will suffer a similar fate.
    So these previously insured people will now end up in the exchanges and be eligible for subsidies if their income merits that ... which, in many cases for "artists", that would be likely.

    These individuals were happy to have catastrophic coverage only, which is no longer an option for them.

    Do you think that the young, healthy ones might just opt to pay the fine?
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  10. #40
    Senior Member luvmylabs23139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    Another unintended consequence:

    So these previously insured people will now end up in the exchanges and be eligible for subsidies if their income merits that ... which, in many cases for "artists", that would be likely.

    These individuals were happy to have catastrophic coverage only, which is no longer an option for them.

    Do you think that the young, healthy ones might just opt to pay the fine?
    We currenty have an 80/20 plan with a $3500 deductable. Works for us as we have banked 2 years worth of max out of pocket costs. BUT per BUMFACE that is no good. They just released some base rate for NC and a 60/40 plan will be more per month with the same deductable minus his required "freebies".
    Still waiting for our $ to the clostest plan to what we have now but will be a ton more. We will loose our healthy customer discount because BUMFACE says we have to pay for the overweht blobs.
    Hihope Hiland Heathen of Perth CD, RE, CGC, TDI

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •