There you go conservatives: Obamacare is failing

The failings of Obamacare are the failings of private insurance. With single payer there wouldn't be anything to sign-up for because everybody would automatically be signed up . The part of Obamacare that is doing well is the Medicaid expansion, but the private insurance side is failing, Nobody wants expensive Insurance with huge deductibles, large co-pays and and a narrow network of providers. Don't blame all the problems on the website people are seeing what the polices provide vs. what they cost and are deciding not to the get polices. Expect a rather large 2015 premium increase.

Indeed, many Obamacare applicants with very low incomes are discovering that when they apply for Obamacare they are automatically enrolled into Medicaid. Some have objected, . . . but so what; one gets what Obamacare says one gets, even if it's Medicaid.

Unfortunately the Government has gotten into the habit of lowering Medicaid remuneration to physician's delivering healthcare, . . . and, as a result, doctors are choosing not to see new Medicaid patients. So some poor folks who wanted an Obamacare policy, . . . were automatically enrolled into Medicaid instead, . . . and may have difficulty finding a doctor who'll see them.

What a Country !

[DonDiego is Home. He should not be posting as the fair lady teechur anymore.]

Another silly post by DonDiego.

Extending Medicaid to low income people without regard to their age only increases their treatment options. These are the people who are totally uncovered now, who haven't been able to purchase insurance because it's been too expensive. If you think it's challenging to get a doctor who accepts Medicaid, try finding one who accepts no payment at all!

And remember, a person who qualifies for Medicaid remains free to purchase coverage from a private insurer though the exchange, if they choose and can afford it.

Ahhhhh, but of course! People with Medicaid now were so much better off before when they're insurance was ....nothing. I bet they whole heartedly agree too!

Basically, what this elitist DonDiego is saying is that we shouldn't bring burgers to the starving people because they're just Whoppers . . .



and not Wagyu Kobe with a chipotle aïoli.

I decided to offer up some facts: this is what healthcare.gov generates for me using my data. (Note these results don't include any subsidies that I may or may not be entitled to.) The rates are for one adult male age 45, and I am a nonsmoker. As you can see there are a total of 15 plans available to me but only from one company. There are no platinum plans available where I live. Note the high deductibles, high out of pocket costs and high co-pays. Of particular note is the $50 co-pay on the primary physician charges plus a 40% coinsurance once I have met my deductible. My primary physician currently only charges me $65 cash price for the entire visit If I pay her in full for the visit. In other words I could easily end up spending more out of pocket on simple primary care physician visits with the insurance vs. no insurance. If you are wondering why people aren't signing up this is why. The product sucks!!

Premiums mean NOTHING until subsidies are factored in. For the same reason Vegas room rates mean nothing until resort fees are factored in.

What insurance did you have in 2013? What did it cover? What did it cost?

And is $750 really a high annual deductible for health insurance? Seriously?

Wait, what happened to your wife with the pre-existing conditions and the huge medical bills? Obviously, if you had included your wife (and a daughter?), Obamacare for you would be the bargain of the century, right? Even before any subsidies. Even in Indiana.

If you give a damn about paying your medical bills and your wife's health, you'll sign up.

Unless you live in a state that didn't expand Medicaid and have income below the poverty level or above 144% of it in which case what you see is what you pay.

I did find it more than a little ironic that the abbreviated name for the first plan Mal shows is "caca"...

I have 5 years on Mal and live in the same state and get rates that pretty much mirror his, but about $50 higher. However I smoke, and they don't have any option to show that rate, so who knows what it would really be for me. What I find odd is that I checked soon after the exchange went live and found rates starting at about $300, (lower than what I'm getting now), WITH tobacco use. Based on the prices I saw a month ago I decided to keep what I already had, (It's OK, Obama told me I could).

I have a high deductible policy with my deductible being $5,500, but once I reach my deductible I'm covered 100%. From what I can see the co-pay's and maximum out of pocket expenses with these plans are not all that different from my paying everything up to my deductible, and may actually cost me more. I did the math a long time ago and found that frequently the "high deductible" policies ended up costing close to the same amount for the maximum out of pocket as purportedly "better" plans.

Prior to this summer my cost was $174 a month, which rose to $215 in July. Earlier this fall Anthem gave me a choice of either keeping the same plan at the same price through June at which point the plan would be terminated, or pay an increased premium of $251 per month to be able to keep my existing plan for another year, (I'm not sure if it could or could not continue after that; guess I'll find out a year from now). From all the choices I was finding I opted to stick with my current plan at $251 per month. I don't know for sure, but I suspect I'm still subject to the whims of Anthem if I ever have a large claim and they could try to rescind my policy for frivolous reasons, but I'll cross that bridge if I ever get to it.

I never considered the PPACA to be a solution for all of the countries healthcare woes, but changing the status quo is the first critical step in an overall reform of the system. The fact that it didn't help me personally, at least currently, is of no concern to me. We spend far more than any other developed nation on healthcare as a percentage of GDP with results that usually chart well below that of most others. This is but one small step in what is going to be a many years long battle.

Will next years premium costs rise? Perhaps, but I'd be inclined to believe their is an equal chance it will go in the other direction. Some providers are staying off the exchange because of uncertainty in how many people will enroll, which, at least here, leaves Anthem with a monopoly in much of the state, (there are other options available for some counties). Because of the subsidies there is also an incentive for the insurers to make premium rates higher than they might otherwise, knowing that most people will be pleased to see how much the rates fall when the subsidies are applied. But the new law also limits how much insurers can profit each year, so if their income turns out to be higher than expected then rates will have to fall.

The fact of the matter is the PPACA is the law of the land and it isn't going anywhere. Even if there is a shift in the controlling powers in 2016 it may end up being tweaked, but full repeal is unlikely when the end result would be millions of people who would lose their health insurance. Personally, I'd really like to see the arguments shift away from something we can't do anything about, and unto the other issues of healthcare that are the cause of spiraling healthcare costs.

This article where a woman was charged $83,046 for a 3 hour hospital visit for two scorpion anti-venom shots which would have cost her $200.00 in Mexico is a fine example of out of control costs. Or how about KV Parmaceutical who received FDA approval and a 7 year exclusivity for a drug that helped prevent premature birth which had long been prescribed "off label" and compounded by pharmacists for about $10-$15 per dose and promptly raised the price to $1,500 per injection, (with 15-20 injections being needed for a typical case). A recent news report showed the price for a 1 month supply of a generic drug varying from $11 to $455, but since many people only have a small co-pay for prescriptions most are unaware of the vast difference in pricing. A while back I posted an article about people going to other countries for knee or hip replacement, in some cases getting first class service at the same time, and paying about 10%-15% of what the same operation would cost in the U.S.

The higher the costs are, the more insurers can raise premiums. The higher the premiums, the more money they can make. I'm pretty sure they'd rather make 20% of a billion dollars than 20% of a million. And all of us are paying for this, one way or another.

Insurance company profit margins are about 5% of revenue, so insurance company profits are not the problem.

Almost 30% of the medical costs in this country are incurred by 5% of the population. Until we figure out a way to handle this, medical costs and in turn insurance costs are going to be high. As the population ages medical costs will continue to be higher.

It looks like no matter what maliber picks he will be paying in the $12-$15,000 range for insurance and out of pocket; certainly not the cheap coverage that obama promised.