The Unaffordable Care Act

The nice folks at Investor's Business Daily also wrote:

"People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."

Of course Stephen Hawking is a UK citizen. Turns out that on the subject of ObamaCare, Investor's Business Daily is essentially worthless.

Why yes, I am and yes I do. I have been fucked twice by "health insurance" in my life. The system is fundamentally dishonest and designed to cheat the consumer and now Obama is going to force me to buy a shitty product from a dishonest company so I can get screwed yet again. You can't have a workable healthcare system when the starting proposition is we have to guarantee unending and ever increasing profits for insurance companies, hospital companies and pharmaceutical companies. That is the proposition Obama started with. I'd also say the young person is worse off than they were before because their wallets would be fatter from all the premiums they didn't have to pay for a shitty product that still leaves them bankrupt under the old system.

So you want to say it is going to get better in 2015, but it was supposed to get better in 2014. You need to look at the writing on the wall there is a reason all these provisions are being rolled back and that is because Obama wants to artificially hold down the premiums to make it look good because the real numbers aren't looking good. In a lot of these states that fall under the Federal exchanges there are hardly any companies offering any policies and those that do are just offering the Bronze plan.

Right now Obama needs the insurance companies more than they need him that is why he was willing to offer up cancer patients and other really sick folks in 2014 as the sacrificial lambs in an uncapped year. I mean no harm no foul right ask a cancer patient to pay an extra 50k a year out of pocket until insurance companies figure out how to make computers talk to each other. How anybody could buy such a load of horse crap is beyond me it defies common sense.

And the real long term con is the change in thinking he has caused as people suddenly think of an 80/20 plan with a $2500 out of pocket yearly cap as a "Cadillac" plan instead of the norm. The new norm is a 60/40 plan with a $6,250 out of pocket yearly cap and that costs every person that has insurance more money every year. That is how he fleeced everybody so he could guarantee the profits for the insurance companies.

Really? Nobody outside Congress is being subsidized by their employer for the full amount of their health insurance? Thats likely news to every wall street trader, lawyer, Google employee, or millions of other people.

But I'm happy to join hands with Don Diego and say members of Congress aren't worthy of that full subsidy...especially the ones who preach about how the system they use for their family is so awful for everyone else.

"All aboard ! "

There's news on Obamacare. In the 36 States in which the Federal Government is running the insurance exchanges, the prospective health insurance purchaser cannot be provided the correct price.

From the Wall Street Journal: "Pricing Glitch Afflicts Rollout of Online Health Exchanges":
"Less than two weeks before the launch of insurance marketplaces created by the federal health overhaul, the government's software can't reliably determine how much people need to pay for coverage, according to insurance executives and people familiar with the program.
Four people familiar with the development of the software that determines how much people would pay for subsidized coverage on the federally run exchanges said it was still miscalculating prices. Tests on the calculator initially scheduled to begin months ago only started this week at some insurers, according to insurance executives and two people familiar with development efforts.
'There's a blanket acknowledgment that rates are being calculated incorrectly,' said one senior health-insurance executive who asked not to be named. 'Our tech and operations people are very concerned about the problems they're seeing and the potential of them to stick around.'"

Ref: Wall Street Journal

Where is this heh' train gonna end up?

pj, . . . pj, . . . pj.

i. DonDiego did not state that "[n]obody outside Congress is being subsidized by their employer for the full amount of their health insurance." Lots of folks receive such employment benefits. DonDiego does not care if a private employer pays for the health insurance, life insurance, car insurance, et cterea of their employees. In fact, DonDiego is happy for such employees, including wall street traders, lawyers, Google employees, and millions of others.
Because, so far as DonDiego knows no one is violating the law and the taxpayer is not paying for it.

ii. It is not an issue of whether Congressfolks are "worthy" of a subsidy; it is a question of following the Law. [Incidentally, it is not a "full subsidy"; the subsidy is supposed to be equivalent to that which Congressfolks presently receive on their FEHB plans; DonDiego doesn't know exactly how to calculate the subsidy to be "equivalent", since the policies are different, . . . but, heckfire, they're just making it up as they go along anyway.]

iii. DonDiego has not heard any Congressperson say: " . . . the system they use for their family is so awful for everyone else." Perhaps pjstroh can cite a source.


It is clear in the DonDiego post which pjstroh quoted, above, that DonDiego is speaking of the Obamacare Law.
__The Obamacare Law requires Congressfolks to obtain heath insurance through Obamacare exchanges.
__The Obamacare Law provides subsidies based solely upon income. Congressfolks incomes exceed the maximum for which a subsidy is provided. [Technically, because the Government is sufficiently incompetent that it cannot determine the income of Obamacare applicants this year anyone can claim a subsidy. The plan is being applied assuming applicants have subscribed to "the honor system"; DonDiego expects each applicant to be honest, as well.]
__The Law provides no subsidy for Congressfolks who are required to obtain health insurance through Obamacare exchanges.
__The legislators who entered this provision into the Law were clear that it was the intention of this provision that there be no subsidy. [The reason this provision was added was to dissuade legislators from voting for the Law.]
__It was clear at the time this provision was placed into the Law that there would be no such subsidy. [Of course the Law had to be passed to find out what was in it.]
__It was clear at the time that the Law was passed that there would be no such subsidy. [Of course the Law had to be passed to find out what was in it.]
__After the Law was passed Government and Private lawyers interpreting the Law agreed there was no provision for such a subsidy. [The Law had been passed and they found out what was in it.]
__During a Congressional recess, the President ordered the Office of Personnel Management to "rule" that Congressfolks are eligible for the subsidy.
__The subsidy prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management for Congressfolks bears no relation to the subsidies detailed in the Law for citizens. The subsidy is designed to provide an equivalent amount to that which Congressfolks have been receiving through the FEHB Plan. No one else in the Country receives a similar taxpayer-provided subsidy.

QED

Don Diego, I'm going to let you in on a little known secret: Members of Congress are employees of the Federal Government. Their salaries and benefits are paid as part of the same social contract you had with any previous employer at any private company. You correctly cite the law does not provide a subsidy for Federal Employees (or any private employees) beyond income requirements...and that is relevant how exactly? The Federal government has decided to pay some of their employees with benefits that go beyond the legislative requirements. Many private companies have too. Is this somehow illegal as Don Diego suggests? Um...no.

Don Diego's big complaint is the Federal Government has decided to give Congress premium access to health insurance with the collective taxpayers dime. A worthy gripe, in my opinion. But I'm going to let Don Diego in on another little known secret: that is no different from the deal they had before. Killing the AFA will not address Don Diego's big gripe regarding Congress' cushy government run health exchange program.

Sorry, my mistake I was wrong. I thought I had read it that congress voted themselves a different health ins. plan.

J

oops oops. duplicate duplicate

J J

What DonDiego's "complaint" is has nothing to do with the issue. [Why does pjstroh find it necessary to address DonDiego's "complaint"? Pr'bly for the same reason Chilcoot has to address what DonDiego "means".]

What private companies do has nothing to do with the issue. Private companies may compensate their employees as they wish [e.g. General Motors]. Even cities may compensate their employees as they wish [e.g. Detroit].

Prior to the passage of Obamacare all [note i.] civilian federal employees were eligible to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program (FEHB). This included Congresspersons. Under FEHB federal employees may select one of several group health plans in each state, plans offered by the same insurance carriers that service many corporations or some carriers that specialize in government plans. When one is engaged in selecting a plan the cost is presented and broken down into the amount the Government will pay and the amount the employee is responsible for. All the Government costs are authorized by Law. Law passed by Congress. Only Congress may authorize Government expenditures.

Obamacare explicitly denies Congresspersons and their staffs from participating in the FEHB program. It goes further, it explicitly states Congresspersons must obtain their health insurance from an Obamacare exchange. The Law does not provide for any subsidies in addition to those already authorized in the Obamacare legislation.

Congress authorizes Congressional compensation by Law. To change Congressional compensation requires a Law, . . . e.g. Congress must vote itself a raise. [Does pjstroh actually believe that if Congress did not have to vote themselves a raise they would? Every time they vote themselves a raise it makes headlines, . . . negative headlines.] Congress did not vote themselves additional compensation; no Law has been passed to include compensation for health insurance. Heckfire, Congress was in recess when it happened.
President Obama does not have the authority to grant Congress additional compensation; the likely source of such authority would be the Obamacare Law. If the President were to have such power he could raise/lower any federal employees salary at his pleasure. He cannot.

Does DonDiego expect this to be corrected? No. Why would Congress want to? It's free stuff.

Congress has been given a subsidy which no one else receives in direct contradiction of the provisions of Obamacare.
That was the issue (not complaint); Congress has received special treatment in spite of Congresspersons' denials.



note i: DonDiego supposes there may be some federal employees covered by something unique, e.g. those exposed to on-the-job hazards, or denied the FEHB program, e.g. part-time employees, but for purposes of this discussion it makes no difference.

jatki99 was not wrong.

Congress did vote themselves a different health insurance plan. It is called Obamacare.