Obamacare cost...

[VirginiaCougar]

Obamacare's Website Is Crashing Because It Doesn't Want You To Know How Costly Its Plans Are



http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth...ns-true-costs/

It has been really funny to see these complaints about the cost of insurance on the health exchanges. The rates are expensive for some, very true, but that is also the most market based part of the plan. It is the market that is causing those high prices - the same reason healthcare is so expensive in the US. We have the most market based system among advanced industrialized nations and the highest costs by far. Markets don't play nice with goods that are inherently inelastic.

I wonder if many of those complaining about costs realize what it is that they are really saying - the implications of their complaints.

[SandYFan]

It has been really funny to see these complaints about the cost of insurance on the health exchanges. The rates are expensive for some, very true, but that is also the most market based part of the plan. It is the market that is causing those high prices - the same reason healthcare is so expensive in the US. We have the most market based system among advanced industrialized nations and the highest costs by far. Markets don't play nice with goods that are inherently inelastic.

I wonder if many of those complaining about costs realize what it is that they are really saying - the implications of their complaints.

Are you seriously arguing that the reason rates are expensive for some people is because of the free market?

This may be the dumbest thing you have ever posted.

[VirginiaCougar]

Are you seriously arguing that the reason rates are expensive for some people is because of the free market?

This may be the dumbest thing you have ever posted.

Exchanges = a type of market. That is why the Republicans initially proposed the idea back in the day. They called it the market response to Hillarycare. I know it may be uncomfortable, but there you go.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

It has been really funny to see these complaints about the cost of insurance on the health exchanges. The rates are expensive for some, very true, but that is also the most market based part of the plan. It is the market that is causing those high prices - the same reason healthcare is so expensive in the US. We have the most market based system among advanced industrialized nations and the highest costs by far. Markets don't play nice with goods that are inherently inelastic.

I wonder if many of those complaining about costs realize what it is that they are really saying - the implications of their complaints.

Yet the same market the year before Obamacare offers catastrophic coverage for a fraction of the Obamacare Bronze plan. I don't think you have the slightest clue about the market distortions present in healthcare that produces these high costs. There is inelastic demand in all kinds of different goods and you don't see the price explosion that has taken place in healthcare in the last 30 years. Milk is a fairly inelastic good yet it remains relatively cheap because there are different producers in competition with each other to meet demand. The reality is that inelastic demand doesn't play nice when a producer is able to engage in monopoly pricing. A big part of the reason why they can engage in monopoly pricing is because the health insurance system diffuses the costs to the employers/population in general so the end consumer has zero say over the pricing. A lot more people have to pay dentists, optometrists and plastic surgeons out of pocket and therefore the related costs in these fields have tracked much closer to inflation. They have to price according to what competition dictates along with what people can pay. What they charge people cannot be diffused to the population in general.

The only area where there is true inelastic demand is emergency care. In this facet, healthcare resembles more of a utility where there would inherently be monopoly pricing. But I'm sure ERCougar would be okay with regulation of his particular field.

Cancer treatment, heart doctors, most of anesthesiology, dermatology, radiology, etc. all of this stuff could be cheaper if these guys were subject to market forces affecting their prices.

[Katy Lied]

It has been really funny to see these complaints about the cost of insurance on the health exchanges. The rates are expensive for some, very true, but that is also the most market based part of the plan. It is the market that is causing those high prices - the same reason healthcare is so expensive in the US. We have the most market based system among advanced industrialized nations and the highest costs by far. Markets don't play nice with goods that are inherently inelastic.

I wonder if many of those complaining about costs realize what it is that they are really saying - the implications of their complaints.

Are you calling the US health care industry, fraught with regulations and litigation liability, a free market? I notice that you've avoided the term "free."

[Eddie]

It has been really funny to see these complaints about the cost of insurance on the health exchanges. The rates are expensive for some, very true, but that is also the most market based part of the plan. It is the market that is causing those high prices - the same reason healthcare is so expensive in the US. We have the most market based system among advanced industrialized nations and the highest costs by far. Markets don't play nice with goods that are inherently inelastic.

I wonder if many of those complaining about costs realize what it is that they are really saying - the implications of their complaints.

I think they know what they are saying. They are saying that it used to cost less before the government got involved. The implications of that complaint are pretty clear.

Exchanges = a type of market. That is why the Republicans initially proposed the idea back in the day. They called it the market response to Hillarycare. I know it may be uncomfortable, but there you go.

You may not have noticed, but at least they figured out the idea was a dumb one before making it law.

OK - that last comment I was just trying to be funny. This isn't about republicans or democrats to me. This is about my shrinking wallet as the cost of living goes up and my take home pay stays the same. And this is one more aspect of people's take home pay shrinking.

I tend to think that health care is a huge problem that has gotten way out of hand. Frankly, I'm not sure how to fix it either. But what I do know is that the ACA does not seem to be the answer. My insurance rates were increasing fast enough BEFORE that piece of legislation.

[Goatnapper'96]

It has been really funny to see these complaints about the cost of insurance on the health exchanges. The rates are expensive for some, very true, but that is also the most market based part of the plan. It is the market that is causing those high prices - the same reason healthcare is so expensive in the US. We have the most market based system among advanced industrialized nations and the highest costs by far. Markets don't play nice with goods that are inherently inelastic.

I wonder if many of those complaining about costs realize what it is that they are really saying - the implications of their complaints.

It is market based upon laws that prevent insurers from using risk when assessing rates. That is partly what insurance is, but the market response would be that people with conditions that make them more expensive to insure pay more - however part of the law was to stop this. However, the money to cover those folks for both insurance and the fact that the dorky actuaries are correct that they will actually cost more in actual health care costs still has to come from somewhere. While there is enough healthy people for a vibrant market the law forces that market to absorb the costs of those whose previous insurance costs took into account their higher risk.

And yes I think the point people are making is that this law was sold under the false pretense that when absorbing those folks whose costs previously included allowing insurers to take risk into account there would be no significant increase to the rest of the pool. However, it is foolish for anyone to have believed it so while I can understand jumping Obama for essentially lying, only a dumbass couldn't spot the lie in the first place.

[Katy Lied]

the dorky actuaries are correct

I think most of us read this as:

the dorky actuaries are correct

While Indy reads it:

the dorky actuaries are correct

[Uncle Ted]

Even the New York Times is negative about the Obamacare portal... The Dems need to make some phone calls and get this article pulled.

In March, Henry Chao, the chief digital architect for the Obama administration’s new online insurance marketplace, told industry executives that he was deeply worried about the Web site’s debut. “Let’s just make sure it’s not a third-world experience,” he told them.

Two weeks after the rollout, few would say his hopes were realized.


For the past 12 days, a system costing more than $400 million and billed as a one-stop click-and-go hub for citizens seeking health insurance has thwarted the efforts of millions to simply log in. The growing national outcry has deeply embarrassed the White House, which has refused to say how many people have enrolled through the federal exchange.


Even some supporters of the Affordable Care Act worry that the flaws in the system, if not quickly fixed, could threaten the fiscal health of the insurance initiative, which depends on throngs of customers to spread the risk and keep prices low.


“These are not glitches,” said an insurance executive who has participated in many conference calls on the federal exchange. Like many people interviewed for this article, the executive spoke on the condition of anonymity, saying he did not wish to alienate the federal officials with whom he works. “The extent of the problems is pretty enormous. At the end of our calls, people say, ‘It’s awful, just awful.' ”
[...]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/us...mentsContainer




Obama said "ship it" when it wasn't apparently ready...

Major insurers, state health-care officials and Democratic allies repeatedly warned the Obama administration in recent months that the new federal health-insurance exchange had significant problems, according to people familiar with the conversations. Despite those warnings and intense criticism from Republicans, the White House proceeded with an Oct. 1 launch.


A week after the federal Web site opened, technical problems continued to plague the system, and on Tuesday people were locked out until 10 a.m., although some applicants were able to sign up as the day went on. Officials said they were working 24 hours a day to improve the system and that they were confident it would soon be able to meet the demand. They added that there was ample time to correct the site to allow consumers to get insured by Jan. 1.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...administration

[Uncle Ted]

I really like what Senator Obama had to say about HillaryCare...

[CardiacCoug]

It has been really funny to see these complaints about the cost of insurance on the health exchanges. The rates are expensive for some, very true, but that is also the most market based part of the plan. It is the market that is causing those high prices - the same reason healthcare is so expensive in the US. We have the most market based system among advanced industrialized nations and the highest costs by far. Markets don't play nice with goods that are inherently inelastic.

I wonder if many of those complaining about costs realize what it is that they are really saying - the implications of their complaints.

You've said this before and it's so ridiculous.

What the hell kind of "market system" makes it damn near impossible for a consumer to find out the cost of a desired/needed service?

Where health "insurance" is involved in the US, even the most basic free market principles are absent. No cost transparency, very little incentive for consumers to seek out low costs, and very little incentive for providers to offer inexpensive care. That's not a market system.

[Jacob]

Exchanges = a type of market. That is why the Republicans initially proposed the idea back in the day. They called it the market response to Hillarycare. I know it may be uncomfortable, but there you go.

A type of market, yes. Unfortunately, not a free one.

[Jacob]

Maybe this ended up in a different thread, but I was able to finally, after 40 or so attempts, see a price estimate, though not an actual price on the healthcare.gov website. I am currently in an unhealthy pool with my employer, meaning that health insurance costs me more because I am lumped in with less healthy people at work. I hoped that maybe being lumped in on the federal exchange my rate would at least not go up. Wrong. They were very vague on the coverage offered, but it appeared, that to get a little less coverage than I have now, I would have to pay an extra $300 per month on the federal exchange. And almost double what I could have got for myself on the open market last year on a private family plan. So, that's an extra $3,600 per year for me, or an extra $7,00 compared to the private market last year. This may end up being one of the biggest taxes levied on middle and up Americans in a long, long time. Or the biggest wealth transfer in a long time, if the rumors of the subsidies are accurate.

[il Padrino Ute]

Maybe this ended up in a different thread, but I was able to finally, after 40 or so attempts, see a price estimate, though not an actual price on the healthcare.gov website. I am currently in an unhealthy pool with my employer, meaning that health insurance costs me more because I am lumped in with less healthy people at work. I hoped that maybe being lumped in on the federal exchange my rate would at least not go up. Wrong. They were very vague on the coverage offered, but it appeared, that to get a little less coverage than I have now, I would have to pay an extra $300 per month on the federal exchange. And almost double what I could have got for myself on the open market last year on a private family plan. So, that's an extra $3,600 per year for me, or an extra $7,00 compared to the private market last year. This may end up being one of the biggest taxes levied on middle and up Americans in a long, long time. Or the biggest wealth transfer in a long time, if the rumors of the subsidies are accurate.

May be?

[Jacob]

So I finally finished my taxes for this year and I was surprised to get a refund. Feels great. Only reason I'm posting this is to update my last post. My total federal income tax liability for the year was only $4,736. A $300 per month premium bump is $3,600 per year. The result is an increase 76% on my tax bill. Opponents of O-care should be hyping this as the tax increase that it is.