CBS: ObamaCare forcing millions to lose their insurance

posted at 8:01 am on October 25, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

And that number comes from a UCLA expert interviewed by CBS who supports the ironically-titled Affordable Care Act.  Around 14 million people buy their own health insurance on the individual markets, which is actually about the same as the true number of Americans uninsured by circumstance rather than choice.  Half of those insured will lose that insurance thanks to the mandates imposed by ObamaCare, and will get forced to buy new policies.  UCLA public health policy director Gerry Kominski says that they will get a better product with more protection, but don’t tell that to Natalie Willes:

“I was completely happy with the insurance I had before,” Willes said.

So she was surprised when she tried to renew her policy. What did she find out?

“That my insurance was going to be completely different, and they were going to be replaced with 10 new plans that were going to fall under the regulations of the Affordable Care Act,” she said.

Her insurer, Kaiser Permanente, is terminating policies for 160,000 people in California and presenting them with new plans that comply with the healthcare law.

“Before I had a plan that I had a $1,500 deductible,” she said. “I paid $199 dollars a month. The most similar plan that I would have available to me would be $278 a month. My deductible would be $6,500 dollars, and all of my care after that point would only be covered 70 percent.”

Do the math here.  Willes will have to pay $948 more a year for the new policy, but that’s not all.  She will also have to another $5,000 extra on top of that to get past the deductible each year before she gets any benefit from the policy at all. If she’s reasonably healthy, all of her medical costs will get paid straight out of her pocket, on top of her insurance policy costs which will now total $3,336, or almost a cool $10,000 after the deductible before she sees any benefit at all.

Who’d bother to buy insurance under those conditions? Only the sick and infirm, or those who suddenly get that way and can now force insurers to cover them when they need care.  The website is only the portal to much larger problems, and Americans who suddenly experience the trauma of sticker shock will not be pleased to live through what Barack Obama and Democrats have done to their finances.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The website is only the portal to much larger problems, and Americans who suddenly experience the trauma of sticker shock will not be pleased to live through what Barack Obama and Democrats have done to their finances.

The left will just blame Republicans and the masses will all nod in agreement.

Gatsu on October 25, 2013 at 8:06 AM

And that number comes from a UCLA expert interviewed by CBS who supports the ironically-titled Affordable Care Act.

Data point #1,284,659 that this was intentional to destroy the private health insurance industry. And the industry executives don’t care because they’ll go from being held accountable executives to unaccountable bureaucrats.

rbj on October 25, 2013 at 8:06 AM

This is the reason that I have zero intention of signing up for this boondoggle. It isn’t worth it in the first place, so why risk putting out all of your identity online to a website that doesn’t even work? You have to be crazy to trust the security of this system given all that is already going wrong.

Mord on October 25, 2013 at 8:08 AM

The left will just blame Republicans and the masses will all nod in agreement.

Gatsu on October 25, 2013 at 8:06 AM

They’ll try, but it’ll be a tough sell. It’s well-established that Republicans have opposed Obamacare every step of the way. And the mere fact that its nickname, Obamacare, is widely used even by journalists sympathetic to Obama certainly won’t help the Dems distance themselves from this disaster.

Doughboy on October 25, 2013 at 8:10 AM

“If you like your health insurance, you can keep it” — Comrade O, Socialist-Liar-In-Chief.

This cannot possibly be true when the government dictates what health insurance plans health insurance companies must provide, and there are only four of them.

Comrade O was lying.

farsighted on October 25, 2013 at 8:11 AM

No wonder zero is ready to start talking about amnesty why not. He shoved 0 care up our torsos now its time for amnesty! And the sad thing is there are pubbies ready to bend over…. again.

rodguy911 on October 25, 2013 at 8:12 AM

…where’s the… “I told you so?”

KOOLAID2 on October 25, 2013 at 8:13 AM

The website is only the portal to much larger problems, and Americans who suddenly experience the trauma of sticker shock will not be pleased to live through what Barack Obama and Democrats have done to their finances.

Which is why the surrender weasels were dead wrong two weeks ago. There was a point to be made about how wrong Obamacare is. The GOP could have made it but cowards got in the way of doing what was right.

Happy Nomad on October 25, 2013 at 8:13 AM

I feel like I live in an alternate universe……where was this reporting in 2009 you liars at CBS????

When you find a Progressive…..vote with your pocketbook…..or viewing choice.

PappyD61 on October 25, 2013 at 8:14 AM

Guess the bigger question is how will the regime enforce the penalities for those who refuse to bend over. Tax refunds will work. But wage garnishments may become necessary as taxpayers start claiming 0 to avoid 0care penalties.Stealing from one’s paycheck/401K will be a pretty sight.No wonder he needed 16K more IRS agents.The brownshirt patrol is alive and well.

rodguy911 on October 25, 2013 at 8:17 AM

Ken Cuccinnelli had a great line in last night’s debate. He said he’s for puppies but he doesn’t bring one home without a plan about how to take care of it (pointing out that McAuliffe is all hat and no horse). The media is deliberately missing the point and reporting this morning that Cuccinnelli likes puppies.

Obamacare is much the same thing. It is clear that there isn’t any real plan as to how to implement what has been promised. But the media is out there pretending that the math makes sense.

Happy Nomad on October 25, 2013 at 8:18 AM

No wonder he needed 16K more IRS agents.The brownshirt patrol is alive and well.

rodguy911 on October 25, 2013 at 8:17 AM

…Acorn has to work!

KOOLAID2 on October 25, 2013 at 8:18 AM

As Obama famously said about someone’s mother getting treatment, perhaps Natalie Willes doesn’t have to go to a doctor for treatment she can just stock up on pain pills.

Nomas on October 25, 2013 at 8:19 AM

As Obama famously said about someone’s mother getting treatment, perhaps Natalie Willes doesn’t have to go to a doctor for treatment she can just stock up on pain pills.

Nomas on October 25, 2013 at 8:19 AM

You can buy a lot of pain pills for $10K a year.

Happy Nomad on October 25, 2013 at 8:25 AM

To all you Obama voters…Free is Expensive…morons…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:28 AM

Does Anyone have a running total on the number of people that have lost their health insurance over this slow motion train wreck ?

brads01 on October 25, 2013 at 8:29 AM

UCLA public health policy director Gerry Kominski says that they will get a better product with more protection, but don’t tell that to Natalie Willes:

I think someone should point Nancy to the opinion of Gerry Kominski and inform her that he is the public health policy director at UCLA. I am not sure where she gets the idea she can decide on her own what product suits her.

DaveDief on October 25, 2013 at 8:29 AM

Witch Doctors…seeing a surge in patients…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:30 AM

“That my insurance was going to be completely different, and they were going to be replaced with 10 new plans that were going to fall under the regulations of the Affordable Care Act,” she said.

It’s the Obamacare regulations that are causing premiums to explode. It’s the regulations that should be challenged next. Class action suit. It’s one thing to to have the SC call it a tax in theory. It’s another thing to have 14,000,000 actual victims of Obamacare law.

monalisa on October 25, 2013 at 8:30 AM

Just imagine all the money that is going to be sucked out of the economy and re-directed to pay ObamaCare plans.

Recession…permanent.

albill on October 25, 2013 at 8:30 AM

You can buy a lot of pain pills for $10K a year.

Happy Nomad on October 25, 2013 at 8:25 AM

Not really.
My calculations come in at around 550 pills. While it may seem like alot, if you have a chronic condition that requires 2 pills or more a day…

astonerii on October 25, 2013 at 8:30 AM

Vulnerable Dems will pay for this in 2014 make no mistake – maybe not to the extent that it flips control to McConnell but it will be painful nonetheless. The panic is building among them and is evidenced by their sudden flip on delaying the mandate. But a mandate delay still won’t bring back someones policy that’s being cancelled or bring down their certain to rise premiums. The only thing that I can figure is that they’re just now realizing that Obama/Pelosi/Reid lied to them and lied to them good. Ben Domenech is fond of saying that something will come after Obamacare, the only question is what – as more and more Dems jump ship it becomes clear to me that it will something that is not in the direction that the Dems would have preferred.

volnation on October 25, 2013 at 8:30 AM

Millions to lose health policies…and half of them are Obama voters…karma is a bitch…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:31 AM

Paging VerbalDouche, according to her Nobody was losing their plans, that was all Faux News propaganda.

BeachBum on October 25, 2013 at 8:31 AM

Of NY’s new enrollees, 64% are for Medicaid.

wow

Hard to believe that the inevitable collapse was not by design (unintelligent design).

mjbrooks3 on October 25, 2013 at 8:32 AM

Millions to lose health policies…and half of them are Obama voters…karma…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:32 AM

How shocking that people are not enjoying paying the high price for all those “free” new coverages Obama promised.

“Free” birth control, “free” mammograms, “free” colonoscopies! Obamacare was going to make health care so much better by requiring health insurance companies to provide all these “free” preventative products and services.

How did people think the insurance companies were going to pay for all this new mandated “free” stuff? Did they imagine that insurance companies have secret groves of trees on which they grow cost-free birth control pills and mammogram machines and gastroenterologists?

If this country were not full of economic illiterates, we wouldn’t be in this mess. Instead, we’ve got idiots who think Obama pays for government give-away programs with his magic “stash” of unlimited cash voting for corrupt politicians who are even more economically illiterate than the fools who elect them.

AZCoyote on October 25, 2013 at 8:34 AM

Millions to lose health policies…and half of them are Obama voters…karma…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:32 AM

No, Karma would be if all of them were voters for the lazy stupid coward. As it is, the math really doesn’t work if millions are losing health insurance and hundreds of thousands sign up for Obamacare.

Happy Nomad on October 25, 2013 at 8:34 AM

A major political victory is that even Dems are calling this “Obamacare”.

mjbrooks3 on October 25, 2013 at 8:34 AM

Do the math here. Willes will have to pay $948 more a year for the new policy, but that’s not all. She will also have to another $5,000 extra on top of that to get past the deductible each year before she gets any benefit from the policy at all. If she’s reasonably healthy, all of her medical costs will get paid straight out of her pocket, on top of her insurance policy costs which will now total $3,336, or almost a cool $10,000 after the deductible before she sees any benefit at all.

“But…but…but Ted Cruz!!..Wacko Birds!!…Shutdown, default!!!…ELVENTY!!!”
/Libtards

Bitter Clinger on October 25, 2013 at 8:35 AM

Of NY’s new enrollees, 64% are for Medicaid.

wow

Hard to believe that the inevitable collapse was not by design (unintelligent design).

That story was out this morning…in a lot of states the Medicaid enrollment is up 87%!!!…the system will collapse before they get the stupid website working…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:35 AM

Not really.
My calculations come in at around 550 pills. While it may seem like alot, if you have a chronic condition that requires 2 pills or more a day…

astonerii on October 25, 2013 at 8:30 AM

Yeah but God forbid that she would be allowed to stay on her current plan.

Happy Nomad on October 25, 2013 at 8:36 AM

Paging VerbalDouche, according to her Nobody was losing their plans, that was all Faux News propaganda.

BeachBum on October 25, 2013 at 8:31 AM

“CBS are racist liars”
/VerbalDouche

Bitter Clinger on October 25, 2013 at 8:37 AM

Just imagine all the money that is going to be sucked out of the economy and re-directed to pay ObamaCare plans.

Recession…permanent.

albill on October 25, 2013 at 8:30 AM

Racist. How dare you point out the flaws in dear leader’s wisdom.

Happy Nomad on October 25, 2013 at 8:37 AM

When this is mentioned on a lefty site, the standard retort is..well, they had crappy plans anyway so now they have a better one. Total BS, if these plans worked for the people who had and covered catastrophic illness then who are they to say you need more to cover hang nails and arome therapy.

BeachBum on October 25, 2013 at 8:37 AM

If this keep’s up…and it will only get worse…the people will be screaming for Zerocare to be repealed after the mid-terms…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:39 AM

What I find most fascinating about all of this is the almost total lack of awareness on this particular point on the left. I don’t know if they’re in denial, or willfully deceptive, or both. But pretending/believing the website is the only problem with this law is going to make for some interesting pretzel contortions by leftist media when they are forced to start reporting on the fact no one likes their new insurances options, and no one is buying.

There was this little gem buried in a Headline link yesterday that talked about how millennials might be turned off by ObamaCare. Of course the only thing they talked about in the article was the website problems.

“When all this stuff is behind us, and this thing is actually working and people are posting on Facebook that they just got health insurance … [Republicans] will be seen as criticizing and obstructing something that is demonstrably going to help people’s lives,” said Daniel Franklin, a Democratic pollster. “Where’s the win for them there?”

I’d like to smoke what these guys are smoking.

NotCoach on October 25, 2013 at 8:39 AM

arome = aroma

BeachBum on October 25, 2013 at 8:41 AM

“You’re paying more for a better product and for more protection — and you won’t understand the value of that until you need it,” he said.

Which is why we’re lucky to have the party of the elite dictating what we need.

kcewa on October 25, 2013 at 8:42 AM

Where

X= the no. of persons dropped from their health insurance policy

and

Y= the number of trolls appearing in HOTGAS threads to berate those on the right for not caring about impoverished Americans and illegal aliens

we find that where

X(X) over a denominator of 1 is equal to a numerator of 1 over a denominator of Y(Y) is the equivalent of …


TROLL FREE THREAD

M240H on October 25, 2013 at 8:43 AM

When the wind blows it whispers ‘Cruz’…

mjbrooks3 on October 25, 2013 at 8:43 AM

For those who haven’t been paying attention, Republicans had nothing to do with this monstrosity;

- Not a single Republican voted for it or supported the bill

Why didn’t they? Because this collapse was all predictable. Most people who foresaw the issues knew at a minimum people;

- Would NOT be able to keep their plan they liked
- The cost of coverage and deductibles would increase
- The cost would force some people put of the market
- Good people would be penalized by the IRS for not complying with this fiat
- The quality of care would decrease for most people

But the website doesn’t work?

That’s a strawman and the least of Obamacare’s problems.

Democrats and Obama are destroying the entire health care system for over 90% of the people for their utopian dream.

And we are lesser as a nation for it. This entire, sordid affair is despicable.

Marcus Traianus on October 25, 2013 at 8:43 AM

The website is the least of the problems…wait till people have to start forking out thousands of additional $$$ from their annual disposable income for basically no healthcare…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:44 AM

Of NY’s new enrollees, 64% are for Medicaid.

wow

Hard to believe that the inevitable collapse was not by design (unintelligent design).

That story was out this morning…in a lot of states the Medicaid enrollment is up 87%!!!…the system will collapse before they get the stupid website working…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:35 AM

NY is doing well compared to other states. Oregon reported 56,000 new “Obamacare” enrollees, 100% of whom were Medicaid sign-ups. Washington state reported that 90% of its new “Obamacare” sign-ups were Medicaid.

But what all these newly “insured” Medicaid enrollees don’t know is that few doctors will accept new Medicaid patients these days, because the government reimbursement rates are lower than what it actually costs doctors to treat these patients. So good luck using that new “free” health insurance, folks. You’re about to find out that it is worth exactly what you’re paying for it.

AZCoyote on October 25, 2013 at 8:44 AM

Data point #1,284,659 that this was intentional to destroy the private health insurance industry. And the industry executives don’t care because they’ll go from being held accountable executives to unaccountable bureaucrats.

rbj on October 25, 2013 at 8:06 AM

They’ve sort of made that change already. They are selling a product largely designed by the government, to whomever the government says they have to sell it to (and whoever they say has to buy it), and their ostensible bosses, the owners, are allowed to keep only the percentage of premiums specified by the government. Everyone involved in this process is practically a government employee already. The insurance companies under this law are PINO private in name only.

One of the many dangers with this law has always been that as the industry collapses, they’ll simply introduce more and more stringent regulations, but make sure to subsidize a few giant insurers provided they do exactly a they’re bid – at which point, you have single payer in all but name.

“If you like your health insurance, you can keep it” — Comrade O, Socialist-Liar-In-Chief.
This cannot possibly be true when the government dictates what health insurance plans health insurance companies must provide, and there are only four of them.
Comrade O was lying.

farsighted on October 25, 2013 at 8:11 AM

When the left inevitably claims that we need single payer because the “free market” is failing us, let’s not forget this is what they mean by “freedom”.

RINO in Name Only on October 25, 2013 at 8:46 AM

“I was completely happy with the insurance I had before,” Willes said.

We can probably add…”before I voted for Democrats” to her sentence.

cajunpatriot on October 25, 2013 at 8:47 AM

When this is mentioned on a lefty site, the standard retort is..well, they had crappy plans anyway so now they have a better one. Total BS, if these plans worked for the people who had and covered catastrophic illness then who are they to say you need more to cover hang nails and arome therapy.
BeachBum on October 25, 2013 at 8:37 AM

The problem is Obamacare’s high cost. Regardless of whether you like your current plan or not, if you can afford your current plan, then it’s better than Obamacare.

txhsmom on October 25, 2013 at 8:48 AM

If she’s reasonably healthy, all of her medical costs will get paid straight out of her pocket, on top of her insurance policy costs which will now total $3,336, or almost a cool $10,000 after the deductible before she sees any benefit at all.

If she’s reasonably healthy, why would she have to pay anything at all? Under AFA, there is no co-pay for preventative care, including check-ups flu shots, breast exams, et al.

Not sure what you’re trying to say here but I don’t know what out of pocket expenses she would face.

Who’d bother to buy insurance under those conditions? Only the sick and infirm, or those who suddenly get that way and can now force insurers to cover them when they need care.

Once you tell insurers that it’s not ok to tell people with pre-existing conditions to crawl into a corner and die, you can’t let people opt in only when severely ill. That would be comparable to letting someone buy flood insurance the day floodwaters start rising.

bayam on October 25, 2013 at 8:49 AM

So let me get this straight…a healthy individual has to pay double, triple and maybe more to get “better insurance”, but the deductibles are so high that the person winds up paying for most their own care anyway before that “better” insurance kicks in…by that time the year is over and the process starts all over again…

I’m starting a health insurance company…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:49 AM

“You’re paying more for a better product and for more protection — and you won’t understand the value of that until you need it,” he said.

Yeah, you never know when a 58-year-old male might need to be covered for an unexpected pregnancy.

Happy Nomad on October 25, 2013 at 8:49 AM

cajunpatriot on October 25, 2013 at 8:47 AM

how very true…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:50 AM

The UCLA professor essentially says you don’t know what you really want. Once you have this better plan you’ll come to appreciate that your barebones much cheaper coverage was eliminated. They really think they know better for us than we know for ourselves. They really hate the simple freedom of people making their own choices.

Ted Torgerson on October 25, 2013 at 8:51 AM

Math.

almost a cool $10,000 after the deductible before she sees any benefit at all

Note that she pays out $10,000 and then only gets 70% covered.

G. Charles on October 25, 2013 at 8:57 AM

So great, now instead of a policy that doesn’t cover Everything, you have a policy that even covers gender reassignment. However, when suddenly you want or need one of these other procedures that is now covered, You Have to Pay for it Yourself ANYWAY because you are still paying off your higher deductible. That’s fantastic!!!

BeachBum on October 25, 2013 at 8:57 AM

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 9:00 AM

“Once you have this better plan you’ll come to appreciate that your barebones much cheaper coverage was eliminated.”

Yes, you’ll be so thankful that you have maternity benefits at age 58, and delighted to pay extra for them.

G. Charles on October 25, 2013 at 9:01 AM

If this keep’s up…and it will only get worse…the people will be screaming for Zerocare to be repealed after the mid-terms…

PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:39 AM

I’m making the prediction that 0dumbaCare gets repealed before the next election…

Anti-Control on October 25, 2013 at 9:03 AM

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 9:00 AM

Hope you were chanting that using proper form.

Bent over. Facing DC. With your pants around your ankles.

Happy Nomad on October 25, 2013 at 9:06 AM

If she’s reasonably healthy, why would she have to pay anything at all? Under AFA, there is no co-pay for preventative care, including check-ups flu shots, breast exams, et al.

bayam on October 25, 2013 at 8:49 AM

Because even reasonably healthy people have medical issues now and then. I’m not talking anything catastrophic. My current health insurance pays for checkups, but my children have both been to the doctor a second time this year. That costs me $130 for each visit. A finger infection from a hang nail cost me $450 at my doctor’s office. One of my children has eczema. It’s mild, but flares now and then. One of the creams costs me $75, with insurance. OOP it would be $400. These are relatively minor things, but when people have to start paying for those on top of higher premiums the economy is going to take a hit. People are going to be hurt by this. Now, instead of a few people having to decide between health care and bills, it’ll be the entire middle class.

txhsmom on October 25, 2013 at 9:08 AM

It seems like people are being forced to pay 10k a year for catastrophic care. Great if you get hit by a truck but not so great for anything else.

Blake on October 25, 2013 at 9:08 AM

Want to laugh and cry? do a site search of hot air and search for anninca’s comments from 2009 on this obamacare boondoggle.

Yes, I’m a Kaiser “baby.” I love it.
They don’t over-medicate, over-prescribe, or over-treat.
I’ve always loved my HMO.
I’m figuring that’ll be the type of program offered by a public plan.
No, you won’t get everything you “think” you need.
You have a cold?
You won’t get antibiotics.
That practice by “private” doctors, giving into their hypochondriac patients, has pushed us into a
danger zone, medically speaking. Now, we need SUPER-drugs.
Why? Because so many of you wouldn’t accept that a cold or the flu is viral. You demanded anti-
biotics and, thus, made them ineffectual.
Frankly, people. You’re a bunch of hypochondriacs.
You drive doctors nuts.
AnninCA on June 10, 2009 at 2:36 PM

There are hundreds of insane, dishonest ramblings like this.

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 9:14 AM

If she’s reasonably healthy, why would she have to pay anything at all? Under AFA, there is no co-pay for preventative care, including check-ups flu shots, breast exams, et al.

bayam on October 25, 2013 at 8:49 AM

Except for those pesky premiums, which are paying for all that “free” crap, which increased 40% for her. This also seems to be a rather callous and obnoxious response. What if she does become sick or injured? Before she had a $1,500. Now she has a $6,500 deductible. And because her premiums and deductible increased so much she starts to wonder if even having health insurance is worth it.

Not sure what you’re trying to say here but I don’t know what out of pocket expenses she would face.

We call those deductibles and co-pays in this universe.

Once you tell insurers that it’s not ok to tell people with pre-existing conditions to crawl into a corner and die..

Demagogic balderdash. Every state prior to ObamaCare had options for such individuals. I am not going to claim they were all good options, but no one was being told to crawl into a corner and die.

you can’t let people opt in only when severely ill. That would be comparable to letting someone buy flood insurance the day floodwaters start rising.

And you can’t tell people you have a sack of gold for them and expect them to say thank you when there is nothing but shiite in the sack.

NotCoach on October 25, 2013 at 9:14 AM

They voted for him so they deserve the Obama Care disaster

HAGGS99 on October 25, 2013 at 9:14 AM

bayam on October 25, 2013 at 8:49 AM

Tell us what you think AFTER you’ve signed up for it. That may be hard to do from Canada though.

Oldnuke on October 25, 2013 at 9:16 AM

Not sure what you’re trying to say here but I don’t know what out of pocket expenses she would face.

bayam on October 25, 2013 at 8:49 AM

The natl ave for mammogram is $250. A flu shot $14. She is paying a $1,000 more just in premium. Get yourself a new calculator, preferably one that doesn’t say OBAMA on the logo.

hillsoftx on October 25, 2013 at 9:17 AM

Get yourself a new calculator, preferably one that doesn’t say OBAMA on the logo.

hillsoftx on October 25, 2013 at 9:17 AM

It won’t help. He covers the numbers in brown stains on the first use, thus leaving them unreadable.

NotCoach on October 25, 2013 at 9:21 AM

If she’s reasonably healthy, why would she have to pay anything at all? Under AFA, there is no co-pay for preventative care, including check-ups flu shots, breast exams, et al.

Not sure what you’re trying to say here but I don’t know what out of pocket expenses she would face.

What is it about the concept of a deductible don’t you understand?

Once you tell insurers that it’s not ok to tell people with pre-existing conditions to crawl into a corner and die, you can’t let people opt in only when severely ill. That would be comparable to letting someone buy flood insurance the day floodwaters start rising.

bayam on October 25, 2013 at 8:49 AM

First, insurers aren’t charity wards, no matter how you want them to be. I’d love it if in each of the 50 states a relief fund were administered by some religious organization to help cover the reasonable cost of care for those in dire straits. The administration of the care would be so much better.

On your flood insurance point, that’s exactly what Obamacare allows. Don’t get the insurance, but then have your catastrophe? Fine, sign up now, don’t get rejected, and taxpayers will cover the nut.

BuckeyeSam on October 25, 2013 at 9:24 AM

What I find most fascinating about all of this is the almost total lack of awareness on this particular point on the left. I don’t know if they’re in denial, or willfully deceptive, or both. But pretending/believing the website is the only problem with this law is going to make for some interesting pretzel contortions by leftist media when they are forced to start reporting on the fact no one likes their new insurances options, and no one is buying.

NotCoach on October 25, 2013 at 8:39 AM

I think it’s a combination of magical thinking, normalcy bias, and the Dunning-Kruger effect – these retards want 0dumbaCare to work despite it being an economic impossibility, have no idea of how to prepare for its inevitable failure, and are too stupid to realize how obviously wrong they’ve been about it all along…

Anti-Control on October 25, 2013 at 9:26 AM

The website is the least of the problems…wait till people have to start forking out thousands of additional $$$ from their annual disposable income for basically no healthcare…
PatriotRider on October 25, 2013 at 8:44 AM

I think you may be wrong about the website. Think about what healthcare.gov is – it’s more than a website. It’s an attempt to centralize the entire insurance industry.

Imagine taking every clothing retailer and manufacturer in America and creating a central market. And having that market designed by the government.

The thing isn’t broken because of a few bugs. It may be impossible to do.

kcewa on October 25, 2013 at 9:26 AM

There are hundreds of insane, dishonest ramblings like this.

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 9:14 AM

Yeah, I wouldn’t get medical advice from old Anna. lol!

Blake on October 25, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Anti-Control on October 25, 2013 at 9:26 AM

Well stated.

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 9:30 AM

You’re paying more for a better product, and for more protection

But if I’m satisfied with the product I currently have, why should I have to pay more for a better product? I’m sure a 2014 Audi A3 is a better product than my 2006 Mazda 3. But, the product I currently own meets my needs, and the better product doesn’t provide me enough benefit to justify paying the additional cost.

HarryBackside on October 25, 2013 at 9:31 AM

I think it’s a combination of magical thinking, normalcy bias, and the Dunning-Kruger effect – these retards want 0dumbaCare to work despite it being an economic impossibility, have no idea of how to prepare for its inevitable failure, and are too stupid to realize how obviously wrong they’ve been about it all along…

Anti-Control on October 25, 2013 at 9:26 AM

What Murphy said.

NotCoach on October 25, 2013 at 9:31 AM

It seems like people are being forced to pay 10k a year for catastrophic care. Great if you get hit by a truck but not so great for anything else.

Blake on October 25, 2013 at 9:08 AM

And considering the likelihood of being in a situation that requires catastrophic care, you’d be better off putting the bulk of that 10k into a health savings account, and purchasing a high deductible insurance plan. To bad ObamaCare takes away that option.

HarryBackside on October 25, 2013 at 9:36 AM

If she’s reasonably healthy, all of her medical costs will get paid straight out of her pocket, on top of her insurance policy costs which will now total $3,336, or almost a cool $10,000 after the deductible before she sees any benefit at all.

Maybe so, but I bet now she gets free birth control. So there!!

PackerBronco on October 25, 2013 at 9:41 AM

I am a health insurance agent. I hear stories like this everyday from my clients both individual and companies. Next year is when the small and medium size companies are going to get hit hard with ACA’s “minimum standards”. The tragedy is “we” Republicans said all this was going to happen and we were vilified. It sure doesn’t make it any better to be able to say, I told you so.

Hopeless Future on October 25, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Wow, who could have seen this coming?

Chris of Rights on October 25, 2013 at 9:50 AM

At what point will the people take to the streets? Liberalism is more than a mental pathology, there is an evil spiritual component to all of this to destroy the last bastion of human freedom and religious liberty. The media is more to blame for this than the government and they will pay a dear price in hell for what they have done to enable abortion (murder of innocent children)the destruction of all our human liberties, families, schools and public life.

wepeople on October 25, 2013 at 9:57 AM

Being forced to pay thousands more for your health care and then being told you will appreciate the extra coverage later is like being forced to buy a 500HP gas hog of an automobile, being forced to pay for the extra gas it burns and then being told that you will appreciate it more if you ever find yourself on a drag strip.

JohnnyL on October 25, 2013 at 9:58 AM

My deductible went from $500 to $750. Thanks for nothing democrats.

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 9:59 AM

Obama is forcing the middle and working class into being poor. He has successfully nickeled and dimed people into poverty.

Thanks, Obama!

Blake on October 25, 2013 at 10:01 AM

Being forced to pay thousands more for your health care and then being told you will appreciate the extra coverage later is like being forced to buy a 500HP gas hog of an automobile, being forced to pay for the extra gas it burns and then being told that you will appreciate it more if you ever find yourself on a drag strip.

JohnnyL on October 25, 2013 at 9:58 AM

Higher maintenance costs on that gas hog as well. And probably more frequent.

NotCoach on October 25, 2013 at 10:02 AM

But hey, at least the rich white guy didn’t win last year, right?

crushliberalism on October 25, 2013 at 10:45 AM

Press 1 for Help

If you click Obamacare
You’ll see a plan that isn’t there
It isn’t there again today
I wonder when it will display

We were told not to despair
Yes, there were glitches here and there
But a fix would soon begin
As expert techs were scrubbing in

Being stranded in the lurch
Allowed some time to do research
Which disclosed to no surprise
A cache of presidential lies

So I caution you beware
Of this thing called Obamacare
In place of what was claimed to be
Lies a true catastrophe

Barnestormer on October 25, 2013 at 10:45 AM

You’ll get a better product!

That’s the new Democratic mantra.

NO, YOU’LL GET A MORE EXPENSIVE PRODUCT!

GarandFan on October 25, 2013 at 10:51 AM

When this is mentioned on a lefty site, the standard retort is..well, they had crappy plans anyway so now they have a better one. Total BS,

BeachBum on October 25, 2013 at 8:37 AM

Exactly. My individual health ins. plan was dropped and the replacement plan I’ve been offered looks almost identical to the old one (co-pays, deductibles, out of pocket max.) except I will be the proud new owner of those highly coveted maternity/pediatric care benefits- that I’ll never use- and it will be almost twice the price.
If I had a crappy plan before, it looks to me like I’m basically getting the more expensive version of the crappy plan back.

lynncgb on October 25, 2013 at 10:53 AM

They voted for him so they deserve the Obama Care disaster

HAGGS99 on October 25, 2013 at 9:14 AM

Too bad the rest of us are being dragged into the pile of cr@p.

freedomfirst on October 25, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Who cares? Under the Obama Administration, the wealth gap has increased dramatically. This is what he wants to happen. Make more people dependent on the government and ensure Democratic voters for years to come.

djaymick on October 25, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Does Anyone have a running total on the number of people that have lost their health insurance over this slow motion train wreck?

brads01 on October 25, 2013 at 8:29 AM

Rush says “Just two outfits cancels 460,000 policies in one week[.]”

I admit I’m only just “getting” this part of Obamacare. Pretty awful playing games with that many people.

Also, where does the government get off re-arranging Willes’s finances, when it’s running a $17 trillion debt?

Herald of Woe on October 25, 2013 at 11:01 AM

But if I’m satisfied with the product I currently have, why should I have to pay more for a better product? …

HarryBackside on October 25, 2013 at 9:31 AM

Better yet, if a Ford F-250 suits my needs (none of the govt’s business what my needs are, by the way), why would an effing Prius be the better product? “Better” is a subjective concept. This is a loss of freedom without a doubt.

freedomfirst on October 25, 2013 at 11:02 AM

None of the people getting means-tested government benefits will ever vote to reduce them,
nor vote for any politician that will reduce them.
But it’s factually much worse than it first appears because federal government workers
will not vote to fire themselves either, just as the 17th Amendment ( ed: The worst thing to
ever happen to this country) is inviolate because The Senate will never vote to fire itself.
So we must in fact subtract 21,880,000 from the full-time worker count .
In other words you’re outvoted by 36% .
Does it make sense yet? This is not a small margin and it cannot be politically
reversed because the margins are too high. Were the skew relatively small (and it looks
small until you subtract out federal workers) you could potentially do so, because some
people won’t vote and you could “motivate the base.” But note that with the federal
workers out, and we’re not subtracting the State workers, which also exist on this same
largesse, you can’t get there because this means nearly 40% of those receiving such
benefits would have to stay home when reductions are proposed, and they never will.
As such you cannot vote your way out of this.
You cannot politically organize your way out of this.
You can’t do it in the Democrat Party and you can’t do it in the Republican Party. Nor can
you do it in a third party.
Every single person who argues otherwise is an idiot or worse, a fraudster (if they
have run the numbers above.)
Delusions persist because people don’t examine the facts in detail. I recognize that I
participated in attempting to politically change things for far too long because I did not
look, in detail, at the math .
But I can no longer make any logical argument that political activism is useful in any way,
shape or form. It is a waste of energy, time and money that I can expend elsewhere on
something that brings me more joy, rather than tilting at windmills.
There is only one remaining peaceful way to change things: Withdraw your consent and
thus intentionally but peacefully and lawfully destabilize the underpinning of the
government debt market, thereby denying the government the means to continue
screwing you, your children and grandchildren irrespective of the vote count.
The only other choices remaining are consenting to your own economic death, along with
that of your children and grandchildren, or violence .
If you claim that you will “get yours” for “your kids” (or your spouse, or just yourself)
you’re deluding yourself as the odds are that (1) you will fail and (2) even if you
“succeed” the victory will be both temporary and pyrrhic as you cannot overcome the
voting block deficiency.
In short, read this Ticker again in light of the above mathematical facts .
Then act, or not, but the math doesn’t care if you agree with it or not.

market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=225405

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 11:04 AM

All is happening EXACTLY as we predicted. Pretty much every opponant of Obamacare proclaimed loudly from the very start that this would happen, all while Obama was lying about people being able to keep their existing insurance.

Shame on the media for ignoring those very obvious predictions and schilling for Obama all these years. If they had been fair in their reporting from the start, this nightmare legilsation would never have become law.

Texas Zombie on October 25, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Robert Bork’s new book from beyond the grave:
Slouching Towards SinglePayer

Marcola on October 25, 2013 at 11:11 AM

It’s called “choice”. You chose to vote for socialists, and now they are choosing the important things in your life for you. Cheer up, the Waaaaahmbulance ride is covered.

RSbrewer on October 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA! O-BA-MA!

bayam on October 25, 2013 at 8:49 AM

Del Dolemonte on October 25, 2013 at 11:19 AM

If they can make it work, OK by me. My concern would be that the insurance companies are really
very inefficient. I’ve seen some studies that say that as much as 30% of costs go to paperwork
admin. The proposed plan that puts them in charge seems to be nothing more than a kind of
kickback scheme to pay insurance companies to keep the system overly complex. The fox guarding
the henhouse, so to speak.
I’d like to see something that’s more competitive, or then we’ll be really having to supplement to
make it affordable.
That means, we get hit twice. Once by the insurance companies to keep the defunct system going.
Again, by taxes to supplement.
In other words, the efficiencies of a public option could help lower the costs for real people.
AnninCA on July 31, 2009 at 11:01 AM

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 11:20 AM

So to summarize, you guys are against preventive care even though it saves lives because you
think it costs too much. Rationing much?
crr6 on September 1, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 11:24 AM

That’s the best argument, really. The fact is that sometimes people DO need a bit of help in reining
in “free enterprise.”
That’s where we’re at, in my mind. They went too far. And now, they really need their wings
snipped.
AnninCA on September 1, 2009 at 2:44 PM

Murphy9 on October 25, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Comment pages: 1 2