Most uninsured ignoring healthcare exchanges

posted at 12:41 pm on November 8, 2013 by Bruce McQuain

So what was the point of all this drama?  Why did Democrats pass this awful health care law?  Wasn’t it to ensure that those without healthcare insurance would finally be covered?

Hmmm … maybe someone should have asked the uninsured whether or not it was a priority for them.  Gallup tells us most of them are ignoring the push for them to enroll:

In the midst of widespread news coverage of problems with the federal health exchange website, relatively few uninsured Americans (18%) — the primary target population for the exchanges — have so far attempted to visit an exchange website. The percentage is slightly higher, 22%, among uninsured Americans who say they plan to get insurance through the exchanges.

Have you personally gone to, or attempted to go to, a government health insurance exchange website since the Internet-based health exchanges opened on October 1, or not?

These results are based on a series of questions Gallup asked uninsured Americans about the health exchanges from Oct. 23-Nov. 6.

Not exactly what one would call a “thundering herd” of uninsured, is it?  In fact:

Gallup previously found that less than half of uninsured Americans (44%) who plan to get insurance say they will do so through an exchange, and about one in four say they are more likely to pay a fine instead of getting insurance. These findings help explain the low percentage of the uninsured who have attempted to access the exchange websites.

They certainly do.  They also help explain why ObamaCare is likely to fail miserably.  The only group which saw this as a huge priority were Democrats in Congress and the White House.  Despite anecdotal complaints, the vast majority of Americans were either happy with their health care situation or felt fine without insurance (those usually being the young and healthy who saw no need for it at the time).

Are there broader implications?

The health exchange websites are not only fraught with the technical problems that have led to so much news coverage in recent weeks, but have also generated relatively little interest or use among uninsured Americans — the primary target group for the exchanges. The majority of uninsured Americans are unfamiliar with the exchanges and relatively few have tried to access them to date, even among those who say that eventually, they will most likely get their insurance through an exchange website.

The reality is this law was passed to satisfy a political agenda, not to satisfy the demands of the citizenry.  And that reality is demonstrated by this sort of indifferent reception.  Even though the rollout has been a disaster, the biggest problem remains government butting into a market where it was neither needed or wanted.  The results are predictable.

~McQ


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

So, given that the whole marketplace thing is turning into an irrelevant, flop, Obamacare boils down to:
-Forcing everyone to have comprehensive coverage
-Higher deductibles and premiums for everyone
-Sick people get insurance subsidized by others

Mohonri on November 8, 2013 at 12:45 PM

I wonder why they were uninsured before…

Could it be, “Meh?”

Wino on November 8, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Is it news if it’s unexpected?

HiJack on November 8, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Hmmm … maybe someone should have asked the uninsured whether or not it was a priority for them.

The “uninsured” were asked, and they said that they didn’t want obamacare – all Americans were asked and WE said that we didn’t want obamacare. There has never been broad support for obamacare – we’ve been talking about this since 2009.

Pork-Chop on November 8, 2013 at 12:46 PM

If you have insurance, you can keep your insurance. You will just have to pay 4 times as much and increase your deductible.

Wino on November 8, 2013 at 12:46 PM

So what was the point of all this drama? Why did Democrats pass this awful health care law? Wasn’t it to ensure that those without healthcare insurance would finally be covered?

The Great Headfake.

Controlling healthcare under the guise of “helping” the downtrodden uninsured.

Bitter Clinger on November 8, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Who could have predicted this?!?

NotCoach on November 8, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Gallup previously found that less than half of uninsured Americans (44%) who plan to get insurance say they will do so through an exchange, and about one in four say they are more likely to pay a fine instead of getting insurance. These findings help explain the low percentage of the uninsured who have attempted to access the exchange websites.

If only there was better “messaging” by the left and Obama!

One more speech should do it.

Gatsu on November 8, 2013 at 12:48 PM

I cannot wait for rhe website to work. Then the real fun begins when there are no excuses for people to sign up.

Remember healthy younglings… “It’s the law”!

LtGenRob on November 8, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Of course, what better way to create needy uninsureds than by cancelling the policies of people who do want health insurance.

Bitter Clinger on November 8, 2013 at 12:50 PM

I guess they aren’t really responsible adults ………… perhaps that was the problem all along.

SC.Charlie on November 8, 2013 at 12:50 PM

Meant to say there’s no excuse to blame when they don’t sign up.

LtGenRob on November 8, 2013 at 12:50 PM

The real “story” here is that the ACA is a backdoor to single payer. Their ultimate goal. Obama has ruined the chance that left can ever make this happen for the next hundred years.

AYNBLAND on November 8, 2013 at 12:54 PM

obama has destroyed his party and their ideals.

He cares NOT who goes under the bus.

It couldn’t happen to a bigger bunch of morons.

If you soar with turkeys you drop like them.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 12:54 PM

This is perfect about obama.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 12:54 PM

So what was the point of all this drama? Why did Democrats pass this awful health care law? Wasn’t it to ensure that those without healthcare insurance would finally be covered?

Its the first step towards single payer, and with that comes absolute government control of what is now 1/6 of the US economy.

Any other questions?

BobMbx on November 8, 2013 at 12:55 PM

I will not comply because I am a free citizen of the United States, not a subject of its government. I consider non-compliance with this monstrosity and the tens of thousands of pages of regulations that are to be enforced by an unelected bureaucracy, and that have left a gigantic carbon footprint on our environment and the United States Constitution, a duty.

Non-compliance is my executive order, and that order reads in part that I do not recognize any government’s claim on my action or inaction in the marketplace, nor upon any personal information I am unwilling to divulge.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Most people going to the exchanges are the ones that are insured that are getting kicked off their old plans. Nothing like legislating demand for your product.

What a total friggin’ waste of time and money. Don’t they realize that because of higher premiums and deductibles, these people won’t be able to buy a new Volt?

TexAz on November 8, 2013 at 12:56 PM

The reality is this law was passed to satisfy a political agenda, not to satisfy the demands of the citizenry. And that reality is demonstrated by this sort of indifferent reception. Even though the rollout has been a disaster, the biggest problem remains government butting into a market where it was neither needed or wanted. The results are predictable.

(Bold added)

Exactly, and well said McQ.

Perhaps they are thinking the dynamics will change when the penalty increases from $95 or 1% to 2% or 2.5% – but again, they are still ultimately in the position of hoping that the laws of economics and human nature can be changed by their force of will to hope it so.

The deeper meaning is that we are looking at a premium death spiral starting – where the one’s in the exchanges, other than those jumping in to get their new Medicaid membership, are the one’s who are less than healthy, who have pre-existing conditions, and are going to be more expensive.

While the private insurers have some capping of their exposure under the law, premiums will still go up – forcing more people out of the exchanges – and leading to more adverse selection all the while the cost to the taxpayer for this EpicClusterFark soars as those insurers get taxpayer funds to cover their ‘excessive’ losses.

Obamacare was never intended to ‘fix’ what was broken in the healthcare industry. It was purely a political agenda ploy to expand government and fund ever increasing wealth redistribution efforts.

Athos on November 8, 2013 at 12:57 PM

The majority of uninsured Americans are unfamiliar with the exchanges and relatively few have tried to access them to date…

Well, yesterday dailymail tried to access the healthcare site and got a bunch of garbled screens with, for example, instead of the words ‘Username’ and ‘Password’ there were jumbled letters like: ‘???ffe.ee.myAccount.login.username???’ and ‘???ffe.ee.myAccount.login.password???.’

Graphics of the messed up screens at link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2491576/Obamacare-website-spews-garbled-messages-despite-fixed-end-November.html

anotherJoe on November 8, 2013 at 12:58 PM

Sorry, this should have been in quotes

I will not comply because I am a free citizen of the United States, not a subject of its government. I consider non-compliance with this monstrosity and the tens of thousands of pages of regulations that are to be enforced by an unelected bureaucracy, and that have left a gigantic carbon footprint on our environment and the United States Constitution, a duty.

Non-compliance is my executive order
, and that order reads in part that I do not recognize any government’s claim on my action or inaction in the marketplace, nor upon any personal information I am unwilling to divulge.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 12:58 PM

Not even in China/Russia, nor in any land in the world is there a “mandate”.

DO NOT COMPLY.

What are they going to do? Lock you all up?

Imagine, we could all be in the same camp, together.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 12:59 PM

This thing’s going down like a Nazi blimp.

Chuck Schick on November 8, 2013 at 1:00 PM

Note the silence of the lambs trolls.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 1:00 PM

So Obama addressed a non-crisis by destroying American healthcare.

Cicero43 on November 8, 2013 at 1:00 PM

I was insured. My policy will be cancelled at the start of next year. BCBS said they will automatically enroll me a plan for twice the cost next year if I don’t cancel by then (which I will). After that, I’ll see if can get a policy for less. If not, then I will go from being insured to uninsured. Quite a success for Obamacare!

MJBrutus on November 8, 2013 at 1:00 PM

I wonder why they were uninsured before…

Could it be, “Meh?”

Wino on November 8, 2013 at 12:45 PM

And will continue to be “Meh?” until they have to file their taxes. For those who make money to tax.

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:02 PM

They aren’t ‘health care exchanges’.

Think of them as ‘centralized identity theft exchanges’.

Or as ‘unable to deliver what they promise’ site.

Or ‘incompetence on display’ site’.

ajacksonian on November 8, 2013 at 1:03 PM

And will continue to be “Meh?” until they have to file their taxes. For those who make money to tax.

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:02 PM

Just make sure the gov’t doesn’t owe you a refund. They have NO means to enforce anything, outside of obama changing the law. Of course, the thug in chief might do that. As it is now they are sool.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 1:06 PM

The ACA was never really about ensuring uninsured have health insurance. ACA was all about the penalty tax on those millions of sheep who decide to simply roll over and opt out of Obamacare and just pay the penalty-tax.

Imaging the huge windfall of free money the government is now going to legally extort, and get from millions of people.

Obamacare was never really about the health insurance and the ‘public-good’. The bill was always about the penalty-tax.

This whole crap sandwich is just like gun-control. It was never about the insurance or the guns. It is and will always be about control. Well, control and huge profits for the insurance industry.

DonB on November 8, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Instead of thinking about this as ‘health care’ think of the web site as ‘vaporcare’, just like Duke Nukem 3D was vaporware for so many years… we now have vaporcare.

ajacksonian on November 8, 2013 at 1:07 PM

If you have insurance, you can keep your insurance. You will just have to pay 4 times as much and increase your deductible.

Wino on November 8, 2013 at 12:46 PM

I note that premium isn’t the only measure. Leave it to the 0gabe regime to lower premiums (while raising deductibles).

I hated this year that my flex savings account cap was reduced by 50%. This effectively increased my taxes. I also have avoided opting into a HSA because of 0gabecare. This stupid law has influenced millions of decisions affecting the economy and the insurance and medical industries.

freedomfirst on November 8, 2013 at 1:07 PM

I am uninsured. I have asthma, pretty severe, but I manage fine out of pocket. The evil drug companies created a miracle drug and give it to me at a 75% discount, no questions asked. I pay my prefered doc about $50 every couple of months and every couple of years I do have a $3000+ er bill that takes some time to pay off.

I will not sign up on the ACA exchange. I refuse.

myrenovations on November 8, 2013 at 1:07 PM

Ayn Rand laughs her dead azz off.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 1:08 PM

Out of curiosity, can insurers still offer non-compliant individual plans at all? My impression is that in order to satisfy the employer mandate, the individual mandate, or to qualify to be included on the exchanges, the insurance policy must meet the requirements of the law.

Here’s what I’m driving at–could a healthy person opt to get a cheaper, old-style (what Obama likes to call “subpar”) plan, pay the fine, and still up (financially) ahead?

Mohonri on November 8, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Can you give specifics on how Obamacare does anything to change the free rider problem, please?
 
rogerb on October 21, 2013 at 8:34 PM

 
Many with less income and security will make different and IMHO more responsible decisions – which will ironically benefit folks like you.
 
verbaluce on October 21, 2013 at 9:21 PM

rogerb on November 8, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Genuine, knowing that $95 will barely cover a routine doctor visit and that hospitals will still be required by law to provide care regardless of insurance coverage or ability to pay, do you think Obamacare will do anything to change the free rider problem?
 
rogerb on October 7, 2013 at 1:23 PM

 
Well it’ll do more to address it than simply scrapping the whole thing and going back to the old system where it was a huge problem driving up health care costs for everyone exorbitantly…
 
Genuine on October 7, 2013 at 1:33 PM

rogerb on November 8, 2013 at 1:13 PM

The Coming Insurance Company Bailout

The Dems may, I say may, have a real problem if the young and healthy don’t sign up, and so insurance company revenue doesn’t equal payouts. The problem is that the Dems may see that as an opportunity to force us into single payer, as this is going to lead to the dire need to bail out $$$ the insurance companies, or, if they go belly up, to institute a complete govt (single payer) takeover of health care: http://spectator.org/archives/2013/11/05/the-coming-obamacare-bailout

So it looks very much like, in not too much time, there is going to be a fight with two options: bailing out the insurance companies OR of letting them go bankrupt and going single payer. This has the potential to be a real govt or at least “health care shutdown” type stand off. The option that we as Republicans may push for is to bail out the insurance companies contingent upon Obamacare being scrapped with a free market replacement.

Look at the dramatically reduced health care costs in Singapore for a model to follow. In Singapore everyone has health saving accounts, and there is sharp price competition for all medical services. Everyone pays for their own medical care, so the costs are driven way way down (sometimes by 80% for major procedures like bypass operations).

anotherJoe on November 8, 2013 at 1:13 PM

Just make sure the gov’t doesn’t owe you a refund. They have NO means to enforce anything, outside of obama changing the law. Of course, the thug in chief might do that. As it is now they are sool.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 1:06 PM

And how do you do that without lying about deductions?

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:14 PM

I guess they aren’t really responsible adults ………… perhaps that was the problem all along.

SC.Charlie on November 8, 2013 at 12:50 PM

This.

ConDem on November 8, 2013 at 1:15 PM

Obamacare was passed to solve the free rider problem:
 
rogerb on October 24, 2013 at 4:06 PM

 
I’d say Obamacare was passed so that people with preexisting conditions and the working poor could get insurance.
 
red_herring on October 24, 2013 at 4:14 PM

 

Medicaid is expanded to a family of four making $33,000 per year. I’d say that’s an ok working definition, though the income would probably go up to 40 or 50k.
 
red_herring on October 24, 2013 at 4:37 PM

 

So you’re expecting the medicaid-eligible “working poor” to spend money on insurance premiums and deductibles?
 
rogerb on October 24, 2013 at 6:12 PM

rogerb on November 8, 2013 at 1:15 PM

So, for the young women who don’t need insurance and will take the penalty, is their birth control still free?

skeeterbite on November 8, 2013 at 1:16 PM

And how do you do that without lying about deductions?

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Produce less. They waste your and your children’s efforts.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 1:18 PM

And how do you do that without lying about deductions?

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Or, get paid differently.

The best doctors will barter going forward.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 1:19 PM

At least the cost of a date with Sandra Fluke will be cheaper, eh fellas?

Chuck Schick on November 8, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Produce less. They waste your and your children’s efforts.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 1:18 PM

Or, get paid differently.

The best doctors will barter going forward.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 1:19 PM

So be lazy or be liar it is! Well, many will take that choice probably. Especially those near retirement. Ain’t communism grand?

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:23 PM

Well, yesterday dailymail tried to access the healthcare site and got a bunch of garbled screens with, for example, instead of the words ‘Username’ and ‘Password’ there were jumbled letters like: ‘???ffe.ee.myAccount.login.username???’ and ‘???ffe.ee.myAccount.login.password???.’

Graphics of the messed up screens at link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2491576/Obamacare-website-spews-garbled-messages-despite-fixed-end-November.html

anotherJoe on November 8, 2013 at 12:58

From a developer perspective this looks like either a broken binding to a control or someone ran the ToString function on a class’s property instead of getting the actual value. The dots are syntax of class names, property names, and variable names. If their classes are named ffe.ee and aren’t obfuscated during compilation and actually look like that in the source code, they are royally screwed. Nothing is worse than trying to figure out what a class named ‘ffe’ does or what a variable named ‘ee’ is used for.

ConDem on November 8, 2013 at 1:24 PM

Best thing about obamacare- it will set liberalism back several decades before they can do this much damage again. Next Nov is going to be fun.

Ta111 on November 8, 2013 at 1:25 PM

We should have known this was coming. Hitler has lost his policy too.

http://conservatives4palin.com/2013/11/the-obligatory-hitler-lost-his-insurance-video.html

TarheelBen on November 8, 2013 at 1:26 PM

Who wants more paperwork?

thebrokenrattle on November 8, 2013 at 1:27 PM

The reality is this law was passed to satisfy a political agenda, not to satisfy the demands of the citizenry. And that reality is demonstrated by this sort of indifferent reception. Even though the rollout has been a disaster, the biggest problem remains government butting into a market where it was neither needed or wanted. The results are predictable.

And yet Boehner, McConnell, and the surrender weasels made Cruz into the enemy for calling for defunding.

Happy Nomad on November 8, 2013 at 1:27 PM

If insurance companies are not getting enough revenue, and they can’t makes pay outs, medical providers like doctors and hospitals would not be compensated.

So critical medical services may stop being provided. This is why at this point a kind of stand off may ensue, between the leftists that want single payer, and those that want to bailout the insurance companies (us?). Yes, bail ‘um out, but put Obamacare six feet under as a condition. But we got to be unified as a party (not like in VA) and win the upcoming elections to achieve our goal, or if the Dems win elections, probably single payer or continuous obscenely expensive and unconditional insurance bailouts will be the result.

anotherJoe on November 8, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Here’s what I’m driving at–could a healthy person opt to get a cheaper, old-style (what Obama likes to call “subpar”) plan, pay the fine, and still up (financially) ahead?

Mohonri on November 8, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Excellent question, Mohonri!

I was also wondering this morning if some creative insurance companies might find a way to offer supplemental health insurance policies to help people pay for the high Obamacare deductibles.

It is time to apply some American ingenuity to this problem.

wren on November 8, 2013 at 1:32 PM

The real “story” here is that the ACA is a backdoor to single payer. Their ultimate goal. Obama has ruined the chance that left can ever make this happen for the next hundred years.

AYNBLAND on November 8, 2013 at 12:54 PM

It’s not just the left – it’s all the progressives that want this. The establishment Republicans – the progressives on the right will “fix” Obamacare and make it single payer just as quick as the progressive lefties.

Medicaid, Medicare, Welfare, WIC, Part D, The Department of Energy, Department of Education, etc. What government power grabbing program has ever been eliminated by the right?

batterup on November 8, 2013 at 1:33 PM

And how do you do that without lying about deductions?

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Your comment suggests you don’t grasp how to avoid being owed a refund. First: Hire a CPA.
Second: You are free to refuse to take deductions, thereby upping your income and lowering, if not eliminating any chance of a refund.
Third: The only way the IRS can forcibly extract the fine is through withholding part of any refund to which you may be entitled at the end of the year. No refund, no fine.

Just in case you don’t get that, let me reiterate: hire a CPA.

totherightofthem on November 8, 2013 at 1:37 PM

Even though the rollout has been a disaster, the biggest problem remains government butting into a market where it was neither needed or wanted.

nor allowed.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on November 8, 2013 at 1:39 PM

Well, that didn’t work. Let me re-format:

And how do you do that without lying about deductions?

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:14 PM

Your comment suggests you don’t grasp how to avoid being owed a refund. First: Hire a CPA.
Second: You are free to refuse to take deductions, thereby upping your income and lowering, if not eliminating any chance of a refund.
Third: The only way the IRS can forcibly extract the fine is through withholding part of any refund to which you may be entitled at the end of the year. No refund, no fine.

Just in case you don’t get that, let me reiterate: hire a CPA.

Actually, another way to eliminate refunds is to withhold just the right amount of tax during the year via your W2 or quarterly payments. Good practice would result in you breaking even at tax time, neither owing nor being owed anything. So, one more time: hire a CPA.

totherightofthem on November 8, 2013 at 1:40 PM

Here’s what I’m driving at–could a healthy person opt to get a cheaper, old-style (what Obama likes to call “subpar”) plan, pay the fine, and still up (financially) ahead?

Mohonri on November 8, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Excellent question, Mohonri!

I was also wondering this morning if some creative insurance companies might find a way to offer supplemental health insurance policies to help people pay for the high Obamacare deductibles.

It is time to apply some American ingenuity to this problem.

wren on November 8, 2013 at 1:32 PM

Heck, I could have no insurance, pay for everything out of pocket, and be way ahead financially. Except there’s this little thing about potentially catastrophe. What’s the name for that type of insurance? You know, I think it it used to be the definition of the word ‘insurance’, something about when a catastrophe happens, it’s on the tip of my tongue…

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:41 PM

totherightofthem on November 8, 2013 at 1:40 PM

I will certainly admit to not being a tax expert. But if you don’t take deductions, then you just owe more taxes. Unless you meant: estimate a lesser amount and then take them anyway, in which case you are lying.

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:45 PM

Actually, another way to eliminate refunds is to withhold just the right amount of tax during the year via your W2 or quarterly payments. Good practice would result in you breaking even at tax time, neither owing nor being owed anything. So, one more time: hire a CPA.

totherightofthem on November 8, 2013 at 1:40 PM

Yeah, I just fiddle with my deductions. Need to revisit since my daughter just got married.

jdpaz on November 8, 2013 at 1:46 PM

So what was the point of all this drama? Why did Democrats pass this awful health care law? Wasn’t it to ensure that those without healthcare insurance would finally be covered?

Because politically it doesn’t get better than having to call your elected official for your health care. The first question will be “Have you kept your donation to my reelection up” er premium up.

CW20 on November 8, 2013 at 1:46 PM

What’s the name for that type of insurance? You know, I think it it used to be the definition of the word ‘insurance’, something about when a catastrophe happens, it’s on the tip of my tongue…
 
Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 1:41 PM

 
Discontinued.

rogerb on November 8, 2013 at 1:47 PM

Got a wife and 3 kids. Currently carrying 15 allowances on my W-4. Works out so that I nearly break even on my taxes.

jdpaz on November 8, 2013 at 1:49 PM

Well, yesterday the dailymail tried to access the healthcare site and got a bunch of garbled screens with, for example, instead of the words ‘Username’ and ‘Password’ there were jumbled letters like: ‘???ffe.ee.myAccount.login.username???’ and ‘???ffe.ee.myAccount.login.password???.’

From a developer perspective this looks like either a broken binding to a control or someone ran the ToString function on a class’s property instead of getting the actual value. The dots are syntax of class names, property names, and variable names. If their classes are named ffe.ee and aren’t obfuscated during compilation and actually look like that in the source code, they are royally screwed. Nothing is worse than trying to figure out what a class named ‘ffe’ does or what a variable named ‘ee’ is used for.

ConDem on November 8, 2013 at 1:24 PM

That’s exactly what I was thinking! Lol.

Actually, as I have only done a little bit of amateur programming, I’m thinking this looks like an outward symptom of a possible deep down problem that could be caused by any of many types of issues, though you could very well be right. But this may or may not be easy to debug. Yeah, why in the world would a class be named “ffe”, or a variable named “ee”? Looks like lax coding, here’s the “Healthcare Mash” video bemoaning the sloppy coding: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaC1lk7KVzI

anotherJoe on November 8, 2013 at 1:51 PM

Here’s what I’m driving at–could a healthy person opt to get a cheaper, old-style (what Obama likes to call “subpar”) plan, pay the fine, and still up (financially) ahead?

Mohonri on November 8, 2013 at 1:12 PM

It will be up to the ins co to keep those “sub-standard (LOL” plans. Most wont cause they need the revenue to support the Devil’s Deal they signed up for with Obama. But there are options to consider:
1) Check out health sharing ministries (religious) or ethical health (ie, Liberty) policies–both are EXEMPT from O’care.
2) Check into critical and accidental policies, both still available. Wont pay out tons, but very affordable
3) Work/watch for cash only doctors.
4) Have your medical needs & prescribed drugs bid upon for pricing.

Here is great site that gives you options.

hillsoftx on November 8, 2013 at 2:00 PM

…Yeah, why in the world would a class be named “ffe”, or a variable named “ee”? Looks like lax coding, here’s the “Healthcare Mash” video bemoaning the sloppy coding: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaC1lk7KVzI

anotherJoe on November 8, 2013 at 1:51 PM

What ConDem alluded to. Javascript ‘compressors’ which replace whitespace and long variable names with the shortest possible to reduce bandwidth. With a name like ee and ffe that is almost certainly what is going on.

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 2:01 PM

I am one of the “uninsured” and I won’t go near this monstrosity with a forty foot pole. I pay for everything out of pocket, can usually get cash discounts for visits and meds. Am a responsible adult who understands risk and consequences. Don’t need no nanny telling me how to live my life “for my own good.” I’m old enough that I’ve pretty much already figured out what’s in my best interest.

“Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” – C.S. Lewis

Ace ODale on November 8, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Once again the only people who will be harmed by this government debacle are the honest hard working folk actually footing the bill for it. Well at first anyway, eventually it’ll hose everyone.

“If you think more government is the solution you obviously don’t understand the problem.”

And I’d add to that quote “And you’re an idiot to boot”.

Oldnuke on November 8, 2013 at 2:07 PM

And how many of the respondents who said they were probably, eventually, going to get insurance said so because

a) they’re afraid of admitting that they’re planning on “breaking the law”

and/or

b) they have not paid any attention to what’s going on at all and just don’t realize yet that the cheapest option is just to pay the fine

?

hisfrogness on November 8, 2013 at 2:07 PM

I am one of the “uninsured” and I won’t go near this monstrosity with a forty foot pole. I pay for everything out of pocket, can usually get cash discounts for visits and meds. Am a responsible adult who understands risk and consequences. Don’t need no nanny telling me how to live my life “for my own good.” I’m old enough that I’ve pretty much already figured out what’s in my best interest.

Ace ODale on November 8, 2013 at 2:06 PM

You’re still going to get screwed. You’re going to have to pay that fine/tax which is manageable for a few years then it becomes usurious. I’m with you though and hate it when someone tells me what is “Good for Me.”

Oldnuke on November 8, 2013 at 2:11 PM

why in the world would a class be named “ffe”, or a variable named “ee”?

What ConDem alluded to. Javascript ‘compressors’ which replace whitespace and long variable names with the shortest possible to reduce bandwidth. With a name like ee and ffe that is almost certainly what is going on.

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 2:01 PM

Well, in retrospect, it seems like this practice must be considered unwise in this case, trading a miniscule amount of bandwidth for making debugging much more difficult? Or, with a variable name like “ee,” perhaps they just didn’t want to type so much? Lay A z.

anotherJoe on November 8, 2013 at 2:15 PM

obama has destroyed his party and their ideals.

He cares NOT who goes under the bus.

It couldn’t happen to a bigger bunch of morons.

If you soar with turkeys you drop like them.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 12:54 PM

They don’t seem very destroyed at the moment. And the GOP seems hell-bent on minimizing the risk of adverse consequences to the Dems in future elections.

Midas on November 8, 2013 at 2:17 PM

anotherJoe on November 8, 2013 at 2:15 PM

I should’ve clarified more. You don’t minimize/obfuscate the original source code, just the stuff on the production server. This is perfectly fine.

Fenris on November 8, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Just make sure the gov’t doesn’t owe you a refund. They have NO means to enforce anything, outside of obama changing the law. Of course, the thug in chief might do that. As it is now they are sool.

Schadenfreude on November 8, 2013 at 1:06 PM

If the donks win the HOR in 2014 and put Nanzi back as speaker expect the very first bill passed will be changing that little hickup in the cACA.

As to changing your deductions, i don’t believe there is any law that says you can’t match your withholding with your final tax bill. As far as I know you can even owe up to 15% on April 15th without a penalty being assessed.

jukin3 on November 8, 2013 at 2:26 PM

One Great Unmentionable is the fact that many poor or uninsured people are in that fix because they are immature or careless. They do not give a hoot about responsibility. Do you think that the hippie surfer in the Fox special on food stamps is going to sign up? LOL.

PattyJ on November 8, 2013 at 2:34 PM

Of course, the Administration will look at the 18% as a huge success, but the 18% of individual who purchased their own coverage themselves and are being dropped, is a small number.

djaymick on November 8, 2013 at 2:40 PM

Work is hard! Please do it for me government.

faol on November 8, 2013 at 2:49 PM

They already have free health care when they need it through the EMTALA law which says anyone who comes into an American ER has the right to 1) a medical screening examination to determine if an emergency exists; 2) treatment for any emergent condition until the point of stabilization; and 3) once stabilized, to have a safe discharge or a safe transfer to an appropriate facility (e.g. long term care) if the patient can no longer care for themselves. A hospital’s obligation to provide emergency service in accord with this act is tied to their receipt of Medicare funds. Since nearly every hospital in America receives Medicare funds that means nearly every ER is open to anyone who comes through the door. Moreover, this applies to every person regardless of who they are, where they came from, whether they pay taxes, or who they pay taxes to.

So why should they buy insurance through Obamacare?

kcewa on November 8, 2013 at 3:06 PM

Nobody HAS to use the exchanges. If your insurer cancels your insurance because it does not qualify under PelosiCare and offers you a policy that DOES qualify, you can accept it. You don’t NEED to go to the exchange or to purchase insurance from a company participating in the exchange. You can purchase your health insurance through ANY insurance company licensed to sell health insurance in your state.

The Democrats are using rhetoric to make it seem like you have to go to the exchange. You don’t. You might visit there to learn what your subsidy amount is but you don’t have to purchase insurance there.

In fact, what we can do to “fight back” a little is to make it a point NOT to do business when any company participating in your local state’s exchange.

crosspatch on November 8, 2013 at 3:46 PM

This ties into a feeling I’ve had since the Supreme Court decision. I think that John Roberts, while upholding the individual mandate, may well have kicked the foundation out from under the law.

The penalty was framed as a penalty for a very specific reason. Conservatives are by nature law-abiding. Obamacare was designed to require that all persons obtain insurance as a matter of law. A person not purchasing insurance would be breaking the law, and would be punished by the penalty fine. Thus conservatives, while despising the law, would find themselves in a moral dilemma — pay for the hated Obamacare, or break the law.

What John Roberts did was reframe the penalty as a tax. This subtly changed the conservative perception of the situation. Now, one is not required to obtain insurance as a matter of law, one is required to choose between obtaining insurance, or paying a tax. Note that Roberts has neatly excised the ethical dilemma and left it in the trash. No one need feel them self to be a lawbreaker by going insured. Going insured is a choice. Paying the tax is another choice.

As we now see, the vast majority of uninsured persons are choosing to pay the tax. The absence of healthy enrollees in the Obamacare exchange is going to implode the exchanges and bring on the death spiral in the first year of the program.

In addition, Roberts has framed the ultimate conservative issue going into the 2014 election. Millions of people are going to go uninsured for 2014. Come November 2014, the death spiral will be in its second year — insurance rates for 2015 will be skyrocketing and the penalty tax will double. The Republicans have the ultimate issue laid out right in front of them:

Repeal the Obamacare penalty tax.

Now if the “individual responsibility payment” was held to be a fine for breaking the law, it would be very hard for conservatives to campaign on that issue. They would essentially be campaigning to overturn a penalty for breaking the law, and allowing unpunished lawbreaking. But the payment is not a penalty. It is a tax. Repealing taxes is a natural, time-tested position for conservatives. In addition, this is going to be a very big, plainly unfair and capricious looming tax facing millions and millions of people across the political spectrum. If you ever wanted a crossover issue to bring conservatives into power, you couldn’t ask for a better one. Getting people to vote on abstractions is difficult. Getting people to vote money into their wallets is much, much easier. Played right, Republicans could take the Senate and pick up many, many House seats.

The issue will be crystal clear for all uninsured Americans. Pay 1% of your income this year and 2% of your income next year as punishment for not being able to afford insurance, or vote Republican and keep your money.

jms on November 8, 2013 at 8:11 PM

Most uninsured ignoring healthcare exchanges

…who is shocked?

KOOLAID2 on November 8, 2013 at 8:57 PM