I wouldn't have offered such criticism to bigpuffery, he tends to get all butt-hurt when he thinks people are insulting him and he likely would have taken that criticism as an insult.
Last I heard was that the number of healthy young needed had fallen well short of the target. One politico article I read said 40% had been the target so 28% is not getting it done. The other factor is going to be drop-outs. How many "young invincibles" will want to drop out of the program after paying in for awhile and seeing no "benefit?" How does the ACA handle this kind of phenomenon?
40% is the ideal rate and matches the % of the population, I believe. It's not the rate needed for ACA to work. Independent analysts and insurers have said 28% is good enough for year 1 - the system has a buffer to pay insurers extra funds if do not generate enough revenues (the risk corridor) in the first few years, and that is expected not to be used. In other words, the insurers priced their plans properly. Based on the signup experience in Massachusetts (which ACA has mirrored very closely so far), not many. This is becoming a GOP cried wolf scenario. Every month, the GOP comes up with a new "concern" that's going to bring down the economics Obamacare. And then it gets proven false. And then they repeat. At what point do you stop choosing to believe their next one?
But based on the experience in Massachusetts, young people will stay on their plans, not just pay two or three payments then cancel.
I don't see the relevance of that to anything I said. How many times have you believed one of the GOP's theories on what will go wrong with Obamacare? And how many times have you found it to be wrong?
Insurance AND The ACA are long-term propositions and so cannot be judged on too many short-term analyses. However, starting on the right path would be helpful.
And the hits keep coming... Uninsured admissions dropped by 29 percent in states that expanded medicaid Hospitals see blue-red divide early into Obamacare’s coverage expansion Hospital Corporation of America executives said uninsured admissions dropped 29 percent in states that expanded Medicaid, but actually increased by 5.9 percent in non-expanding states.
Romneycare was kind of a unique animal. Check out section five: http://mittromneycentral.com/resources/romneycare/
GOP goes quiet on ObamaCare “The Republican position of repeal has become increasingly problematic for GOP Senate candidates, so it’s no surprise that they’re beginning to abandon their failed strategy of wasting millions attacking Democrats on ObamaCare,” On the campaign trail, it is clear that some candidates and groups are starting to pivot. BENGHAZI!!!
And things just continue to get worse for the enemies of the American people. Turns Out Obamacare Premiums Aren't More Expensive After All http://finance.yahoo.com/news/turns-obamacare-premiums-arent-more-153900650.html When the cost of an employer-provided health insurance plan is compared to the cost of an Affordable Care Act plan bought on a state health insurance exchange, the ACA plan will be more affordable on average, a new analysis from PricewaterhouseCoopers' Health Research Institute finds. "In 2014, the premiums for health plans offered on new state exchanges under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are comparable to — and in some cases lower than — those being offered by employers with similar levels of coverage," the analysts concluded. "The data suggest the new exchanges are competitive with the current insurance market." The analysis is based on employer-sponsored premiums of 156 million people in 2013. Here's an infographic illustrating those numbers (this is the median annual price for each kind of plan): Because the cost of an insurance plan varies significantly from person to person, these median prices do not reflect realities for every individual. But overall, the cost of insurance on the exchanges is competitive: about 4% less than employer plans, before taking subsidies into account. Some of those cost savings come from the exchange plans' narrower networks — that's fewer available doctors and hospitals to choose from. But what about all those news stories about people whose premiums had shot way up? Those were often people whose pre-ACA insurance did not meet even the most basic standards set forth by the law. "Some of the sticker shock noted among enrollees in the new exchanges is due to more comprehensive insurance coverage in the exchange plans," the PwC analysis notes, citing research in Health Affairs. "More than half the people in the individual market had coverage below the bronze level of 60%, the lowest level in the exchanges." That means that the people most likely to see their rates going way up were people whose insurance would not actually have helped them much when they needed it most.
1) Median price statistics are irrelevant 2) The plans being cheaper due to limited network is a big deal. In Texas for example, the Blue Cross plan that you buy through the exchange does not include Kelsey Seybold. Their network names are similar so many consumers have purchased only to find out that Kelsey isn't available. I'll be surprised if Memorial Hermann is in the network beyond next year.
what amateurish analysis from Cometswin BACKFIRE and many are saying premiums will rise next year since Obamacare wasn't able to get the desired % of healthy people into the program.
