Already happened with those $6,000 deductibles and $10,000 maximum out of pocket expenses of Obamacare. That is not Health Insurance at all since it is basically worthless to millions of Americans.
The maximum is before subsidies. The max out of pocket for 2017 was just over $7k. It is dishonest or ignorant to claim people are paying that much. You are lying or you are not informed. Based on your history I would guess a combo of both. All legitimate estimates show a massive increase in health care costs with the repeal. Just say your are fine with this and with tens of millions more uninsured, don’t pretend it’s based on cost.
If you sell health insurance you should stop immediately; you aren’t competent and could lose your license. Well, you would if you weren’t in a trash market.
Oh now that is funny when Polar Bear does not cherish vague, unsubstantiated claims of financial Armageddon now that Trump is in office. Apparently, it was good enough to get him elected. What next — Trump no longer loves wikileaks???
Also on the upside in your opinion, less spending on Social Security, although it comes at the expense of the 17,000 additional people expected to die now.
March 15, 2017 at 2:58 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
4
2
17,000 to die now?
Call the underwriters, er, undertakers!
I love the fake concern by Libitterals over people expected to ‘die now’… while they ignored vets dying while waiting for health care treatment they EARNED for their service, rather than received as a welfare benefit/ entitlement.
March 17, 2017 at 10:04 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
Yes, if you worked in insurance and were competent, or had any knowledge on anything you would know fewer people insured means more deaths; a lot more people uninsured means a lot more people dead.
Go to Hell regarding liberals not concerned with veterans. You are a despicable piece of trash. What a waste of life, and a wasted life. Your ignorant non-stop posting, and constant sad, sad insults, lies and threats are why few intelligent people come here anymore.
March 17, 2017 at 11:21 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
I worked in insurance, was competent and still am, and know everything about everything, and can contradict what you concluded by simply stating more deaths cannot be attributed to less insurance.
More deaths are usually attributable to less HEALTH CARE TREATMENT or nature taking its course on an aging population. Boom!… assumption summarily dispelled!
Warning!… Libitteral in Uraniumeltdown stage!
Run for the hills! Take cover!
March 17, 2017 at 11:22 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
2
You’re… not your.
oops! UW culpa.
March 17, 2017 at 11:38 am
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
“and know everything about everything”
that sentence is textbook case of know-it-all behavior in the psychology field.
“A person who acts like a know-it-all might be a megalomaniac, or a narcissist, or someone overcompensating for depression, but it could just be that they have a very common disorder: Banal human arrogance.”
March 17, 2017 at 1:39 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
You aren’t competent, you have proven over and over you don’t understand the basics.
“More deaths are usually attributable to less HEALTH CARE TREATMENT or nature taking its course on an aging population. Boom!… assumption summarily dispelled!”
And the data, history, and common sense show less insurance leads to less treatment. Boom, retarded rant dispelled.
You admit you no longer work in insurance, stop saying you do, or, you write like an elementary student. Saying you know everything about everything is plain stupid. Get a life, get out of the house and enjoy your probably forced due to incompetence retirement.
March 15, 2017 at 9:51 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
The projections of LOST policies is based on CURRENT PIF counts.
The proper projection of lost policies must be based on projected PIF under the scenario of ACA continuing in it’s inevitable DEATH SPIRAL. In that case, nearly zero ACA policies would remain. As such, the DROP in PIF count from Death Spiraled ACA to repealed ACA and whatever replacement is chosen would be infinitesimally small.
So, ‘Fake Projections’ IS a proper categorization of CBO’s numbers.
LOL at Libitterals support of the CBO now when the same CBO forecast …. nothing for ACA – because the Dems hid it from everyone until they passed it without Republican support (note: a single RINO, 1-term HoR guy doesn’t count as Republican support).
I’ve got to leave to review again the Raging Madcow announcement last night of TrumPresident’s 1040 for 2005, as I need a few more yucks this morning.
I am seeking clarification on your base assumption to intelligently discuss a possible issue I have with how you framed your argument on PIF projections.
Are you able to cite a non-partisan study that determined in exactly what year the ACA is projected to have zero policies in force?
I understand ACA-death spiral; however, I have not seen any unbiased report definitively stating “if nothing changes, the ACA will have no insureds by 20xx.”
For what it’s worth, I agree the ACA is a super-duper failure (I stole that phrase from someone else who posts here), and I agree we need to make significant changes to it.
On its face, it sounds slightly insincere to state definitively “the ACA will have NO policyholders if nothing is done” without a non-partisan citation to support that, especially as it is that assumption which has led you to basically say “if the AHCA has even one insured member, that’s an increase of one policyholder over the ACA because the ACA will have 0 members.”
I am hoping you have some non-partisan projection/evidence to support that the ACA will actually have zero policyholders when 20xx arrives.
Rosenblatt, do you really believe that Republicans will continue to pour taxpayer money into the imploded Obamacare to keep it alive in perpetuity? Sure, it will be around for a while until the Republican plan comes in to take over the failed plans and give the American consumer choice over no choice.
March 15, 2017 at 2:07 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
You missed my point Agent. I did not say anything about Republicans or Democrats. I did not say what one party was doing was right or wrong.
I purposely am trying to leave “sides” out of the question I asked PBR, hence my comment about a non-partisan analysis.
Let me try again.
I am seeking clarification of PBR’s statement on WHEN the ACA is projected, by a non-partisan analysis, to have zero policyholders thereby lending credence to his argument that any AHCA projected insured counts should be considered an improvement over the ACA count of zero insured’s due to a death spiral.
Will that death spiral cause zero insured’s under the ACA in 2017? 2018? 2020? 2025? This is extremely important if we are going to compare the enrollment numbers under AHCA against what we expect enrollment to be under the ACA.
Example: is 1,000,000 covered under the AHCA in 2019 more or less than the number of those projected to have coverage under the ACA in 2019?
When exactly does PBR’s death spiral cause the ACA enrollment to be nil? What non-partisan report is able to confirm that projection?
March 15, 2017 at 3:04 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
@Rosenblatt; ACA repeal being imminent means NO ONE will spend money to project ACA PIF counts. But it could be done, and I did so by projecting continuation of the death spiral. ZERO PIF is the Death Spiral were allowed to continue.
Of course, you want me to post a link to someone doing such irrelevant projections. I won’t because it is a common sense, accepted conclusion of the end result of the death spiral.
A negative can’t be proven. So, you should project what PIF would result if ACA were allowed to continue. Ready, steady, … GO!
March 15, 2017 at 3:09 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
@Rosenblatt; like a mortality table, the death spiral of ACA predicts eventual death, not an exact date of death.
Why is the specific date relevant to the discussion?
In other words, your concern and mine is to make a valid comparison of PIF under ACA continuing versus repealed and replaced. ANY year in the future can be used to make the comparison, but the END result is what matters, not ONE particular measuring point in time.
By definition, the death spiral will not abate, and the market will eventually collapse.
Any discussion of specific dates / years when one option is better than another is a …. ‘rabbit hole’ type argument.
March 15, 2017 at 3:35 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
Well, I appreciate your semi-rational and totally non-attacking & non-insulting reply, so I sincerely thank you for that.
However, now you have raised an argument based on a theory dependent on increases/decreases over time, can’t substantiate your argument with any evidence, and then claim discussing the assumption you made up that’s driving the basis of your argument is not worth discussing anymore.
Your reply shot down your own theory and any future argument you may have on comparing the projected insureds.
I mean – if you can’t tell me what the projected ACA enrollment numbers would be in 2018 and beyond, there’s no way you can prove the AHCA enrollment will be higher or lower than the (non-existent) projected ACA counts for that same period in time.
You raised an argument that we need to compare projected counts from the two options, then said debating when one option would actually have resulted in more people being insured versus the other option is a ‘rabbit hole’ argument.
I do not see a way to rationally discuss this with you in more detail since you are willing to contradict yourself at a moments notice.
I’d suggest you try to be more consistent in your posts – if you bring up an issue, be prepared to discuss it without resorting to comments like “it’s a rabbit hole issue, so I’m not talking about it anymore.” If anyone dug the rabbit hole, you did, not the person asking “hey – what’s in the hole”?
March 15, 2017 at 5:46 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
3
@Rosenblatt:
I do not consider 2018 to be a valid comparison point in time, so I refuse to answer your question, and refuse to give even a rough estimate, such as 50% of current PIF.
2018 is too soon for the Death Spiral to end ACA enrollment.
YOU need to defend YOUR selection of 2018 as a VALID and MEANINGFUL point in time to compare PIF projected under ACA and its replacement plan. Ready, steady, GO!
March 16, 2017 at 9:45 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
3
0
I initially wrote
I understand ACA-death spiral; however, I have not seen any unbiased report definitively stating “if nothing changes, the ACA will have no insureds by 20xx.”
Then I wrote
Will that death spiral cause zero insured’s under the ACA in 2017? 2018? 2020? 2025?
Then I wrote
if you can’t tell me what the projected ACA enrollment numbers would be in 2018 and beyond
It is clear I am not using 2018 as a “VALID and MEANINGFUL point in time” – it’s clear I was leaving the date open for you to tell us when it’s projected that the ACA will have zero policyholders and have its death spiral completed.
I don’t need to “defend my selection of 2018” as I didn’t actually select 2018 as the date. I left picking a date open to you.
March 15, 2017 at 4:32 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
Polar, UW sounds a lot like Alan Grayson, doesn’t he?
You generally sound a lot like Hitler, just add in or focus more on : millennials, gays, liberals, socialists, communists, egg heads, dweebs, dorks, scientists, northeasterners, Californians, blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, Arabs, Koreans, actuaries, professors, students, young people, people not in sales, people who aren’t agents, underwriters, computer programmers, transgendered people, just to name a few.
March 17, 2017 at 11:25 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
@UW; you missed ‘Russians’… more specifically, ‘Russians who hacked the Electoral College System election’.
Next time, remember to include it in your list of deplorables, despicables, and irredeemables.
March 17, 2017 at 1:42 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
2
0
No, idiotic. He, like you, repeats everything Trump says as truth, so oooooobviously he wouldn’t include the Russians, Einstein. You aren’t intelligent, I think it’s debatable whether you are even literate. I believe your fall into this category:
Freedumb of choice in Dem’s ACA: buy health insurance at excessive prices, with unnecessary coverages, OR pay a tax penalty and get no coverage at all – to partly subsidize those paying NOTHING for their coverage.
Again, become fully literare, read it again, and then comment. You and Agent combined might equal a 100 IQ.
March 15, 2017 at 12:58 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
Polar, from what I glean from Blue Cross in the near future, there will be freedom of choice offered in the plans. Actual boxes to check for the consumer on what they want or don’t want. That sounds like freedom to me.
Yes; it is a way for consumers to buy as much as they want and can afford. It is a way to avoid paying for things others will use but you may not use but will subsidize unnecessarily.
Dems and Libitterals don’t believe in freedom of choice, but they do believe in freedumb of Socialist / Communist politicians choosing on behalf of the ‘peasants’ they think are too dumb to choose as wisely as them.
Polar, I remember the first shellacking and Obama admitting it and said that perhaps it just wasn’t explained well enough in his 28 speech barnstorming tour. The American people saw right through the lies, distortions, promises and the law was a failure from the beginning and has been imploding since. Progressive elitists think everyone is stupid but them. How wrong they were.
March 14, 2017 at 1:43 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
10
1
Well, just don’t buy an iPhone, Celtica. Duh! Although, if you twist your knee requiring ACJ surgery, you’ll need 24 iPhones and if you want to have a child, you’ll need about 10 more (not counting prenatal care, anesthesia, C-sections, or other complications). The list obviously goes on from there. It should also be noted, Jason Chaffetz received a free iPhone courtesy of his campaign donors. Oh, the same people who pay his monthly bills.
Rosenblatt, you are completely missing the point Polar is making. By the way, who at this point is interested in enrolling in a failed Healthcare Law now or in the future? Health Insurance companies are already in the process of designing freedom of choice in their plans. How do I know this? Blue Cross and Blue Shield is one of the largest and they have seen the handwriting on the wall. I don’t know why you are so concerned about enrollment numbers between the two plans. That should not be a concern to you. Just get on the bandwagon to a better solution and restoration of freedom of choice to the consumer. It will be all better in the near future.
Pretty sure Polar can clarify his own remarks and explain what his point was if he thinks I missed it. I’ll wait for him to do so if he chooses.
How many times do I have to write “I think the ACA is a super-duper failure” before you stop telling me things like “I have to get on the bandwagon”? Come on man, you MUST remember by now that I’ve been saying it’s horrible for quite some time now, yes?
Also, it’s pretty rude to tell me what I should be concerned with. You have your concerns and I have mine. We both can be concerned with whatever we want. Yay America.
Again, the EXACT year ACA completely collapses is dependent on resistance in Dem states. So it may drag on, painfully to some citizens. Thus, making ANY projection based on the free wills of 50 different states is too tall a task for me to venture into now.
The END result is a collapse of ACA due to the current Death Spiral and states eventually realizing ACA failed and they have to adopt the new approach produced by the Republicans.
Why on Earth would I waste time projecting what Dem governors will do to resist TrumPresident? Jerry “Moonbat” Brown, etc. are not necessarily rational people.
Moonbat completely turned around the trashed state after the Republican celebrity, just like Obama did after Bush, and like somebody will have to do after this disgraceful, celebrity, incompetent Republican fails, damages the country and goes back to his inherited palaces with the extra money he illegally makes from being president.
President Trump will be President for at least the next 3 years and 10 months. Stop criticizing every little thing that happens or what you think is going to happen. Sit back and enjoy the ride as he Makes America Great Again. Jobs are way up and illegal border crossings are way down.
President Trump for next 3 years and 10 months? Think again. Wikileaks just released details that Mike Pence will be the President with work underway to impeach Trump. Wonder if Trump still loves Wikileaks…
This seems like bs to me. Wikileaks has not been credible for about 5 years. They are pro-Russian, pro-Trump. I don’t doubt this guy could be impeached but not as wikileaks claims, and not before the midterms.
Phone Raging Madcow on MSLSD and ask her to make it a feature story tonight. Tell her you’ll forward any TrumPresident tax returns that may find their way to your mail box. Say you know Koskinen and Lerner personally.
Since the February 2015 (238,000) and February 2016 (237,000) net jobs gained were both higher than February 2017 (235,000), it is too soon to judge how much better President Trump will be creating jobs than President Obama.
By the way, more jobs does not equal a greater America, just a more employed America.
Or we could “Just pass it to see what it does”. Isn’t that what they said of Obamacare? We will have to pass it to see what it does….. I, for one, have not been overly affected by the ACA since I work for a large employer who is exempt from the requirements, but I have plenty of friends who’s companies cancelled their group plans and they were left out in the cold because of Obamacare. They couldn’t afford the offerings on the government website because they “made too much”. Most of them just paid the fines instead.
Your company is not exempt, they met the requirements. Actually small companies are exempt. Most group plans dropping are not because they can’t afford it, they are because they don’t pay enough and think their employees will get subsidies.
Over 2,000 large companies and unions applied for and received exemptions from complying with Obamacare mandated plans. Now, they won’t have to worry about the Progressive solution any longer.
Really? Explain the nearly 2200 exemption granted, many for employers or unions favorable to Dems in respect of donations from their employees or employees.
I dare you to provide proof that exemptions weren’t granted en masse.
March 15, 2017 at 3:16 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
silence after being asked to supply proof no exemptions were granted…. crickets beginning to chirp in the distance… and polar bears snoring loudly, asleep on an iceberg…
March 15, 2017 at 10:03 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
2
3
@Agent; we should make it a point to ignore the lies by UW as that’s all he can do now to resist TrumPresident. It is a waste of time replying to obvious lies. IMO, it’s baiting to take the debate down a rabbit hole with no bottom to the ‘layers of lies’ Libitterals are telling these days.
Anyone who denies the 2200 exemptions is a purveyor of Fake News. Very fake news.
Polar, the true believers transfixed by Media Matters & Moveon.org will never believe us on any issue. I agree, it is a waste of time. We can be secure in our belief that we know the truth and we know right from wrong.
March 15, 2017 at 1:24 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
Agent wrote, “We can be secure in our belief that we know the truth and we know right from wrong.”
Not according to Jesus, you don’t Agent. According to Supply Side Jesus, yes.
March 15, 2017 at 3:13 pm
Conserving the Truth says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
@Agent and Polar,
Please respond with a simple yes or no. Please. I need to know this. Do either of you support the current draft of the new health care plan? Please do not respond with, “Well, this is going to change in the second/third draft” or “No matter what it is better than Obamacare”. Please just respond – yes or no. Do you support what has been presented to the American people?
I shook my magic eight-ball filled with black ink and an air-filled pyramid shaped object, with printed answers on each of the pyramids’ 4 faces, to get an answer for you.
It said: “Ignore the troll attempting to take the debate down a rabbit hole on his/ her terms and definitions.” The type was very tiny to fit all of that on one side of the pyramid thingy.
Expected. I try to have a sensible conversation with someone who represents absolute evil and this is the result. You are too cowardly to respond “yes” because you know this plan is essentially a death ticket for the elderly but too proud to say “no” because your oppressed, bigoted brain cannot fathom disagreeing with your lord emperor. You aren’t even funny, just….SAD!
You’ve had plenty of time to read and digest the plan and post that you know know mostly everything that will be in parts two and three.
Presuming EVERYTHING you expect to be included in part 2 & 3 is captured in those plans, do you agree with how part 1 of 3 is currently drafted in its entirety?
Conserving the Lie, you are one word parsing dude which is a Progressive trait. Sorry to disappoint you, but I support the final version that will finish demolishing Obamacare and save the taxpayer $883 Billion in taxes and offer freedom of choice to the consumer.
Asking for a simple yes or no on how you worded it is not an option.
Although your reply is baffling as usual – saying yes based on “facts” you apparently know to be true – I appreciate that you’ve actually given and answer and not continued to beat around the bush. What will be done to prevent some elderly from paying nearly half their annual income on health insurance? The CBO report should have you worried. Does it? Then again you could be exceptionally wealthy and everything you’ve said on here will suddenly make sense. If you super rich, congrats!!! Your President is working for you!
Parse, parse, parse. Purvey another liberal news farce.
Medicaid. Jobs. Expanded retirement plans in lieu of Failing Social Security. Replace PAYGO government schemes with pre-funded financial plans managed by private industry…. etc.
Psst; don’t like the US Healthcare and insurance industry now? Move to socialized medicine nations such as Britain or Cana-duh! Buh-bye! Oh, and let us know how long it takes to get treatment for serious illnesses.
Polar, liberals are problem creators with fear as their watchword. Conservative Republicans are problem solvers. Just look at the mess to be cleaned up.
March 20, 2017 at 5:45 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Polar, just in. The CBO were off on the Obamacare enrollment by “millions”. Why are we not surprised?
March 17, 2017 at 11:38 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
‘exceptionally wealthy’ = term used by jealous millennial.
Buzzfeed Fake News yet again. Had you been paying attention to our new POTUS, you may have heard him saying that he wouldn’t sign a bill that did not take care of the people. Health Insurance will be coming down when everything is finalized. Quit getting your news from the left. They have lied to us for 8 years and you gobbled it up without any criticism. Lemmings following the Progressives are a big part of the problem in this country.
Oh Boy, here we go again!
Breaking News: Republicans are going to fix Healthcare and restore freedom of choice and competition in the marketplace. What a novel idea.
Yes, the Republicans are firmly committed to restoring our freedom to experience personal bankruptcy from medical bills.
Already happened with those $6,000 deductibles and $10,000 maximum out of pocket expenses of Obamacare. That is not Health Insurance at all since it is basically worthless to millions of Americans.
The maximum is before subsidies. The max out of pocket for 2017 was just over $7k. It is dishonest or ignorant to claim people are paying that much. You are lying or you are not informed. Based on your history I would guess a combo of both. All legitimate estimates show a massive increase in health care costs with the repeal. Just say your are fine with this and with tens of millions more uninsured, don’t pretend it’s based on cost.
If you sell health insurance you should stop immediately; you aren’t competent and could lose your license. Well, you would if you weren’t in a trash market.
How many experienced bankruptcy BEFORE ACA?
Numbers, and facts, please, not VAGUE, UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS of pending financial Armageddon.
In your list of facts, please cite the PROJECTED premium rates used in your dire forecast.
Yes, and then I’m going to reply for Yogi for him before you do: those numbers are fake. Fake news! Duuuuh.
Guy is a Birther, that’s all you need to know.
Oh now that is funny when Polar Bear does not cherish vague, unsubstantiated claims of financial Armageddon now that Trump is in office. Apparently, it was good enough to get him elected. What next — Trump no longer loves wikileaks???
$883 Billion in Obamacare taxes going away. Oops!
Also on the upside in your opinion, less spending on Social Security, although it comes at the expense of the 17,000 additional people expected to die now.
17,000 to die now?
Call the underwriters, er, undertakers!
I love the fake concern by Libitterals over people expected to ‘die now’… while they ignored vets dying while waiting for health care treatment they EARNED for their service, rather than received as a welfare benefit/ entitlement.
Yes, if you worked in insurance and were competent, or had any knowledge on anything you would know fewer people insured means more deaths; a lot more people uninsured means a lot more people dead.
Go to Hell regarding liberals not concerned with veterans. You are a despicable piece of trash. What a waste of life, and a wasted life. Your ignorant non-stop posting, and constant sad, sad insults, lies and threats are why few intelligent people come here anymore.
I worked in insurance, was competent and still am, and know everything about everything, and can contradict what you concluded by simply stating more deaths cannot be attributed to less insurance.
More deaths are usually attributable to less HEALTH CARE TREATMENT or nature taking its course on an aging population. Boom!… assumption summarily dispelled!
Warning!… Libitteral in Uraniumeltdown stage!
Run for the hills! Take cover!
You’re… not your.
oops! UW culpa.
“and know everything about everything”
that sentence is textbook case of know-it-all behavior in the psychology field.
“A person who acts like a know-it-all might be a megalomaniac, or a narcissist, or someone overcompensating for depression, but it could just be that they have a very common disorder: Banal human arrogance.”
You aren’t competent, you have proven over and over you don’t understand the basics.
“More deaths are usually attributable to less HEALTH CARE TREATMENT or nature taking its course on an aging population. Boom!… assumption summarily dispelled!”
And the data, history, and common sense show less insurance leads to less treatment. Boom, retarded rant dispelled.
You admit you no longer work in insurance, stop saying you do, or, you write like an elementary student. Saying you know everything about everything is plain stupid. Get a life, get out of the house and enjoy your probably forced due to incompetence retirement.
The projections of LOST policies is based on CURRENT PIF counts.
The proper projection of lost policies must be based on projected PIF under the scenario of ACA continuing in it’s inevitable DEATH SPIRAL. In that case, nearly zero ACA policies would remain. As such, the DROP in PIF count from Death Spiraled ACA to repealed ACA and whatever replacement is chosen would be infinitesimally small.
So, ‘Fake Projections’ IS a proper categorization of CBO’s numbers.
LOL at Libitterals support of the CBO now when the same CBO forecast …. nothing for ACA – because the Dems hid it from everyone until they passed it without Republican support (note: a single RINO, 1-term HoR guy doesn’t count as Republican support).
I’ve got to leave to review again the Raging Madcow announcement last night of TrumPresident’s 1040 for 2005, as I need a few more yucks this morning.
I am seeking clarification on your base assumption to intelligently discuss a possible issue I have with how you framed your argument on PIF projections.
Are you able to cite a non-partisan study that determined in exactly what year the ACA is projected to have zero policies in force?
I understand ACA-death spiral; however, I have not seen any unbiased report definitively stating “if nothing changes, the ACA will have no insureds by 20xx.”
For what it’s worth, I agree the ACA is a super-duper failure (I stole that phrase from someone else who posts here), and I agree we need to make significant changes to it.
On its face, it sounds slightly insincere to state definitively “the ACA will have NO policyholders if nothing is done” without a non-partisan citation to support that, especially as it is that assumption which has led you to basically say “if the AHCA has even one insured member, that’s an increase of one policyholder over the ACA because the ACA will have 0 members.”
I am hoping you have some non-partisan projection/evidence to support that the ACA will actually have zero policyholders when 20xx arrives.
Rosenblatt, do you really believe that Republicans will continue to pour taxpayer money into the imploded Obamacare to keep it alive in perpetuity? Sure, it will be around for a while until the Republican plan comes in to take over the failed plans and give the American consumer choice over no choice.
You missed my point Agent. I did not say anything about Republicans or Democrats. I did not say what one party was doing was right or wrong.
I purposely am trying to leave “sides” out of the question I asked PBR, hence my comment about a non-partisan analysis.
Let me try again.
I am seeking clarification of PBR’s statement on WHEN the ACA is projected, by a non-partisan analysis, to have zero policyholders thereby lending credence to his argument that any AHCA projected insured counts should be considered an improvement over the ACA count of zero insured’s due to a death spiral.
Will that death spiral cause zero insured’s under the ACA in 2017? 2018? 2020? 2025? This is extremely important if we are going to compare the enrollment numbers under AHCA against what we expect enrollment to be under the ACA.
Example: is 1,000,000 covered under the AHCA in 2019 more or less than the number of those projected to have coverage under the ACA in 2019?
When exactly does PBR’s death spiral cause the ACA enrollment to be nil? What non-partisan report is able to confirm that projection?
@Rosenblatt; ACA repeal being imminent means NO ONE will spend money to project ACA PIF counts. But it could be done, and I did so by projecting continuation of the death spiral. ZERO PIF is the Death Spiral were allowed to continue.
Of course, you want me to post a link to someone doing such irrelevant projections. I won’t because it is a common sense, accepted conclusion of the end result of the death spiral.
A negative can’t be proven. So, you should project what PIF would result if ACA were allowed to continue. Ready, steady, … GO!
@Rosenblatt; like a mortality table, the death spiral of ACA predicts eventual death, not an exact date of death.
Why is the specific date relevant to the discussion?
In other words, your concern and mine is to make a valid comparison of PIF under ACA continuing versus repealed and replaced. ANY year in the future can be used to make the comparison, but the END result is what matters, not ONE particular measuring point in time.
By definition, the death spiral will not abate, and the market will eventually collapse.
Any discussion of specific dates / years when one option is better than another is a …. ‘rabbit hole’ type argument.
Well, I appreciate your semi-rational and totally non-attacking & non-insulting reply, so I sincerely thank you for that.
However, now you have raised an argument based on a theory dependent on increases/decreases over time, can’t substantiate your argument with any evidence, and then claim discussing the assumption you made up that’s driving the basis of your argument is not worth discussing anymore.
Your reply shot down your own theory and any future argument you may have on comparing the projected insureds.
I mean – if you can’t tell me what the projected ACA enrollment numbers would be in 2018 and beyond, there’s no way you can prove the AHCA enrollment will be higher or lower than the (non-existent) projected ACA counts for that same period in time.
You raised an argument that we need to compare projected counts from the two options, then said debating when one option would actually have resulted in more people being insured versus the other option is a ‘rabbit hole’ argument.
I do not see a way to rationally discuss this with you in more detail since you are willing to contradict yourself at a moments notice.
I’d suggest you try to be more consistent in your posts – if you bring up an issue, be prepared to discuss it without resorting to comments like “it’s a rabbit hole issue, so I’m not talking about it anymore.” If anyone dug the rabbit hole, you did, not the person asking “hey – what’s in the hole”?
@Rosenblatt:
I do not consider 2018 to be a valid comparison point in time, so I refuse to answer your question, and refuse to give even a rough estimate, such as 50% of current PIF.
2018 is too soon for the Death Spiral to end ACA enrollment.
YOU need to defend YOUR selection of 2018 as a VALID and MEANINGFUL point in time to compare PIF projected under ACA and its replacement plan. Ready, steady, GO!
I initially wrote
I understand ACA-death spiral; however, I have not seen any unbiased report definitively stating “if nothing changes, the ACA will have no insureds by 20xx.”
Then I wrote
Will that death spiral cause zero insured’s under the ACA in 2017? 2018? 2020? 2025?
Then I wrote
if you can’t tell me what the projected ACA enrollment numbers would be in 2018 and beyond
It is clear I am not using 2018 as a “VALID and MEANINGFUL point in time” – it’s clear I was leaving the date open for you to tell us when it’s projected that the ACA will have zero policyholders and have its death spiral completed.
I don’t need to “defend my selection of 2018” as I didn’t actually select 2018 as the date. I left picking a date open to you.
Polar, UW sounds a lot like Alan Grayson, doesn’t he?
Yup!
You generally sound a lot like Hitler, just add in or focus more on : millennials, gays, liberals, socialists, communists, egg heads, dweebs, dorks, scientists, northeasterners, Californians, blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, Arabs, Koreans, actuaries, professors, students, young people, people not in sales, people who aren’t agents, underwriters, computer programmers, transgendered people, just to name a few.
@UW; you missed ‘Russians’… more specifically, ‘Russians who hacked the Electoral College System election’.
Next time, remember to include it in your list of deplorables, despicables, and irredeemables.
No, idiotic. He, like you, repeats everything Trump says as truth, so oooooobviously he wouldn’t include the Russians, Einstein. You aren’t intelligent, I think it’s debatable whether you are even literate. I believe your fall into this category:
ht tp://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/32-million-us-adults-are-functionally-illiterate-what-does-even-mean
The ACA is not in a death spiral. Anyone making that claim is not qualified to discuss health insurance.
Rosenblatt, Yogi here lies about his degrees, qualifications, and work history hoping for intelligent discussion with him is a waste of energy.
He thinks climate change is a conspiracy to enrich scientists and that Obama was not born in the USA.
Freedom of choice in Trump world: feed your family or buy healthcare.
Freedumb of choice in Dem’s ACA: buy health insurance at excessive prices, with unnecessary coverages, OR pay a tax penalty and get no coverage at all – to partly subsidize those paying NOTHING for their coverage.
What you are getting at with “unnecessary coverages” doesn’t actually exist. You don’t buy coverages from a basket.
Wow! You are clueless. Read the coverages mandated. Ask Nancy Pee-Low-See-It-After-We-Pass-It for an explanation of those mandated coverages.
Again, become fully literare, read it again, and then comment. You and Agent combined might equal a 100 IQ.
Polar, from what I glean from Blue Cross in the near future, there will be freedom of choice offered in the plans. Actual boxes to check for the consumer on what they want or don’t want. That sounds like freedom to me.
Yes; it is a way for consumers to buy as much as they want and can afford. It is a way to avoid paying for things others will use but you may not use but will subsidize unnecessarily.
Dems and Libitterals don’t believe in freedom of choice, but they do believe in freedumb of Socialist / Communist politicians choosing on behalf of the ‘peasants’ they think are too dumb to choose as wisely as them.
Polar, I remember the first shellacking and Obama admitting it and said that perhaps it just wasn’t explained well enough in his 28 speech barnstorming tour. The American people saw right through the lies, distortions, promises and the law was a failure from the beginning and has been imploding since. Progressive elitists think everyone is stupid but them. How wrong they were.
Well, just don’t buy an iPhone, Celtica. Duh! Although, if you twist your knee requiring ACJ surgery, you’ll need 24 iPhones and if you want to have a child, you’ll need about 10 more (not counting prenatal care, anesthesia, C-sections, or other complications). The list obviously goes on from there. It should also be noted, Jason Chaffetz received a free iPhone courtesy of his campaign donors. Oh, the same people who pay his monthly bills.
*ACL surgery
Gosh, Captain — all I have to do is give up my iPhone to have health care coverage? I’m in!
Or if you are born with bad genetics hopefully you inherited a few hundred iPhones.
I tired quickly reading this hyperbole sub-thread. tldnr.
You should read a book on grammar instead.
Rosenblatt, you are completely missing the point Polar is making. By the way, who at this point is interested in enrolling in a failed Healthcare Law now or in the future? Health Insurance companies are already in the process of designing freedom of choice in their plans. How do I know this? Blue Cross and Blue Shield is one of the largest and they have seen the handwriting on the wall. I don’t know why you are so concerned about enrollment numbers between the two plans. That should not be a concern to you. Just get on the bandwagon to a better solution and restoration of freedom of choice to the consumer. It will be all better in the near future.
Pretty sure Polar can clarify his own remarks and explain what his point was if he thinks I missed it. I’ll wait for him to do so if he chooses.
How many times do I have to write “I think the ACA is a super-duper failure” before you stop telling me things like “I have to get on the bandwagon”? Come on man, you MUST remember by now that I’ve been saying it’s horrible for quite some time now, yes?
Also, it’s pretty rude to tell me what I should be concerned with. You have your concerns and I have mine. We both can be concerned with whatever we want. Yay America.
Again, the EXACT year ACA completely collapses is dependent on resistance in Dem states. So it may drag on, painfully to some citizens. Thus, making ANY projection based on the free wills of 50 different states is too tall a task for me to venture into now.
The END result is a collapse of ACA due to the current Death Spiral and states eventually realizing ACA failed and they have to adopt the new approach produced by the Republicans.
Why on Earth would I waste time projecting what Dem governors will do to resist TrumPresident? Jerry “Moonbat” Brown, etc. are not necessarily rational people.
Moonbat completely turned around the trashed state after the Republican celebrity, just like Obama did after Bush, and like somebody will have to do after this disgraceful, celebrity, incompetent Republican fails, damages the country and goes back to his inherited palaces with the extra money he illegally makes from being president.
President Trump will be President for at least the next 3 years and 10 months. Stop criticizing every little thing that happens or what you think is going to happen. Sit back and enjoy the ride as he Makes America Great Again. Jobs are way up and illegal border crossings are way down.
President Trump for next 3 years and 10 months? Think again. Wikileaks just released details that Mike Pence will be the President with work underway to impeach Trump. Wonder if Trump still loves Wikileaks…
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/pence-dismisses-claims-planning-white-house-takeover-article-1.2997723
This seems like bs to me. Wikileaks has not been credible for about 5 years. They are pro-Russian, pro-Trump. I don’t doubt this guy could be impeached but not as wikileaks claims, and not before the midterms.
Fake news.
Phone Raging Madcow on MSLSD and ask her to make it a feature story tonight. Tell her you’ll forward any TrumPresident tax returns that may find their way to your mail box. Say you know Koskinen and Lerner personally.
Weird.
Jack Kanauph,
Since the February 2015 (238,000) and February 2016 (237,000) net jobs gained were both higher than February 2017 (235,000), it is too soon to judge how much better President Trump will be creating jobs than President Obama.
By the way, more jobs does not equal a greater America, just a more employed America.
Or we could “Just pass it to see what it does”. Isn’t that what they said of Obamacare? We will have to pass it to see what it does….. I, for one, have not been overly affected by the ACA since I work for a large employer who is exempt from the requirements, but I have plenty of friends who’s companies cancelled their group plans and they were left out in the cold because of Obamacare. They couldn’t afford the offerings on the government website because they “made too much”. Most of them just paid the fines instead.
Your company is not exempt, they met the requirements. Actually small companies are exempt. Most group plans dropping are not because they can’t afford it, they are because they don’t pay enough and think their employees will get subsidies.
Over 2,000 large companies and unions applied for and received exemptions from complying with Obamacare mandated plans. Now, they won’t have to worry about the Progressive solution any longer.
You are absolutely clueless.
Really? Explain the nearly 2200 exemption granted, many for employers or unions favorable to Dems in respect of donations from their employees or employees.
I dare you to provide proof that exemptions weren’t granted en masse.
silence after being asked to supply proof no exemptions were granted…. crickets beginning to chirp in the distance… and polar bears snoring loudly, asleep on an iceberg…
@Agent; we should make it a point to ignore the lies by UW as that’s all he can do now to resist TrumPresident. It is a waste of time replying to obvious lies. IMO, it’s baiting to take the debate down a rabbit hole with no bottom to the ‘layers of lies’ Libitterals are telling these days.
Anyone who denies the 2200 exemptions is a purveyor of Fake News. Very fake news.
Polar, the true believers transfixed by Media Matters & Moveon.org will never believe us on any issue. I agree, it is a waste of time. We can be secure in our belief that we know the truth and we know right from wrong.
Agent wrote, “We can be secure in our belief that we know the truth and we know right from wrong.”
Not according to Jesus, you don’t Agent. According to Supply Side Jesus, yes.
@Agent and Polar,
Please respond with a simple yes or no. Please. I need to know this. Do either of you support the current draft of the new health care plan? Please do not respond with, “Well, this is going to change in the second/third draft” or “No matter what it is better than Obamacare”. Please just respond – yes or no. Do you support what has been presented to the American people?
I shook my magic eight-ball filled with black ink and an air-filled pyramid shaped object, with printed answers on each of the pyramids’ 4 faces, to get an answer for you.
It said: “Ignore the troll attempting to take the debate down a rabbit hole on his/ her terms and definitions.” The type was very tiny to fit all of that on one side of the pyramid thingy.
Expected. I try to have a sensible conversation with someone who represents absolute evil and this is the result. You are too cowardly to respond “yes” because you know this plan is essentially a death ticket for the elderly but too proud to say “no” because your oppressed, bigoted brain cannot fathom disagreeing with your lord emperor. You aren’t even funny, just….SAD!
Let’s rephrase the question.
You’ve had plenty of time to read and digest the plan and post that you know know mostly everything that will be in parts two and three.
Presuming EVERYTHING you expect to be included in part 2 & 3 is captured in those plans, do you agree with how part 1 of 3 is currently drafted in its entirety?
Psst; you aren’t trying to ‘have a debate’. You are trying to set the rules for a debate, then debate under your rules (e.g. Y or N reply only).
Conserving the Lie, you are one word parsing dude which is a Progressive trait. Sorry to disappoint you, but I support the final version that will finish demolishing Obamacare and save the taxpayer $883 Billion in taxes and offer freedom of choice to the consumer.
Asking for a simple yes or no on how you worded it is not an option.
Agent,
Although your reply is baffling as usual – saying yes based on “facts” you apparently know to be true – I appreciate that you’ve actually given and answer and not continued to beat around the bush. What will be done to prevent some elderly from paying nearly half their annual income on health insurance? The CBO report should have you worried. Does it? Then again you could be exceptionally wealthy and everything you’ve said on here will suddenly make sense. If you super rich, congrats!!! Your President is working for you!
Parse, parse, parse. Purvey another liberal news farce.
Medicaid. Jobs. Expanded retirement plans in lieu of Failing Social Security. Replace PAYGO government schemes with pre-funded financial plans managed by private industry…. etc.
Psst; don’t like the US Healthcare and insurance industry now? Move to socialized medicine nations such as Britain or Cana-duh! Buh-bye! Oh, and let us know how long it takes to get treatment for serious illnesses.
Only liberally schooled snowflakes ‘worry’ about problems.
Courageous, ambitious, successful people step up to solve the problems they face.
Polar, liberals are problem creators with fear as their watchword. Conservative Republicans are problem solvers. Just look at the mess to be cleaned up.
Polar, just in. The CBO were off on the Obamacare enrollment by “millions”. Why are we not surprised?
‘exceptionally wealthy’ = term used by jealous millennial.
Buzzfeed Fake News yet again. Had you been paying attention to our new POTUS, you may have heard him saying that he wouldn’t sign a bill that did not take care of the people. Health Insurance will be coming down when everything is finalized. Quit getting your news from the left. They have lied to us for 8 years and you gobbled it up without any criticism. Lemmings following the Progressives are a big part of the problem in this country.