Well...what do you think of Obamacare now?

AFM · Dec 27, 2015

Greenbeard said: ↑

No, it isn't. That's the legal upper limit, the bronze tier. Two-thirds of shoppers choose silver plans, which have lower deductibles (and, depending on income, are eligible for cost-sharing subsidies that further reduce the deductible). Another ten percent bought gold or platinum level plans.

Weighted by enrollment and ignoring the cost-sharing subsidies, the average deductible is around $3,000. Not cheap, but a fairly standard high deductible plan. Once you factor in that ~60% of shoppers are getting cost-sharing reductions that lower their deducible, the average drops even more.
Click to expand...

From a poster on another forum:

My selfish answer is repeal it and go back to what we had before! I had a great PPO with a $3,000.00 deductible and an HSA. This plan cost me ~$600/month for my spouse and I. With contributions to my HSA, I could write the check for any medical expenses and accumulate a nice nest egg for future expenses.

When ACA mandates took effect my premium jumped to almost $1000.00/month and the deductible increased to $10,000.00! This hit my budget hard and we have had to change lifestyle to pay the premiums. This in addition to paying my fair share in taxes.

I don't mind paying taxes to subsidize national health care but paying almost a grand a month for a $10,000 deductible insurance plan in addition to my taxes is hurting me big time. The secondary effect is we are not eating out or spending discretionary cash to stimulate the economy just like the 30-40 million middle class people that are getting hammered for premiums. This is one effect on the economy that is difficult to measure.
Click to expand...

rkhames · Dec 27, 2015

Ronstar said: ↑

I like that more Americans have health insurance.

but we need to slow down the increase in premium/co-pay prices, and perhaps even freeze/reverse them.
Click to expand...

In 2010, the US census stated that the number of uninsured in this country was at 16.3%:

In 2010, the percentage of people without health insurance, 16.3 percent, was not statistically different from the rate in 2009. The number of uninsured people increased to 49.9 million in 2010 from 49.0 million in 2009.
Click to expand...

https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/data/incpovhlth/2010/highlights.html

During the first quarter 2015, the percentage of uninsured Americans dropped to

11.9
Click to expand...

%.

Under the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) the uninsured rate dropped to 11.9% for Q1 of 2015. This is down about 1% from last quarter and 5.2% since 2013.
Click to expand...

http://obamacarefacts.com/2015/04/13/us-uninsured-rate-drops-11-9-in-first-quarter-2015/

So, most Americans (83.7%) were already insured prior to the signing of the ACA into law, and slightly more (88.1%) Americans are insured today. For all the billions spent on the ACA, all we got was a 4.4% decrease in the number of uninsured. Seems very little bang for the huge amount of bucks. Further, those modest gains are jeopardized by rising premiums and insurance companies threatening to pull out of the program.

But this is nothing more then a Storm tactic to crash the healthcare system and force a change to a single payer system. If you don't believe me, just ask Harry Reid:

What weve done with Obamacare is have a step in the right direction, but were far from having something thats going to work forever, Reid said.

When then asked by panelist Steve Sebelius whether he meant ultimately the country would have to have a health care system that abandoned insurance as the means of accessing it, Reid said: Yes, yes. Absolutely, yes.

The idea of introducing a single-payer national health care system to the United States, or even just a public option, sent lawmakers into a tizzy back in 2009, when Reid was negotiating the health care bill.

We had a real good run at the public option dont think we didnt have a tremendous number of people who wanted a single-payer system, Reid said on the PBS program, recalling how then-Sen. Joe Liebermans opposition to the idea of a public option made them abandon the notion and start from scratch.
Click to expand...

http://lasvegassun.com/news/2013/aug/10/reid-says-obamacare-just-step-toward-eventual-sing/

lynnlynn · Dec 28, 2015

beth115 said: ↑

The deductibles average between 6000-10,000.00/ year, rendering coverage virtually worthless unless you have a catastrophic condition, even then you will owe your deductible and out of pocket.that is if you can find a hospital and doctor on staff at that hospital that is listed on your plan. Only those that earn enough are subject to the mandate and those that dont earn enough j
Have no mamndate or penalty there is no mandate requring they apply for medicaid. And if there was such a mandate many states did not expand medicaid, so still many uninsureds . only those that already had and could afford health insurance prior to the PPACA are really subject to the mandate and HHS stupid required benefits that you must pay for regardless if you will ever need them such as maternity and newborn care. This law is and will continue to fall apart on its own.
Click to expand...

All those states that did expand Medicaid will stop this program once the Federal government stops paying for it.

lynnlynn · Dec 28, 2015

Shiva_TD said: ↑

Much of the health insurance industry is provided for by "not for profit" organizations so there is no profit for the insurance company and those "for profit":insurance companies must compete with the "not for profit" insurance companies. For example about 1/2 of all of the insurance companies that provide Blue Cross / Blue Shield health insurance are not-for-profit companies today.

Additionally about 1/2 of all health services costs are paid for by the government. There's very little "profit" associated with health insurance in America today.
Click to expand...

You need to educate yourself on Blue Cross/Blue Shield and the other major insurance companies. They have made record profits since the ACA passed. They have made so much money that your premiums are being used to expand coverage in other countries. All of these companies are in the mortgage business for commercial property. United Healthcare owns a bank among many other businesses out there.

Their financial reports can easily be looked up on the internet

PatriotNews · Dec 28, 2015

lynnlynn said: ↑

All those states that did expand Medicaid will stop this program once the Federal government stops paying for it.
Click to expand...

Or the taxpayers of those states will be on the hook.

Shiva_TD · Dec 29, 2015

lynnlynn said: ↑

You need to educate yourself on Blue Cross/Blue Shield and the other major insurance companies. They have made record profits since the ACA passed. They have made so much money that your premiums are being used to expand coverage in other countries. All of these companies are in the mortgage business for commercial property. United Healthcare owns a bank among many other businesses out there.

Their financial reports can easily be looked up on the internet
Click to expand...

The Blue Cross Blue Shield Association (BCBSA) is a federation of 36 separate United States health insurance organizations and companies, providing health insurance to more than 106[2] million Americans.[3] Blue Cross was founded in 1929, and became the Blue Cross Association in 1960, while Blue Shield emerged in 1939 and the Blue Shield Association was created in 1948. The two organizations merged in 1982.

Prior to 1986, organizations administering BCBS were tax exempt under 501(c)(4) as social welfare plans. However, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 revoked the exemption, because the plans sold commercial-type insurance. They became 501(m) organizations, subject to federal taxation, but entitled to "special tax benefits"[8] under IRC 833.[9]

In 1994, BCBS changed to allow its licensees to be for-profit corporations.[4] During 2010, Health Care Service Corporation, the parent company of BCBS in Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Montana and Illinois, nearly doubled its income to $1.09 billion in 2010, and began four years of billion-dollar profits.[10] In the final spending bill for FY 2015 after much lobbying since 2010, nonprofit Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans continue to have special tax breaks that were understood to be threatened by the Affordable Care Act of 2010.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Cross_Blue_Shield_Association

As noted prior to 1986 all of BCBS was a "not-for-profit" 501(c)(4) tax exempt organization. As also noted this changed by an "act of Congress" where a new tax code of 501(m) was created but all 501 organizations are still "not-for-profit" organizations where different tax rules apply. That is not to say that the 36 insurance companies that are members of BCBS are "not-for-profit" because some are and some are not. We can also note that "commercial-type insurance" is not "commerical insurance" but instead is a wierd Congressional term not recognized anywhere else, or even defined in the law itself, was invented by Congress in legislation specifically targeting BCBS.

Section 501(m) was enacted to disqualify traditional Blue
Cross and Blue Shield plans from exemption under 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4). In this
context, therefore, “commercial-type” insurance simply means indemnity insurance
where the insurer promised to reimburse (or indemnify) the subscriber for the costs of
covered health care services.
Click to expand...

http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~acadian/taxexemp/hmo.pdf

So the "not-for-profit" criteria for all 501 organizations that BCBS operate under was not actually questioned by the law but instead a new category was created specifically to address BCBS's providing of "insurance" that was similiar to commercial "for-profit" insurance policies. Each of the 36 independent insurance companies that are members the BCBS organization each file taxes independently and they may or may not be "for-profit" corporations.
Click to expand...

lynnlynn · Dec 29, 2015

Shiva_TD said: ↑

The Blue Cross Blue Shield Association (BCBSA) is a federation of 36 separate United States health insurance organizations and companies, providing health insurance to more than 106[2] million Americans.[3] Blue Cross was founded in 1929, and became the Blue Cross Association in 1960, while Blue Shield emerged in 1939 and the Blue Shield Association was created in 1948. The two organizations merged in 1982.

Prior to 1986, organizations administering BCBS were tax exempt under 501(c)(4) as social welfare plans. However, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 revoked the exemption, because the plans sold commercial-type insurance. They became 501(m) organizations, subject to federal taxation, but entitled to "special tax benefits"[8] under IRC 833.[9]

In 1994, BCBS changed to allow its licensees to be for-profit corporations.[4] During 2010, Health Care Service Corporation, the parent company of BCBS in Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Montana and Illinois, nearly doubled its income to $1.09 billion in 2010, and began four years of billion-dollar profits.[10] In the final spending bill for FY 2015 after much lobbying since 2010, nonprofit Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans continue to have special tax breaks that were understood to be threatened by the Affordable Care Act of 2010.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Cross_Blue_Shield_Association

As noted prior to 1986 all of BCBS was a "not-for-profit" 501(c)(4) tax exempt organization. As also noted this changed by an "act of Congress" where a new tax code of 501(m) was created but all 501 organizations are still "not-for-profit" organizations where different tax rules apply. That is not to say that the 36 insurance companies that are members of BCBS are "not-for-profit" because some are and some are not. We can also note that "commercial-type insurance" is not "commerical insurance" but instead is a wierd Congressional term not recognized anywhere else, or even defined in the law itself, was invented by Congress in legislation specifically targeting BCBS.

http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~acadian/taxexemp/hmo.pdf

So the "not-for-profit" criteria for all 501 organizations that BCBS operate under was not actually questioned by the law but instead a new category was created specifically to address BCBS's providing of "insurance" that was similiar to commercial "for-profit" insurance policies. Each of the 36 independent insurance companies that are members the BCBS organization each file taxes independently and they may or may not be "for-profit" corporations.
Click to expand...

BC/BS should not be "not for profit" which is another good example of what is wrong with our healthcare system.
Click to expand...

Shiva_TD · Dec 29, 2015

lynnlynn said: ↑

BC/BS should not be "not for profit" which is another good example of what is wrong with our healthcare system.
Click to expand...

It's "not-for-profit" because it doesn't have any "profits" at the end of the year. The claims that BCBS earns profits are disputed by the IRS that audits BCBS tax returns. If BCBS was operating "for-profit" it would have it's 501 status revoked by the IRS.

Revenue does not equal profit so many cite the "revenue" statistics without regard for the "expenditures" that result in zero profit at the end of the year. Of note some "operating" money can be retained from year to year by a "not-for-profit" entity and many mistakenly believe this represents "profit" when, in fact, it doesn't.

lynnlynn · Dec 29, 2015

Shiva_TD said: ↑

It's "not-for-profit" because it doesn't have any "profits" at the end of the year. The claims that BCBS earns profits are disputed by the IRS that audits BCBS tax returns. If BCBS was operating "for-profit" it would have it's 501 status revoked by the IRS.

Revenue does not equal profit so many cite the "revenue" statistics without regard for the "expenditures" that result in zero profit at the end of the year. Of note some "operating" money can be retained from year to year by a "not-for-profit" entity and many mistakenly believe this represents "profit" when, in fact, it doesn't.
Click to expand...

consumersunion.org/.../prescriptionforchange.org-surp Please read this because BC/BS do profit, only they call it surpluses.

lynnlynn · Dec 29, 2015

Shiva_TD said: ↑

The Blue Cross Blue Shield Association (BCBSA) is a federation of 36 separate United States health insurance organizations and companies, providing health insurance to more than 106[2] million Americans.[3] Blue Cross was founded in 1929, and became the Blue Cross Association in 1960, while Blue Shield emerged in 1939 and the Blue Shield Association was created in 1948. The two organizations merged in 1982.

Prior to 1986, organizations administering BCBS were tax exempt under 501(c)(4) as social welfare plans. However, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 revoked the exemption, because the plans sold commercial-type insurance. They became 501(m) organizations, subject to federal taxation, but entitled to "special tax benefits"[8] under IRC 833.[9]

In 1994, BCBS changed to allow its licensees to be for-profit corporations.[4] During 2010, Health Care Service Corporation, the parent company of BCBS in Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Montana and Illinois, nearly doubled its income to $1.09 billion in 2010, and began four years of billion-dollar profits.[10] In the final spending bill for FY 2015 after much lobbying since 2010, nonprofit Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans continue to have special tax breaks that were understood to be threatened by the Affordable Care Act of 2010.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Cross_Blue_Shield_Association

As noted prior to 1986 all of BCBS was a "not-for-profit" 501(c)(4) tax exempt organization. As also noted this changed by an "act of Congress" where a new tax code of 501(m) was created but all 501 organizations are still "not-for-profit" organizations where different tax rules apply. That is not to say that the 36 insurance companies that are members of BCBS are "not-for-profit" because some are and some are not. We can also note that "commercial-type insurance" is not "commerical insurance" but instead is a wierd Congressional term not recognized anywhere else, or even defined in the law itself, was invented by Congress in legislation specifically targeting BCBS.

http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~acadian/taxexemp/hmo.pdf

So the "not-for-profit" criteria for all 501 organizations that BCBS operate under was not actually questioned by the law but instead a new category was created specifically to address BCBS's providing of "insurance" that was similiar to commercial "for-profit" insurance policies. Each of the 36 independent insurance companies that are members the BCBS organization each file taxes independently and they may or may not be "for-profit" corporations.
Click to expand...

They call it "surpluses" when it actually is profit and currently their is no limit on how much surpluses they can accumulate year after year.
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

Well...what do you think of Obamacare now?

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

rkhames Well-Known Member

lynnlynn New Member

lynnlynn New Member

PatriotNews Well-Known Member

Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

lynnlynn New Member

Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

lynnlynn New Member

lynnlynn New Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Well...what do you think of Obamacare now?

AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

rkhames Well-Known Member

lynnlynn New Member

lynnlynn New Member

PatriotNews Well-Known Member

Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

lynnlynn New Member

Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

lynnlynn New Member

lynnlynn New Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches