Over 1 Million Enrolled in Federal ACA Exchange -- Where's the Crow Eater?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look it up. Single payer is socialized medicine. Fact.

Lot of corporate leaders in countries with socialized medicine fully support socialized medicine because it relieves them of having to deal with health insurance. I suppose that they're socialists, too? You have to do better than that, pp. If you're a troll, you're falling down on the job, that's for sure.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Over 47 million nonelderly Americans were uninsured in 2012. One million enrolled is hardly a crow dinner.

The terms of the bet were the terms of the bet. Don't move the goalposts now.

A lot more people were covered under expanded Medicaid and the over 1 million number I cited doesn't include the state exchanges. So, the total who have received insurance is higher than 1 million.

But, leave it to a Republican to find reducing the number of uninsured to be a bad thing. If you had your way, even these 1 million would have been out of luck for another year (or indefinitely).

Jeff, I'm on your side, but I'm going to quibble with this word. You mean "obtained." Few people "received" anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look it up. Single payer is socialized medicine. Fact.

You say that like it's a bad thing...

I've lived with socialized medicine. It's wonderful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look it up. Single payer is socialized medicine. Fact.

You say that like it's a bad thing...

I've lived with socialized medicine. It's wonderful.

I've lived with it too and it was the absolute worst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look it up. Single payer is socialized medicine. Fact.

So I looked it up, and socialized medicine means that the government operates the hospitals and employs the doctors. Plenty of single payer systems do not do this. You lose, thanks for asking me to look it up.

[Anonymous]

Let's say, for one year everyone gets a free "trial" at Kaiser or decides to keep their current insurance. I would pick my insurance over Kaiser any day of the week.

[Anonymous]

Kaiser would be a major upgrade from any NHS practice. The good docs in England, Northern Ireland and Scotland do private patients. The ones who are so so do NHS or PCT.
US is naturally getting to the same as fewer talented people go into medicine and docs from other countries and lesser trained US docs take over medicine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Medicare is socialized medicine.

And people who have Medicare are paying a 3.8 percent surcharge on their payments for the ACA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Medicare is socialized medicine.

And people who have Medicare are paying a 3.8 percent surcharge on their payments for the ACA

While you're spamming every thread with this info, can you offer some proof? Thanks.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Medicare is socialized medicine.

And people who have Medicare are paying a 3.8 percent surcharge on their payments for the ACA

While you're spamming every thread with this info, can you offer some proof? Thanks.

As you probably guessed, the poster is wrong. She is talking about the same surcharge discussed in the house sale thread. Information about the surcharge can be found here:

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Newsroom/Net-Investment-Income-Tax-FAQs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um, based on what? Because if we're just going on truthiness, then I would bet that Obamacare directly saved the lives of over 2 million widows and orphans, and won WWII. Maybe also landed on the moon. So, I am convinced that it is the greatest thing we have ever had, and anyone who opposes it hates America and capitalism.

Because THESE people are the ones who had insurance before this idiotic law was passed - we shall see - if the administration even shares this data. They haven't been terribly forthcoming with their information.

Ok, how about this -- please cite evidence supporting your claim that half of the million people who signed up for Obamacare lost their original coverage because of Obamacare. You're the one making the claim. It's on you to provide the data.

As soon as the administration comes out with numbers and stats, I will hop right on that. Note that I began my statement with.... "I would bet....."

Right. And then you go on to say that you are "convinced that many of these enrolled were previously insured." So, what are you basing that conviction on?

Simply the fact that these people, who were cancelled because of Obamacare, were previously paying for their own insurance. Most of them are NOT going to go uninsured since they have previously demonstrated that health insurance is important to them. Their options in terms of getting new coverage are limited..... so, they will likely enroll on the exchanges. Wasn't this the administrations' plan all along?????

So, here is the evidence to support the claim.... http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579326992266662838?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304149404579326992266662838.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um, based on what? Because if we're just going on truthiness, then I would bet that Obamacare directly saved the lives of over 2 million widows and orphans, and won WWII. Maybe also landed on the moon. So, I am convinced that it is the greatest thing we have ever had, and anyone who opposes it hates America and capitalism.

Because THESE people are the ones who had insurance before this idiotic law was passed - we shall see - if the administration even shares this data. They haven't been terribly forthcoming with their information.

Ok, how about this -- please cite evidence supporting your claim that half of the million people who signed up for Obamacare lost their original coverage because of Obamacare. You're the one making the claim. It's on you to provide the data.

As soon as the administration comes out with numbers and stats, I will hop right on that. Note that I began my statement with.... "I would bet....."

Right. And then you go on to say that you are "convinced that many of these enrolled were previously insured." So, what are you basing that conviction on?

Simply the fact that these people, who were cancelled because of Obamacare, were previously paying for their own insurance. Most of them are NOT going to go uninsured since they have previously demonstrated that health insurance is important to them. Their options in terms of getting new coverage are limited..... so, they will likely enroll on the exchanges. Wasn't this the administrations' plan all along?????

So, here is the evidence to support the claim.... http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579326992266662838?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304149404579326992266662838.html

They don't separate those with canceled policies vs those who shopped and found a better deal.

[Anonymous]

And, we still don't know how many have actually PAID for the policies that are in their "shopping carts"........

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:And, we still don't know how many have actually PAID for the policies that are in their "shopping carts"........

Payments are not due until the 23rd. So, don't act like there is some sort of conspiracy. But, this really has to be the bottomed the bucket anti-ACA argument.

[Anonymous]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/19/us/rules-for-equal-coverage-by-employers-remain-elusive-under-health-law.html?_r=1

Small business mandate is now being delayed until after 2014 elections.