It’s not outlandish, it’s pathetic.
You think the CBO is lying to you? Why?
Yes, I agree. For a lot of people, keeping their plan means keeping unhealthy people out of their actuarial lifeboat.
Even the Washington Post admits that Obama lied, giving him “4 Pinochios” in their Fact Checker column:
I will try to explain once more but then I’m going to give up.
Imagine we’re considering the cost of widgets. Let’s say that over the past decade, the cost of widgets increases every year. We could even imagine that the cost of widgets sometimes goes up 4% annually, and sometimes goes up 10 or 12%.
Now, let’s imagine that you have grown so concerned about the cost of widgets that one year, you implement a widget containment plan. After you put in in place, I come back and say “Aha! The cost of widgets is higher now than last year!”
Wouldn’t it occur to you to say “The cost of widgets goes up every year. The relevant question is whether we changed the rate of increase?”
Do you understand that or not?
By the way, Trom’s cite conducted its analysis by taking the average of the five LOWEST premiums pre and post ACA. So, not only is it deceitful because it doesn’t account for the typical increasing trend in premiums, it also looks only at one tail of the distribution.
Of course there are fewer junk plan premiums now. Why not examine the average of all premiums?
This morning I tried to browse the Maryland exchange to check out Terr’s options. However, he didn’t mention that to do so, one has to set up an account, including specific personalizing details. I’m not that interested in evaluating his claims.
Either I don’t understand what the word “deceitful” means, or you don’t. An apples to apples comparison upsets you?
As a healthy, young man who buys his own insurance I’d love to see evidence that premiums for the population of which I am part of have gone down. Seriously, please show me this - I honestly would love to see it.
I understand it perfectly but your analogy is wrong. Comparing the projected price of the widget after the containment plan is in effect to the true price of the widget after the containment plan is in effect is meaningless in this discussion. The true comparison is the price of widgets with and without the containment plan. Make sense?
The cost of the plans under ACA came in lower than the projected plans under ACA…not lower than the plans in the absense of ACA. It’s disingenuous at best to claim this means that ACA brought down the price of the plans.
What happens when the vendors tell you it’s your fault they screwed up, not theirs? Do they get to stay your vendors?
And vendors are, in turn, expected to “manage” their customers, when the customers show they need help. That isn’t just software, but any business.
Is there any evidence of any vendor stepping up and saying anything about it? Any sign any of them knew what was going wrong and what needed to be done about it?
So what next, then? Are you advocating impeaching him, or electing a Republican instead next time who will fix it?
When the Obama-bashers here are done getting your yayas out here, when may we expect some constructive suggestions on what we, his supervisors, should expect him to do about it now? Do let us know when you’re ready, please.
Admit that the ACA is an unaffordable, unconstitutional, ineffective disaster and revoke it.
Let’s check that.
Around page 2:
Private health insurance premiums are anticipated to grow somewhat faster from 2011 through 2013 (reaching 4.8 percent in by 2013), as a result of anticipated gains in employer-sponsored insurance enrollment as overall employment levels increase.
…
Private health insurance premiums are projected to grow at an average rate of 5.6 percent for 2015 through 2020.
Would you say that points to an increase in the rate of growth or a decrease?
Out-of-pocket spending is expected to grow faster through 2013, reaching 3.9-percent growth, as disposable personal incomes increase and employers continue to shift more of the cost of health insurance to their employees.
Out-of-pocket spending growth is projected to grow at an average** rate of 5.0 percent from 2015 through 2020**.
Would you say that points to an increase in the rate of growth or a decrease?
Elvis: Have you switched sides on this debate? Because your quote is pretty much what people are complaining about. Obama didn’t say: “If you like your policy, and it complies with the new law, you can keep it”. He said" “If you like your policy, you can keep it. Period”. He told Americans this before the law was enacted, and after it was enacted.
That article is pointing out the bind that Obama is in wrt trying to make good on his promise and statements-- they were contrary to what the law actually says.
What, and be accused of telling another lie? No thanks.
That option is always available to opponents. Just win enough elections and you will have your wish. But don’t hold your breath for getting rid of Obamacare so long as there is a guy named Obama in the White House.
No. But neither does that absolve the manager of the vendors of their real responsibility to mange the effort competently. If you have bad vendors, it’s the project manager’s responsibility to deal with it, to know what the impact is. Not to launch regardless.
I don’t care if there is, because the responsibility for the project is the project manager’s. The PM needs to know the state of the launch. If he needs to rely on the vendor to let him know something he otherwise wouldn’t, he’s bad at this type of thing. Which, of course, this administration was.
That’s funny. A royal fuck-up occurs, and it’s off base to point that out? They need to do what they should have done in the first place: get competent people in to fix the horrifying disaster they created. Hopefully that’s what they’re doing.
And then what? I’ve heard quite a bit about “revoke and replace”, and the first part is pretty clear, but the second part is a bit fuzzy. Absent, actually, in the sense of being not there.
Go back to treating only the desperately ill people in emergency rooms if they are not insured? Kinda stupid, isn’t it, to wait until people are very sick to treat them. Wouldn’t it be a lot more cost effective to treat them before their condition advances to such a stage? Or do we go to the Social Darwinist approach, give them bus fare to the nearest Potter’s Field and a coupon for a free shovel from Wal Mart? Full price, of course, Wal Mart has to make a profit. Maybe a cheerful, colorful brochure: “So, You’re Going to Die?” Handful of pain meds, maybe, ease their passage, or is that too socialistic for your ass?
Throw the whole thing out, let people put their faith and trust in GreedCo Insurance Co., give them a chance to play Wheel of Coverage? Spin carefully, don’t hit Bankrupt. That would be bad. Then you’re still sick and you’re broke. Shovel coupon and brochure. Does Wal Mart offer spiritual counseling and comfort? Some real potential in that growth market.
You lost the genetic lottery, your child has special medical needs and you can’t insure her? Return the defective merchandise? Should we have special counselors to advise people who are closing in on their benefit caps, select precisely the right time to croak?
So, OK, Obamacare has problems. Fix it, or throw it away, and replace it with…what, exactly? Pissing and moaning isn’t a plan. You got one? Or would you rather bitch?
You want to score that point that badly, John? OK, here it is. Go put in on your scoreboard for all to admire. Sheesh. :rolleyes:
Now, back to the real world discussion …
Is that an indirect acknowledgment that the development team they had been using for the last couple of years was *not *competent? Then why are you not focusing your blame primarily on them instead of indulging in useless, misguided Obama-bashing?
Do you realize which thread you’re posting in? That is the subject. You don’t like it? Start another thread about something you do like. If not for the efforts of people twisting themselves in knots to defend the indefensible, this thread would be 1 or 2 pages long.
Try reading what I wrote. The administrative team overseeing the development was clearly incompetent as evidenced by the results. As far as this launch goes, they are a tribe of insulated bunglers. They need to get experienced administrators of a start-up launch in to remedy the horrendous mess they created, people who actually have a fucking clue how to run such an effort, people who know how to manage vendors (for example), since clearly this administrative team does not.
I don’t know why you’re asking again, since I already answered it. And this entire exchange was not a debate over what the solution is or if Obama should be impeached or whatever other straw man you’d rather argue against. It was in response to your finger pointing at the vendors, as if the administration wasn’t responsible for the vendor’s output. I don’t know what you do for a living, but in business, that’s not how it works.