Can we have some of the evidence that has established that this has happened?
Here’s a cite.
I personally think it’s very possible that it will have this impact once the penalties take effect. But that’s a far cry from claiming that it already happened, let alone that this is “well established”.
So, basically, asshole greedy employers who were already looking for an excuse to cut hours are blaming the ACA for them cutting hours.
By saying “so, basically …” you imply that you’re summing up evidence that’s been presented at greater length. This is not correct - to this point there’s been no evidence of your claim.
News reports today indicate some minor changes that effectively push back the enrollment deadline for individuals for a couple weeks. The White House is preparing clarifying information according to USA Today.
Prior to these changes those persons seeking individual coverage needed to enroll prior to Feb 15 to have coverage by Mar 1st and avoid penalty. Apparently the law specified that you needed to enroll by the 15th to have coverage effective the 1st of the follow month. So enrollments from Feb 16th to 28th would not have coverage until Apr 1st.
That is being changed so that anyone enrolling by Mar 31st will avoid penalty.
Humbly, if the ACA is to deliver a competitive marketplace through the exchanges that will help to drive down the cost of premiums then the website needs to work. It is hard to gather the same comparative information over the phone.
The delay is a start at addressing the problems from the poor website roll out. I would not be surprised to see new and unexpected problems turn up resulting in further delays.
why are my premiums going up?
Because Obama hates you, and is out to get you. The rest of us don’t have that problem.
Well, no…a lot of us hate him and are out to get him, too.
Are your premiums going up?
Did your premiums never go up in the past? Most people have a history of having their premiums increase over time. Average premium increases in rhe past 12 years have varied from as low as 3% (in the past year) to as high as 14% in 2002.
Is the rate of increase for your premiums higher, the same or lower than comparable periods in the past?
“Government numbers actually show that the fraction of part-timers in the workforce has declined since 2010 and in a longer historical perspective, the share of part-timers was less during this recession than in the downturn of 1983.”
[quote=“Hentor_the_Barbarian, post:110, topic:671841”]
Are your premiums going up?
[quote]
yes
at a lower rate. When I renewed my financial advisor was pretty close to the mark on his estimate if the ACA was passed.
when the ACA passed my insurance rose considerably. I think it was 27%. It went up 17% this year and it’s going up 12 % next year.
It’s going up because of the required mandates of the ACA bill so the claim that insurance rates would fall was just a flat out lie.
[quote=“Magiver, post:112, topic:671841”]
[quote=“Hentor_the_Barbarian, post:110, topic:671841”]
Are your premiums going up?
If the claim was that Magivers rates won’t go up, and yours actually have, then that would be a lie.
Of course, I don’t think anyone voted for the Affordable Care for Magiver Act. On average, health insurance costs are going down.
The WSJ article that I cited earlier asserted that the rate of “just under 30 hours” part timers has gone down, which suggests that it’s not related to Obamacare. (Your link which ostensibly says the opposite doesn’t work.)
[BTW, the quote from me that you responded to was not addressed to you.]
[quote=“Magiver, post:112, topic:671841”]
[quote=“Hentor_the_Barbarian, post:110, topic:671841”]
Are your premiums going up?
There’s absolutely nothing in the ACA that would cause your premiums to increase by that magnitude year over year. (There’s also no truth to claims that Obamacare has made premiums decrease.) On average, the impact of Obamacare to this point is thought to be on average an increase of a couple of percentage points, varying based on prior plan design. (Overall medical inflation has been pretty low the past few year - mostly recession-related - which has mitigated this impact.)
[quote=“Hentor_the_Barbarian, post:113, topic:671841”]
[quote=“Magiver, post:112, topic:671841”]
He, the President said they would go down. cite. He didn’t say they would go down except Magiver’s.
[quote=“Fotheringay-Phipps, post:114, topic:671841”]
The WSJ article that I cited earlier asserted that the rate of “just under 30 hours” part timers has gone down, which suggests that it’s not related to Obamacare. (Your link which ostensibly says the opposite doesn’t work.)
[BTW, the quote from me that you responded to was not addressed to you.]
[quote=“Magiver, post:112, topic:671841”]
They increased the requirements of insurance polices. So yes, there is something that would cause rates to go up. It’s directly related to ACA.
I’m starting to think the exchanges may collapse if the website makes it so hard to sign up that only the sickest who need the most care are determined enough to do so. That is kind of a bummer; but even if that part of the law ends up just withering away and all we are left with is the Medicaid expansion and the various new rules that have been added, I would still consider that a great improvement on what we had before.
In particular, I will smirk and gloat if the red states continue to stubbornly refuse the federal money from the Medicaid expansion and thus subsidise the expansion in blue states. Not only will that be a windfall for the lower-middle income workers that will get health care under Medicaid, it will also be a boon to the medical sector in those states and a body blow to that sector in red states. So we ought to see a continued sharpening of the tendency for blue states to have better economies and better jobs than red states.
Unless, of course, the enhanced eligibility for Medicaid drives a lot of lower income people to migrate to Blue States and then the feds cut back on the reimbursement, leaving the Blue States holding the (inflated) bag.
Then you might smirk and gloat a little bit less.
The fact that you think we’d be dismayed at people getting the medical care they need, even if that means in the Democratic-controlled states, tells me a whole lot more about you than it does about Obamacare…
I’m not sure who “we” is and think in general people should speak for themselves and not for other people.
But I was addressing a guy who was planning to smirk and gloat should there be a “body blow” to the medical sector in Red States.