Total Posts:20|Showing Posts:1-20
Jump to topic:

Is Obamacare a success?

Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2014 2:31:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The figure I am hearing is that 7.1 million people enrolled in health insurance.
However, Obamacare also expanded Medicaid, so is this figure including them or not?
Further, 7.1 people may have enrolled, but does that include family members (spouse, kids) or not?
Lastly, does that include those that "lost" their insurance or otherwise lost their hours/jobs, which forced them to the exchanges?

Does anyone know?

Regardless, according to Michael Moore, in 2006 (I think), there were 50 million uninsured persons in America, a figure I don't recall hearing disproven, and one that seemed true during the debates.

So, is 7 million of 50 million considered a success?
Or is it more like 20 million of 50 million? Or 4 million?
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2014 3:19:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
http://www.latimes.com...
This seems to suggest the 7 million is due to the ACA in total, possibly number of cases (not people). It would corrobarate this guy's 9.5 million figure:

http://justoneminute.typepad.com...

So, maybe 10-14 million of 50 million?
Was that the goal, to revolutionize (and in my opinion destroy liberty, given anything can be a tax now), to help less than a third of those who needed it?
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 12:31:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Nobody has an opinion on whether or not a policy that only helps 15% of the people who allegedly needed help is to be considered a success?
My work here is, finally, done.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 12:53:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 12:31:42 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Nobody has an opinion on whether or not a policy that only helps 15% of the people who allegedly needed help is to be considered a success?

It's early. Give it time.
1Percenter
Posts: 781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 12:59:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The numbers become even less spectacular when you realize that they included people that switched coverage or were dropped from their previous plans in their numbers.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 8:18:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 12:53:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 4/7/2014 12:31:42 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Nobody has an opinion on whether or not a policy that only helps 15% of the people who allegedly needed help is to be considered a success?

It's early. Give it time.

So, does that mean those calling it a success are celebrating prematurely?
My work here is, finally, done.
ironmaiden
Posts: 456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 9:44:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/4/2014 2:31:21 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
The figure I am hearing is that 7.1 million people enrolled in health insurance.
However, Obamacare also expanded Medicaid, so is this figure including them or not?
Further, 7.1 people may have enrolled, but does that include family members (spouse, kids) or not?
Lastly, does that include those that "lost" their insurance or otherwise lost their hours/jobs, which forced them to the exchanges?

Does anyone know?

Regardless, according to Michael Moore, in 2006 (I think), there were 50 million uninsured persons in America, a figure I don't recall hearing disproven, and one that seemed true during the debates.

So, is 7 million of 50 million considered a success?
Or is it more like 20 million of 50 million? Or 4 million?

Hasn't...like...3 million people people who have signed up lost their health insurance due to Obamacare?
"I know what you're thinking. 'Did he fire six shots or only five?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being that his is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question. 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya, punk?"
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 10:04:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 9:44:10 PM, ironmaiden wrote:
At 4/4/2014 2:31:21 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
The figure I am hearing is that 7.1 million people enrolled in health insurance.
However, Obamacare also expanded Medicaid, so is this figure including them or not?
Further, 7.1 people may have enrolled, but does that include family members (spouse, kids) or not?
Lastly, does that include those that "lost" their insurance or otherwise lost their hours/jobs, which forced them to the exchanges?

Does anyone know?

Regardless, according to Michael Moore, in 2006 (I think), there were 50 million uninsured persons in America, a figure I don't recall hearing disproven, and one that seemed true during the debates.

So, is 7 million of 50 million considered a success?
Or is it more like 20 million of 50 million? Or 4 million?

Hasn't...like...3 million people people who have signed up lost their health insurance due to Obamacare?

Don't know.
Did they lose employer insurance, or the plan they had? There is a difference.
My work here is, finally, done.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2014 10:11:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 8:18:42 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/7/2014 12:53:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 4/7/2014 12:31:42 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Nobody has an opinion on whether or not a policy that only helps 15% of the people who allegedly needed help is to be considered a success?

It's early. Give it time.

So, does that mean those calling it a success are celebrating prematurely?

Yes
ironmaiden
Posts: 456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 5:49:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 10:04:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/7/2014 9:44:10 PM, ironmaiden wrote:
Hasn't...like...3 million people people who have signed up lost their health insurance due to Obamacare?

Don't know.
Did they lose employer insurance, or the plan they had? There is a difference.

I'm pretty sure they all lost the plan they had. Obama's whole "If you like your plan keep you plan" promise kinda failed.
"I know what you're thinking. 'Did he fire six shots or only five?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being that his is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question. 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya, punk?"
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 6:36:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/8/2014 5:49:35 PM, ironmaiden wrote:
At 4/7/2014 10:04:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/7/2014 9:44:10 PM, ironmaiden wrote:
Hasn't...like...3 million people people who have signed up lost their health insurance due to Obamacare?

Don't know.
Did they lose employer insurance, or the plan they had? There is a difference.

I'm pretty sure they all lost the plan they had. Obama's whole "If you like your plan keep you plan" promise kinda failed.

Business offers/pays for insurance of plan XXY.
Omamacare happens ----> insurance company no longer offers plan XXY.
Business then offers/pays for insurance plan XYZ.

What does that have to do with the 7 million who "signed up" for Obamacare?

Now, it is entirely different if the business offered plan XXY, it was no longer offered, and the business no longer offers insurance, thus those employees go to "sign up" for Obamacare.

See the difference?
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 6:46:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/7/2014 10:11:02 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 4/7/2014 8:18:42 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/7/2014 12:53:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 4/7/2014 12:31:42 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Nobody has an opinion on whether or not a policy that only helps 15% of the people who allegedly needed help is to be considered a success?

It's early. Give it time.

So, does that mean those calling it a success are celebrating prematurely?

Yes

At what point is a success or failure?
Time-wise? Enrollment-wise?

There is no way this was going to get those 50 million insured, so if it was only aimed at getting half of them, is that a success?
Any insight as to the numbers?
My work here is, finally, done.
ironmaiden
Posts: 456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 6:57:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/8/2014 6:36:01 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/8/2014 5:49:35 PM, ironmaiden wrote:
At 4/7/2014 10:04:38 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/7/2014 9:44:10 PM, ironmaiden wrote:
Hasn't...like...3 million people people who have signed up lost their health insurance due to Obamacare?

Don't know.
Did they lose employer insurance, or the plan they had? There is a difference.

I'm pretty sure they all lost the plan they had. Obama's whole "If you like your plan keep you plan" promise kinda failed.

Business offers/pays for insurance of plan XXY.
Omamacare happens ----> insurance company no longer offers plan XXY.
Business then offers/pays for insurance plan XYZ.

What if the employee preferred plan XXY?

What does that have to do with the 7 million who "signed up" for Obamacare?

Now, it is entirely different if the business offered plan XXY, it was no longer offered, and the business no longer offers insurance, thus those employees go to "sign up" for Obamacare.

See the difference?

Ok, so I was wrong about people "losing" insurance. I'm sure that's happened to some people, however. But whether they "lost" or "changed" plans, I wouldn't call that a success. Obama declared that you could keep your plan and blah blah blah, but that isn't the case for 3 million Americans out there.

Besides, most of the people who signed up for Obamacare are gonna find themselves paying more for health care than they already were. People who didn't sign up are gonna be taxed as a punishment. There are still millions of people who are uninsured. And guess what? The government has spent quite a fuckload of money on that terrible ad-campaign and on building the website. Our tax dollars, spent on pictures of gay guys drinking coffee. All for nothing. It simply doesn't seem like Obamacare is affecting the country in a positive way.
"I know what you're thinking. 'Did he fire six shots or only five?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being that his is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question. 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya, punk?"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2014 11:26:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/8/2014 6:46:03 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/7/2014 10:11:02 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 4/7/2014 8:18:42 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/7/2014 12:53:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 4/7/2014 12:31:42 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Nobody has an opinion on whether or not a policy that only helps 15% of the people who allegedly needed help is to be considered a success?

It's early. Give it time.

So, does that mean those calling it a success are celebrating prematurely?

Yes

At what point is a success or failure?
Time-wise? Enrollment-wise?

There is no way this was going to get those 50 million insured, so if it was only aimed at getting half of them, is that a success?
Any insight as to the numbers?

There really isn't an "end" to it, as in "we hit the magic number, lets call it a day and do something else." In the end, the "success" is if the help it caused is worth the expense it cost. That is something that will be subjective to each individual person, so you will always see people that call it a success, regardless of the balance, and you will always see people that call is a failure.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Quatermass
Posts: 166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2014 8:17:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm not entirely sure what the problem is, but from across the pond it sounds as though the same Americans as cried for free healthcare for the past twenty years are now crying because they're getting free healthcare?
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2014 10:19:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/9/2014 8:17:42 AM, Quatermass wrote:
I'm not entirely sure what the problem is, but from across the pond it sounds as though the same Americans as cried for free healthcare for the past twenty years are now crying because they're getting free healthcare?

Obamacare isn't free health care..
YYW
Posts: 36,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2014 8:47:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/4/2014 2:31:21 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
The figure I am hearing is that 7.1 million people enrolled in health insurance.
However, Obamacare also expanded Medicaid, so is this figure including them or not?
Further, 7.1 people may have enrolled, but does that include family members (spouse, kids) or not?
Lastly, does that include those that "lost" their insurance or otherwise lost their hours/jobs, which forced them to the exchanges?

Does anyone know?

Obamacare did not, itself, cause anyone to lose coverage. Individual employers' decisions to no longer cover their employees caused those who lost their coverage to lose their coverage.

Regardless, according to Michael Moore, in 2006 (I think), there were 50 million uninsured persons in America, a figure I don't recall hearing disproven, and one that seemed true during the debates.

The figure is actually closer to between 36-40m people, but yeah.

So, is 7 million of 50 million considered a success?
Or is it more like 20 million of 50 million? Or 4 million?

I think it's too early to say whether Obamacare is a success or not. I think it is the single greatest expansion of the social security net since the LBJ years, and I think that in the long run everyone in the US will benefit from it but right now, even if the numbers look favorable, we're not in a position to measure whether the policy has had its intended effects. Five, ten and fifteen years from it's passage, however, we will be.
Quatermass
Posts: 166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2014 1:58:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/9/2014 10:19:33 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 4/9/2014 8:17:42 AM, Quatermass wrote:
I'm not entirely sure what the problem is, but from across the pond it sounds as though the same Americans as cried for free healthcare for the past twenty years are now crying because they're getting free healthcare?

Obamacare isn't free health care..

Ah I see upon reading about it now they use the very opaque term 'affordable' without giving one any idea what they mean by 'affordable'. I mean, if you're Richard Branson, then a fifteen million dollar yatch is not only afforable but a downright bargain! For us mere mortals, however...
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2014 9:03:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/4/2014 3:19:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
http://www.latimes.com...
This seems to suggest the 7 million is due to the ACA in total, possibly number of cases (not people). It would corrobarate this guy's 9.5 million figure:

http://justoneminute.typepad.com...

So, maybe 10-14 million of 50 million?
Was that the goal, to revolutionize (and in my opinion destroy liberty, given anything can be a tax now), to help less than a third of those who needed it?

I don't know about "liberty", but our democracy is certainly screwed up. Nothing to do with the ACA, though.

Could you explain what you mean?
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2014 9:33:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/10/2014 9:03:55 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 4/4/2014 3:19:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
http://www.latimes.com...
This seems to suggest the 7 million is due to the ACA in total, possibly number of cases (not people). It would corrobarate this guy's 9.5 million figure:

http://justoneminute.typepad.com...

So, maybe 10-14 million of 50 million?
Was that the goal, to revolutionize (and in my opinion destroy liberty, given anything can be a tax now), to help less than a third of those who needed it?

I don't know about "liberty", but our democracy is certainly screwed up. Nothing to do with the ACA, though.

Could you explain what you mean?

The government can now tax you more for not purchasing a product, as opposed to taxing you less for doing so (i.e. credit/deduction).

I would feel a lot better if I could think of an example of being taxed more for not engaging in commerce.

So, now, the next bailout can just be "hey, Americans, buy a GM car, or pay a $50 tax".
My work here is, finally, done.