If you have "no place to go," come here!

ObamaCare Clusterf***k: Shorter Uwe Reinhardt: Forcing more people to buy a defective product is the answer!

Rainbow Girl's picture

Maybe Lambert can figure out the actuarial features of HappyLand that UR describes with mathematical and logic mumbo jumbo. The one problem he sees with ObamaCare is that the penalty is too low and it will lead too many to opt out, leading to "adverse selection," i.e., the exchanges tanking and ObmaCare failing.


Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

Thanks Lambert! I'm catching up -- wasn't a Correntian yet when O'Liar (and his lackeys like Uwe) used the pretext of "health care" to create the Rentiers wet dream).

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

Administration--cause they're "one step ahead."

Heard on "The Press Pool" earlier this week that they are microtrageting "the Young Invincibles."

A health reporter (didn't catch his name--believe he was with Politico or The Hill), without blinking an eye, said that "Enroll America" and other non-profits will aggressively target this group, initially.

Have to--if not enough of them are in the Health Exchange Pool--premiums will skyrocket.

So, I suppose it's "sc**w the poor and the sick," since they'll make ObamaCare "look bad."

BTW, hope to "report on" the spousal benefit debacle as I experience it, when we return.

Got a lot of double-talk when I called our Benefits Department, and asked why there was a "link to a Health Exchange Calculator."

Either the benefits clerk was a "dumb a**, or she thinks that we are," LOL!

She claims that Mr. Alexa's company is planning to offer a group health plan, this year. But refused to give ANY specifics. They're still in the "planning stages."

A video on the corporate web site also mentions that the Federal Exchange will have ONLY ONE PLAN offering in 2014!

Has anyone read anything about this?

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

read this piece, a while back.

But until HR mentioned it, I never realized that it applied to EVERYONE shopping on the exchange (since it's title refers to "small firms.")

His HR said to "expect hiccups" the first several years. Sounds like they're "in the tank" for the ACA.

Apparently, they've received the good news (this was inferred) that they are exempt from offering comprehensive plans.

At this point, my bet is that they will offer an exorbitantly priced "skinny plan" (which will not meet the criteria as "affordable"), so that they can say that they offer health insurance, while ensuring that most of their employees will flee to the Federal Health Exchange.

Time will tell . . .

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

one reason that "Enroll America" and other Dem nonprofits are going to roll into high-gear is the debacle of the Federal Exchange not having the ability to set up choice (may be one reason that lawmakers have been discussing trying to exempt federal employees, also).

Imagine how angry the federal work force will be with "no choice," when they've for years, had the "most choice" of almost any corporation or institution.

I really doubt that any of us will have access to any specific information, anytime soon.

The health reporters on XM explain the delay in getting out "Exchange" information on HHS deciding that too much info, too soon, will cause potential exchange (Marketplace) buyers to lose interest.

I suspect the "real reason" is what the NYT article states (and what lawmkers know--including Max Baucus)--when the realization that the much flaunted "choice" does not exist (for 2014, anyway), "the American People" may finally wake up to the fact that the ACA amounts to a corporate "give-away"--nothing more.

Submitted by hipparchia on

i'm going to guess that "one plan" refers to the Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) which:

will be delayed until 2015. Small-business employees will still be able to get insurance, but the states have the option to limit that to one choice, rather than a variety of plans, for the first year.

SHOP was going to be a separate program, still on the exchanges, for small businesses to be able to offer a variety group plans to their employees. generally speaking, small businesses have had to lump all their employees into one group and buy only one plan. states setting up their own exchanges may be ready to offer multiple shop plans in 2014, but the the federal exchange isn't going to be ready for that until 2015 (see pp10-11).

alternatively, the "one plan" may have been referring to a situation similar to california, where if you want top-flight medical care, you may have to buy the only plan that is offering it, as all of the others will be keeping their costs down by contracting with only the bargain-basement providers:

People who want UCLA Medical Center and its doctors in their health plan network next year, for instance, may have only one choice in California's exchange: Anthem Blue Cross. Another major insurer in the state-run market, Blue Shield of California, said its exchange customers will be restricted to 36% of its regular physician network statewide.

Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

" ... Another major insurer in the state-run market, Blue Shield of California, said its exchange customers will be restricted to 36% of its regular physician network statewide."

And the other one, in your post, about UCLA Medical only being available under one ("platinum") plan.

This gives new meaning to the concept that ObamaCare is forcing people to pay high prices for junk -- it's actually high prices for access to a phantom ghetto of threadbare (or nonexistent) health care services.