What If They Gave a Health Care Plan and Nobody Paid?

homer

Here’s the news you heard: More than 8 million Americans signed up for Obamacare through state market exchanges. Here’s the news you didn’t hear: One third of those 8 million did not pay their first month’s insurance premium. The Obama administration refused to release the payment information so the House Energy and Commerce Committee rounded up the figures itself. Read the press release here.

At last, we have concrete numbers documenting a long-suspected flaw of Obamacare: Not everyone who signs up for insurance will pay for it. What the Obamanauts failed to consider — d’oh! — is that millions of Americans don’t have bank accounts. Without bank accounts, they can’t write checks to pay their premiums!

The most recent numbers I have uncovered, based upon a 2011 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation study, found that 17 million adult Americans are “unbanked,” which means they have no checking account, while 51 million are “underbanked,” which means they have bank accounts but they rely upon alternative financial services such as payday loans, rent-to-own services, pawn shops, or refund-anticipation loans. It is safe to say that people relying upon pawn shops and payday loans don’t carry big cash balances in their checking accounts.

It should come as no surprise that there is a significant overlap between those who are unbanked or underbanked and those who are unable or unwilling to purchase health care insurance. It seems the geniuses who designed Obamacare didn’t consider this — indeed, they still haven’t figured it out (or, if they have, they haven’t fessed up to it yet).

This is just one more example of the colossal incompetence of those who designed the insurance scam, I mean scheme, and of those who argued that we should pass the legislation to find out what’s in it.

banking_statusAnother bad sign: There is a direct correlation between age and the likelihood of having a bank account. The under-24 crowd is more than three times as likely as the 55- to 64-year-old cohort to not have a checking account. Thus, a disproportionate number of non-payers will be the coveted healthy young people whose payments into the exchanges subsidize the payments of older participants. This imbalance increases the likelihood of a demographic death spiral in which the average cost per insured is higher than the insurance companies projected, insurers raise rates, more healthy people drop out, and the cycle repeats itself.

The hubris of the do-gooders: There’s a special irony here. One reason that so many Americans are unbanked is that Obama-era economic policies — the super-low interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve Board and consumer “protection” initiatives such as the crackdown on overdraft practices — make small checking accounts a drain on banks. Rather than sign up new accounts, banks are incented to weed them out. In other words, Obama-era banking policy works to undermine Obama-era health care policy.  But the do-gooders never learn. They always know better than everyone else and their appetite for meddling never ceases.

— JAB


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

59 responses to “What If They Gave a Health Care Plan and Nobody Paid?”

  1. thebyurokrat Avatar
    thebyurokrat

    http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/starting-the-conclusion-then

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/house-gop-admits-obamacare-survey-bogus

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/house-gop-rigged-obamacare-survey

    It’s pretty clear that the survey used to “demonstrate” the committee’s talking points was highly suspect, and should be treated with caution.

    This report wasn’t aimed at truth, it was aimed at providing soundbites for an off-year election.

    1. So argue sources who are dogmatic defenders of Obamacare. They may be right; the numbers may be skewed by the House committee’s methodology. But maybe the Obamanauts are spinning like crazy. Let’s see how many more checks came in the last two weeks of April…

      1. thebyurokrat Avatar
        thebyurokrat

        Your reply suggests that maybe you should exercise more caution in buying these results.

        Do you remember their lines on the enrollment “catastrophe”?

  2. larryg Avatar

    the “they did not pay” is the latest right wing trope making the rounds of the right wing echo chamber and repeated by supporters like JimB.

    It’s total partisan blather… red meat to their base and to the gullible.

    re: ” Obama-era economic policies ” – do you mean the policies of the Bush-appointed do-gooder Bernanke? why don’t you say that – ? don’t you think shifting the blame from a Bush-appointed guy to “Obama’s policies” a bit disingenuous?

    Have you bothered to check how many folks who don’t have insurance from the exchanges also have not paid?

    do you think the rate of non-payment would be any different or do you just not care anyhow as long as you can focus on ObamaCare?

    you guys have no alternatives. It would be something else if you did. There would be a real alternative to support but to oppose something .. over and over – without saying “we should be doing this instead” is just totally feckless.

    1. LarryG scorched earth tactics in defending Obamacare:

      (1) Call the skeptics “right-wing whackos” and their criticism “partisan blather.”
      (2) Accuse the opposition of having no alternative.
      (3) Throw up a bewildering smog of unanswerable questions.
      (4) Shift blame to Bush whenever possible.
      (5) Totally ignore the substance of the criticism.

      1. larryg Avatar

        LarryG scorched earth tactics in defending Obamacare:

        (1) Call the skeptics “right-wing whackos” and their criticism “partisan blather”

        they ARE whackos guy. Have you been listening to them? And yes it’s totally partisan these days. 40 votes against without a single REPLACE?

        (2) Accuse the opposition of having no alternative (which is both untrue and irrelevant).

        it’s true and very relevant. show me you guys “REPLACE”

        (3) Throw up a bewildering smog of unanswerable questions.

        the question is what do you stand for?

        (4) Shift blame to Bush whenever possible.

        nope… be honest about the double standard in place right now. Prior POTUS have had their share of “lies” .. “out of the Iran-Contra Loop”, “read my lips no new taxes”, and ” Sadaam is supporting Al Qaeda and we must invade”.

        Here’s the kind of the you guys are part of – and never once stepping up to say it is wrong. you just stand by and say nothing.

        http://youtu.be/CzE1bszhX5Q

      2. billsblots Avatar
        billsblots

        larry does seem insane sometimes. hope he was able to keep his doctor, the lying selling point of Obamacare to the 85% who already had health insurance.

        1. larryg Avatar

          there is no guarantee you can keep your doctor with private insurance either.

          The POTUS screwed up for sure but what kind of a lie is “REPLACE”?

          The GOP is fundamentally opposed to the government being involved in health care.

          if they were honest – they’d admit this to voters and offer it as a competing vision for the country to choose from – true to the principles upon which the country was founded.

          instead they slink around being dishonest about it.

          For the record – I do buy the Dems – plan. I think there should be an individual mandate – like we have for social security – but then the GOP is opposed to Social Security also but are too spineless to admit it to voters.

          this is about fundamental dishonest with the American people.

          the only “insanity” are those who excuse dishonesty with voters.

          The GOP talks a big line on principles and I’d agree – principles are important but when you are unwilling to actually run on your principles because you know you’ll lose – then you basically have no principles because you’re trying to get elected on a lie.

          At least be honest for what you stand for.. even if you go down.

          Much of the GOP does not believe in how the country was designed. They believe that they can get elected by whatever means it takes – and then implement their “principles” on people who never would have voted for them to start with if they actually knew what they were.

          You can see folks like Rand Paul struggling with this. He has principles. He wants to be honest about them but he also sees that he cannot get elected if he is really honest with voters.

          I respect Ron Paul even if I do not agree with him. At least he is trying to be honest. The others, not so much.

          The Dems, on the other hand are not misrepresenting their core principles. they make no excuses about it much less see to misrepresent it to voters.

          that’s a fundamental difference between the two parties these days.

          People like Dick Lugar and Bill Bennett- who were honest about their positions is now gone – voted out by their own party.

        2. larryg Avatar

          It’s a simple thing BillB – be honest about your position – put it to the voters and let them decide.

          that’s what the country is about… it’s what Thomas Jefferson and his fellow fore fathers stood for.

          If the GOP has a better idea – run on it and be man enough to abide by the verdict of the voters.

  3. Les Schreiber Avatar
    Les Schreiber

    So low interest rates are responsible for people being “unbanked”. I think the correlation with poverty is higher than low interest rates. I don”t understand the preoccupation with what the fed did in the wake if the financial crisis. There are few in the economics profession who doubt that fed action saved us from a “Great Depression”. As the economy improves the FRB is in fact winding down the bond purchase program. Where is the correlation with health insurance?
    Where is a workable alternative?
    There are many models in the rest of the industrialized world but if those are suggested all we here is “socialism”. Do we want a society where your income determines your access to a doctor?

    1. larryg Avatar

      re: ” So low interest rates are responsible for people being “unbanked”. I think the correlation with poverty is higher than low interest rates. I don”t understand the preoccupation with what the fed did in the wake if the financial crisis. ”

      ANYTHING that occurs under Obama’s watch qualifies as something that is his fault! He’s the guy who cannot possibly be POTUS .. just can’t happen… but he is.. and so like spoiled brats – the right cooks up anything and everything it can to attribute to him… whether it’s true or not.

      I do not defend him. He has his problems. He is a politician – no question but comparing him to prior POTUS – he’s really not that different. He’s had his successes and his failures but that’s not good enough for the right … they have yet to accept him as a duly elected POTUS.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      “There are few in the economics profession who doubt that fed action saved us from a “Great Depression”.”

      Really?

      Have these 209 economists who opposed the stimulus plan in 2009 all changed their minds?

      http://www.openmarket.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/final_cato_stimulusad_wpost.pdf

      It was good to see my old economics professor, Kenneth Elzinga, on the list.

    3. Les, Les, Les, I did not say that “low interest rates are responsible for people being unbanked.” I said it was one factor. Can you deny that low interest make small checking accounts less profitable than they would be otherwise?

      As for Fed action saving the U.S. economy, that is a very different issue. How is that even relevant to the point I was making?

  4. larryg Avatar

    Here’s another… not a word from Conservatives on how wrong this is:

    http://youtu.be/x9mnkC0pgXk

    I can post a dozen more to make the point.

    it’s one thing to oppose the policies of a POTUS – but the kind of blather coming from the right is not about policy…

    1. LarryG’s First Rule of Rhetoric: If someone raises a point you disagree with, dismiss it as “blather.” Your opponents don’t have wits or brains. They are driveling idiots. Don’t dignify them by actually addressing their arguments.

      Larry G’s Second Rule of Rhetoric: If the first rule doesn’t work, try this: Point to someone else and knock down his argument. That’s a lot easier than addressing the argument of the person you’re actually arguing with.

      1. larryg Avatar

        re: ” LarryG’s First Rule of Rhetoric: If someone raises a point you disagree with, dismiss it as “blather.” Your opponents don’t have wits or brains. They are driveling idiots. Don’t dignify them by actually addressing their arguments.”

        they’re definitely not idiots but they are clearly engaging in relentless blather – no question about that. The GOP has no agenda other than hate and discontent these days.

        “Larry G’s Second Rule of Rhetoric: If the first rule doesn’t work, try this: Point to someone else and knock down his argument. That’s a lot easier than addressing the argument of the person you’re actually arguing with.”

        if the argument had merit – I’d admit it but this stuff is pure right wing blather from the echo chamber.

        the right just cannot accept the fact that the man in charge – is in charge.

        they’re like a bunch of weasels…who stand side by side with racists and have nary a word to say about it .. Take a look at what Sununu and Trump and many others like Limbaugh and Hannity and O’Rielly, Ingram, etc have said and tell me how many GOP stood up and called it out as wrong?

        Nope they stand shoulder to shoulder and take turns.

        the GOP has no solutions so they personalize their criticism.. to the person – Ad Hominem… just totally slimy … border racism.. that apparently not a single person in the GOP is man enough to admit it.

        One GOP, one time, McCain corrected one lady and since that time – not one GOP has stood up for what is right.

        how can you accept as legitimate – complaints from people who see and hear the racism and ignore it and join in the criticism – ?

      2. larryg Avatar

        NO! Our economy has a 17% drag on it. It keeps people from getting raises when they are more productive. It keeps them from being able to put more money into their IRAs. It keeps them from buying homes or sending the kids to college.

        And what does the GOP do about it?

        Nothing.

        worse than nothing – they attack what others have tried to do.

        their “solution” is to watch more people pay higher and higher premiums, lose their insurance when they lose their job with employer-provided insurance, watch as people work 40-50 hours a week and have no insurance – and cannot get it.

        and what do they do about it?

        immigration – what do they do about it?

        the economy – what do they do about it?

        banking regulation – what do they do about it?

        how many bills have the GOP – got to the desk of the POTUS for signature or veto?

        Even Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton – and even Bush I found a way to compromise – to get legislation passed.

        what has this Congress done ?

        this is the most feckless Congress in the history of the Country.

        the only thing they can seem to do – is line up with the racists… side by side without a whimper..of objection. This is basically about the GOP view that the POTUS is illegitimate and they are not about to do anything in the way of moving anything forward because if they do that – it will mean they are willing to work with the POTUS and that cannot be – in the eyes of their base.

        Listen to the dialogue from the right these days … it’s not about what they think is a better way to do things.. none of that.. it’s all about hate and discontent of this POTUS proposals..

        there are 40 votes for REPEAL but how many with REPLACE?

        They hate Dodd Frank but where is their alternative?

        They are up in arms about Immigration but where is their proposal?

        they don’t like the way the POTUS is doing foreign affairs but where is their alternative?

        it’s just ridiculous.

        there is zero leadership from the GOP. it’s whatever they can do to oppose this POTUS and nothing more.

        How many GOP disowned this :

        http://youtu.be/YRsW6Rikd0c

        how many critics of Obama in this blog have disowned these comments?

  5. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    “The Obama administration refused to release the payment information … ”

    Uh – why wouldn’t the Obama Administration release the data? Wouldn’t that solve the problem pretty quickly?

  6. chris bonney Avatar
    chris bonney

    Krugman’s column this morning pretty much debunks the whole “they’re not paying” thing. The survey on which this premise is based was done, among other things, before something like a million March enrollees’ payments were due.

    1. larryg Avatar

      it don’t really matter that the basis for the claim is wrong.. in terms of the way the GOP and the right wing is operating these days.

      whatever it is – no matter how dishonest it is – hits the right-wing echo chamber and then propagates across the web and FAUX – then gullible supporters/admirers who have no need to actually verify the facts – just blather it as if it was the truth on high.

      this is what passes for “principled opposition” these days

      and if it turns out to be wrong – no matter… yet another outlandish bogus “fact” will soon follow and blather its way across the internet/media.

      it’s easy to figure out what the current narrative is. Just tune in to FAUX ad you’re on track with the current blather.

      it’s sad that folks who claim to be objective and fact-based – just fall into these things.. hook, line, and sinker…

      talking about you JimB. Shame on you.

      😉

      you don’t have to be a megaphone for every right-wing trope that hits the echo chamber -you know.

      for months the claim was that the website was so broke that it was kaput, then no one was going to enroll.. then when they did enroll.. the mantra changed to “they’re not paying”.

      it’s hilarious as hell in part because of the predictable and pathetic follow up rhetoric of the right.

      not a word about what the GOP would specify for REPLACE – not a word. They’ve had years but the best they can manage is this pathetic almost adolescent narrative.

  7. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    My understand is that many are not yet required to pay their first month insurance.

    WHy are we going down this ridiculous road. Larryg is right. Ditto Paul Krugman.

    The Bacons of the world are an odd, delusional bunch. If it’s not debunking the “science” of global warming, it’s the Nanny-warnings of deficit spending, if it’s not that it’s Obamacare in Obamaland.

    What Bacon needs is a 24/7 TV show with Gretchen Carlson showing thigh and cleavage and saying, “right you are, Jim.”

    1. larryg Avatar

      whoa.. high cleavage? is that the secret to the right wing mindset?

      😉

      sorta makes sense..

  8. Les Schreiber Avatar
    Les Schreiber

    I am still waiting for the Republican alternative to the ACA

  9. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    Larryg,
    Did you know that Michelle Bachmann was Gretchen Carlson’s nanny?

    How’s that for your international right wing conspiracy!

    1. larryg Avatar

      that’s downright scary Peter. Bachmann is nutty as fruitcake!

  10. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Bacon provided nothing but facts and logical conclusions yet the lefties on this blog want to pillory him. Makes me think that maybe the left is starting to get really nervous going into this Fall’s elections.

    1. Obama wouldn’t disclose the data – fact.
    2. A congressional Committee published their estimates of the data – fact.
    3. The published data shows a high incidence of late payments – fact.
    4. People without credit cards or checking accounts will have a hard time paying bills – logical conclusion.
    5. The group of young un and underbanked Americans overlaps with the set of people who bought their health care through the exchanges – logical conclusion.
    6. Low interest rates discourage banks from providing free or low cost checking accounts – fact.
    7. The Fed has artificially held down interest rates – fact.
    8. The Fed’s actions may have inadvertently contributed to the high incidence of late payments for Obamacare – logical conclusion.

    Yes, the argument hinges on the validity of the data provided by a standing committee of the US Congress. But since the Obama Administration refuses to discuss the data that’s the best official or semi-official numbers anybody has at the moment.

    Now Obama could perform the accounting I’d expect of an 11 year old who owns a lemonade stand and say how much the government expected to receive in payments by May 5 vs how much they actually received. But he won’t disclose the data. And we all know that Obama will willingly lie to the American people in order to fraudulently foist Obamacare on the nation.

    So, when he won’t comment on what seems like straight-forward data about Obamacare a lot of people start to wonder what’s happening.

    If Obama wants to dispel this rumor all he has to do is state the facts.

    1. larryg Avatar

      ” Bacon provided nothing but facts and logical conclusions yet the lefties on this blog want to pillory him. Makes me think that maybe the left is starting to get really nervous going into this Fall’s elections.”

      typical right wing blather….

      1. Obama wouldn’t disclose the data – fact.

      yup. why should he? The right just wants to use it as a weapon. but they’re not even facts.. they’re bogus but that don’t keep the right from using it and folks like Bacon from repeating it without verifying it.

      2. A congressional Committee published their estimates of the data – fact.

      a bogus Congressional COmmittee which is typical for the GOP these days.

      3. The published data shows a high incidence of late payments – fact.

      ” It asked insurers how many enrollees had paid their first premium; it ignored the fact that the first premium wasn’t even due for the millions of people who signed up for insurance after March 15.

      And the fact that the survey was so transparently rigged is a smoking gun, proving that the attacks on Obamacare aren’t just bogus; they’re deliberately bogus. The staffers who set up that survey knew enough about the numbers to skew them, which meant that they have to have known that Obamacare is actually doing O.K”

      4. People without credit cards or checking accounts will have a hard time paying bills – logical conclusion.

      you mean for just folks who buy insurance from the ObamaCare exchanges or all folks?

      5. The group of young un and underbanked Americans overlaps with the set of people who bought their health care through the exchanges – logical conclusion.

      bogus conclusion – typical of the propaganda, and outright disinformation from the right these day

      6. Low interest rates discourage banks from providing free or low cost checking accounts – fact.

      yes.. but now you KNOW you ARE treading into deliberate misinformation here.

      7. The Fed has artificially held down interest rates – fact.
      8. The Fed’s actions may have inadvertently contributed to the high incidence of late payments for Obamacare – logical conclusion.

      “Yes, the argument hinges on the validity of the data provided by a standing committee of the US Congress. But since the Obama Administration refuses to discuss the data that’s the best official or semi-official numbers anybody has at the moment.”

      A GOP committee – spewing disinformation.. what a novel concept.

      “Now Obama could perform the accounting I’d expect of an 11 year old who owns a lemonade stand and say how much the government expected to receive in payments by May 5 vs how much they actually received. But he won’t disclose the data. And we all know that Obama will willingly lie to the American people in order to fraudulently foist Obamacare on the nation.”

      actually anyone who believes this tripe is a gullible rube

      “So, when he won’t comment on what seems like straight-forward data about Obamacare a lot of people start to wonder what’s happening.

      If Obama wants to dispel this rumor all he has to do is state the facts.”

      why should Obama do anything for any of these fools who take data and deliberately spin it into lies?

      The GOP is pathetic these days. They simple do not regard this POTUS as legitimate .. and so they call him a subhuman mongrel or a “weak” leader who is ignoring the law and should be impeached (how can you be both at the same time?).

      this is comical. sooner or later the folks who are not racists in America are going to see what this is really about – and it ain’t the truth.

    2. larryg Avatar

      There are legitimate complaints about Obama but these right wing misinformation/disinformation narratives only prove just how unprincipled much of the GOP is now days.

      We have idiots like Daryl Issa running around making a total fool of himself and his party so what do they do when it becomes painfully obvious what a clown he is ? Well of course they go get another right wing fool to replace him

      Benghazi is 1/10th a serious as this:

      http://youtu.be/LZ_Vxoyu8zY or this http://youtu.be/WSiZHmrxfcM

      or the Beruit Bombing or IranContra or the Savings & Loan debacle under Reagan.

      this is total partisan crappola

      the GOP has moved far, far right. People like Dick Lugar and Bill Bennett forced from office. Jeb Bush is being called a RINO by his own GOP.

    3. larryg Avatar

      “The survey that House Republicans used to conclude that only 67 percent of HealthCare.gov enrollees had paid their first premium appears designed to yield an unfavorable result — at least that’s the perception of one of the people whose company was asked to respond to it.

      “The survey was so incredibly rigged to produce this result, it was a joke,” a source, whose company received it and who provided it to TPM, said. “Everyone who saw it knew exactly what the goal was.”

      The survey included language that explicitly left out the fact some people would still have time to pay their premium after April 15, which is when the House Energy and Commerce Committee asked companies to return their answers.

      The GOP survey simply asked companies for the number of enrollees who paid their first premium and the number who have not — but it did not account for the fact that some people in the latter group could still pay until at least April 30.

      Nearly 40 percent of Obamacare enrollees signed up after March 15 — which means their first premium wasn’t due until after the committee finished collecting its data. The GOP’s 67 percent figure was therefore founded on bad math: It accounted for all enrollees, but it demanded figures be compiled more than two weeks before the actual deadline for many people to make their payments.

      Republicans held the 67 percent finding up this week against the Obama administration’s victory lap when the law surpassed 8 million figures. TPM’s source concluded that the House survey was specifically designed to undermine the law’s recent run of good news.

      “They were clearly trying to get a specific result to rebut any positive news about enrollment,” the source said. “If they were really trying to get full data, they would have waited until early May for the answers.” ”

      Now the question is why are folks who claim they are objective so willing and eager to repeat bogus survey’s without even checking to see if it were truly valid since they knew it came from a partisan source to begin with?

      the “survey” was blatantly partisan from it’s inception. there is no way to separate it’s purpose and conclusion from a partisan purpose.

      why would anyone left or right, with a cursory sense of judgement support it as “factual”?

      1. Larry, it’s interesting how you are willing to swallow MSNBC’s “reporting” on the issue without reservation — as if MSNBC was interested in giving an unbiased presentation of the facts.

        1. larryg Avatar

          well no, as a matter of fact, I do not. MSN is as biased as FAUX in many ways but what MSN does NOT do is engage is misinformation and disinformation.

          they tend to cheerlead and rah rah the things they believe in and like to do victory laps for sure but they are not usually shoveling out just flat out bad info to the gullible. I will never say they never do but in general they don’t while the folks on the other side continuously engage in it and that “survey” is an excellent example of it. They did the survey BEFORE the end of the period that people had to pay.

          they did that on purpose and then they portrayed it as “fact”.

          this is not the first time you have repeated something put out by the right that turned out to be disinformation guy… sometimes, you tend to be too willing to repeat the propaganda sometimes and not put a critical eye on it first.

          over and over on health care the right has engaged in almost non-stop disinformation from death panels to enrollment to this.

          I understand the opposition. Some of it I think is valid it had not a single GOP vote…. the POTUS did lie about keeping the doctor but a lot of this other stuff is just plain lies – not honest mistakes but intentional manipulation of information in “logical” strings to fool the gullible and to great success I might add. And if there actually was a on-the-table viable alternative – you would not need to engage in these disinformation campaigns to begin with but this is what happens when one side is fundamentally opposed to the CONCEPT of some kind of government sanctioned health care – and won’t admit it – so they have no alternative and as “principled” opposition (sic) justify their just simply dishonest approach 40 times of Repeal and Replace – without once have a Replace.

          let’s debate on the merits. Have you heard be repeat a single piece of “left” propaganda? truly? I strive not to but the truth is there is so very little of it on the left to start with. they just believe in their positions. They are unabashed and unapologetic about their support for health care – they don’t have to fool people to start with.

  11. virginiagal2 Avatar
    virginiagal2

    Without getting into the partisan part of the discussion, I see two holes in the whole thesis.

    The first is that people who do not have checking accounts are not prevented from making payments. People without checking accounts make payments every day. Most commonly they use money orders, which you can buy at the post office, Wal-Mart, the grocery store, the drug store, and a boatload of other places. Pretty much any place that will take a check will take a money order. Money orders are generally actual preferred, as they can’t bounce.

    Not have a checking account is not an obstacle in paying insurance.

    The second point is that Obama almost certainly does not HAVE the payment information for all of these policies, because the payment is going to private insurance companies, not the government. You’re basically asking for a custom report from every company on every exchange in every state, looking at their new customers, distinguishing who got their insurance through the exchange and who didn’t, and then you’re going to have to figure out a way to aggregate that data from all those disparate sources.

    Setting aside the apparent fact that the payment deadline hasn’t passed, I doubt that this data is going to be fast and simple to gather and aggregate.

    1. The reason I made the connection between Obamacare enrollments, late payments and the number of unbanked citizens is that I have a friend in Richmond whose employer was looking into the matter for business (not political) reasons. My friend had picked up on the relationship and thinks the unbanking issue could be a challenge. He did not extrapolate from that information to draw political conclusions like I did. But I believe that the non-payment/unbanked nexus is a real one.

      1. virginiagal2 Avatar
        virginiagal2

        There is a surcharge (not large, but when you’re poor, small amounts matter) for money orders.

        But I’m guessing the issue is the boss wondering either, “I don’t know how they would do it” because he or she honestly doesn’t know how you would pay non-cash transactions without a check, or the boss thinking, “How do I make money orders cheaper or less inconvenient for my employees?”

        When I Google “health insurance payment money order” and variants thereof, I get lots and lots of instructions specifically saying they do take them.

        1. larryg Avatar

          I learned something in doing volunteer taxes this year. There is a place on the 1040 to put in your routing and account number for not only checks, but savings accounts – and debit cards. They could get their refunds credited to their debt cards.

          In our area – WalMart gives it’s employees debt cards – and that is how they get paid – the debit card gets their paycheck.

          indeed: ” Can I pay my health insurance premium with a credit card, debit card, money order, or cash?

          At least within the individual-market exchange, insurers are required to accept money orders and pre-paid debit cards. They do not have to accept credit card or debit card payments unless states make that a requirement, although many insurers currently accept all of these forms of payment. Therefore, it may vary from state to state and between insurers. ”

          I wonder when the claim is made that someone is “unchecked” if that include the use of a debit cards?

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      The more steps you add to a payment process the higher the liklihood of late or missing payments. That’s the experience of just about everybody who has ever tried to process payments.

      Nobody said they couldn’t make payments, only that they would be more likely to pay late or not at all if paying is relatively more inconvenient.

      If the data was not available then that’s what Obama needed to say. However, the Congressional Committee seems to have figured out how to get the data … they asked for it. Also, since people who don’t pay will be canceled and since the entire Obamacare scheme hinges on younger people paying a lot relative to risk so that older people can pay less relative to risk – shouldn’t the payment numbers be known?

      1. larryg Avatar

        re: ” The more steps you add to a payment process the higher the liklihood of late or missing payments. That’s the experience of just about everybody who has ever tried to process payments.”

        totally true

        “Nobody said they couldn’t make payments, only that they would be more likely to pay late or not at all if paying is relatively more inconvenient.”

        what does this have to do with anything in particular. Doesn’t this apply to a wide variety of payment situtations?

        “If the data was not available then that’s what Obama needed to say.”

        How would Obama KNOW since we’re talking about dozens, hundreds of separate individual private insurance companies?

        ” However, the Congressional Committee seems to have figured out how to get the data … they asked for it. ”

        you mean they asked each company to give them the data? How did they do it? When you send survey’s to multiple recipients you almost never get a 100% return rate so did the GOP describe their process for getting the data?

        “Also, since people who don’t pay will be canceled and since the entire Obamacare scheme hinges on younger people paying a lot relative to risk so that older people can pay less relative to risk – shouldn’t the payment numbers be known?”

        why would this be any different from other health insurance companies not associated with the exchanges?

        do you think that folks who buy private insurance from the exchanges pay differently that people who buy market insurance not from the exchanges?

        this BOGUS to the BONE DJ – and YOU know it.

        be honest guy.. this is totally dishonest.

        have you bothered to do due diligence here?

  12. larryg Avatar

    why would the “unbanking” issue have any more or less impact on the private insurance offered through the Exchanges than private insurance offered outside of the exchanges?

    why would you even think the situation was unique only to the Healthcare exchanges and nothing else?

    it would seem to be illogical to look at something like unbanking and thinking it would only apply to one segment of anything rather than it having a wider effect on many things.

    Do you think, for instance, that other, market-based insurance that has no connection to the healthcare exchanges would be subject to the same forces?

    I think you are making a fundamental mistake in your reasoning here.

    I also would think – that the “unbanked” would likely be near the lower economic margins and entitled to very high subsidies – that their payments might be on the order of a hundred dollars or less per month… something they could handle but close to the point where they would not even qualify for the exchanges but rather the medicaid expansion (if in their state).

    If you really want to dig into something meaty – consider what those on the economic margins in a state without the expansion – might be doing with respect to moving to states that have the expansions.

    If you really want to be non-partisan – then you’d ACCEPT the fact that the health care law – good, bad or ugly – is here to stay for at least a couple of years – no matter what happens …. so why join the continuing drumbeat of basically propaganda and disinformation to start with?

    why not give it two years to see what happens.. since that train has left the station and on it’s way?

    1. The House survey results might be skewed marginally by conducting the polling before the final enrollment cut-off date somewhat but it is ludicrous to call the results “a lie,” as MSNBC does, or to dismiss the findings totally out of hand, as you do.

      One third of all enrollees at that the time of the survey had not paid their premiums. The survey covered a large majority of people who would end up enrolling. The final million or so people who enrolled after the survey were not likely to alter the final results very much. The final number will end up pretty close to the House number. Let’s say that the official tally is only 30% failing to pay, as opposed to 33% — would that really make a big difference in terms of the viability of Obamacare? No.

      Yes, the GOP press release should have mentioned the fact that its survey represented a snapshot of enrollment before the final results. On the other hand, MSNBC and other die-hard Obamacare supporters are engaging in fantasy thinking to suggest that the results are entirely illegitimate. The fact is, Larry, you don’t want to believe the numbers and you’ll grasp at any straw to avoid confronting reality on this issue.

      1. larryg Avatar

        re: ” The House survey results might be skewed marginally by conducting the polling before the final enrollment cut-off date somewhat but it is ludicrous to call the results “a lie,” as MSNBC does, or to dismiss the findings totally out of hand, as you do.”

        they are indeed a LIE – BECAUSE the people doing the survey KNOW that they are not collecting complete data and they STILL don’t care!

        “One third of all enrollees at that the time of the survey had not paid their premiums. The survey covered a large majority of people who would end up enrolling. The final million or so people who enrolled after the survey were not likely to alter the final results very much. The final number will end up pretty close to the House number. Let’s say that the official tally is only 30% failing to pay, as opposed to 33% — would that really make a big difference in terms of the viability of Obamacare? No.”

        what difference does it make if you don’t know the same data for market-based insurance?

        “Yes, the GOP press release should have mentioned the fact that its survey represented a snapshot of enrollment before the final results. On the other hand, MSNBC and other die-hard Obamacare supporters are engaging in fantasy thinking to suggest that the results are entirely illegitimate. The fact is, Larry, you don’t want to believe the numbers and you’ll grasp at any straw to avoid confronting reality on this issue.”

        no – they KNEW the data was not complete. The KNEW IT and they never intended to wait much less inform people.

        I don’t care about the data they presented because it’s totally suspect from the get go.. they had no intention of doing an honest survey.. they INTENDED it to be yet another propaganda piece.

        this is classic propaganda and disinformation which the right traffics in all the time. In “study” after, study, we find the right playing illicit data games these days. “President Obama: The Biggest Government Spender In World History” – the POTUS cannot spend one penny that Congress does not approve but don’t let that minor fact get in the way of a lie.

        there is no honestly in what the GOP does these days. It’s totally disingenuous. You cannot watch the Koch boys anti-health care commercials going on at the same time
        the GOP takes 40 REPEAL votes without a single REPLACE proposal.

        If the GOP had an ounce of backbone, they would tell the American people that they OPPOSE the CONCEPT of govt-sanctioned health care and promise to dismantle it – including Medicare but how many of them will actually say that when they run for election? that’s dishonest. They purposely lie to voters because they know they’d get voted out if they actually told the truth – and that’s the honest truth.

        there is no “REPLACE” – it’s a bald-faced lie 10 times worse than what the POTUS said and the rest of this silly ‘survey’ stuff is just accouterments.

      2. larryg Avatar

        Here’s the basic issue:

        1. – the Dems do no hide their vision of health care. They unabashedly think it should be universal and like every other OECD country – on the planet.

        2. – The GOP has a fundamentally different vision but they will not express it openly in a clear way

        3. Instead the GOP attack what they disagree with – without ever putting forth their true vision of what it ought to be or not.

        4. Fundamentally, the country was explicitly designed to be a Democratic Republic where the elected run to represent the views of those that elect them.

        5. If the GOP ran on their fundamental principles – they’d be out of touch with about 75% of the country – – and they know this – so they will not even offer – as legislation – what they’d do except for possibly folks like Paul Ryan who would voucherize Medicare which is still disingenuous because even Ryan believes that Medicare is not a GOP vision so he basically blinks.

        the rest of the GOP won’t even touch Ryan’s Medicare proposal with a 10 foot pole.

        It’s dishonest to want to represent the country and not truly tell the country what your core principles are with regard to health care.

        In 1993, I thought that the GOP was in favor of health care but wanted individual responsibility for it – ergo the individual mandate but since that time the GOP has basically disavowed it.

        so what do they stand for?

        the answer is – they refuse to say… and that’s dishonest and unprincipled – as a party and worse – they chcose to engage in disinformation about the Dems vision – like death panels and your doctor being a government doctor and a whole passel of lies designed to convince the gullible.

        that’s simply and fundamentally not a principled position.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      The people who don’t have checking accounts or credit cards are typically young people. The Obamacare structure only meets its predicted economic profile if young, relatively healthy people buy insurance. In fact, they have to not only buy the insurance but they must keep paying their premiums in order to stay insured.

      Young people often don’t have a credit history, don’t have checking accounts, sometimes don’t have regular employment, etc. Therefore, if you establish an insurance scheme whereby young people are required to be premium paying insurance customers for the economics of the scheme to work then you’d better make sure the young people get into the system and stay in the system.

      1. larryg Avatar

        re: ” The people who don’t have checking accounts or credit cards are typically young people. The Obamacare structure only meets its predicted economic profile if young, relatively healthy people buy insurance. In fact, they have to not only buy the insurance but they must keep paying their premiums in order to stay insured.”

        true. now how are you going to truly know this with the totally bogus approach you’re relying on?

        “Young people often don’t have a credit history, don’t have checking accounts, sometimes don’t have regular employment, etc. ”

        how about cell phones and auto payments and insurance? Do you think young people have cell phones and cars?

        “Therefore, if you establish an insurance scheme whereby young people are required to be premium paying insurance customers for the economics of the scheme to work then you’d better make sure the young people get into the system and stay in the system.”

        how about keeping their cell phones and cars? How do you think they pay for those things?

        this is BOGUS DJ – and you know it.

        this is all about a right wing trope – one desperate lie after another to continue their claims that ObamaCare will fail.

        why not give it a couple years and let real data accumulate? why are you so willing to accept totally questionable data and premises so easily?

        I thought you were a businessman? do you analyze this way in your business?

        1. DJRippert Avatar
          DJRippert

          I didn’t think your arguments could get less logical but they just did.

          “how about cell phones and auto payments and insurance? Do you think young people have cell phones and cars?”

          Do you really think that my son’s cell phone contract generates profits which are used to subsidize my cell phone contract?

          If my son fails to pay his cell phone bill the cellular company will turn off his service. However, the cell phone company does not use a scheme that makes my cell phone affordable by making my son’s cell phone more expensive than it should be. Of course, that is exactly what OFraudmaCare does.

          The only reason the OFraudmaCare scheme works is because the young and statistically healthy subsidize the old and statistically unhealthy. That’s how insurance companies can provide affordable coverage to middle aged Americans with pre-existing conditions.

          What happens to that scheme if the young and statistically healthy drop out?

          1. They pay a minor fine. In 2014, they’ll pay $95 or 1 percent of their taxable income, whichever is greater. In 2015, the fine will be $325 or 2 percent of taxable income, and in 2016 the penalty will be $695 or 2.5 percent of income.

          2. The only way the economics work are if all the young people sign up or if the fines are big enough to make up the subsidy required from the young people. Do you really think those fines are sufficiently large? In Arizona, a 30 year old making $30,000 per year will pay $2,772 per year for a medium-good health plan from Aetna. Or, they’ll pay a $300 fine.

          3. The average American between the ages of 20 – 39 has $2,714 in annual health insurance claims costs during those 20 years.

          4. The Aetna policy I describe in 2. (above) has a deductible of $5,000. In other words, on average, the entire premium is a surplus used to subsidize older people.

          What do you think happens if a lot of people expected to provide, on average, $2800 per year subsidies to the old start paying $300 fines instead?

          Dude, this is not hard.

          http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottgottlieb/2014/03/28/how-much-does-obamacare-rip-off-generation-x-we-ran-the-numbers-here-are-the-results/

          1. larryg Avatar

            I didn’t think your arguments could get less logical but they just did.

            “how about cell phones and auto payments and insurance? Do you think young people have cell phones and cars?”

            Do you really think that my son’s cell phone contract generates profits which are used to subsidize my cell phone contract?”

            do you think young people without checkbooks don’t pay for their costs like cell phones? does the lack of a checkbook keep them from paying?

            “If my son fails to pay his cell phone bill the cellular company will turn off his service. However, the cell phone company does not use a scheme that makes my cell phone affordable by making my son’s cell phone more expensive than it should be. Of course, that is exactly what OFraudmaCare does.”

            but how does that affect your son’s ability to pay without having a checkbook? That’s the claim you making right?

            do you understand insurance guy? do you think you are subsidizing those who have accidents because you pay premiums and don’t have an accident?

            “The only reason the OFraudmaCare scheme works is because the young and statistically healthy subsidize the old and statistically unhealthy. That’s how insurance companies can provide affordable coverage to middle aged Americans with pre-existing conditions.”

            really – then how does Medicare work?

            “What happens to that scheme if the young and statistically healthy drop out?”

            do you think if young people did not have to buy auto insurance, that they still would?

            “1. They pay a minor fine. In 2014, they’ll pay $95 or 1 percent of their taxable income, whichever is greater. In 2015, the fine will be $325 or 2 percent of taxable income, and in 2016 the penalty will be $695 or 2.5 percent of income.”

            yup… but what does any of this have to do with the original premise of not having a check book? You’re now onto something else

            “2. The only way the economics work are if all the young people sign up or if the fines are big enough to make up the subsidy required from the young people. Do you really think those fines are sufficiently large? In Arizona, a 30 year old making $30,000 per year will pay $2,772 per year for a medium-good health plan from Aetna. Or, they’ll pay a $300 fine.”

            do you know for a fact – that this is not going to work? why are you so willing to assume it will not and why are you willing to assume that changes may be necessary as they have been for Medicare and Social Security. Why are you assuming failure before you have even had a chance to see real data?

            “3. The average American between the ages of 20 – 39 has $2,714 in annual health insurance claims costs during those 20 years.”

            so?

            “4. The Aetna policy I describe in 2. (above) has a deductible of $5,000. In other words, on average, the entire premium is a surplus used to subsidize older people.”

            what “old” people are you talking about since “old” gets Medicare.

            “What do you think happens if a lot of people expected to provide, on average, $2800 per year subsidies to the old start paying $300 fines instead?”

            why do you assume young people won’t buy health insurance any more or less than they’d have a cell phone or an auto or auto insurance especially if the insurance is dirt cheap compared to market-based insurance?

            “Dude, this is not hard.”

            apparently it is because some folks are willing to presume things that are not facts without waiting to see the facts. Why are you so willing to write this off now and not wait until it plays out the way you think it will?

            “http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottgottlieb/2014/03/28/how-much-does-obamacare-rip-off-generation-x-we-ran-the-numbers-here-are-the-results/”

            re: “We ran the numbers. Here are our results:”

            what numbers from where? Do you expect me to believe anything these guys say when their data source is described as “our numbers”?

            totally bogus.. guy.. this is the right wing in action..once again.. do you KNOW who he works for ?

            why are you so willing to believe known opponents made up data and not wait to see real data? for what purpose?

          2. larryg Avatar

            I think it is a distinct possibility that ObamaCare could fail. It’s a complex scheme that is rich in possibilities for unintended consequences but I do
            not believe the conventional wisdom of the critics in large part because they are preconceived opponents and more than willing to manipulate data to serve partisan purposes.

            It’s really no different than Social Security or Medicare was – at their beginning.

            but when we have but two choices for moving forward on health insurance and one of them is basically bogus to the bone and not a real approach, you are left with one – and the one could not get a majority vote without some major – perhaps fatal compromises. totally acknowledged.

            But it’s nothing to be proud of from the opponents who are just flat out dishonest about their real intentions – they have zero intentions of doing anything about health care because they fundamentally are opposed to the government being involved in it – despite the fact that every single advanced economy on the planet from Australia to Singapore does otherwise.

            Let the opponents run on an honest plank – and admit that they are totally opposed to the government being involved in health care – and then let them live with the verdict of voters.

            what is so virtuous and “principled” about lying your ass off to the American Public in the first place?

            Stand for what you believe and let the voters decide.

            The party that says they stand for “values” and “principles” is instead spineless and cowardly … they’ve cooked up the whole Benghazi thing because they are petrified that Clinton will give the dems 8 more years and by that time ObamaCare will be as embedded as Medicare.

            They SAY they have strong conservative “beliefs” but instead of making them clear to voters, they choose instead to lie about it and then once elected, implement them on folks who would have never voted for them if they really knew what their agenda was.

            How can this be a good thing? Stand up for what you believe – honestly and forthrightly – and let the voters decide if that’s what they want.

            Name the top 3 countries in the world that do not have government sponsored health care. This is what the GOP truly wants. So name the best countries that do not have govt-sponsored health care.

  13. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Today is to Obamacare what 1965 was to Medicare.

    Back in 1965 Medicare’s supporters put forth estimates of what Medicare would cost over time. The reasonableness of these projections were one reason why Medicare was supported.

    In what should surprise nobody the actual costs of Medicare have greatly exceeded the estimates from 1965.

    There are three ways to look at the rising costs of Medicare and only one is honest.

    1. Compare payouts today to what was paid in 1965. Stunningly, this is what Jim DeMint tried to do. It is extremely dishonest given that it fails to account for inflation.

    2. Compare the percentage of payroll required to fund Medicare in 1965 vs now. That still has Medicare costing 150% of what it was projected to cost. This, however, is also not completely honest because it was not how the House Ways and Means Committee estimated costs back in 1965.

    3. State the costs from 1965 and today in constant dollars. While this also has some technical tricks (like what index of inflation to use) it is the most honest. However, you still have to correct for population growth to be fair.

    Here’s a good look at another semi-fair answer …

    http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/library/chart-graph/actual-vs-estimated-spending-medicare

    Uh oh! In 1965 the Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare costs would increase 6.1X by 1990. Only the analysis neglects to include the fact that US population grew by over 55M people over that period.

    I guess I’ll have to do this myself.

    Medicare costs have rose by a cumulative annual growth rate of 18.17% from 1965 to 1990. Annual inflation during that period was 5.75%. Meanwhile, US population growth over the same period was 1.05%.

    Medicare cost growth exceeded the combination of inflation and population growth by 11.9% per year between 1965 and 1990.

    11.9% above and beyond inflation and population growth is a very scary number.

    If my parents had invested $10,000 on the day I was born at 11.9% it would be worth $4,849,028 today. By the time I am eligible for Medicare it will be worth just under $15M. That would pay for a lot of medical expenses.

    Maybe my old man should have done me a favor and bought me out of Medicare. Oh wait, I forgot …. nothing grows at 11.9% after inflation in real terms for decades at a time. Well … except, of course, for our incompetent federal government’s drunken sailor spending sprees.

    And that’s why conservatives AND INDEPENDENTS are watching OFraudmaCare very closely right now.

    1. larryg Avatar

      “Today is to Obamacare what 1965 was to Medicare.”

      agree

      “Back in 1965 Medicare’s supporters put forth estimates of what Medicare would cost over time. The reasonableness of these projections were one reason why Medicare was supported.

      In what should surprise nobody the actual costs of Medicare have greatly exceeded the estimates from 1965.”

      it costs the same as other health care – actually less…

      “There are three ways to look at the rising costs of Medicare and only one is honest.

      1. Compare payouts today to what was paid in 1965. Stunningly, this is what Jim DeMint tried to do. It is extremely dishonest given that it fails to account for inflation.”

      not true. the rates are adjusted … and again what you pay for medicare care under Medicare is usually LESS that what others pay.

      “2. Compare the percentage of payroll required to fund Medicare in 1965 vs now. That still has Medicare costing 150% of what it was projected to cost. This, however, is also not completely honest because it was not how the House Ways and Means Committee estimated costs back in 1965.”

      no you’re wrong again. Part A is funded from payroll – not Part B, The Part A part is still running about even with payout.

      you and others here STILL do not understand PartB. If you are going to make statements then PLEASE go get the facts before you really make an ass out of yourself.

      “3. State the costs from 1965 and today in constant dollars. While this also has some technical tricks (like what index of inflation to use) it is the most honest. However, you still have to correct for population growth to be fair.”

      you DO have to account for population growth I agree but you still do not understand how Part B is funded.

      “Here’s a good look at another semi-fair answer …

      http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/library/chart-graph/actual-vs-estimated-spending-medicare

      you’re relying on a source that also does not understand the difference between Part A and Part B – and in additional does not compare Medicare costs to non-Medicare costs – in both cases they have gone up higher than anticipated.

      “Uh oh! In 1965 the Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare costs would increase 6.1X by 1990. Only the analysis neglects to include the fact that US population grew by over 55M people over that period.

      I guess I’ll have to do this myself.”

      you need facts first. go get some facts guy. ALL healthcare – Medicare AND non-Medicare has gone up higher than anticipated in 1967

      “Medicare costs have rose by a cumulative annual growth rate of 18.17% from 1965 to 1990. Annual inflation during that period was 5.75%. Meanwhile, US population growth over the same period was 1.05%.”

      tell me how much non-Medicare health care costs have gone up.

      “Medicare cost growth exceeded the combination of inflation and population growth by 11.9% per year between 1965 and 1990.

      11.9% above and beyond inflation and population growth is a very scary number.”

      how about non-Medicare health care costs?

      “If my parents had invested $10,000 on the day I was born at 11.9% it would be worth $4,849,028 today. By the time I am eligible for Medicare it will be worth just under $15M. That would pay for a lot of medical expenses.

      Maybe my old man should have done me a favor and bought me out of Medicare. Oh wait, I forgot …. nothing grows at 11.9% after inflation in real terms for decades at a time. Well … except, of course, for our incompetent federal government’s drunken sailor spending sprees.”

      blah blah blah..

      “And that’s why conservatives AND INDEPENDENTS are watching OFraudmaCare very closely right now.”

      that would be fine if we were working off of facts but we’re not.

      I have homework for you. I want you to go find out if Medicare Part B is pre-funded from FICA. Then I want you to find out if Medicare Part B is 1. totally voluntary and 2. costs a monthly premium.

      go find out DJ and then come back and discuss.

      the problem with the right wing and their would-be supporters these days is not only do they not work with FACTS – they DON’T WANT to work with facts.

      go get the facts guy and come back. tell me if Medicare Part B costs a monthly premium and how much it is.

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        You’re losing it Larry. If you going to drink and then post you could at least invite me to the party.

        “not true. the rates are adjusted … and again what you pay for medicare care under Medicare is usually LESS that what others pay.”

        This was Jim DeMint’s analysis of total Medicare expenditures not the amount that any person pays nor the amount that the government pays vs private insurers. The point is that he compared the total dollars paid out in 1965 against the total dollars paid out in 1990 with no adjustment for inflation. He then got agitated that the amount had gone up.

        Given his inflation denial philosophy he might have been a good choice for the General Assembly’s road funding czar position.

        1. larryg Avatar

          You’re losing it Larry. If you going to drink and then post you could at least invite me to the party.

          “not true. the rates are adjusted … and again what you pay for medicare care under Medicare is usually LESS that what others pay.”

          This was Jim DeMint’s analysis of total Medicare expenditures not the amount that any person pays nor the amount that the government pays vs private insurers. The point is that he compared the total dollars paid out in 1965 against the total dollars paid out in 1990 with no adjustment for inflation. He then got agitated that the amount had gone up.

          Given his inflation denial philosophy he might have been a good choice for the General Assembly’s road funding czar position.

          I’m not denying the inflation – I’m saying that ALL health care costs have gone up since that time by a lot – but in general Medicare reimbursements are LOWER than non-Medicare reimbursements.

          The premiums AND the payouts for Medicare ARE adjusted to inflation.

          you still have not answered me about how people get Medicare PartB Dj.

          how do people get Medicare Part B?

      2. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        “you need facts first. go get some facts guy. ALL healthcare – Medicare AND non-Medicare has gone up higher than anticipated in 1967”

        Yes but until recently I had to make payments for Medicare but didn’t for private insurance. When you take money from people at the point of a gun (which is what our government does) you owe the people a higher level of accuracy and due dilligence than when the people can either buy or not at their discretion.

        1. larryg Avatar

          re: ” “you need facts first. go get some facts guy. ALL healthcare – Medicare AND non-Medicare has gone up higher than anticipated in 1967″

          Yes but until recently I had to make payments for Medicare but didn’t for private insurance. When you take money from people at the point of a gun (which is what our government does) you owe the people a higher level of accuracy and due dilligence than when the people can either buy or not at their discretion.”

          again DJ, how do people get Medicare PartB…??

      3. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        The problem with liberals is that they can’t understand that we have a health care COST problem in the United States. We need to lower the COSTS of health care. Siphoning money from the young to subsidize the insurance of the old does not materially reduce COSTS.

        OFraudmaCare is income redistribution, not health care efficiency.

        If you really want to improve health care in America – sell it by the pound. At any given height your health care rate is $X / lb. Fewer pounds, lower costs. More pounds, more costs.

        That alone would do more to reduce health care costs than the entire 3,000 page OfraudmaCare bill.

        1. larryg Avatar

          “The problem with liberals is that they can’t understand that we have a health care COST problem in the United States. We need to lower the COSTS of health care. Siphoning money from the young to subsidize the insurance of the old does not materially reduce COSTS.”

          blah blah blah.

          ALL healthc are has gone up. you don”t like ObamaCare – fine. Give me another solution and stop blathering GOP propaganda talking points.

          “OFraudmaCare is income redistribution, not health care efficiency.”

          DO you think Medicare Part B is income redistribution?

          “If you really want to improve health care in America – sell it by the pound. At any given height your health care rate is $X / lb. Fewer pounds, lower costs. More pounds, more costs.”

          and you say I’ve been drinking? 😉

          “That alone would do more to reduce health care costs than the entire 3,000 page OfraudmaCare bill.”

          Like the GOP – you have no solutions – only opposition to what you don’t agree with.

          that’s not a solution guy.

          I’m still waiting for you to tell me how Medicare Part B is funded and how people qualify for it and how they pay for it.

          you need to find this out guy.. it directly relates to ObamaCare.

          If you do not know how Medcare Part B is funded – you do not understand an important part of current healthcare in the US.

          1. larryg Avatar

            DJ – when you pay insurance premiums and do not suffer a loss, are you “subsidizing” the people that do have a loss?

            do you think in private insurance, that some people have higher losses than others?

            do you think when that happens that there is “income redistribution”?

            you basically know ONE THING here and that is the claim by the right wing echo chamber about “adverse selection”.

            this is the same crowd that has propagandized ObamaCare from the get go talking about death panels and government doctors and failed enrollments and whatever else they can cook up.

            do you REALLY think you understand “adverse selection” but even if you do – when will you truly know the dimensions of it in Obama Care?

            Do you think you know what is going on right now ?

            why are you worrying about it right now?

            what difference does it make – right now?

            why is it being discussed – right now?

            do you think discussing it right now will change anything – right now?

            so what you are engaging in – basically is your version of what Jim Bacon does on his financial boomergeddon gloom and doom message.

            Jim is betting that the whole thing is going to collapse in a steaming pile .. and by golly so is DJ..!!!

            why the relentless gloom and doom narrative on ObamaCare? This is the very same discussion that Conservatives had for Medicare.

            and .. not only is it still around.. the right is still saying it’s going to fail… but not a word from them to REPEAL Medicare so it can be saved from failing!

            😉

            ObamaCare IS a mess AND the POTUS – DID LIE.

            move on – give a better idea and stop the kvetching …

            tell me what we should be doing instead and tell me why the GOP can’t offer it as a viable alternative.

            and go learn about Medicare Part B – please.

        2. larryg Avatar

          Bloomberg:

          Insurers Say Most Obamacare Customers Paid First Premiums

          http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-06/insurers-say-most-obamacare-customers-paid-first-premiums.html

          “Three large health insurers including WellPoint Inc. (WLP) and Aetna Inc. (AET) say that a high percentage of their new Obamacare customers are paying their first premiums, undermining a Republican criticism of enrollment in the program.

          As many as 90 percent of WellPoint customers have paid their first premium by its due date, according to testimony the company prepared for a congressional hearing tomorrow. For Aetna, the payment is in the “low to mid-80 percent range,” the company said in its own testimony. Health Care Service Corp., which operates Blue Cross Blue Shield plans in five states including Texas, said that number is at least 83 percent.

          Making the first monthly payment is the last step to confirm enrollment in plans sold under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and Republicans have made the question of how many paid a line of attack on the law.

          “What you have here is very solid first year enrollment, no matter how you slice it,” Dan Mendelson, president of Avalere Health, a Washington consulting firm, said in a phone interview. “This thing is, at this point, well entrenched.” ”

          Now the question is – why were you Jim Bacon and D.J. so quick to jump on the GOP propaganda and disinformation bandwagon? , and not even wait for a a more objective/credible source?

          And what can you think about the GOP when they had just surveyed WellPoint and Aetna who told them the numbers were 80% plus ?

          How can the GOP be so pathetically dishonest as to knowingly make such a bogus claim when THEY KNEW Wellpoint and Aetna were scheduled to testify?

          geeze guys.. are you so eager to confirm your biases that you’d throw your lot in with a bunch of GOP liars? Why? where in the world is your objectivity?

          both of you boys just latch on to right wing echo chamber blather… shame on you!

          you guys are hopeless just hopeless! Ya’ll need some remedial work:

          http://youtu.be/8CBqjZX6FjE

  14. larryg Avatar

    re: ” When you take money from people at the point of a gun (which is what our government does) you owe the people a higher level of accuracy and due diligence than when the people can either buy or not at their discretion.”

    well yes.. but are you using a standard for all spending or just spending you don’t agree with?

    do you think that the Govt forces people to buy Medicare Part B and C or it is at their discretion?

    do you think it is forced income redistribution to take money from “young” taxpayers to pay for healthcare for Seniors ?

    what would you do instead? stop funding Medicare?

    let’s forget what the GOP and your opposition is to Obamacare and have you tell me what you’d do about Medicare Part B and C. would you defund both because it’s forced income redistribution to pay for adverse selection?

  15. I reproduce this email correspondence from Deena Flinchum, Blacksburg, Va. with her permission. JAB

    I find your article noted above quite interesting but would like to add a couple of things to it that aren’t in the subject (banking) but may be of interest to you in case you didn’t know.

    First of all, I am not against the ACA per se; but the way it was rolled out and modified on the fly – illegally IMHO – and the lack of transparency make me question how it can ever really work well and if we will ever be allowed to know enough to make our own judgements.

    I spent over 35 years in IT as a systems analyst and designer as well as in management, and the federal roll-out was a great example of how NOT to bring up a complex system. I have brought up complex systems and could go into a lot of detail here but I’ll spare you.

    You didn’t mention this but a lot of those ‘sign-ups’ are likely duplicates. When the federal system was crashing or hanging up constantly, a person trying to sign up had to abandon their original entry and start all over. God knows how many of these there are. Also there was no way to modify the data at the start. If a person added a new baby, moved to another state, got married or divorced, etc, there was no way to update the record. I suspect – though have not read specifically – that this problem was also handled by multiple entries, at least at first. It would be interesting to know what the counts will be after all of these things and the non-payments get accounted for; but I don’t think we will ever get a straight answer from this administration.

    I live in SW Virginia and have been following the Medicaid expansion with a great deal of interest. I do a lot of volunteer work down here and know families that have members who could benefit from this. I am not wedded to Medicaid expansion, but I think it is a travesty that we have a group of people who are too ‘rich’ for Medicaid and too ‘poor’ for the Exchanges. This has to be fixed somehow. Still I agree with the HofD that Obama cannot be trusted to do what he says. While the Obama administration was ridiculing Republican legislatures for saying that they don’t trust Obama on this issue, HHS Secretary Sebelius informed the Senate Finance Committee that some states may see cuts in Medicaid funding as an incentive for them to process the Medicaid applications from the federal Exchange more rapidly. (Follow this (link.)

    Now the problem with transferring Medicaid applications originated with the federal roll-out. The uptick in Medicaid beneficiaries in the states that did expand Medicaid has already increased the workloads of DSS’s and cutting the budget will not be helpful. Now does it exactly, uh, reassure those states who didn’t expand Medicaid – Virginia, for example – that they could trust this administration to keep its word on paying most of the Medicaid costs in the future? Read the whole thing, Jim. It’s short. I’m not reassured at all.

    1. larryg Avatar

      JimB – the “illegal” perspective is now going around for administrative changes being made. You need to acquaint yourself with how the law gets passed and embedded in that law are administrative powers.

      take the EPA – which promulgates regulations – the law gave the EPA the power to do that and that same approach is used in many laws and if the Congress does not want to grant that authority for a given law, they won’t.

      If the administration makes administrative changes the law does not empower them to do – you can bet they will be reined in by opponents.

      this idea that the law is being “broken” multiple times is foolish. Think about how many different regulations are promulgated – take Virginia where DEQ is now promulgated stormwater regulations that are not in the law because the law that passed delegated that responsibility to them.

      People do not understand government. It’s apparent that not even some members of Congress do either – OR worse they do but are cynically – again – telling lies to fire up their base.

      and let me tell you – I do NOT LIKE the WAY that Medicare PART D (and C) were “rolled” out but my view is that they are the law and you fix them. You do not dump them especially when you have no alternative.

      Finally, Deena,s point. I too worked in IT – specifically in databases and yes you can get “dups” if the database is not working on one copy in real time and has replicated databases – you can get two same transactions recorded but you also can find them – and that’s part of the IT function.

      but more than that – you – and Deena confuse signups – which are REAL signups with real companies AFTER the healthcare.gov database gets their data. Do you think any company that receives these transactions is not going to detect duplicate signups when they start to process the transactions?

      the bigger point is WHY ARE YOU worried about things like this?

      why are you concerned about how many signups there are or not in the first place? why does that matter? It’s working .. there are glitches as there are with many private sector databases initially. these things will work out but why in the world are you spending time bean counting – in the first place?

      it’s almost as if you are ROOTING for problems that will cause it to fail.. and every time some new things surfaces you jump on it like it’s your last hope to derail it. Why would you do that?

      It’s the law. it was not created the best way but it’s here now. It has flaws – not unusual at all for any legislation or any private sector initiative. We fix those things We go to version 2.0 and version 3.0.

      if we start over – we have a real template for a different approach.

      your approach is to kill it then figure out something else.

      why?

Leave a Reply