• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

ACA Running Thread

WakeandBake said:
I think 2and2 and wrangor have legitimate gripes, they are just griping at the wrong politicians it seems.
Click to expand...

Who am I supposed to gripe to, the Republicans who have tried to have the thing repealed about 87 times and have run most of their subsequent campaigns on getting it repealed?
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Putting aside whether that is a good idea or not, that dream doesn't have anything to do with the logistics of Obamacare, which is what businesses of all sizes are actually currently faced with and what this thread is about.
Click to expand...

Well you already heard my response to that: it is what it is and this is a trade off for the time being for the fact that a lot of people now have insurance that didn't before. It's a net positive for society even if some small business owners are stuck spending extra time and money on administrative efforts. Is it a hindrance? Sure. Do I think it's worth it as opposed to the old system? Absolutely.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Who am I supposed to gripe to, the Republicans who have tried to have the thing repealed about 87 times and have run most of their subsequent campaigns on getting it repealed?
Click to expand...

I would think Republican governors and state legislatures who have obstructed its implementation. And the SCOTUS maybe?
 
WakeandBake said:
I would think Republican governors and state legislatures who have obstructed its implementation. And the SCOTUS maybe?
Click to expand...

Yeah, SCOTUS can bite my bag. I don't think the state has anything to do with my gripe, I'm not complaining about Medicaid or the individual exchanges.
 
PhDeac said:
Classic Wrangor and jhmd #doyouwanttobuildastrawman

building_olaf_by_trollinlikeabitchtit-d74zalf.jpg
Click to expand...

Sorry PH. He got you. You walked right into it. Obama promised that if you wanted everything to stay the same you would have that option. Unfortunately for me and for my employees it wasn't the truth.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
So I was wrong that it applied to you, it doesn't change the underlying premise that you will a) find any reason to not believe statistics if they are counter to your worldview, b) are so jaded about the ACA that someone could show you without a doubt it was saving the bulk of people money and you would still rail against it because you were getting screwed (which ties back into case (a) where you probably wouldn't even believe it in the first place since it wasn't happening to you), and c) your language of "community organizer" and blaming Obama for everything that happens obfuscates any legitimate argument you might have had in the first place.

In sum, the ACA is not perfect and it is still in its early stages. There are going to be ups and downs, but remember that Obama wanted to go to single payer and we ended up with the current model because of political compromise and the lack of a good-faith effort from the GOP in engaging in a reasonable dialogue. Not to mention the primary structure of the ACA is a recycled Republican idea from the 1990's and I think we can all agree that you wouldn't be upset with this if it was paraded in by a GOP Congress.
Click to expand...

Can we please end this lie? GOP voted 100% against it. Dems voted 100% for it. If the Dems wanted single payer we would have it. If Obama wanted single payer he should have whipped his party into line. I am so tired of hearing people blame ACA on pubs as if they could have done anything but bend over and take it. It is an embarrassing lack of intellectual honesty.
 
No it really isn't. I'll find plenty of articles on the topic from the time period when I get home.
 
Wrangor said:
Can we please end this lie? GOP voted 100% against it. Dems voted 100% for it. If the Dems wanted single payer we would have it. If Obama wanted single payer he should have whipped his party into line. I am so tired of hearing people blame ACA on pubs as if they could have done anything but bend over and take it. It is an embarrassing lack of intellectual honesty.
Click to expand...

Blue Dog Dems and the line generally having moved to the right since Reagan are to blame.
 
WakeandBake said:
Blue Dog Dems and the line generally having moved to the right since Reagan are to blame.
Click to expand...

At least you aren't attempting to blame it on republicans. Kudos for that. Dems voted it through. If they wanted to have HC reform with compromise they could have done it. It just wouldn't look anything like this.
 
WakeandBake said:
But I thought NC was making it worse for you through less competition
Click to expand...

I don't think competition has much to do with it. We have an existing policy, which is noncompliant but the premium is getting jacked up because of, if you believe the reps, having to pay the penalties for being non-compliant. Alternatively, we can shift to an ACA-compliant plan with the same carrier that allows us to access the same providers and covers the same procedures plus those features mandated by the ACA that the existing plan doesn't cover (in our case it is just going from vision exams every two years to every year and adding children's dental, which we don't need because we already provide free dental for the entire family and the ACA's version of children's dental coverage is dogshit), but it shifts a much higher cost burden onto the employees. We priced out the similar plans with BCBS and two other carriers, and the one we are looking at still costs the least (and is the one everyone is used to using in terms of available doctors). So what it comes down to is paying $45k more per year so that everyone gets an additional eye exam once every two years. Jesus H, I'll pay for them to go to the damn eye doctor.
 
Last edited:
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I don't think competition has much to do with it. We have an existing policy, which is noncompliant but the premium is getting jacked up because of, if you believe the reps, having to pay the penalties for being non-compliant. Alternatively, we can shift to an ACA-compliant plan with the same carrier that allows us to access the same providers and covers the same procedures plus those features mandated by the ACA that the existing plan doesn't cover (in our case it is just going from vision exams every two years to every year and adding children's dental, which we don't need because we already provide free children's dental and the ACA's version of children's dental coverage is dogshit), but it shifts a much higher cost burden onto the employees. We priced out the similar plans with BCBS and two other carriers, and the one we are looking at still costs the least (and is the one everyone is used to using in terms of available doctors). So what it comes down to is paying $45k more per year so that everyone gets an additional eye exam once every two years. Jesus H, I'll pay for them to go to the damn eye doctor.
Click to expand...

ok, I was thinking though that if NC were not opposing then your employees could opt out of your plan and get much better rates through the excahnges and get assistance. then both you and your employees would be happy
 
Wrangor said:
Sorry PH. He got you. You walked right into it. Obama promised that if you wanted everything to stay the same you would have that option. Unfortunately for me and for my employees it wasn't the truth.
Click to expand...

Refer to LK's post. Refer to mine. jhmd made a severely reductionist argument that you feel for as usual. Obama didn't say "If you like your plan" until after he was elected.
 
The impact to Small groups in the ACA is a really under-reported issue IMHO. As we all know, most SGs don't offer insurance. I think something like 2/3rds of small employers do not offer coverage to their employees nor are the retired to under the new law. And nothing under the law will increase the take rate.

But, most states already had a small group reform law which regulated prices. In NC, you could only discount or upcharge 25% of the basic premium. The ACA outlawed this and all SGs pay the same rate. New age bands were also introduced and gender rating went away. As a result, you see some crazy scenarios. Young healthy male groups (or some combination of these) get killed when moving to an ACA complaint plan. Some other groups (older, sicker) get decreases but on average SG rates went up, to the tune of 15% or so on average + medical trend,

So what do these SGs do? They drop coverage for their lower income employees (or set very high contribution amounts) thereby forcing people into the exchanges and subsidies. This has a tendency to poison the SG pool even more driving more groups to drop.

Who loses in all this? The tax payer as more people get access to subsidies who were otherwise happily covered in groups. Some analysis put forth by the WH actually suggested MORE employers would take coverage, not less. Thats pure folly.

I can't imagine in 5 years there will be much of a small group market left.
 
PhDeac said:
Refer to LK's post. Refer to mine. jhmd made a severely reductionist argument that you feel for as usual. Obama didn't say "If you like your plan" until after he was elected.
Click to expand...

It's ok to lose every once in a while. Even to JH.
 
I love that in this whole discussion of the ACA we just have a bunch of people bitching about their plans having been changed. Any thoughts on the millions of previously uninsured people who now have health insurance?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top