Obamacare: 7million exchange enrollments, ~8-9m plans sold directly, ~8m covered by other provisions

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**whembly**

You see... if it wasn't for the shutdown... this will be all over the news.

Here's some twittah complaints...

So if I dont have ObamaCare in 2 months I get Fines ???? Yea that will help with the already severe financial situation—
Terrance Martyr (@BrokenVessel_) October 02, 2013

What's all this noise about if I don't get the health insurance then The government is gonna take my income taxes?—
Kevin Hume (@TSL_KHume7) October 01, 2013

So I have places telling me if I don't get insurance on ACA, I'm going to get fined? But I make no money. Whatttttt's the deal?—
Trigger Warning (@TaeSalsa) October 01, 2013

So if you don't have a health insurance plant and don't get #Obamacare you will be fined? That doesn't seem like a Free Country's law…….—
Michael N. (@Mic_Nas89) October 02, 2013

It's okay if we don't get ObamaCare but we'll be fined for that in the future? Seriously? What the feth.—
♡ (@MsHooahGal) October 02, 2013

Wait I just found out I have to pay a $95 fine if I choose not to enroll in Obamacare because I don't have health insurance. This is fethed.—
Gabriel. (@supertrvmp) October 02, 2013

Wait…so wtf does that mean for the younger generation? A mandatory $95 fine for no insurance?—
_MarkGT_ (@EstradaAMark) October 01, 2013

Seriously?! A $95 fine if I don't have health insurance by jan. 1?—
justin. † (@justineatzombie) September 30, 2013

So you're telling me if I don't get Obamacare, by the end of 2014 I could get PENALIZED??—
Francisco Padilla (@ifrankyy) October 01, 2013

So according to Obamacare, I'll be penalized if I don't get medical insurance…. Hmmm. Wow—
Juan C. Negrete (@UTSAMarineVet09) October 01, 2013

Exit question: How many of them voted for Obama?

**Jihadin**

Wonder if those that came up/created ACA/ObamaCare took into account the big business dumping their retiree's into the program....

**Ouze**

I was finally able to get an account created!

I'll start looking at plans momentarily; I need to figure out where I can see what I pay for now via work. ADP probably. .

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit: but I can't log on with my credentials, and the password reset email link doesn't send anything.

Worst MMO ever.

**Ahtman**

whembly wrote:
You see... if it wasn't for the shutdown... this will be all over the news.

People complaining about a government program on the internet is unusual and exciting, and would certainly be big news.

**d-usa**

Ouze wrote:

Worst MMO ever.

I've been grinding for two days and I still haven't leveled up to silver. The farming system is really broken.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:
whembly wrote:
You see... if it wasn't for the shutdown... this will be all over the news.

People complaining about a government program on the internet is unusual and exciting, and would certainly be big news.

This is the cornerstone and centerpiece of ObamaCare, insurance available for all. Available on an exchange that encourages competition between plans. Everybody can log on and get insurance!

Having a screwy start would be pretty newsworthy and it would be wonderful stuff for Republicans to blabber on about.

Now? "Look guys ObamaCare exchanges have a long loading time!" "Shut the feth up and open the government back up'l

**Jihadin**

Mental reminder to you all. On government shutdowns. The programs security protocol are disable. Cannot guarantee privacy security. So you might be hitting schedule downtime till the IT guru comes back to work.....Monday....maybe....was explain to me at the Social Security Office today as I was trying to get a replacement SS card being they could not verify anything....

**Ahtman**

I actually heard someone complaining that they had a preexisting condition that they had no health care for, but now they were being forced to get insurance that would cover it thanks to the ACA.

**Jihadin**

Hear about the seniors having to pay for prenatal care and other issues dealing with births?

**Ouze**

d-usa wrote:I've been grinding for two days and I still haven't leveled up to silver. The farming system is really broken.

I heard tell that someone on a different server logged in on the first day, and the newbie level bureaucrats were dropping purple cancer medications. They probably shut it down to fix the loot rates, those are only supposed to drop off junior congressmen.

Jihadin wrote:Mental reminder to you all. On government shutdowns. The programs security protocol are disable. Cannot guarantee privacy security. So you might be hitting schedule downtime till the IT guru comes back to work.....Monday....maybe.....

The systems to lock accounts for multiple bad passwords, and to reset accounts on the site should be totally automatic and not require human intervention (in fact, it would not be possible to even run if it did require such). The only possibility, and in fact the most likely one at that, is they simply can't handle the load of hundreds of thousands of people accessing the site at once.

The "live chat" feature probably IS down for the reasons you say, though, I haven't tried it because I already have insurance via my job and I don't want to tie someone up when so many people who don't are trying to get this done, just to satisfy my curiosity.

**Ahtman**

Jihadin wrote:
Hear about the seniors having to pay for prenatal care and other issues dealing with births?

Depends on what you mean by paying I suppose. If it is in an oblique way, such as all insurance programs do, then it makes sense, but if they are individually being charged for a pregnancy they didn't have then that would be strange. young and middle aged people paying for insurance also cover senior issues. That is generally how insurance works. Lots of people pay in and cover those that are having trouble. People pay car insurance even though there is nothing wrong with their car, and that payment goes to cover the cars that are having a problem at that time.

**Ouze**

Jihadin wrote:
Hear about the seniors having to pay for prenatal care and other issues dealing with births?

If they are complaining about this, they should probably shut their whiny, entitled mouths. The average cost of prenatal care, when needed, is $2,000 total. The average cost of treating cancer starts at around $4,500 a month and scales up from there; as I'm sure you know, so you tell me which cohort is really eating up those premiums.

I don't know of any insurance system in the world that allows you to pay in and have your premiums only go to the costs of healthcare for people in your age group.

**Jihadin**

Running the programs is money. IT on duty is money. If the IT guy was being paid from "Fee" base then aye it still be running. Wife was wife me and knew what she was talking about so she clarified it for me.

edit

How many seniors we know are still having babies?

edit 2

I fully aware how much cancer treatment cost

**Ouze**

It's an interesting point, though. I mean, supposedly the ACA is essential spending so not affected by a shutdown, but if it's being supported by furloughed federal employees in a nonessential department, I have to imagine we have kind of a Schrodinger's website.

Jihadin wrote:How many seniors we know are still having babies?

How many babies, on average, have colon cancer, or require hearing aids, or any of the other myriad of costs that are much, much more likely to hit the elderly?

My stepson had brain cancer (medullablastoma) when he was 4, so I know it happens, but it's rare - we're talking averages, right?

edit: quoting, how does it work?

**whembly**

Jihadin... are seniors complaining about pre-natal gak? o.O That seems odd.

I'm confused... shouldn't they be on Medicare? Or is this supplemental?

EDIT: applicable?

**Ouze**

Yes, applicable. sadly.

**Jihadin**

Each year in the U.S. there are approximately 13,400 children between the ages of birth and 19 years of age who are diagnosed with cancer. About one in 300 boys and one in 333 girls will develop cancer before their 20th birthday. In 1998, about 2500 died of cancer, thus making cancer the most common cause of death by disease for children and adolescents in America.

http://www.acco.org/information/aboutchildhoodcancer/childhoodcancerstatistics.aspx

In the United States, between 1997 and 1999, 539 births were reported among mothers over age 50, with 194 being over 55.[4] According to statistics from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, in the Britain, more than 20 babies are born to women over age 50 per year through in-vitro fertilization with the use of donor oocytes (eggs).[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pregnancy_over_age_50

My Google Fu was weak on this one. I'm just pointing out that some of the packages, which seems to be a "package", include things not "needed". I'm wording this all wrong Ouze so bear with me.

Edit

How the Hell you get a screen shot of my monitor when I was playing WoW?

Now has anyone seen the number to take ObamaCare/ACA beyond the threshold concerning young adults? From what I understand a huge number of young adults need to enroll for it to become self sustaining? Sebster, I think, mention it awhile back?

Edit 2

The senior bit I heard on NPR. They were mentioning how couples are paying for pre natal and other issues dealing with pregnancies. Even if one or both sex are "snipped" to prevent having more kids.

Yes I'm fully aware its still in launch mode

**Ouze**

Jihadin wrote:
I'm wording this all wrong Ouze so bear with me.

Yeah, I get that, it's cool. I'm not being any more clear I think, I feel like both of our points are sailing past each other - let me try and explain what I'm saying again too.

Jihadin wrote:
Now has anyone seen the number to take ObamaCare/ACA beyond the threshold concerning young adults? From what I understand a huge number of young adults need to enroll for it to become self sustaining? Sebster, I think, mention it awhile back?

I think this is a feature of every insurance company. You have 10 people who each pay a dollar for insurance, and you have a monthly pool of $10. Lets presume each disease costs 2 dollars. You can't afford to treat everyone at the same time, but the demographics of your plan mean that 1 young person has a baby ($2) one person in the middle breaks a leg ($2) and 3 old people have cancer ($6), so it works out. You can't have any insurance plan that doesn't include people paying into it who aren't actually sick.

**Jihadin**

I'm going with three to four years down the road for it to truly effective. I, IMO, will not consider effective if we're dipping into another fund to finance it. Actually Ouze I think we're on the same page but not on the same line. Its the "pre-made package" that's having issues. I'm not going to beat my drum and do a war dance over some minor issues that can fixed further down the road.

**whembly**

There's a hilarious reddit thread that's tearing up the site's design.

**motyak**

whembly wrote:
There's a hilarious reddit thread that's tearing up the site's design.

Isn't there a hilarious reddit thread tearing up most things?

Also, link please? I could use a laugh.

**whembly**

motyak wrote:
whembly wrote:
There's a hilarious reddit thread that's tearing up the site's design.

Isn't there a hilarious reddit thread tearing up most things?

Also, link please? I could use a laugh.

http://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1nj692/how_not_to_optimize_a_website_healthcaregov/

**motyak**

whembly wrote:
motyak wrote:
whembly wrote:
There's a hilarious reddit thread that's tearing up the site's design.

Isn't there a hilarious reddit thread tearing up most things?

Also, link please? I could use a laugh.

http://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1nj692/how_not_to_optimize_a_website_healthcaregov/

Thanks, but turns out that conversation is way, way over my head. I understood maybe one of ten comments there.

**whembly**

motyak wrote:
whembly wrote:
motyak wrote:
whembly wrote:
There's a hilarious reddit thread that's tearing up the site's design.

Isn't there a hilarious reddit thread tearing up most things?

Also, link please? I could use a laugh.

http://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1nj692/how_not_to_optimize_a_website_healthcaregov/

Thanks, but turns out that conversation is way, way over my head. I understood maybe one of ten comments there.

Basically, the website is poorly optimized for high volume.

Just poor planning really.

**Relapse**

whembly wrote:
motyak wrote:
whembly wrote:
motyak wrote:
whembly wrote:
There's a hilarious reddit thread that's tearing up the site's design.

Isn't there a hilarious reddit thread tearing up most things?

Also, link please? I could use a laugh.

http://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1nj692/how_not_to_optimize_a_website_healthcaregov/

Thanks, but turns out that conversation is way, way over my head. I understood maybe one of ten comments there.

Basically, the website is poorly optimized for high volume.

Just poor planning really.

Like Obamacare is?

Looks like an interesting starting point to investigate and see what the costs to people really will be:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/04/as-obamacare-launches-people-in-all-age-groups-report-problems/

I would really like the news to carry a bit more pronounced coverage of what people that have managed to get through the exchanges are finding out about what their costs or fines are going to be. It could either alleviate fears or prove the naysayers point in time enough for people to write their representitives and say stand down or get rid of the thing.

**whembly**

Yeesh... the danger here is that it may get a reputation that the ACA won't be able to shake....

EDIT: here's the link:
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/ernest-istook-knowing-inside/2013/oct/4/obamacare-has-become-un-affordable-care-act/

WASHINGTON, October 4, 2013 — Not only is Obamacare unpopular with the general public, but it also is losing favor among the very people it’s supposed to help. The White House has difficulty getting the uninsured to buy Obamacare not merely because the government website is bad, but mostly because the product is bad. It’s overpriced.

The Affordable Care Act long ago became known as Obamacare. Now it’s time to re-christen it the Un-Affordable Care Act.

Conservatives should insist that the Obama Administration immediately make public all details about the signups and traffic at the key website, www.healthcare.gov., and Congress should act promptly on that information.

The White House cannot brag about how many have signed up for coverage, so they brag about visits to the site. That’s like a store boasting how many people looked through the windows but never went inside to buy.

Many visitors to the Obamacame website complain because it freezes up before they can even find out the prices of policies. They are the lucky ones.
Once they finally find out the costs, they back off from applying. High premiums are accompanied by high deductibles and high co-pays.

The Administration insists millions will enroll by year’s end, but it’s a mystery how many have applied so far. Reporters beg the public for information. “The Chicago Tribune” deemed it newsworthy when they finally found a lone individual who enrolled. Upon learning that 57-year-old Kathy Kanak signed up on the second day, it was printed as proof that at least one real live Illinoisan had made it through the online maze and applied. Kanak said her willingness to pay the high price was linked to the subsidy she expects to help cover the bill.

In the absence of official figures, media make estimates. London’s “Daily Mail” reported that less than 1% of the first day’s website visitors actually signed up. They estimated only .058% of California visitors had done so, .059% of Connecticut’s and .032% of New York’s.

Kansas Congressman Tim Huelskamp said his state was shut out. Although an estimated 365,000 Kansans lack insurance, zero individuals reportedly signed up on day one. In Louisiana, only after the second day did Blue Cross-Blue Shield get word that it had new customers—a whopping seven of them in the whole state.

Nobody knows how much the fault stems from the lousy computer system and how much from the lousy prices. Premiums are soaring because the law dictates so many expanded benefits and so much bureaucracy.

As the Manhattan Institute calculated, Obamacare increases individual-market premiums by 99% for men and 62% for women. The worst prices hit young adults. The American Action Forum says a healthy 30-year-old male will see the cheapest option rise 260% on average. Premiums would increase in every state. In Vermont, it will rise 600% in Vermont.

The same mandates also bring dramatic premium increases for group plans. So who does get lower premiums? Mostly those with pre-existing conditions, which is a major factor in shifting the cost increases onto everyone else.

The facts are dawning on people as they learn the truths about Obamacare, like when they find out how ultra-expensive it will be for them on top of the costs to taxpayers in general. It is a far cry from Obama’s cynical promises to cut insurance costs by $2,500 a year for a family of four.
High prices, high deductibles and high co-pays are generating high disgust.

The start of registration has opened eyes. The official website has a companion official Facebook page. From its visitors we learn what’s being said by those who visit the official website. There on Facebook, the complaints focus on two things:
1—The website is lousy, and
2—So are the prices for Obamacare

“I am so disappointed,” comments Leslie S. from Georgia. “These prices are outrageous and there are huge deductibles. No one can afford this!” 333 people “liked” her comment.

Tammy B. of Ohio wonders, “How is it that Facebook … can reliably handle BILLIONS of electronic interactions per second, but the Healthcare.gov site, which is literally the very heart of the Obamacare program, wasn’t ready for the obvious millions of visitors.” 109 people “liked” her comment.

Florida’s Mary J. complains that premium subsidies for low earners doesn’t counteract how Obamacare reduces income, “…Businesses and companies … knock everyone to part time to avoid penalties of ACA. More people would be working if it weren’t for the fact that the welfare system pays out more than a full time job. … we are going to be taxed and have to pay for some one else’s health care.” 145 people “liked” her comment.

Alabama’s James A commented, “I will have a choice…..I can pay my rent and buy groceries, or I can pay the health care premiums, move out into the streets and live under a bridge somewhere, and go hungry! Can I please get one of those exemption things that the President and Congress got?” 60 people “liked” what James said.

Meantime the White House feigns that it doesn’t know how the web applications are going. That’s a remarkable statement from a group that mastered Internet technology in two successful elections. After all, it’s routine today for even non-techies to monitor visitors, traffic and sales in real-time, with non-stop detailed reports.

Most likely, the White House has put out the word to conceal bad news and let the President’s people spin a cover story. As they’ve done in other controversies, they’ll conceal the embarrassing truth as long as they can, hoping that meantime Obamacare will become locked-in for perpetuity.

If Obamacare were the great product that Obama claims, it would outsell Ginsu Knives, Sham-Wow!, George Foreman Grilles and every other product that’s hawked by pitchmen. The site would be slicker than eBay’s, Amazon’s, esurance, and all others that deal in high-volume sales.

Obama told the country, “Just visit healthcare.gov, and there you can compare insurance plans – side by side – the same way you’d shop for a plane ticket on Kayak or a TV on Amazon.”

Not exactly, Mr. President. Those websites work well and offer quality goods at affordable prices. That is quite unlike people’s experience with Obamacare.

We can learn from what Desiree M of Louisiana posted, addressing the multitude who complain about Obamacare’s website: “To everyone having problems, maybe God is trying to stop you from making a huge mistake.”
114 echoed her words with a “like.”

**Relapse**

From that article, I guess Obama has some of that old "transparency" magic happening.

**whembly**

Relapse wrote:
From that article, I guess Obama has some of that old "transparency" magic happening.

What's that?

I am curious what's someone experience who has a pre-existing condition.

**Ouze**

Alright, now we're back to where every Obamacare thread ever goes, forever and ever, hallelujah, amen.

**KalashnikovMarine**

You mean the bit where it sucks?

**Relapse**

Ouze wrote:
Alright, now we're back to where every Obamacare thread ever goes, forever and ever, hallelujah, amen.

I just wish there was much more real world information about what people were finding out about charges and penalties that would apply to them. So far there seems precious little out there for as many people that must have checked the site or signed on.