How to test the success/failure of obamacare

I am far from pleased at the present health insurance situation, but I wanted to put this question to the group here. At what point can Obamacare be judged a failure or a success?

Considering that the bulk of the plan doesn't even take effect until 2014, I think that's hard to say. The one thing that will be an early indicator is how much premiums go up because insurance companies can no longer deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, set limits on what they spend on treatments and have to carry all kids until they're 26. I'm sure there will be some increases by the insurance companies and for me, that will be the first indicator.

What I wonder is how Democrats will exempt union cadillac plans from any tax. That could also be another tale tale sign.

Acording to the Wall Street Journal, Verison and Catapiller are already calculating their costs to rise this year. Those costs will be pasted on in higher prices for their products or the costs will be reduced by a reduction in labor. Additionally, US accounting laws require businesses to restate their earnings in light of their higher tax burden. This is going to have an effect on earnings statement, which I believe will have an affect on future employment. We are already in a recession and Obamacare is just going to add to the situation.

Now as far as the insurance situation goes, you can thank the government for that. Health Insurance should work like any other insurance, like homeowners or auto. It pays out to cover a catstrophy, it doesn't pay for routine maintenance. The purpose of insurance should be to prevent financal ruin, but provide the appearance of free healthcare.

Now as far as the insurance situation goes, you can thank the government for that.

Willy, I'm going to do that just as soon as I get a letter from Obama, iffen this includes me.

The first changes under the new health care law will be easy to see and not long in coming: There'll be $250 rebate checks for seniors in the Medicare drug coverage gap,

http://www.ajc.com/business/health-care-gains-start-391466.html

.

One way it can be tested is to see how many of those people used as poster boys and girls--folks who are dying--get help before 2014.

Great answers, thanks. I think Keli's test is a useful one--are the people being held up as ideals actually benefitting? I am also anxious to see what happens with insurance premiums, but of course any rise will just be blamed on greedy insurance companies rather than this legislation.

My fear and prediction is that the quality of Medicaid and Medicare will drop considerably, as they are subsidized by other patients who bare the brunt of their costs. As the one pool increases and the latter decreases, I do not see good things coming as a result.

I bet the union cadillac plans will end up being quietly protected in the end, I believe they have a "stay" already, as it is.

I also agree with Cato's idea of catastrophic rather than routine coverage. I am looking into such a thing, combined with an F or Health Savings Account, right now, although who can say if that will be legal in a few years.....

SheikBen wrote:Great answers, thanks. I think Keli's test is a useful one--are the people being held up as ideals actually benefitting? I am also anxious to see what happens with insurance premiums, but of course any rise will just be blamed on greedy insurance companies rather than this legislation.

My fear and prediction is that the quality of Medicaid and Medicare will drop considerably, as they are subsidized by other patients who bare the brunt of their costs. As the one pool increases and the latter decreases, I do not see good things coming as a result.

I bet the union cadillac plans will end up being quietly protected in the end, I believe they have a "stay" already, as it is.

I think that we should ask the average Medicare/Medicaid user exactly what $500 billion of their benefits they want cut?

Keli wrote:

I think that we should ask the average Medicare/Medicaid user exactly what $500 billion of their benefits they want cut?

I doubt if one red penny is cut from Medicare. I have yet to see a government program be cut, especially an entitlement program and I doubt if we see one now.

Cato wrote:

Keli wrote:

I think that we should ask the average Medicare/Medicaid user exactly what $500 billion of their benefits they want cut?

I doubt if one red penny is cut from Medicare. I have yet to see a government program be cut, especially an entitlement program and I doubt if we see one now.

Well, do they really need to cut medicare since they are going to cut that same amount in waste and fraud?

Isn't it illegal to force people to pay

A protection racket is an extortion scheme whereby a criminal group or individual coerces other less powerful entities to pay money, allegedly for protection services of Obamacare.

.

If they know how much money is going to waste and fraud in medicare and medicaid, one wonders why they haven't done something about this sooner.

Maybe the elimination of fraud makes the bill "bipartisan" as it is something the Dems are giving up.

(Mark Steyn's idea)

Here's a curious problem. I've been trying to access the roll call vote on the health care bill on the house.gov website and it won't let me. I've never had this problem before. I wonder............

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/89473-pres-obama-names-15-recess-appointments-including-becker

Obama has not "given up" corruption. He panders to it. Becker and Pearce may yet get us to card check without an inconvenient Congressional vote.

Considering that the bulk of the plan doesn't even take effect until 2014, I think that's hard to say. The one thing that will be an early indicator is how much premiums go up because insurance companies can no longer deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, set limits on what they spend on treatments and have to carry all kids until they're 26. I'm sure there will be some increases by the insurance companies and for me, that will be the first indicator.

Or go down because the people that play roulette and don't get coverage, particularly the 18-35 demographic are now contributing to the pool.

Perhaps there will even be a little competition between providers, much like is going on with auto insurance today.

Very good, TerryRC, we have two seperate predictions and we will see what happens.

TerryRC wrote: much like is going on with auto insurance today.

And while the premiums have somewhat stagnated so the way auto insurance companies have increased profits is by reducing services as I found out the hard way.

10 to 20 years ago, what used to get a policy holder 50/100/50k coverage not gets you 20/40/10K coverage.

Will health insurance be the same way with today’s Cadillac plans gets you catastrophic coverage 20 years from now?

Or go down because the people that play roulette and don't get coverage, particularly the 18-35 demographic are now contributing to the pool.

And don't get coverage?????

What the ell re you talking about, TRC?

20,000 newly hired IRS Agents will insure that won't happen.

I think Sam misunderstood TRC's point, which is that all the currently young, healthy Americans choosing to gamble and not purchase health insurance will be forced too and that will drive premiums down.

I DISAGREE for TWO reasons.

1) The fines imposed for not purchasing insurance will be significantly less than the price of actually purchasing a policy.

2) This legislation also forces insurance companies to cover ALL PREEXISTING CONDITIONS.

This means that even if I'm wrong about the fines not compelling people to purchase insurance, mandating insurance companies cover all pre-existing conditions will ensure premiums will not decrease. It also means that if I'm correct, premiums will increase at an unprecedented rate.

This also means that if I'm correct, we will end up with a single payer system by default. Fewer and fewer Americans will be able to afford private insurance even insurance partially paid for by their employers. What I imagine will eventually happen is a system where everyone is on some substandard government insurance plan with upper middle class and wealthy Americans purchasing supplemental plans or paying for better care out of pocket.

What I imagine will eventually happen is a system where everyone is on some substandard government insurance plan with upper middle class and wealthy Americans purchasing supplemental plans or paying for better care out of pocket.

And would that be a terribly bad system?

ziggy wrote:

What I imagine will eventually happen is a system where everyone is on some substandard government insurance plan with upper middle class and wealthy Americans purchasing supplemental plans or paying for better care out of pocket.

And would that be a terribly bad system?

Well now, apparently not for substandard people like yourself if that is all it takes to make you happy.

I don't mind being described as a "substandard" person- especially by one who has no proof of his own "standard", nor a definition of what it a "standard" person might be.

HA, it was you who aluded to the fact that that was what you were.

I can't imagine you being so brazen as to be telling someone else what is good or bad for them.

and would that be a terribly bad system?

Yes, on many different levels and for many different reasons. We're talking about the government nationalizing the health insurance industry. Health insurance, like life insurance or car insurance, is based upon a series of assumptions (http://www.quatloos.com/basic_insurance.htm), That we disapprove or disparage the motives of for-profit insurance companies does not change a series of facts - a government that is big enough to give you cradle to grave health care is big enough to deny you health care at any stage of your life based on criteria that are beyond your control. The only way government can control the costs in health care is to ration care. This is eugenics. This is social engineering. You think this is compassionate? Wait until someone you love is denied care. I hope it doesn't happen. It will.