The quiet unraveling of ObamaCare

BRUTALITOPS

on indefiniate mod break
Contributor
Indeed, last week brought arguably the worst news for the program since the healthcare.gov debacle: UnitedHealthcare, the nation's largest insurer,announced that it might quit ObamaCare's exchanges next year. Should UnitedHealthcare act on this threat, there may not be enough (red) tape in the desk drawer of even future President Hillary Clinton to put the ObamaCare Humpty Dumpty back together again.
United announced during an investor briefing Thursday that it was expecting a whopping $425 million hit on its earnings this year, primarily due to mounting losses on its ObamaCare exchange business. "We cannot sustain these losses," United CEO Stephen Hensley declared. "We can't really subsidize a marketplace that doesn't appear at the moment to be sustaining itself."


Even the administration has admitted that ObamaCare enrollment hasessentially flatlined, with only 1.3 million new members expected to buy coverage next year, compared to the 8 million projected when the law was passed. This means that overall enrollment by 2016 will be somewhere between 9.4 million and 11.4 million. That's half — half — of the 21 million initially predicted. So much for universal coverage!


The reason for this pathetic take-up rate is that the lavish benefits — in-vitro fertilization for 50-year-old women, for example — that ObamaCare mandated for qualifying plans have backfired. This mandate was intended to make sure that the young and healthy would purchase full — not bare-bones, catastrophic — coverage so that they would offset the cost of sicker patients. Instead, it has forced companies to jack up rates so much that only those eligible for full subsidies (the relatively poor) or the sick find it worth their while to buy coverage. The relatively young and healthy are opting to pay the penalty and "go naked." This, in turn, is forcing insurers to raise prices even more, which is causing more healthy people to drop out, unleashing the dreaded adverse selection spiral.


http://theweek.com/articles/589920/quiet-unraveling-obamacare
 
Are Medicare/Medicaid TriCare/VA Social Security and tax deduction beneficiaries "takers"?

re: social security, people are only receiving the money that they were originally forced to put in. So they would not be takers as long as they aren't getting more than they contributed.

tax deduction beneficiaries are not takers...how can they be taking their own money? The fact that less of their money is being taken does not make them takers. It makes them the opposite.

as for the rest, yes - takers.
 
Arizona's co-op is bowing out, as of December 31st 2015.
They've lost too much money and are converting to a profit organization.
 
Legion, you might wanna Google what an LES is. Military housing, food, Tricare, Etc. Are all automatically deducted from ones pay. I.E. they are not free. They are paid for service.
 
Legion, you might wanna Google what an LES is. Military housing, food, Tricare, Etc. Are all automatically deducted from ones pay. I.E. they are not free. They are paid for service.

Did I say they were free?

They are subsidized by taxpayers.
 
re: social security, people are only receiving the money that they were originally forced to put in. So they would not be takers as long as they aren't getting more than they contributed.

tax deduction beneficiaries are not takers...how can they be taking their own money? The fact that less of their money is being taken does not make them takers. It makes them the opposite.

as for the rest, yes - takers.

I think it should be "forced to put in , with interest". the baby boomers are the recipients. I am not a baby boomer. my wife is a last year vintage, baby boomer. we take nothing. we are an asset to other poor people. we don't even register on the charts. it is called subsistence I think. it is good. I am thankful to The Lord to have food, shelter and clothing. I am thankful for the spiritual riches.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top