Thread: Uninsured Have Increased Under Obama and Since Obamacare Was Enacted

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

There was a 2009 legislature decision to deny health care coverage to legal immigrants. This was recently reversed in a court decision.

Massachusetts court makes key ruling on immigrant health benefits | masslive.com

I'm not aware of how it's been implemented to date, but it could be included below.

Current eligibility in MassHealth :
MassHealth: General Eligibility

There's also Commonwealth Care. Another program for health insurance
Commonwealth Care Health Insurance

Have you noticed there's more than one program in place and yet proponents keep talking about reducing overhead with one payer and one set of rules...but no such program exists even in the much lauded example of Massachusetts and its health-care reform?

The only thing the Massachusetts legislation tried to do was acheive expanded coverage, which it did, using the the same carrots and sticks that ACA uses. Saying it doesn't control costs is like saying it doesn't reduce traffic jams or lower the price of gasoline, it did nothing to address those issues.

ACA uses the same methods to expand coverage, but that hasn't gone into effect yet, so whining about the reason we need ACA, i.e. declining coverage, and blaming ACA, before it goes into effect, is demonstrating some pretty intense cognitive dissonance.......

Originally Posted by soot

I'm not defending Obamacare, but has it actually gone into effect to the point where we should already be seeing the (allegedly) positive effect of the legislation?

My understanding is that it hasn't.

And if it hasn't I don't really see the point of this thread.

Yeah, uninsured numbers have increased, just as they have for every year of the last decade. And we've put a plan in place that's supposed to turn that around, but the plan hasn't gone into effect yet.

So we blame the plan?

That sounds kind of, I don't know, fucking retarded.

Yes parts are in place and if hundreds of waivers were not given out of the plan we would be in even worse shape. 2014 will be the biggest hut that is when the worst parts kick in... Notice they planned that for after the elections....

Originally Posted by soot

I'm not defending Obamacare, but has it actually gone into effect to the point where we should already be seeing the (allegedly) positive effect of the legislation?

My understanding is that it hasn't.

And if it hasn't I don't really see the point of this thread.

Yeah, uninsured numbers have increased, just as they have for every year of the last decade. And we've put a plan in place that's supposed to turn that around, but the plan hasn't gone into effect yet.

So we blame the plan?

That sounds kind of, I don't know, fucking retarded.

There is no positive effect of this law... that's why it was timed to happen after the 2012 election.

Were everything to be cookies and cream... and peace on earth, don't you think they would have had it start sooner?

Originally Posted by goober

And cost is the next thing they are working on, and they will succeed in lowering costs, it's what happens when smart people address a problem, they solve it.

You mean like the Democrats' ending poverty? And Obama keeping unemployment in the single digits? I noticed the left hasn't Quite got the 'US Solvency' thing beat, but if those darn Republicans don't get in the way, it should be gone in just a few short years!

Originally Posted by Stangler

The nature of Obamacare is that it should help transition towards a system like Germany has which would result in better results for less money than our system.

From another thread, it would indeed appear that Germany has a superior system, but it's an effort in futility to try to impose a grass-roots system in a top-down manner, especially when the top is controlled by corrupt politicians, regardless of party.

Originally Posted by Greenbeard

Why would this be surprising? Poor economic conditions are always associated with higher uninsurance rates...

Yeah - I don't like Obama or any of his policies that I'm aware of, but Obamacare is not the primary driver of the most recent rises. Or is it...?

Originally Posted by soot

Yeah, uninsured numbers have increased, just as they have for every year of the last decade. And we've put a plan in place that's supposed to turn that around, but the plan hasn't gone into effect yet.
So we blame the plan?
That sounds kind of, I don't know, fucking retarded.

But failing to look past the superficial reasons for something in a complicated system is, well, fucking retarded. Uninsurance is up - Why? Unemployment is up. Unemployment is up - Why? People aren't hiring. People aren't hiring - Why? The economy is unstable and the labor market is in flux. The economy is unstable - Why? The financial markets are on a 'very cautious' footing. The financial markets are scared - Why? There's concern the US is going broke. There's concern the US is going broke - Why? Government spending is growing enormously. Government spending is growing enormously - Why? A number of reasons, but one of the most visible is... Obamacare.
Jumping back a bit, the labor market is in flux - Why? Employers are concerned that the cost of hiring is going to go way up. Employers are concerned that the cost of hiring is going to go way up - Why? Increasingly anti-business regulation and mandates, the most visible of which is... Obamacare.

Does this mean it's all due to Obamacare? Of course not. I'd even venture it's a small contributing factor. But among countless 'small contributors', it's one of the bigger ones.

Originally Posted by soot

I'm not defending Obamacare, but has it actually gone into effect to the point where we should already be seeing the (allegedly) positive effect of the legislation?

My understanding is that it hasn't.

And if it hasn't I don't really see the point of this thread.

Yeah, uninsured numbers have increased, just as they have for every year of the last decade. And we've put a plan in place that's supposed to turn that around, but the plan hasn't gone into effect yet.

So we blame the plan?

That sounds kind of, I don't know, fucking retarded.

Indeed, you're correct.

Originally Posted by CSA

Yes parts are in place and if hundreds of waivers were not given out of the plan we would be in even worse shape.

The part you're referring to sets a floor for annual benefit limits in health plans; those waivers temporarily allow plans that can show they would face large losses of coverage if they complied to retain their existing benefit limits. That isn't part of the law's coverage expansions and it doesn't have much to do with lowering the uninsurance rate.

Originally Posted by tsquare

There is no positive effect of this law... that's why it was timed to happen after the 2012 election.

Were everything to be cookies and cream... and peace on earth, don't you think they would have had it start sooner?

Magically wishing something could start sooner doesn't make it so. It takes time to implement the law, particularly because so much of it is state-driven. Had they opted for a single, federally-run national exchange they probably could've shaved a year or two off the launch date. As it is, the states are designing their own. That offers flexibility and the ability to tailor the exchanges to the individual state's needs and environment, but it adds a layer of complexity and stretches out the implementation timeline.

Originally Posted by tsquare

There is no positive effect of this law... that's why it was timed to happen after the 2012 election.

Were everything to be cookies and cream... and peace on earth, don't you think they would have had it start sooner?

What I can't understand that's if Obamacare is so good for the American people why wait to implement. If it's so good why do you have to give out wavers and why not implement the total package NOW. If it's also so good for the American people why are 30 states suing to kill it?

Originally Posted by Forplay

What I can't understand that's if Obamacare is so good for the American people why wait to implement. If it's so good why do you have to give out wavers and why not implement the total package NOW. If it's also so good for the American people why are 30 states suing to kill it?

^^^ Please read the last paragraph of the post above yours.

Originally Posted by Greenbeard

"Magically wishing something could start sooner doesn't make it so..."

Originally Posted by Zedrow

^^^ Please read the last paragraph of the post above yours.

I did but my questions we're not answered, notice I asked three questions, I break them down:

1. What I can't understand that's if Obamacare is so good for the American people why wait to implement.

I add again I guess it's not all that good if you have a bill that takes yrs to implement.

2. If it's so good why do you have to give out wavers and why not implement the total package NOW.

Why are wavers handed out if it's so good.


3. If it's also so good for the American people why are 30 states suing to kill it?

30 states suing not because they love the plan, but because they hate it.

In closing I don't see any good in this plan.