Comments on: If You Like Your Health Care Coverage, Vote Against Obama/Biden

By: lineholder

lineholder — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:42:51 +0000

It’s politics. SOOO much deceitfulness and corruption…so little time.

By: Repair_Man_Jack

Repair_Man_Jack — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:40:32 +0000

to discover that gambling happens here….

By: lineholder

lineholder — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:39:12 +0000

from service providers, in a situation where the only entity with regulatory controls over price for the service is government, and in a case where market values of services can be directly related to subsidy costs, which comes back down to the tax rates put upon taxpayers.

And Obama’s plea to Americans is that he “needs more time”????

Vote Romney, 2012!!!!

By: Repair_Man_Jack

Repair_Man_Jack — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:33:36 +0000

Notice I didn’t ask should these statutes apply? Bottom line. Insurance rates will move IAW any advance notice of regulatory activity. Coincidentally, so will political contributions. Correlation or coincidence? Who’s to ever say….

By: lineholder

lineholder — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:28:33 +0000

or regulating it. The only force that would be able to do so would be the federal government and that’s it.

And the market prices can be directly related to the subsidy costs, can’t they? Which in turns comes back to the taxpayers.

Another question…in the case of the Public Health Insurance Exchange, and with the federal government having so much direct influence on entities that may or may not be provided with the opportunity to offer their product/services via the exchange…will Kickback statutes apply?

By: Repair_Man_Jack

Repair_Man_Jack — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:23:15 +0000

1) Not that I know of. My take is that it will start at a slower rate than that survey and then accelerate into a Tragedy O’ The Commons scenario as more and more businesses fail to compete on Labor Cost unless they follow suit. Expect it to become virulent in non-capital-intensive occupations. Not so much in huge factories.

2) Unknown. It could easily become a component of the all-encompassing “Student Fees” if a university chose to bury it somewhere.

3) A good follower of Mein Obama would argue that these children can stay on Mom and Dad’s plan until age 26. Not that all students are under age 26 anymore, but it is somewhat of an answer. The problem ensues when Mom and Dad work for employers who dump them onto the exchange.

Here is a question for you.

Why would anyone who qualifies their plan on the exchange and has a large, forced market charge anything that resembles a fair, market-clearing price? This is particularly of relevance since the AAFCA doesn’t direct HHS to investigate any annaul rate increase under 10%. It could be like the magic of compounding interest….

By: lineholder

lineholder — Tue, 15 May 2012 20:00:54 +0000

1) Employer-dumping I was aware of. Last year, McKinsey survey showed 30% of businesses choosing employer-dumping into the exchange. Do we have any more current reports on how this may be trending? The Fox News report really doesn’t focus on this that much.

2) About the mandated increase in maximum coverage and the added costs to colleges, has there been any indication about how other schools might be addressing this? Are they simply increasing insurance premiums costs? Or are they “redistributing” it by dispersing it across the student population via tuition rate increases?

3) This quote from the Franciscan University statement:

“Due to these changes in regulation by the federal government, beginning with the 2012-13 school year, the University 1) will no longer require that all full-time undergraduate students carry health insurance, 2) will no longer offer a student health insurance plan, and 3) will no longer bill those not covered under a parent/guardian plan or personal plan for student health insurance. The current student health insurance plan will expire on August 15, 2012″

About point 1…just my take, but that flies in the face of one of the objectives of PPACA doesn’t it, which was to get people in this age group covered under some form of health insurance?

Also thought this post-script added after to the fact at the CatholicVote.org site to be interesting:
“Further, according to this administrator, the ?exception? even for self-insured plans is ambiguous and likely on paper only. In implementation the HHS would likely rule the same as the so-called accommodation, requiring the third-party administrators of self-insured plans to cover the items and procedures ?for free,? which of course is a farce”