Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

gabeana

(3,166 posts)
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 04:49 PM Oct 2013

What are the problems with Obama Care besides the computer glitch

because too many people swarming the sites.

Even Anderson Cooper said the program is a disaster but of course he doesn't say why, just throws it out there, he said it when he had that tea bagger leader on yesterday. Making the point that the GOP should have let the focus be on obamacare instead of shutting down the government that would of made their position stronger

everything I have read and heard about for the most part is positive, not perfect but headed in the right direction

is all they have the computer glitch the first few days? is there anything I am missing?

22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What are the problems with Obama Care besides the computer glitch (Original Post) gabeana Oct 2013 OP
I don't know--but I'm going to predict that Sebelius is toast. TwilightGardener Oct 2013 #1
because of the computer glitch gabeana Oct 2013 #2
I think it's a host of things, like budget, contractors, oversight, etc. TwilightGardener Oct 2013 #5
People are getting hosed in Republican states. dawg Oct 2013 #3
But that isn't the fault of the plan nobodyspecial Oct 2013 #9
it's not shiny and polished and shrink-wrapped. unblock Oct 2013 #4
For people at the botom, it's only a major medical care policy Warpy Oct 2013 #6
Here's my problem with that.... jberryhill Oct 2013 #7
Let's hope so Warpy Oct 2013 #14
It's those festering untreated conditions which blow up jberryhill Oct 2013 #17
Do you have any actual quotes and facts or are you theorizing? grantcart Oct 2013 #18
well, Medicare and Medicaid are different Warpy Oct 2013 #20
From the inital introduction of state funded health care it took Canada 20 grantcart Oct 2013 #21
The people on the bottom in the states that participated will get medicaid or fully subsidized plans Warren Stupidity Oct 2013 #15
Obama likes it being called Obama care gabeana Oct 2013 #22
The website is bad and we don't yet have solid enrollment numbers, so it's probably too early. dairydog91 Oct 2013 #8
It's only been 17 days! How could we have "solid enrollment"? Geez. n/t pnwmom Oct 2013 #11
Uh, yeah. dairydog91 Oct 2013 #12
The biggest glitch? GeorgeGist Oct 2013 #10
The low enrollment would be bad if it continues as a trend wercal Oct 2013 #13
My BF PasadenaTrudy Oct 2013 #16
The in$urance companie$ re$ponce to the ACA. Glassunion Oct 2013 #19

TwilightGardener

(46,416 posts)
5. I think it's a host of things, like budget, contractors, oversight, etc.
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 05:01 PM
Oct 2013

This was a large and highly visible project, and her baby--she is the face of it. Glitches can usually be fixed right away, so I'm going to guess that the problems go beyond a glitch.

dawg

(10,624 posts)
3. People are getting hosed in Republican states.
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 04:57 PM
Oct 2013

No tax subsidies for the poorest workers who need them the most. (Because they were supposed to be covered by expanded Medicaid.)

Also, no subsidies for people with available coverage at work (even if it is shitty).

nobodyspecial

(2,286 posts)
9. But that isn't the fault of the plan
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 05:29 PM
Oct 2013

Blame it on the Supreme Court. And I think once these people see how screwed they are getting, the states will change hands.

Warpy

(111,316 posts)
6. For people at the botom, it's only a major medical care policy
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 05:16 PM
Oct 2013

The huge deductibles will still mean no one working in jobs like retail will be able to see a doctor when they get sick, they still won't be able to afford it.

There are three levels of care, the lowest one making sure that poor folks can't get care. Women will still have to pay for birth control pills out of pocket with the two lower tier plans and since women not making a lot of money are the women they most want to contol, that's why it was designed that way.

There needs to be one level, no deductible and the only way to do that is single payer.

This is Heritage Foundation Non Care Insurance. Please stop calling it Obamacare.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
7. Here's my problem with that....
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 05:21 PM
Oct 2013

"no one working in jobs like retail will be able to see a doctor when they get sick"

Granted, they can't do that at all now, because many doctors won't enroll you as a patient or give you an appointment if you don't have insurance.

Consequently, there are a lot of folks running around with chronic, but relatively easily treatable conditions.

What everyone does get is at least one free visit a year.

While that goes under "preventive care", you have to take into account that people walking in for their annual check-up will get those chronic conditions looked into.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
17. It's those festering untreated conditions which blow up
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 06:56 PM
Oct 2013

Granted, there are accidents and unpredictable acute conditions of all kinds, but there are a lot more undiagnosed or ignored chronic conditions that are going to be picked up and treated before they turn into disasters, as a consequence of that annual checkup.

grantcart

(53,061 posts)
18. Do you have any actual quotes and facts or are you theorizing?
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 07:06 PM
Oct 2013

In the states that agreed to expand medicare a family of 20k would be eligible for a large subsidy and very low deductibles



Your State is Expanding Medicaid

States have the option to expand Medicaid coverage to everyone under 138% of the poverty level. If a state expands Medicaid, most of the costs are covered by the federal government under the health reform law. Because your state decided to expand Medicaid, your income (which is 85% of the poverty level) makes you eligible for the program. Medicaid coverage varies from state to state, but out-of-pocket costs are generally very low. Tobacco use is never taken into account in Medicaid eligibility.



People wanting facts in their situation can use the calculator:

http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/

For example a family of 4 would be eligible for a $ 6,917 subsidy that would pay 83% of the premium with very low deductibles.

Warpy

(111,316 posts)
20. well, Medicare and Medicaid are different
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 08:10 PM
Oct 2013

Some states did expand Medicaid back into the insurance program for the working poor it was always meant to be. Some states did not.

However, not all states did and even in the ones that did, many low wage workers will still not be eligible, especially in the cities where dollar amounts of pay might be higher, but are eaten up by high rents and other urban expenses.

While this Heritage Foundation plan combined with expanding Medicaid will help many people, it is definitely going to leave a lot of people behind because it's linked to arbitrary dollar amounts rather than cost of living.

Single payer is the only way to go.

grantcart

(53,061 posts)
21. From the inital introduction of state funded health care it took Canada 20
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 10:01 PM
Oct 2013

years to get national coverage and 20 more years to get universal single payer coverage.

I just wanted people who are reading the thread to understand that what you are saying is not factual. Those families living in states cooperating with the ACA at the state level and are making 20K will be getting health care covered with little or no deductions.

 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
15. The people on the bottom in the states that participated will get medicaid or fully subsidized plans
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 06:39 PM
Oct 2013

where before, if they didn't qualify for Medicaid they got nothing.

gabeana

(3,166 posts)
22. Obama likes it being called Obama care
Fri Oct 18, 2013, 11:33 AM
Oct 2013

in one of the debates he said it has a nice ring to it

but you are right it is a republican plan

dairydog91

(951 posts)
8. The website is bad and we don't yet have solid enrollment numbers, so it's probably too early.
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 05:27 PM
Oct 2013

It's more than just a computer "glitch". The Federal Exchanges are, relative to the amount of people who've tried to register, barely better than nonfunctional. I've repeatedly tried to get in, just to see what the system looks like, and I've only once been able to reach the registration page (And it didn't work when I got there).

One potential problem is that Obamacare lowers some people's premiums (Like the old and the sick) by increasing other people's premiums (Namely the young and healthy) compared to what you saw pre-Obamacare. It levels costs across society, but here that means that the young and healthy MUST join in large numbers for prices to remain stable. The mandate requires that most people purchase insurance, hence creating an incentive for the young and healthy to purchase these *relatively* expensive insurance plans. In effect, the old and sick pay less, the young and healthy pay more, and insurance companies are able to give those lower rates to the old and sick BECAUSE they are getting extra money from the young and healthy.

If not enough of the young and healthy sign up, the insurance companies will have no choice but to crank up their premiums in order to avoid losing money. This may further dissuade the young and healthy (the people who have the most financial incentive to gamble on not needing health insurance) from buying insurance, thus driving up insurance prices even more, causing more young and healthy to bail out, causing further price spikes. One fear related to the website is that the mandate starts out relatively light, and that the sheer cumbersome nature of the site may dissuade people who don't feel any deep need to have insurance now from buying it at the moment. If this means that a lot of young and healthy people decide to go uninsured for a year, then you'll probably see a major spike in insurance prices. That hits everyone, including the federal government, which would have to subsidize a lot of those increases.

EDIT: Here's a link to a WonkBlog post discussing what insurance "death spirals" look like.

dairydog91

(951 posts)
12. Uh, yeah.
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 05:39 PM
Oct 2013

We need to see the data, which is why I'm not going to say it's a "disaster". However, if the data did show that very few young people have signed up, then prepare for premium spikes, which even then are not necessarily a "disaster". It's something to look for. All I pointed out is a potential problem, and noted that we can't tell whether or not it exists.

wercal

(1,370 posts)
13. The low enrollment would be bad if it continues as a trend
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 05:50 PM
Oct 2013

I've seen two types of sign up success stories on this site:

1) Late 50's, pre-existing condition

2) Young, barely making enough money to stay off of Medicaid

The system relies on a pool of relatively healthy young people, who make enough money to pay in without subsidy.

These people either don't know about it, don't care about it, or don't want any part of it. They will pay the fine....many of them won't even know or care about the fine, since they pay somebody else to do their taxes.

I talked to a young woman about it two weeks ago. She had no idea there was an individual mandate, whatsoever. I'm pretty sure she is going to sit back and do nothing...out of sight, out of mind.

Glassunion

(10,201 posts)
19. The in$urance companie$ re$ponce to the ACA.
Thu Oct 17, 2013, 07:21 PM
Oct 2013

I could not keep my existing policy and coverage. They no longer offer the plan.

Now I have to pay 2x the amount for less coverage and unaffordable deductibles.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What are the problems wit...