they take money and don't pay much back.

People who can't afford a decent policy become burdens to the government. If they really can't afford a decent policy, they should try to see if they qualify for a subsidy.

I bought my own healthcare for years. It's just something you do because you are a responsible person. You should also have renter's or homeowner's insurance and most definitely insurance on your car if you want one.

Judging by what is happening in Medicare Advantage, a common change appears to be to INCREASE the deductible. This causes the cancelation of the old policy and the new similar policy is poorer and higher priced.

With these individual plans anyone who suffered a very serious illness or accident would eventually be thrown off the ship for a multitude of reasons. Maybe they were too sick to read the fine print and jump through hoops, maybe they were too sick to work and pay the premiums, maybe the COBRA was too expensive, maybe the COBRA expired. After that, sorry, no longer a customer. Good bye, sucker... hope you can swim.

My wife and I ran out a COBRA to the bitter end. After that we were uninsurable, not able to buy individual insurance at any price. My wife was not yet fully recovered and qualified for our state's high risk insurance pool. I went without and our kids were on a separate inexpensive policy. (Between five years old and adolescence healthy kids are easily insured.)

We've got health insurance through my wife's work now. Our credit rating has been destroyed, but it's good to know the ACA will help others avoid the hell we went through.

What kind of society is it where very sick people are expected to fight with a soulless corporations?

A single payer plan would be best, a nation taking care of it's own people for the simple reason they are human beings, but the ACA is better than what we had, and probably the best that could be pushed through in a nation that is governed by bought-and-paid-for brain-dead Reagan worshiping zombies.

Before the ACA, most people could only afford catastrophic insurance, if that. I had that kind of insurance at one point, and was thrilled to finally have insurance until I learned how useless it was. And then I figured out that I still couldn't afford to go to the doctor.

Also were responsible people. They bought policies that covered what they needed, not what some functionary thought they should have.

They ended up in bankruptcy court and the government covered the hospital's losses.

I wish that Kaiser offered health care everywhere. They are less expensive than some other plans, comprehensive, focus on preventive care, are pretty much doctor owned and managed. I love my Kaiser healthcare.

True, my deductibles have gone up for 2014. But then my healthcare costs go up every year. Plus this year I get a very cheap opportunity to join a health club through my Kaiser plan.

No. I don't work for Kaiser.

You see you can't sleep in the street, not pay your utilities, groceries, etc
Some of you just refuse to be honest with yourselves.

$7.25/hr * 40 hours * 52 weeks = $15080. The cut off for Medicaid is 133% of the federal poverty level, or $15,280 for an single person household. You would be provided for despite your inability to pay, which is why some of us are fighting so hard for this law. And should your income go up, health insurance would be highly subsidized until you reach a middle class level of income, ensuring medical care isn't priced out of your reach. At least that's the plan, and I hope to God it works because the system we had sucked.

what makes you think that is the only possibility? Sounds like you've never been in this spot before. Rents run $1000 or more in our area,and there are utilities. The theory sounds nice but reality bites your assumption in the tail feathers. If you want to put your beliefs into the general public I suggest you visit the lower-classes and what they pay and earn and then come back and tell me if works

My 82 y/o mother has a decent plan as part of her retirement package. She has had some serious medical issues over the last year, culminating in a trans catheter aortic valve replacement late this past summer. She's on a fixed income, and her premium for her current policy costs her $138.00/month. It includes a good prescription plan, which she desperately needs. Without the scrip plan, her monthly meds would cost her several hundred dollars/month, with her current plan, her out of pocket is somewhere around $80/month.

On October 2, she received a letter from her provider informing her that the carrier will be dropping her current plan on Jan 1. I have been scrambling to find coverage at the same cost....so far the best I can find increases her premium from the $138/month to around $400/month, with substantial increases in copay and out of pocket costs. She literally cannot afford higher costs. Her policy was supposed to be "grandfathered", but there are loopholes in that a mile wide. She is a couple grand over the income level that allows a subsidy, so there is no help there. I do not want her to lose her current doctors, but that may not be possible.

As for her current plan being "substandard", that's just bullshit. She's had excellent coverage and care. The new ACA regulations call her plan "substandard" because in part it doesn't provide prenatal or pediatric care. WTF? She's EIGHTY TWO YEARS OLD!

It's a massive clusterfuck of epic proportions.

This is bad news if it is legit. The Repugs will run with this...

The very article cited in the OP is evidence of this.

I prefer not to give them any help. It just proves that the policies were worthless from the outset.

So the idea of a DU spiking the story has no value where it counts. In fact, attempting to obscure evidence is generally considered an admission the evidence is damaging. A proper rebuttal is required. Rhetorically screaming, "Shut-up!" draws even more attention to the thing you're attempting to hide.

So far the only thing approaching a rebuttal that I've seen here is, "You stupid stupid-heads bought a stupid policy." To wit the next batch of ads will say, "Obama said I could keep my stupid policy and I don't feel like voting for people who call me stupid."

that provided very little, in most cases zero, actual coverage and benefits.

Remember, for every dollar of their household budget they add to more expensive policy premiums and deductibles is a dollar they aren't spending on the economy. They are going to miss that money and so are the people they spent it on.

Sniffing that their policy was junk in haughty overtones isn't going to ease their resentment in the least; actually it will probably just aggravate them more. It will be even worse if they start seeing they are paying for coverage that is of no use to them. Elections aren't won by being dismissive of people's legitimate concerns.

off unsuspecting policyholders. The point is that they won't be disappointed in their new and upgraded policies.

you're assuming they don't know any better.

because they fail to meet the ACA's minimum standards for coverage.

Many people may have been perfectly satisfied with their policies and may actually have used them to their satisfaction. "That money missing from your paycheck is because we know better than you. You should be thanking us," is a crappy campaign slogan.

And keep in mind this is just the individual insurance market. The effects to the employer-based market are yet to be seen but the President already delayed that portion of the law under the admission it would be harmful. Now the only question is, how harmful?

Quote: "That money missing from your paycheck is because we know better than you. You should be thanking us," is a crappy campaign slogan.

-------------------------


-------------------------
Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

I prefer a country with at least minimal consumer protection laws.

Just saying.

And when has anyone deliberately sought out the personal consumption of chicken manufactured to be poisonous?

when did anyone seek out a sham shady insurance policy?

don't answer. not interested.

epistemological closure

You don't know it was sham insurance, you're just calling that to be dismissive of the real concerns of real people; and if we don't treat them as if they matter they will make their voices heard elsewhere.

Policies that could drop you for no reason at all, policies that could change the terms, rates, copays, at will.

There is no way that Obama or anyone else could make a guaranty that people could keep their insurance AND at the same price, terms, etc.

The blame for these cancellations lay with the companies, not with the president.

How is the average person is going to interpet that statement?

As it's been pointed many times many of the changes these people are seeing will be improvements. But at the end of day the President said those words and they'll be used against him and the party. You just know there's an add coming in 2014. The question is come next November will the people initially upset about their plan being changed realize what they have is better?

The truth will win out.

Make no mistake this is ad bait like crazy this can be easily hung over obamas head. Telling an estimated 17 million Americans they can keep their policy and going the opposite direction is not good for us.

Read my lips: no new taxes.

People take things for granted that they shouldn't.

but unfortunately what happens is the individual who wants to blame the president will do so and tell all of their friends as my "acquaintance" did. try to tell these morons that their original policy was crap to begin with and under ACA they have a better policy that will protect them better. But they are morons who hate Obama anyway. So it's a good excuse to blame Obama. She wanted to blame Obama so she did and no conversation with me is going to change her mind. I walked away. But unfortunately there will be many others who have their policy canceled. The ACA says they cannot refuse to cover you because of pre-existing conditions. Unfortunately it does not state that your ins company must continue to cover you. So the high risk people will be dropped not because they did not pay their premiums, but because the ins company can dump you and use ACA as an excuse. It's an excuse for private ins companies to continue to scam the people (as they have always done). The republicans were the ones who blocked single payer plan and shoved us all right back in bed with the private ins company. But as my republican "acquaintance" continues to do - it's easier to blame Obama for anything -including burnt toast - than it is to understand why it's happening. Only direct true comparisons can tell whether any one policy is better than another. but if you are talking to a republican-it doesn't matter. They will blame Obama no matter what.

It has been against the law for many years. Insurance companies could not simply drop people under federal law.

How would you like to be priced out of health insurance and have one of your family die because no one earns over mimimum wage? I think that would be a hell'va lot worse. Or does anyone else matter but you?
the Republicans have 8 years to correct this problem and had no intention to help low-income people
As Mr. Gringrich said two days ago there is only a small portion of the people that don't have access to health care and it seemed just fine to him. I would advise Mr. Gringrich to get out of his ivory tower where the well to do are located and come down to the common man and get an education, but I assume he doesn't want to do that as reality might be too much for him to comprehend.

You almost sound vindictive as if these people were to blame for others not having insurance.

And B. Make health insurance affordable, having your premiums go up causes at least one part of the plan to fail.

People paying for those policies were being robbed. Their insurance covered little and did not protect them from financial disaster. Many of those "millions" will qualify for vastly superior plans at very low cost due to subsidies.

They may not share your sentiments. They may resent coverage they won't use at substantially higher prices. And they may resent people telling them they have to pay a lot more money because some other person somewhere said they aren't smart enough to make their own decisions.

For example, this morning's heritage foundation sponsored case of the woman with the 10x increase. Her policy paid 50 bucks. 50 bucks for a doctors visit or a heart attack. That policy was simply fraudulent and under the ACA, not legal. Good. The fact that this woman didn't understand she was being robbed, or that she did not have to settle for the 500/month replacement, doesn't change anything.

So much for a perfect chess game. Sometimes close enough isn't.

for myself and question questionable reporting. If it isn't black or white, don't bother me. Obama bad-insurance company good. Thanks.

So they cancel their junk policies. Sad indeed.

Amazing how the Ted Cruz- style ACA haters post the same articles.

people are going to be paying more for shitty policies? Now, people are pissed because some have to give up shitty plans for better policies.

Eighty-plus percent of the American people already get insurance through their employer, through Medicare, through Medicaid. They don't have to worry about or do or change anything. Those remaining individuals who do not have insurance at all now will have it available to them through -- or don't have insurance at all or get it through the individual market will now have insurance available to them through expanded Medicaid services in those states that have accepted the expanded Medicaid program, as well as through the health care marketplaces.

There's nothing more American than that.

From the get-go, the phrase was "If you LIKE your insurance, you can keep it"..

I wish they had never used anything near that language, because MOST people HATE the insurance they have, and have NEVER been truly able to "choose", because they have always been limited to whatever plan their boss thinks they deserve.

For instance, if you belong to a union., your continued ( still relatively good) insurance comes with a very high hidden cost.. WAGES. Every bargaining period ends with LESS than what was asked for in wages, in exchange for enhanced pension (which may or may not be there when you need it) and/or not losing something you already have in insurance coverage, and whatever is left over may be a penny here and there on wages.

Other companies may "offer" coverage, but most of the time it;s a carrot dangled in front of low wage workers who either are never given enough hours to qualify or who truly cannot afford it, even if, on paper, they "should be able to".

ACA put regulations in place that many employers' flimsy coverage would NEVER meet.

I hear he's even tying up traffic in Boston!

THANKS OBAMA!!

Now ACA Has Revealed The Scam As Millions Of Policies Canceled Due To Lack Of Coverage

When President Obama said if people liked their insurance plan they could keep it, he didn't count on the millions of people in America who apparently had been paying for practically nothing....

To upgrade an existing policy to ACA standards, that basically means:

1) You can't arbitrarily cancel anymore
2) You can't impose lifetime caps
3) You have to cover routine preventive care

And these things justify a price increase of $500/month? That could only be true if the company really was a predator and had every intention to deny coverage and cancel policies as people got sick.

Please note that the pre-existing conditions thing is not an issue in these cases because we are talking about people who ALREADY had policies.

so they could gouge the customers by forcing them to a whole new pricing tier.

For those under the income 400% level, it should work out OK because the ACA policies should be much better coverage and the subsidy should soften any price increase.

But there are some big exceptions:

1) Lots of people are above the 400% level, but certainly aren't wealthy -- not wealthy enough to absorb a $5000/year increase without it really hurting. These people are getting hammered

2) Some of the ACA policies are real pieces of shit. In my case, Anthem is trying to keep people on the pre-ACA policies an extra year. That preserves a fairly robust provider network. They are asking about a 10% price increase for the same old policy that doesn't meet any of the new ACA standards, which is a heck of a deal for them. They offer 16 policies on the exchange, and every one of them has a really horrible provider network -- no more than about 10% of the docs in the area are in it. I have see 4 docs in the past 3 years, and NONE of them are in this network. And with the ACA policies, out of network is not covered at all. So those policies completely suck. Please check your provider network carefully before making any decisions.

You are right the ACA is a complete disaster.

Scrap it and go to single payer.

Can't go back now. All we can do is go forward.

then my employer changed our plan to one of those high deductible scams. Now I have a different employer and am lucky enough to have good insurance that will not be changing, at least for next year.

As most of us get insurance through our employers, nobody has really had ever had a guarantee that they could keep insurance they liked.

They change the policies on purpose so that they wouldn't be able to be grandfathered in.
Saying that he " knew" implies that he has some psychic power.
Getting stale.
I'm not sorry that people can't keep sucky ass plans that would bankrupt them anyway.
I'm not.
The insurance companies see the writing on the wall. They will be phased out starting soon.
And they will have to continue giving rebates when they overcharge. And we will sue them into irrelevance, if they don't comply.
By reading what you have been writing for the last few days I'd think you wanted the Paul Ryan plan. Or non plan as it was.