Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

This news is simply fascinating. I mean, who could have possibly guessed?

"LOS ANGELES (AP) — Fears that health insurance exchanges wouldn't attract the young, healthy people needed to make them financially viable are being heightened by the early results of signups in several states.

If it becomes a trend, that could lead to increases in insurance premiums and deductibles next year. Along with the paltry enrollment numbers released this week, officials in a handful of states said those who had managed to sign up were generally older people with medical problems — those with the greatest incentives to get coverage."


Wait, you are telling me that older people, and people who need expensive care, are signing up for the Affordable Healthcare...and young, healthy people who don't need healthcare are not signing up for the Not-So Affordable Healthcare?

I'm shocked! Absolutely shocked!

Where is the CHANGE some of this country so desperately wanted? Are you telling me that all of those young, energetic, idealistic Obama voters don't want to actually fund healthcare for other people? Damn...how selfish of them. How Conk-like!



Deep down inside, everyone is a Conk.

"I wonder why nobody is posting on this thread."



"Cluck U must be brown, maybe everyone has him on ignore."



"What do you mean 'by 'brown'? Are you playing the race card?"



"No, I mean that he is an asshole."



"We know!"

BlueHen86 wrote:
"I wonder why nobody is posting on this thread."



"Cluck U must be brown, maybe everyone has him on ignore."



"What do you mean 'by 'brown'? Are you playing the race card?"



"No, I mean that he is an asshole."

Pure gold!

I don't see the link to Clucks article..?

Cluck's post is spot on. The classic line: "I wanted affordable healthcare, and thought someone else would be paying for it. I just didn't realize that someone was ME".

BlueHen86 wrote: "I wonder why nobody is posting on this thread."

Because there is no retort.

Baldy wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote: "I wonder why nobody is posting on this thread."

Because there is no retort.

Sure there is.

1). This is corporatism/crony capitalism at its best...you know, the kind that most conks and way too many donks defend.

2). Single payer. Make for profit insurance only for Cadillac plans.

kalm wrote:

Baldy wrote: Because there is no retort.

Sure there is.

1). This is corporatism/crony capitalism at its best...you know, the kind that most conks and way too many donks defend.

2). Single payer. Make for profit insurance only for Cadillac plans.

Gotta protect the insurance companies right to skim 20% off the top......

Baldy wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote: "I wonder why nobody is posting on this thread."

Because there is no retort.

I thought you conk pukes were OK with insurance and big pharma writing their own plan?

(Well not exactly their own, essentially its the same thing proposed by the Heritage Foundation in the 90s, but you know what I mean...)

houndawg wrote:

Baldy wrote: Because there is no retort.

I thought you conk pukes were OK with insurance and big pharma writing their own plan?

(Well not exactly their own, essentially its the same thing proposed by the Heritage Foundation in the 90s, but you know what I mean...)

Do yourself a favor and quit thinking, you're not too good at it.

That "plan" has been in some Donk operatives desk drawer for years now, just waiting for the right ignoramus to get into the White House. Mission Accomplished.

houndawg wrote:

Baldy wrote: Because there is no retort.

I thought you conk pukes were OK with insurance and big pharma writing their own plan?

(Well not exactly their own, essentially its the same thing proposed by the Heritage Foundation in the 90s, but you know what I mean...)

Ah... the latest talking point.

And since Republicans thought it was such a great idea that would work so swimmingly.. why did they never put it forward in Congress?

Heritage is a think tank, dude. They probably also have a plan for colonizing Krypton.

Chizzang wrote:I don't see the link to Clucks article..?

Yeah, my bad...but, here's an educational tip: an amazing thing happens when you quote the paragraph, then put it into a search engine.

http://news.yahoo.com/health-exchanges- ... 54603.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Close enough for government work.

'"We are making an extra push to reach young adults, and we do expect they're going to take a lot of encouraging because they tend to wait until the last minute," said Myung Kim, spokeswoman for Colorado's exchange."

"If such efforts fail and insurance companies end up with too many sick or expensive customers, they might need to increase premiums or eventually leave markets to avoid taking heavy financial losses.

"It's going to be very messy for the next couple of years, until we figure out who is buying insurance," said Glenn Melnick, director of the Center for Health Financing, Policy and Management at the University of Southern California. "There are a lot of pieces of this that are just black boxes right now."

Aetna Chairman and chief executive Mark Bertolini said last month that it was "incredibly important" to get the exchange websites running properly because "the younger, healthier people aren't going to give them more than one shot."'

BlueHen86 wrote:
"I wonder why nobody is posting on this thread."



"Cluck U must be brown, maybe everyone has him on ignore."



"What do you mean 'by 'brown'? Are you playing the race card?"



"No, I mean that he is an asshole."



"We know!"

That was a lot of effort to entertain yourself and kalm.

Hanging with crickets, one of the lower forms of life...very liberal of you.

kalm wrote:

Baldy wrote: Because there is no retort.

Sure there is.

1). This is corporatism/crony capitalism at its best...you know, the kind that most conks and way too many donks defend.

2). Single payer. Make for profit insurance only for Cadillac plans.

Single payer doesn't really do anything unless we are willing to stipulate how much health care someone can get and put a cap on how much we're willing to pay for it. The issue that we have today is that everyone wants their healthcare right away and they don't want to pay for it. Talking about insurance companies and crony capitalism are great icebreakers at Occupy meetings, but it's just a red herring. We want everything when it comes to healthcare (we want every test, every specialist, every procedure, and every drug) right away and we don't want to pay for those things. That's where the issue lies and that's what's not fixed with Obamacare and what isn't fixed just by uttering "single payer". If we don't want these things to cost as much, we need to say to people that they cannot get whatever they want whenever they want, and in some cases they won't be getting it at all. And if they still want to have the immediate access to everything that they do today, then we need to be honest and say that it costs a lot and people need to be prepared to pay for it. All the other stuff about corporatism and such are just smoke and mirrors to shift the debate to politics and not about the actual issues involved.

GannonFan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Sure there is.

1). This is corporatism/crony capitalism at its best...you know, the kind that most conks and way too many donks defend.

2). Single payer. Make for profit insurance only for Cadillac plans.

Single payer doesn't really do anything unless we are willing to stipulate how much health care someone can get and put a cap on how much we're willing to pay for it. The issue that we have today is that everyone wants their healthcare right away and they don't want to pay for it. Talking about insurance companies and crony capitalism are great icebreakers at Occupy meetings, but it's just a red herring. We want everything when it comes to healthcare (we want every test, every specialist, every procedure, and every drug) right away and we don't want to pay for those things. That's where the issue lies and that's what's not fixed with Obamacare and what isn't fixed just by uttering "single payer". If we don't want these things to cost as much, we need to say to people that they cannot get whatever they want whenever they want, and in some cases they won't be getting it at all. And if they still want to have the immediate access to everything that they do today, then we need to be honest and say that it costs a lot and people need to be prepared to pay for it. All the other stuff about corporatism and such are just smoke and mirrors to shift the debate to politics and not about the actual issues involved.

Amen Gannon. To have affordable health care we have to address the underlying cost/effeciency/availability issues which neither the AHCA or single payer address.

If you want automatic contributions by the youngsters you have do mandate it from day one. Not some escalating penalty ladder. This programs will be in a deep hole with young people exercising their right to pay the least possible.

Let's face it....you're 22, a recent college grad, in great health, taking an entry level job. What would you do? I didn't (and maybe won't) get to benefit from the SS money I've been kicking in to provide retirement for those older than me - but that was mandated as a payroll deduction and I never had the opportunity to not pay it.

ASUG8 wrote:I didn't (and maybe won't) get to benefit from the SS money I've been kicking in to provide retirement for those older than me - but that was mandated as a payroll deduction and I never had the opportunity to not pay it.

Keep up the good work. I'll be drawing from SS in about 13 years.
If I'm still on the green side of the grass that is.

ASUG8 wrote:If you want automatic contributions by the youngsters you have do mandate it from day one. Not some escalating penalty ladder. This programs will be in a deep hole with young people exercising their right to pay the least possible.

Let's face it....you're 22, a recent college grad, in great health, taking an entry level job. What would you do? I didn't (and maybe won't) get to benefit from the SS money I've been kicking in to provide retirement for those older than me - but that was mandated as a payroll deduction and I never had the opportunity to not pay it.

Why does a 22 year old need to buy insurance? Obamacare changed it so they can stay on mommy and daddy's until they are 26, even if married or eligible for an employer plan.

So we need young people to enroll to subsidize the sick and older people but we make it so the young don't have to buy insurance?

HI54UNI wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:If you want automatic contributions by the youngsters you have do mandate it from day one. Not some escalating penalty ladder. This programs will be in a deep hole with young people exercising their right to pay the least possible.

Let's face it....you're 22, a recent college grad, in great health, taking an entry level job. What would you do? I didn't (and maybe won't) get to benefit from the SS money I've been kicking in to provide retirement for those older than me - but that was mandated as a payroll deduction and I never had the opportunity to not pay it.

Why does a 22 year old need to buy insurance? Obamacare changed it so they can stay on mommy and daddy's until they are 26, even if married or eligible for an employer plan.

So we need young people to enroll to subsidize the sick and older people but we make it so the young don't have to buy insurance?

True...rather than ask and address the macro question of "why can't 22 y/o go get a decent job and get insurance" they punted and moved the age up to 26.

GannonFan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Sure there is.

1). This is corporatism/crony capitalism at its best...you know, the kind that most conks and way too many donks defend.

2). Single payer. Make for profit insurance only for Cadillac plans.

Single payer doesn't really do anything unless we are willing to stipulate how much health care someone can get and put a cap on how much we're willing to pay for it. The issue that we have today is that everyone wants their healthcare right away and they don't want to pay for it. Talking about insurance companies and crony capitalism are great icebreakers at Occupy meetings, but it's just a red herring. We want everything when it comes to healthcare (we want every test, every specialist, every procedure, and every drug) right away and we don't want to pay for those things. That's where the issue lies and that's what's not fixed with Obamacare and what isn't fixed just by uttering "single payer". If we don't want these things to cost as much, we need to say to people that they cannot get whatever they want whenever they want, and in some cases they won't be getting it at all. And if they still want to have the immediate access to everything that they do today, then we need to be honest and say that it costs a lot and people need to be prepared to pay for it. All the other stuff about corporatism and such are just smoke and mirrors to shift the debate to politics and not about the actual issues involved.

Except that pretty much the rest of the advanced world uses single payer spending less for better outcomes. Of course you already know this.

There are multiple reasons for higher costs but you're only partially right about everyone expecting something for nothing. Some people simply have gone without or waited until a relatively curable problem turns into something big and expensive which ends up costing everyone more anyways.

Then there's the whole pricing structure. I had a buddy go in for a five hour out patient surgery recently that cost $12,000 with insurance. I guarantee you the cash price would have been no more than 1/2 of that.

Or how about Medicare Part D? Every other government is able to leverage their buying power and negotiate down prices.

Would single payer fix everything? No. Would it save us money? Yes. I agree with you in that we may have to restrict how it's used and certain non essential procedures, products, and services might not get covered but hey, weren't you just the one pining on about people expecting something for nothing?

We have socialized medicine Ganny...it's socialism for Pfizer and United Healthcare and capitalism for the rest of us. We once again worship at the alter of faux private enterprise so a few thousand people can get really wealthy. Sorry my man, not everything needs to be for profit (fire departments, health insurance). The system is broken. Quit being a regressive stick in the mud and start considering alternative solutions.