Latest health insurer tactic according to CNN.
Can't drop the costly patient, so drop the costly patient's Dr. from the plan and hope the patient follows.
Docs say insurers dropping them in hopes their costly patients follow - CNN.com
|
Latest health insurer tactic according to CNN.
Can't drop the costly patient, so drop the costly patient's Dr. from the plan and hope the patient follows.
Docs say insurers dropping them in hopes their costly patients follow - CNN.com
"No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period." -Barack Obama
What you didn't think they would figure out a way to save money and get around the law? That's why they pay lawyers and accountants the big bucks.Quote:
Latest health insurer tactic according to CNN.
Can't drop the costly patient, so drop the costly patient's Dr. from the plan and hope the patient follows.
Docs say insurers dropping them in hopes their costly patients follow - CNN.com
You may want to keep your doctor, but he may not want to keep your insurance. Drop your insurance and pay cash, or go with insurance he does take.Quote:
"No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period." -Barack Obama
And once again there is no consequence of this crap sandwich worthy of Tal placing the blame where it belongs.
"You may want to keep your doctor, but he may not want to keep your insurance."
or your insurance may not want to keep your Dr.
Hey tal, why you always want to try and tell people what they think or should think?
Good question, but I know the answer.
Because your version of the truth is so inadequate to someone who has been through this crap long before Obama or the laws he passed. Why you don't remember or acknowledge it is beyond me.
I really don't care what others think, or whether you care what I think, you can take or leave my opinion, as I often reject yours, or others. You can do whatever you want because I always have. Always will. That's fair ain't it? :D
Dude, when I agree more with a Daily Kos blogger than you that should be time to step back and see who's really telling the true story.
Thriving and surviving no matter what the story, and who tells it, is my priority. That's my truth.
Hello again, Steve:
It's the 3rd inning, and nobody is saying that you AREN'T ahead..Quote:
see who's really telling the true story.
But, the game has been rigged... You CAN'T win. EVERYBODY wants health insurance, and NOW they can get it. You gotta be bonkers to think they wouldn't.
Lemme ask you this. Your insurance is gonna cost you a grand more per year. But, you're GONNA pay it, aren't you??? That's because EVERYBODY wants health insurance.
excon
What part of I want people to have insurance too but we're pi$$ed off about being lied to repeatedly and being stuck with crappier insurance that costs us more when we already had bills to pay do you not get? Most people were quite satisfied before you guys came in and screwed it up for everyone instead of fixing it for the few.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Admit it the price of everything is bigger than your check, and one is going up, and the other ain't. Guess which is which?
The truth is we have all been getting screwed for YEARS, and DECADES. Even the price of Vaseline has gone up. But you probably never paid attention until it started to hurt your butt.
Vaseline doesn't cost me $1000 a year more. I can do without Vaseline, I can budget for a few bucks here and a few bucks there, a thousand dollar CHUNK is a problem. Admit it, you really don't givea crap about how it's affecting people, you only care about the agenda.Quote:
Admit it the price of everything is bigger than your check, and one is going up, and the other ain't. Guess which is which?
What are you suggesting ?Quote:
Even the price of Vaseline has gone up. But you probably never paid attention until it started to hurt your butt.
Good question.
I think it was an anal sex joke.
I suggest vote in your own interest based on facts and not just ideology. My hardworking sore a$$ needs a helluva raise to afford enough Vaseline to make it stop hurting. ME! Not the boss, not the president... ME!!
The rest of that psycho babble is irrelevant... SHOW ME THE MONEY!!
Hello again, Steve:
If the agenda includes getting health insurance to 30 million people who've NEVER had it before, then count me in...Quote:
you really don't givea crap about how it's affecting people, you only care about the agenda.
Some people don't WANT the benefits Obamacare brings to them... I've mentioned them to you several time, and you ignore it. To me, the Obamacare PROMISE that they can NEVER throw me off, no matter HOW sick I get, or no matter HOW much my care costs, is a benefit WORTH paying for... That, and that alone is worth MORE than a $1,000 per year.
excon
I think that could have been accomplished much better than the crap sandwich you guys keep defending at all cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
I think you are right, but there are certain idelogical barriers that perhaps it was too soon to overcome.Quote:
I think that could have been accomplished much better than the crap sandwich you guys keep defending at all cost.
When you decide that "for the people" really means what it says, perhaps you will get there. 150 years ago the republicans were willing to fight a war to right a wrong, today they fight a war to preserve a wrong. What is so different about lifting people from slavery and lifting people from misery.
the implementation is a mess, perhaps if it had been approached from a bipartisan perspective you would have had a better outcome, if you hadn't taken certain options off the table and if you had reformed the whole system.. but some things are just too hard
There was no chance of bipartisanship on Obamacare, and the only reason the budget deal wad passed was because the Messiah's Temple was left out of the process.
well at least one part of government is working again
See my comment about the 'bipartisan ' agreement here.....
Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - Obama admits big government doesn't work
Ezra Klein at the Compost reports :
Today, the Obama administration announced that people whose insurance plans were canceled this year will "temporarily" be exempted from the law's individual mandate. Here's how they're doing it -- and what it means for the law.
1. The individual mandate includes a "hardship exemption." People who qualify can either ignore the individual mandate altogether or purchase a cheap, bare-bones catastrophic insurance plan that's typically only available to people under 30.
2. According to HHS, the exemption covers people who "experienced financial or domestic circumstances, including an unexpected natural or human-caused event, such that he or she had a significant, unexpected increase in essential expenses that prevented him or her from obtaining coverage under a qualified health plan."
3. Today, the administration agreed with a group of senators, led by Mark Warner of Virginia, who argued that having your insurance plan canceled counted as "an unexpected natural or human-caused event." For these people, in other words, Obamacare itself is the hardship. You can read HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius' full letter here. HHS's formal guidance is here.
4. How may people does this affect? No one quite knows. Republicans estimate that about 5 million people have seen their plans canceled. The Obama administration believes the number, at this point, is actually in the hundreds of thousands. But there's no truly reliable figure here.
5. The Obama administration argues that there's little reason to fear that these people won't purchase health insurance if they could otherwise afford to. After all, they were already buying health insurance on the individual market before there was any penalty at all. They clearly want health insurance. This just smooths their transition and, in the cases where there really is financial strain, gives them time to figure out a solution.
6. But this puts the administration on some very difficult-to-defend ground. Normally, the individual mandate applies to anyone who can purchase qualifying insurance for less than 8 percent of their income. The Obama administration is erasing that threshold for people whose insurance has been canceled. If they decide insurance costing 5 percent of their income is too expensive, then they can simply opt out. But if someone who's currently uninsured decides 5 percent of their income is more than they can pay, then they have to pay the individual mandate's penalty. What's the logic in that?
7. The same goes for the cheap catastrophic plans sold to customers under age 30 in the exchanges. A 45-year-old whose plan just got canceled can now purchase catastrophic coverage. A 45-year-old who didn't have insurance at all can't. The Obama administration argues that they're just giving a bit of extra help to people who lost what they already had. But why don't people who couldn't afford a plan in the first place deserve the same kind of help?
8. This puts the first crack in the individual mandate. The question is whether it's the last. If Democratic members of Congress see this as solving their political problem with people whose plans have been canceled, it could help them stand against Republican efforts to delay the individual mandate. But if congressional Democrats use this ruling as an excuse to delay or otherwise de-fang the individual mandate for anyone who doesn't want to pay for insurance under Obamacare, then it'll be a very big problem for the law.
The individual mandate no longer applies to people whose plans were canceled
So let me get this straight . People's plans were cancelled because their plans were 'bare bone' plans that did not offer the same coverage that the cr@p sandwich comprehensive Obamacare provides. Now that they find Obamacare UNAFFORDABLE ,they will be allowed to apply for a bare bone plan ? Tell me again why those plans had to be cancelled in the 1st place ?
Incrediable, why didn't the ACA allow this coverage to everyone as the minimum and let the insurance companies sort out the otehr plans with thier cliems, Ismell a rat here somewhere
Obamacare is just like Calvinball, they make up the rules as they go. The school children are in charge of the country.
"Obamacare itself is the hardship."
You just can't make this stuff up.
So now you holler about trying to help people having trouble with the transition? How many people are you talking about this time?
Waiting for all those who defended the cancellations because they were inadequate 'bare bone' plans to defend this stunning reversal. Also waiting to hear them defend the emperor allowing exceptions for the purchase of what is technically ,an illegal plan under the rules of the ACA .
The hardship clause was already in the law. If you read it you would know that.
and evidently in the hands of the emperor ,it's as pliable as silly putty .Quote:
The hardship clause was already in the law. If you read it you would know that.
it really cracks me up . The Dems shut down the government over the threat of repeal. So now ,piecemeal ,they intend to administratively dismantle it ;an effective repeal,hoping we don't notice.
Hello smoothy, I mean tom:Quote:
The Dems shut down the government over the threat of repeal.
Bwa, ha ha ha ha.
excon
What Ex said,Quote:
The Dems shut down the government over the threat of repeal.
Quote:
Bwa, ha ha ha ha.
You know and I know that is exactly the scenario that the emperor and Reid constructed . It played out as they envisioned it would .They blame the Repubics,especially those radical TP . They get to keep Obamacare ,they use the shut down as a campaign issue in 2014 ;and the final icing on the cake is the end of sequester spending (thank you Bonehead and Ryan) .
Hello again, tom:
If you mean, did the Dems step out of the way while the righty's self destructed, I'd agree.Quote:
You know and I know that is exactly the scenario that the emperor and Reid constructed .
excon
Shame the regime can't get out of their own way and quit d*cking around with our lives.
Quote:
High security risk found after HealthCare.gov launch - CBS News
According to federal standards set by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the potential impact of a high finding is “the loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability could be expected to have a severe or catastrophic adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets, or individuals.”
Details are not being made public for security reasons but Fryer testified that one vulnerability in the system was discovered during testing last week related to an incident reported in November. She says that as a result, the government has shut down functionality in the vulnerable part of the system. Fryer said the other high-risk finding was discovered Monday.
In another security bombshell, Fryer told congressional interviewers that she explicitly recommended denial of the website’s Authority to Operate (ATO), but was overruled by her superiors. The website was rolled out amid warnings Fryer said she gave both verbally and in a briefing that disclosed “high risks” and possible exposure to “attacks”.
Fryer also said that she refused to put her name on a letter recommending a temporary ATO be granted for six months while the issues were sorted out.
"My recommendation was a denial of ATO," Fryer told Democrats and Republicans who sat in on the day-long interview. According to Fryer, she first recommended denying the ATO to CMS chief information officer Tony Trenkle based on the many outstanding security concerns after pre-launch testing.
"I had discussions with him on this and told him that my evaluation of this was a high risk," Fryer told the committee. Trenkle retired from his CMS job on Nov. 13. He has not responded to CBS News interview requests.
This is the first time a government insider has gone on record challenging the administration's insistence that there were no worrisome security concerns. On Oct. 30, Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., asked Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in testimony to Congress whether "any senior department officials" advised delaying the rollout of HealthCare.gov.
"I can tell you that no senior official reporting to me ever advised me that we should delay," Sebelius answered. "We have testing that did not advise a delay. So not -- not to my knowledge."
It takes some kinda nerve to intentionally put the people they claim to be trying to help at such risk, and then lie about it.
Looks like the ACA will have the same problems as Target.
Target didn't put their website online with so many holes, someone made a sophisticated attack on their stores. The regime knowingly put up a website so full of holes you could drive a Hummer through it without regard to the security of American's personal information.
You are correct about target, it seems it was limited to retailers in stores and not the website. My apology for the misinformation. But the ACA has not seen the type of theft at this time and as a side note,
Chinese Hackers Attacked FEC During Government Shutdown
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:41 PM. |