If You Like Your Insurance Plan You Can Keep It...Not

[dust1n]

I can see Obama months in advance, wringing his hands in the oval office, speaking to himself with the lights off, "Yeesss, I'll tell them months in advance that they will get to keep their same plan, and then, due to the new standards I set, take away all of their current plans... Muhahah... Muha.. Muhahaha."

 

[Revoltingest]

I can see Obama months in advance, wringing his hands in the oval office, speaking to himself with the lights off, "Yeesss, I'll tell them months in advance that they will get to keep their same plan, and then, due to the new standards I set, take away all of their current plans... Muhahah... Muha.. Muhahaha."

That could very well be. Lyndon Johnson did just that at times, knowing that the public would reject a law if all were known at the time. But it's also possible that, like Dubya, he got bad intel from subordinates who said what they thought he wanted to hear.
Consider: We have a president who makes a statement about his health care plan. It's a claim which would be verifiable with reasonable accuracy. It turned out to be false. What's your explanation?

 

[McBell]

That could very well be. Lyndon Johnson did just that at times, knowing that the public would reject a law if all were known at the time. But it's also possible that, like Dubya, he got bad intel from subordinates who said what they thought he wanted to hear.
Consider: We have a president who makes a statement about his health care plan. It's a claim which would be verifiable with reasonable accuracy. It turned out to be false. What's your explanation?

The fact that there are so many people willing to go out of their way to make Obama look like a liar....

 

[Riverwolf]

That could very well be. Lyndon Johnson did just that at times, knowing that the public would reject a law if all were known at the time. But it's also possible that, like Dubya, he got bad intel from subordinates who said what they thought he wanted to hear.
Consider: We have a president who makes a statement about his health care plan. It's a claim which would be verifiable with reasonable accuracy. It turned out to be false. What's your explanation?

He's a politician.

Seems standard operating procedure to me.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

From the source:

"Like other insurers, the Blue Shield letters let customers know they have to make a decision by Dec. 31 or they will automatically be enrolled in a recommended plan."

Whooptey-doo. Insurers regularly change their policies, typically every year, and require people to find a new insurer or automatically be enrolled in the new plan. That was happening long before the ACA.

The article says this is happening to hundreds of thousands of people ... in other words, 0.1% of Americans ... and as the article says "By all accounts, the new policies will offer consumers better coverage, in some cases, for comparable cost". Obama did not lie, the ACA doesn't make you change your insurer it just requires your insurer to offer a certain minimum level of coverage.

 

[esmith]

Ah yes now I see the whole picture:

 

[Mr Spinkles]

The spin is in the OP. The facts are in the Kaiser article which is the source of the NewsMax article cited in the OP.

I post facts.

You post a cartoon.

Who's spinning?

 

[dust1n]

Consider: We have a president who makes a statement about his health care plan. It's a claim which would be verifiable with reasonable accuracy. It turned out to be false. What's your explanation?

Inability to know all the details of how a future bill will work out with some many parties and interests making various ledgers, etc./Standard rhetoric not matching policy.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Inability to know all the details of how a future bill will work out with some many parties and interests making various ledgers, etc./Standard rhetoric not matching policy.

In addition, Obama's statement was literally 99.9% true, according to the facts given in the article. I'd call that closer to "true" than "false".

 

[esmith]

In addition, Obama's statement was literally 99.9% true, according to the facts given in the article. I'd call that closer to "true" than "false".

Well I see you are referencing what Obama said when he was pressed on the statement I guess he attempted to clarify it by saying it was what he meant not what he said.
Let look at his statement one segment at a time.
“First of all, if you’ve got health insurance, you like your doctors, you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan"

1. If you like your doctor you can keep him. Maybe true maybe not. There are a lot of maybes here.
2 If you like your plan you can keep it... False

So let see we have 2 statements one is false and one is maybe. So I put that at less than 50%. So, where do you get 99.9% true? I sure didn't learn that in school.

Of course I went to school when they actually taught you something

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Well I see you are referencing what Obama said when he was pressed on the statement I guess he attempted to clarify it by saying it was what he meant not what he said.
Let look at his statement one segment at a time.
“First of all, if you’ve got health insurance, you like your doctors, you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan"

1. If you like your doctor you can keep him. Maybe true maybe not. There are a lot of maybes here.
2 If you like your plan you can keep it... False

So let see we have 2 statements one is false and one is maybe. So I put that at less than 50%. So, where do you get 99.9% true? I sure didn't learn that in school.

Of course I went to school when they actually taught you something

The point is as far as the ACA is concerned, you don't have to change doctors anymore than you have to carry an umbrella tomorrow. You may have to change doctors, or carry an umbrella, but that has very little to do with the ACA.

For insurance, when you don't pick out convenient sound bites and actually listen to everything Obama said, in context, he was very clear on how the ACA would affect insurance plans waaaaaaaaay back in 2009 (that's 4 years and one election ago). From the article in the OP:

“When I say ‘If you have your plan and you like it,… or you have a doctor and you like your doctor, that you don't have to change plans,’” the president said after we asked him about this, “what I'm saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform.”
...
“I can't pass a law that says, 'I'm sorry, employers, you can never make changes to the health care plans that you provide your employees.' What I can say is that the government is not going to force you to, your employer or you to join a government plan, for example. If you're happy with it, and your employer's happy with it, keep it."

esmith I can tell you and your Fox News friends are desperately hoping that Americans are too slow-witted to understand even the slightest nuance, and too impatient to hear anything but an out-of-context sound bite.

For those with some amount of working grey matter, the context was this: there were Right-wing accusations that "Obamacare" is going to take away your insurance. The answer is no, it doesn't take away your insurance. It does require insurers to end "lifetime maximums", cover kids until they're 26, etc. The vast majority of plans already did that. The small percentage of plans that didn't do that would have to do that, and this was never a secret.

The people who received "cancellation notices" make up 0.1% of the population, and they aren't actually cancellation but expansion of benefits notices to comply with the ACA minimum benefit requirements. Such notices changing insurance policies have always been with us. Most insurers adjust their premiums and benefits every year and send out a similar notice that you should either switch plans, or they will auto-enroll you in the new plan. Again this was happening waaaaay before the ACA.

To call Obama a liar because of an out-of-context quote when he explained precisely what he meant, in context, at length, multiple times, is dishonest spin.

 

[esmith]

The point is as far as the ACA is concerned, you don't have to change doctors anymore than you have to carry an umbrella tomorrow. You may have to change doctors, or carry an umbrella, but that has very little to do with the ACA.

No, the ACA does not require you to change doctors; However, if your doctor no longer will take you as a patient because of something in the ACA, then you have lost your doctor.

For insurance, when you don't pick out convenient sound bites and actually listen to everything Obama said, in context, he was very clear on how the ACA would affect insurance plans waaaaaaaaay back in 2009 (that's 4 years and one election ago). From the article in the OP:

Quote:
“When I say ‘If you have your plan and you like it,… or you have a doctor and you like your doctor, that you don't have to change plans,’” the president said after we asked him about this, “what I'm saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform.”
.
...
“I can't pass a law that says, 'I'm sorry, employers, you can never make changes to the health care plans that you provide your employees.' What I can say is that the government is not going to force you to, your employer or you to join a government plan, for example. If you're happy with it, and your employer's happy with it, keep it."
You are spinning the story. It was only after he made those comments and was interviewed that he did the spin doctor game and attempt to "change the storyline".

He had made the previous comments then tried to explain himself in a interview. This is spin doctoring plain and simple

esmith I can tell you and your Fox News friends are desperately hoping that Americans are too slow-witted to understand even the slightest nuance, and too impatient to hear anything but an out-of-context sound bite.

For those with some amount of working grey matter, the context was this: there were Right-wing accusations that "Obamacare" is going to take away your insurance. The answer is no, it doesn't take away your insurance. It does require insurers to end "lifetime maximums", cover kids until they're 26, etc. The vast majority of plans already did that. The small percentage of plans that didn't do that would have to do that, and this was never a secret.

The people who received "cancellation notices" make up 0.1% of the population, and they aren't actually cancellation but expansion of benefits notices to comply with the ACA minimum benefit requirements. Such notices changing insurance policies have always been with us. Most insurers adjust their premiums and benefits every year and send out a similar notice that you should either switch plans, or they will auto-enroll you in the new plan. Again this was happening waaaaay before the ACA.

To call Obama a liar because of an out-of-context quote when he explained precisely what he meant, in context, at length, multiple times, is dishonest spin.

I see you are now resorting to attempting to call people that do not agree with your spin, rationalization, opinion or what ever stupid. This type of attack is the favorite attack mode of the left. If you disagree with Obama you are either a racist or stupid. Yes, you won the election but you have not won the battle. The American public will eventually see that the direction the country is headed is the wrong direction. As a matter of fact just about 75%. So prattle on.

 

[Revoltingest]

Inability to know all the details of how a future bill will work out with some many parties and interests making various ledgers, etc./Standard rhetoric not matching policy.

Sounds like we replaced GW Bush with GW Bush.
I expect he'll win again in 2016.
Oh, well...at least we aren't at war in Iran or Syria.
(Look'n at the bright side of the current Dubya.)

 

[Mr Spinkles]

No, the ACA does not require you to change doctors; However, if your doctor no longer will take you as a patient because of something in the ACA, then you have lost your doctor.

But the article in the OP doesn't say people are losing their doctors because of something in the ACA.

He had made the previous comments then tried to explain himself in a interview. This is spin doctoring plain and simple

Explaining, accurately, what the ACA does and does not do = spin doctoring. Got it.

I see you are now resorting to attempting to call people that do not agree with your spin, rationalization, opinion or what ever stupid. This type of attack is the favorite attack mode of the left. If you disagree with Obama you are either a racist or stupid. Yes, you won the election but you have not won the battle. The American public will eventually see that the direction the country is headed is the wrong direction. As a matter of fact just about 75%. So prattle on.

Oh is that a fact, 75% don't support the Affordable Care Act? Really? Is this an actual fact or one of those Fox News "facts"?
[youtube]i7G_IIu-_v4[/youtube]
Fox News Speaks for Majority on Health Care Reform? - YouTube

 

[esmith]

The American public will eventually see that the direction the country is headed is the wrong direction. As a matter of fact just about 75%.[/B] So prattle on.

Oh is that a fact, 75% don't support the Affordable Care Act? Really? Is this an actual fact or one of those Fox News "facts"?

I hate to bring this to your attention, but I do believe you have gone off the deep end. I believe you mentioned something about some people do not have "gray matter" if they think one way. Well Mr Sprinkles maybe you should apply that to yourself. If you read what I posted, see the above highlighted statement, I made no mention of a percentage about the ACA. What I posted is a fact according to the following:
Right Direction or Wrong Track - Rasmussen Reports™
and if you don't like that one
RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Direction of Country

Oh, by the way the youtube video you posted was dated in March 2010. I can neither confirm or deny the facts since I can not find any data during that time period.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Okay, I thought you were talking about the ACA specifically, since that is the topic. Hey, I don't like the direction the country is headed in. I'm with you there. That has little bearing on the OP.

 

[Reverend Rick]

The fact that there are so many people willing to go out of their way to make Obama look like a liar....

I don't think Obama was lying, I think he truly believed everything he said was true at the time he said it.

To me, the biggest point here is no one really knows the impact of the ACA completely.

Here is what I do understand, people with pre-existing conditions can never be charged enough to cover expenses.

This must be made up by younger healthier folks paying too much for their coverage.

Right now the way I see things, there is a real possibility that the ACA may cause less Americans to be covered by health insurance than before the ACA became law.

The only winners here is the insurance companies.

The thing is, this might not work too well either. Perhaps if all the young folks pay the tax instead of buying insurance, more and more insurance companies may decline to offer policies and we will have even less competition and draconian premiums.

Health insurance is unaffordable. People need food and shelter and do not have enough money left to buy overpriced health insurance.

The government can not afford to help folks either. Our country will be deeper in debt and the remaining premium will still be too high for the average person.

Even if you do purchase insurance, the deductables and remaining percentages that YOU will owe the hospital will bankrupt you if you ever have a major procedure.

A 300,000 medical bill will still cost you 60,000 @ 80% plus the deductable.

 

[Awoon]

The whole problem is, No One can say what the Cost is for health care. Is an aspirin $5, $7, $9.00 when distributed by a hospital? Yep, depending on one's insurance policy. The Ins Co will pay, but how much does an aspirin cost? That's the whole problem with health care.

 

[Riverwolf]

And that's why a universal system should be implemented: to simplify the process so people who aren't money-savvy can get help when needed.

So far, I've determined at least one major problem with ACA: it's way too complicated.

 

[Awoon]

And that's why a universal system should be implemented: to simplify the process so people who aren't money-savvy can get help when needed.

So far, I've determined at least one major problem with ACA: it's way too complicated.

Agreed