7 Million people sign up for insurance plans via state/federal exchanges (!)

[Lief 🗽]

Wow, Obamacare has been more successful than even predicted! Thank you, President Obama!

[AggregateDemand]

Wow, Obamacare has been more successful than even predicted! Thank you, President Obama!

If only the problem with healthcare were too few people receiving Medicaid subsidies! Our troubles would be over!

[MalaspinaGold]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/17/fact-sheet-affordable-care-act-numbers

8 Million enrolled in exchanges.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Wow, Obamacare has been more successful than even predicted! Thank you, President Obama!

If only the problem with healthcare were too few people receiving Medicaid subsidies! Our troubles would be over!

Which is a small proportion of the overall coverage increases.

[MaxQue]

Well, that's the issue when you allow profit in healthcare. Never-ending cost increase, as companies wants to have always more benefits.

[MalaspinaGold]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/04/17/its-official-the-death-spiral-is-dead/

So, the Society of Actuaries determines estimates that premiums will increase by 6-7% next year.
That's higher than CBO's extimate of about 3% (because of risk corridors) but in line with CBO's longer term estimates.

Pre-Obamacare, premiums increased by about 8-10% annually.

RIP death spiral

[King]

8 million?

Excellent.

[AggregateDemand]

Which is a small proportion of the overall coverage increases.

The rest was attributable to private sector hiring and employer-provided care

[MalaspinaGold]

False. Does not square with the fact that the uninsured rate fell dramatically only after the exchanges opened, despite job creation comparable to the year before.

[King]

Which is a small proportion of the overall coverage increases.

The rest was attributable to private sector hiring and employer-provided care

So you admit the assertion that the law is a jobs killer is a lie?

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I'm happy to say that I'm part of that 8 million, as are a handful of my now-insured freelancer friends.

[AggregateDemand]

False. Does not square with the fact that the uninsured rate fell dramatically only after the exchanges opened, despite job creation comparable to the year before.

Please stop making things up and look at the data. When the exchanges opened, the unemployment rate rose by about 2% as millions of people received cancellations, and then it dropped 2.5% as all of those people scrambled to get onto the exchanges. The ~.5% are the new enrollees. They represent approximately 20%-25% of all enrollees.

[AggregateDemand]

So you admit the assertion that the law is a jobs killer is a lie?

First, GDP growth is less than the federal deficit, and unemployment rate is still 6.7%

Second, the "job killer" moniker referred to the part-time economy created by the employer-mandate. As unemployment has fallen, the part-time rate has not, particularly for the core 25-54 demographic. The jobs that existed prior to the recession are not returning, though the unemployment rate has declined.

[badgate]

So you admit the assertion that the law is a jobs killer is a lie?

First, GDP growth is less than the federal deficit, and unemployment rate is still 6.7%

Second, the "job killer" moniker referred to the part-time economy created by the employer-mandate. As unemployment has fallen, the part-time rate has not, particularly for the core 25-54 demographic. The jobs that existed prior to the recession are not returning, though the unemployment rate has declined.

That's on businesses for not investing in employees by making them full-time.

[MalaspinaGold]

False. Does not square with the fact that the uninsured rate fell dramatically only after the exchanges opened, despite job creation comparable to the year before.

Please stop making things up and look at the data. When the exchanges opened, the unemployment rate rose by about 2% as millions of people received cancellations, and then it dropped 2.5% as all of those people scrambled to get onto the exchanges. The ~.5% are the new enrollees. They represent approximately 20%-25% of all enrollees.

Gallup begs to disagree with you:


First off, 0 people were thrown off ACA uncompliant plans in 2013. I repeat, zero, ZERO. This is because the ACA mandates did not take effect until January 1, 2014. The people who received the cancellation notices were still insured until the end of 2013. So obviously, that can't explain the spike.

Not to mention, the spike began in the first quarter of 2013, well before any of these cancellation notices even began arriving.

Not even mentioning that this data does not include the March/April surge, which has the uninsured rate going down another 2% to 13%.

Regarding your second point, if you REALLY want to go down that route, fine- just be sure to count the 5-7 million extra off-exchange enrollments in your total- that's where most cancelled policyholders went anyway.

So once again, your initial claim was false.

[AggregateDemand]

First off, 0 people were thrown off ACA uncompliant plans in 2013. I repeat, zero, ZERO. This is because the ACA mandates did not take effect until January 1, 2014. The people who received the cancellation notices were still insured until the end of 2013. So obviously, that can't explain the spike.

The data is right in front of you. The health insurance companies jettisoned as many high-risk people as possible, according to the RAND report, many were smokers. When healthcare.gov came online, all of those newly uninsured people bought coverage.

The decrease of uninsured rates from 17.4 to 15.9 was primarily private sector hiring during 2011 and 2012. Obamacare is credited with reducing the rate by .5% according to the latest data I saw.

Sorry, that's what it is. We're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Democrats managed to pass a new tax on Cadillac insurance plans. The rest of us with non-Cadillac insurance are reliant upon employers to reduce health insurance costs.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

California alone is 1.4 million. Another 1.1 million enrolled in Medi-Cal via the exchange.

[windjammer]

Wow, Obamacare has been more successful than even predicted! Thank you, President Obama!

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

False. Does not square with the fact that the uninsured rate fell dramatically only after the exchanges opened, despite job creation comparable to the year before.

Please stop making things up and look at the data. When the exchanges opened, the unemployment rate rose by about 2% as millions of people received cancellations, and then it dropped 2.5% as all of those people scrambled to get onto the exchanges. The ~.5% are the new enrollees. They represent approximately 20%-25% of all enrollees.

Gallup begs to disagree with you:


First off, 0 people were thrown off ACA uncompliant plans in 2013. I repeat, zero, ZERO. This is because the ACA mandates did not take effect until January 1, 2014. The people who received the cancellation notices were still insured until the end of 2013. So obviously, that can't explain the spike.

Not to mention, the spike began in the first quarter of 2013, well before any of these cancellation notices even began arriving.

Not even mentioning that this data does not include the March/April surge, which has the uninsured rate going down another 2% to 13%.

Regarding your second point, if you REALLY want to go down that route, fine- just be sure to count the 5-7 million extra off-exchange enrollments in your total- that's where most cancelled policyholders went anyway.

So once again, your initial claim was false.

What's the MoE in those polls?  Even with a minimal 1% MoE, pretty much all of the changes in that graph would essentially be statistical noise.

[AggregateDemand]

What's the MoE in those polls?  Even with a minimal 1% MoE, pretty much all of the changes in that graph would essentially be statistical noise.

MOE is +-1%, but Gallup uses relatively sophisticated smoothing techniques, like follow up surveys, running averages, etc.

The Gallup numbers are similar to the BLS projections for insurance coverage, though BLS didn't model the spike in uninsured citizens prior to the roll out of healthcare.gov

[7,052,770]

Paul Krugman annihilates the right-wing denial of Obamacare's successes:  http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/18/on-the-liberal-bias-of-facts/

[AggregateDemand]

Paul Krugman annihilates the right-wing denial of Obamacare's successes:  http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/18/on-the-liberal-bias-of-facts/

Krugman presents no economic data. It's an op-ed, in which he does his usual stück: liberals want to accomplish things, conservatives only want to shrink the government.

His observations are true, but he refuses to acknowledge why conservatism surged in the 1980s--progressive policy had become worse than laissez-faire conservative indifference. Who is to blame for that phenomenon? Conservative Republicans?

Liberals are always fighting the conservative phantom. The real enemy is their own incompetence. Conservatism naturally ebbs and flows because skepticism and hatred of one's own government is difficult to maintain. Furthermore, conservatives have never succeed in shrinking the government more than 1-2%. To date, we have not found a limit to progressive liberal largesse. Entitlements have crowded out productivity, and the middle class are completely on their own. This has nothing to do with conservatism.

[MalaspinaGold]

First off, 0 people were thrown off ACA uncompliant plans in 2013. I repeat, zero, ZERO. This is because the ACA mandates did not take effect until January 1, 2014. The people who received the cancellation notices were still insured until the end of 2013. So obviously, that can't explain the spike.

The data is right in front of you. The health insurance companies jettisoned as many high-risk people as possible, according to the RAND report, many were smokers. When healthcare.gov came online, all of those newly uninsured people bought coverage.

The decrease of uninsured rates from 17.4 to 15.9 was primarily private sector hiring during 2011 and 2012. Obamacare is credited with reducing the rate by .5% according to the latest data I saw.

Sorry, that's what it is. We're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Democrats managed to pass a new tax on Cadillac insurance plans. The rest of us with non-Cadillac insurance are reliant upon employers to reduce health insurance costs.

Pray tell us what you are basing your assertions of rapid jettisoning of high-risk patients during 2013.

Here's Gallup:
http://thrive.gallup.com/2014/04/is-affordable-care-act-working.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And no, not all of the increase in insurance was because of increased hiring:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/168548/newly-insured-2014-represent-adults.aspx

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[AggregateDemand]

The only point you're making is that Democrats will embrace ignorance, if it allows them to project an image of success. Also, it has been illegal to be uninsured since 3/31 so you can file all Gallup data in the paper shredder from now on. The number of uninsured will probably tick up as people neglect to pay their bills.

The enrollment rates are only a small part of the equation. The "deficit neutral" CBO report projected that 45% of new enrollees would be Medicaid eligible. Now Rand, BLS, and EDC (NY) are all forecasting between 62%-65% so you've got to conjure up more money to avoid increasing deficits.

We are all dependent upon the private sector to fix this problem now. ACA has merely jammed the throttle on full, and we will crash if the rudder is not repaired. This is basically what people have been saying from the beginning. If Obamacare works it's because the provisions are so onerous and irrelevant that private industry might suddenly rediscover its conscience.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If Obamacare works it's because the provisions are so onerous and irrelevant that private industry might suddenly rediscover its conscience.

You're a rare Republican in that you concede that government action can spur private companies into doing the right thing when they otherwise would not.