Patterico's Pontifications

10/22/2013

Anyone Try to Create an Account at HealthCare.Gov?

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:51 pm



I just tried. About four times in a row.

I said I was from Delaware, a state that uses the federal Web site, because I was curious to see how it worked.

The first time, the answers to my security questions were all insults to Obama — but they were different. What was my favorite toy as a child? “Obama may blow me.” What kind of cuisine do I enjoy? “I can’t stand Obama.” And so forth. I was told my account could not be created, because the answers to my questions were not distinct. And to try again.

OK, I said Obama in each one, I thought. I had better change it up.

I had to retype my name (John Doe) and my email address (Hushmail, set up for this purpose), each time I tried to create an account again. As for the security questions? OK, time to get serious — kind of.

Screen Shot 2013-10-22 at 6.41.22 PM

Not true — and, admittedly, not particularly funny (this is not Ace of Spades, people!) — but certainly distinct. And yet:

Screen Shot 2013-10-22 at 6.41.43 PM

What was not “distinct” about my answers?

Apparently, Obama is going to do some kind of “tech surge” that everybody knows will fail. So: what should Republicans’ strategy be? Sit by and watch as they fail miserably? Or something else?

I’m sorry, your answer could not be accepted at this time. Please try again.

86 Responses to “Anyone Try to Create an Account at HealthCare.Gov?”

  1. These clowns couldn’t figure out how to get drunk in Vegas.

    SPQR (768505)

  2. The websites would work if you racist tea baggers would just stop going on them so much.

    kaf (81bcc7)

  3. I have heard that once one creates an account it cannot be deleted.
    I’m not going to do that if I can help it.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  4. In the end, each Republican Congressman and Senator will hold his finger up to his constituency’s wind and say (asking way too much for “do”) something he thinks his constituents will like. Pretty much it.

    nk (dbc370)

  5. obamacare is a stupid waste of everyone’s time let’s watch the fox video again

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  6. I have heard that once one creates an account it cannot be deleted.
    I’m not going to do that if I can help it.

    Comment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 10/22/2013 @ 7:02 pm

    I was “John Doe.”

    Patterico (a36e1a)

  7. I wouldn’t be surprised if “John Doe” doesn’t work.

    From what I have read and heard, it seems designed to be resistant to people “just trying to see”, that they want all of the info on a person first.
    Which in some ways I guess makes some sense, if one’s policy is dependent on all kinds of data regarding whether one is eligible for a subsidy or not, etc.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  8. Hotair has a quote from Sebelius claiming Obama did not know that the website was a disaster before Oct 1.

    What a bizarre load of BS. But indicative of the weird mentality of the Obama cult. Now we are formally at the “If only Stalin knew…” point.

    SPQR (768505)

  9. Republicans should be singing the following hymn:

    “We tried to warn against this,
    The President told us to shut up.
    We tried to oppose this,
    The Democrats rammed it through.
    We tried to overturn this,
    The Chief Justice invented a tax.
    We tried to belay this,
    The President would not bargain.
    We tried to delay this,
    The Present sent everyone home.
    We tried to soften this,
    The Present threatened to default.

    It’s on him.”

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  10. *presIDent

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  11. On a semi-serious note, would trying to make a false account on the ObamaCare site be akin to making a false application for a SS# or passport or some other official document?
    Or only if one finalized an application then tried to use the insurance coverage?

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  12. I hear the only function that works is the one that detects your IP address, determines where you live, then cancels your neighbor’s insurance.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  13. Check your inbox. Maybe the first error message was false. Try deleting cookies.If you get some time, call the 800 number.

    johnl (a36123)

  14. I did try the first week just to see what would happen and I posted my results here. I tried again later and actually said I got onto the site, but it tossed me out again.

    Then I posted “never mind, it doesn’t work” because it stopped working before I even entered any information.

    I haven’t tried since then.

    Right now, I have insurance. The price my family paying went up significantly during the last enrollment period.

    I also know that it is just a matter of time before I am dumped into Obamacare.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  15. So MD, are you suggesting that lying to a government web site is the same as lying to a government agent? How exactly do they define “agent” in those laws?

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  16. 12.I hear the only function that works is the one that detects your IP address, determines where you live, then cancels your neighbor’s insurance and checks your web history to determine your political allegiances. FTFY
    Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 10/22/2013 @ 7:22 pm

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  17. Kevin, I’m not “suggesting” anything, just thinking out loud.

    I mean, it isn’t like one is simply getting info from some site, it is intended as a mechanism to apply for governmental assistance (at least if a subsidy is involved), and getting funding under false pretense is a problem.

    Putting false information in an on-line tax return program I assume is a problem when one does it, not just when one cashes a check that was obtained under false pretenses.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  18. Kevin M – I believe that, to be an “agent”, one has to actually *do* something, some actual act …

    Rules out Obamacare, don’t it just ?

    Alastor (e7cb73)

  19. MD, I would think that until you hit the button that says “Here it is, and I certify that it is true” that you can go back and correct mistakes no matter how egregious.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  20. That would make sense, Kevin M.
    (But if so, it might be the only thing about it that made sense. 😉 )

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  21. Hard to say. Probably no one has gotten that far.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  22. Exactly. I was never asked to certify anything, nor would I have. Nor was I warned that using a false name was illegal. I didn’t want to give my real name and information on some account I am not planning to use.

    Patterico (aa15eb)

  23. “Obama may blow me.”

    Speaking of which, your pseudonym should have been not “John Doe” but “Heywood Jablome.” Either that or “Reggie Love.”

    What an uplifting, ennobling time in US history.

    Mark (58ea35)

  24. I have some questions, though.

    I am no longer a young man. When I was a kid and went to the doctor, we paid the doctor.

    Then we were blessed with Medicare. It didn’t actually help me, since I was 8 and my parents were healthy. However, it did help my grandmothers in their old age.

    I never paid attention to insurance until I was an adult. After I graduated from college and got a job, the selling point by many was if I went to work with one company or another was that they offered better health insurance.

    So, I guess what I’m asking is this: What happened? What happened to just paying your doctor for his or her services? Sure, my parents had insurance, but it was a modest plan that paid for catastrophic care. It was not offered by their employers.

    Was it Medicare or something else? And how did we get to the point that the only solution is government-run health care?

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  25. Hmmm…I believe it was the guy on Greta who said the errors weren’t making sense. I do wonder if they have blocked emails like hushmail and guerrilla so people cannot look up prices (some sites do ths). Or, probably more likely, the glitches really are this bad.

    Ratbeach (f5aad4)

  26. hey Pat, why not make one with the name “Sammy Finkleman”, or, better yet, “Paul Lemmen”?

    😎

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  27. 24. Light that man’s cigar. I gather the general drift is back in the 1930’s governments started offering benefits with the paycheck.

    Then businesses started in looking to be competitive.

    Government kept upping the ante and decided to start regulating Healthcare because the hoi polloi couldn’t land the pricier positions offering those bennies.

    They begat the HMOs to group the insured and attract lower cost Healthcare by paying upfront. That started the ‘insurance’ perversion where you pay for a basket of services rather than coverage in the event of illness.

    I could be missing steps but thass what memembery serves up.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  28. One other thing, why didn’t the administration just sell this as an expansion of Medicare and use the already available online resource that works?

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  29. Given what the Left is capable of, this delicious bit of Schadenfreude is probably going to get you SWATted (again).

    It’s not nice to fool with Mother Nature the Leviathan.

    Panther 01 (fef457)

  30. maybe it’s just as well you couldn’t seal the deal?

    http://dailycurrant.com/2013/10/21/obamacare-website-accidentally-enrolls-thousands-in-sex-offender-registry-2/

    BUHWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…..

    i can’t wait for Sam the Sham and Flailalot to try and stin *this* one.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  31. Gary I think offering health care to workers began during a pay freeze period after WW2. Companies started offering perks because they couldn’t offer more money. I also think some of the perks were more beneficial from a tax perspective. That’s my memembery.

    Gazzer (a55a11)

  32. I always practiced in settings where cash for service (on a sliding-fee scale as well) was available.

    Many things have happened, including the simple reality that medicine has become complicated and expensive, and much of the expense is not the doctor fees but tests and medications, etc.

    Back in the day, before Medicare and Medicaid, it was more common than not for the typical doc to provide some free care or care at decreased fees. With the advent of govt. assistance, I think many docs felt a decreased responsibility to be personally involved. During my residency in the 80’s some docs would see our Medicaid patients for free, as they thought it was a bigger hassle for them to train staff for the billing procedures (since it was low pay and a relatively small percentage of their practice).

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  33. Looking around the nets at ‘expert’ commentary, this 404care brick is a total loss.

    They may beat on it for some months but it will never walk on its own. They will start over, with an actual documented design.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  34. spin, and yes, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Currant

    like all good satire, it’s believable.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  35. Obama will play the white knight and postpone his signature legislation because to let it continue into next year will be a disaster for Dems.

    AZ Bob (c99389)

  36. Dingy ding, gary. I ask questions for a reason.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  37. At the polls.

    AZ Bob (c99389)

  38. Red that’s a satirical web site.

    Gazzer (a55a11)

  39. They added something like “browse plans first” today. So I didn’t have to register and give any personal info, but after about 6 screens, I got sent back to the 1st page. Smells like success to me.

    sybilll (a5b3c9)

  40. 30. The DailyCurrant is a spoof site, like the Onion only funny.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  41. I refuse to allow them access to my computer.
    Perhaps I’ll go to the library?

    askeptic (2bb434)

  42. AZ Bob- It was suggested previously that he will never delay the legislation, just delay enforcing a penalty for not having insurance.
    Delaying the legislation would give too much of an “I told you so” opportunity for the repubs.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  43. Forgive me, but I wanted MD in Philly to comment and he provided. Thanks Doctor.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  44. BTW… I suspect that you’re in violation of at least one law doing this, although you can probably claim a 1st Amendment out if they actually bother you – you’re a journalist, at least part time 😉

    There is a remarkably nasty (and ill considered) federal law about misusing computers. Basically, violate any site rule – even the most trivial – and it is a federal felony. I think entering false data also triggers it.

    Cheers. Your government at work.

    John Moore (3f1a01)

  45. 41. Not that I’m schizoid, I think, but my computer has been whacked almost from the day I brought it home.

    I believe they know who you is.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  46. Well Ag 80, you’re welcome.
    What others said is also true.
    I had also read that at one point Gompers and the labor unions liked the idea of employers providing insurance because it gave the unions a role to be important.

    I don’t know the answers, but I’m sure more govt. control and bureaucracy is not it.

    Prior to the mid 60’s or so people with heart attacks were treated by being told to rest at home, in large part because there was no specific treatment available.
    Then it was learned that putting someone in an ICU would allow the heart rhythm to be monitored and possible intervention in the event of a serious heart rhythm disturbance as a complication of the heart attack.
    And then all kinds of other things happened, for example.
    Children with leukemia in the early 1960’s died, now they live after chemotherapy, radiation therapy, maybe bone marrow transplant in rare cases.
    We also have new things to treat like HIV and Hep C which are expensive.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  47. Caught a brief segment of Rushbo today. Seems CNN and Cooper covered the suck in producing an Obama voter, 56 year old woman of color, $24K income, uninsured.

    Eager to sign up, she found her best option, with subsidies, was $350 per month and $6000 deductible.

    She’s disappointed. She’s going to continue going to the ER a la carte.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  48. Look, MD, I don’t have to be honest, because I am.

    I know as well as you do that government programs such as Medicare have actually improved health care intentionally or not.

    Medicare forced the market to come up with new, innovative treatments to reduce health care costs.
    Government programs put a man on the moon, built the Hoover Dam, saved us from polio, actually created the Internet and too many other achievements to name.

    It did all these things and more that have made my life better.

    As a conservative, I don’t hate the government. Actually, I love the government.

    It has an important role in regulating health care, but making health care its role is a step too far.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  49. 56 year old woman of color, $24K income, uninsured.

    “People (or woman) of color” is such a dumb phrase to me (ie, hey, don’t white people have a tint to their skin too?), but that woman is presumably racially black, meaning it’s a given she voted for Obama and will favor any pie-in-the-sky liberal. So now she’ll not only lack health insurance, but she’ll also be dinged with a yearly fine, courtesy of the bigger, bloated IRS.

    She may be too ideologically foolish to see the irony in all of this, and to also connect that with the politicians and policies she generally favors. People like her are classic maroons.

    Mark (58ea35)

  50. Should of just called her a redbone.

    steveg (794291)

  51. I’m pinkish-beige myself. And fifty-seven. My COBRA is almost $600.00/mo and my out of pocket, not my deductible, is $6,000.00. My deductible is $500.00. When it expires in fourteen months … I already said that I’ll be going to Reno and splurging in the bawdy houses, and then on welfare.

    nk (dbc370)

  52. “too many other achievements to name.”

    Ag80 – One of Obama’s favorites, teh intercontinental railroad.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  53. Government programs put a man on the moon, built the Hoover Dam, saved us from polio

    What government program saved us from polio, Ag80? Jonas Salk was a researcher at the University of Pittsburgh and his work was funded by the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, know today as the March of Dimes.

    Steve57 (022c57)

  54. I should probably add that Eli Lilly and Co. actually produced the polio vaccines used in Dr. Salk’s 1954 field trial.

    Steve57 (022c57)

  55. someone wanted data, but without having to expose themselves to the feds?

    http://www.reddit.com/domain/data.healthcare.gov

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  56. And the CDC made sure everybody got the vaccine, and before the vaccine that the outbreaks were contained. Ag80 is right.

    nk (dbc370)

  57. Was it Medicare or something else?

    It was several things, but probably the worst was “cost containment.” By and by, medical plans tried to cut costs and started negotiating contracts with doctors and hospitals. These worthies would offer discounts on the normal price to get patients funneled in by the plans.

    Then someone had the bright idea of “60% of what, exactly?” And they started inflating the standard rate that fewer and fewer paid. Not the insured, not Medicare or Medicaid and even individuals could haggle them down. So the “standard” rate inflated higher and higher and the discounts got larger and larger. And pretty soon the guy without insurance was paying $30,000 for something everyone else paid $3,000 for.

    I have seen a medical bill for an outpatient surgery where the total of charges was $53,000, the negotiated rate was $4,300 and the patient’s portion was $860.

    And that‘s what happened to paying for it yourself.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  58. I don’t see how the CDC could have done that, nk. The Communicable Disease Center (later the Center for Disease Control) didn’t exist before 1946. And it primarily sprayed for Malaria in the south. It didn’t have much in the way of staff, and what it did have knew how to use trucks, sprayers, and shovels.

    I have never read about any CDC role, or government role, in the development of Salk’s polio vaccine except for approving it following the field trial.

    http://www.eds-resources.com/poliotimeline.htm

    1947 – Jonas Salk accepts a position in Pittsburgh at the new medical laboratory funded by the Sarah Mellon Scientific Foundation.

    1948 – Salk’s laboratory is one of four awarded research grants for the polio virus typing project. Salk decides to u se the newly developed tissue culture method of cultivating and working with the polio virus that has recently been developed by John Enders at Harvard University. Other researchers, including Albert Sabin, who would later develop the oral polio vaccine, continue to do their work with monkeys infected with the polio virus, a more difficult and time-consuming process.

    1952 – There are 58, 000 cases of polio in the United States, the most ever. Early versions of the Salk vaccine , using killed polio virus, are successful with small samples of patients at the Watson Home for Crippled Children and the Polk State School, a Pennsylvania facility for individuals with mental retardation.

    1953 – Amid continued “polio hysteria,” there are 35, 000 cases of polio in the United States.

    1954 – Massive field trials of the Salk vaccine are sponsored by the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis.

    1955 – News of the successful vaccine trials is announced by Dr. Thomas Francis Jr. of the University of Michigan at a formal press conference held April 12 in Ann Arbor (the site where the research data from the field trials had been gathered and analyzed). A nationwide vaccination program is quickly started.

    1957 – After a mass immunization campaign promoted by the March of Dines, there are only about 5600 cases of polio in the United States.

    The feds aided in the planning of interstate distribution of the vaccine. But it was primarily the state government public health departments, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, and the manufacturers who made sure everyone got it.

    http://www.vaccineethics.org/salk_polio/documents/Document_J.pdf

    Steve57 (022c57)

  59. David Burge ‏@iowahawkblog 13h

    1. run $1 billion ad campaign
    2. build $600 million web site
    3. decide what the product is #UniversityofObamaMBA

    Steve57 (022c57)

  60. Want to see what the prices are without subsidies? Well someone forgot to password the database the prices are fetched from. If you want to see it in all its glory head on over to data.healthcare.gov https://data.healthcare.gov/dataset/QHP-Individual-Medical-Landscape/ba45-xusy and see it for yourself.

    From weaselzippers Lack Of Security Lets You See What Prices On Healthcare.gov Are BEFORE Subsidies
    http://weaselzippers.us/2013/10/22/ocare-subsidies/

    Yoda (c1890a)

  61. not only can you look things up, if you hit the “export” button in the upper right corner, you can download the whole file in a variety of formats…

    and they are mother huge files too… even in csv format, excel topped out in the middle of Texas at ~65K lines… PDF came in at 2000 or so pages.

    anyone got a suggestion for a reader that can handle a data set this big?

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  62. Open Office calc can handle it

    Yoda (c1890a)

  63. 57.

    So the “standard” rate inflated higher and higher and the discounts got larger and larger. And pretty soon the guy without insurance was paying $30,000 for something everyone else paid $3,000 for.

    Last week, I encountered one surgeon’s “non-negotiable” claim for an angioplasty: over $100,000. For a 90 minute procedure. The hospital bill was less than $20,000.

    Insurer’s premiums are regulated, but no one oversees medical provider rates. The only current way to combat price gouging is through state “unfair business practice” statutes, but I’ve never heard of a successful case in California.

    David (666954)

  64. 59. The list jumps from MI to MO, no MN, WTF?

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  65. I think it only includes states without their own exchanges. Remember, the Federal site this is!

    Yoda (c1890a)

  66. It doesn’t have Cali, and I know for sure that they have their own state exchange.

    Yoda (c1890a)

  67. Yep, doesn’t have New Yuk either, they also have their own state run exchange.

    Yoda (c1890a)

  68. Comment by redc1c4 (abd49e) — 10/23/2013 @ 12:20 am

    Download as .csv to Open Office Calc. Use settings character set: Western European (DOS/OS2-437/US) Language: default (USA)

    Click separated by, and choose semicolon and comma.

    Will download in Excel type spread sheet. Handles it with ease unlike Microsoft Excel. 78438 lines and can handle much more if needed. Much better programs than MS Office, and its totally free!

    Yoda (c1890a)

  69. Maybe no one regulates the provider rates, but that doesn’t mean the insurers get the best deals. My experience is paying cash is far cheaper than insurance.

    http://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/2012/06/04/hospitals-doctors-offer-cash-discount-for-medical-bills-%5Bcharleston-gazette-th-a-344923.html#.UmeK1hCYaQk

    Hospitals, doctors offer cash discount for medical bills

    LOS ANGELES – A Long Beach hospital charged Jo Ann Snyder$6,707 for a CT scan of her abdomen and pelvis following colon surgery. But because she had health insurance with Blue Shield of California, her share was much less: $2,336.

    Then Snyder tripped across one of the little-known secrets of health care: If she hadn’t used her insurance, her bill would have been even lower, just $1,054.

    “I couldn’t believe it,” said Snyder, a 57-year-old hair salon manager. “I was really upset that I got charged so much and Blue Shield allowed that. You expect them to work harder for you and negotiate a better deal.”

    …The difference in price can be stunning. Los Alamitos Medical Center, for instance, lists a CT scan of the abdomen on a state website for $4,423. Blue Shield says its negotiated rate at the hospital is about $2,400.

    When the Los Angeles Times called for a cash price, the hospital said it was $250.

    Hospitals and doctors lose more money on Medicaid than they typically do on the uninsured. The reimbursement rates from the gub’mint. But hospitals have to treat anyone regardless of ability to pay. So the hospitals exert pressure on the insurers to pay more, and the insurers put up with it because they can always pass the costs along.

    It never made sense to me pay premiums every month, and then pay more out of pocket when I do need medical care then I would have if I paid cash. Plus you save on the monthly premium.

    There was a trend started in Oklahoma. They just posted their prices online. And started a bidding war.

    http://www.surgerycenterok.com/pricing/

    The progs would have you believe that health care is a unique market. (A) It’s not subject to market forces. (B) You must be forced to buy insurance or you’re a “free rider.” Complete BS on both counts. It’s different to the degree that they’ve regulated, which only makes it unique in the sense they haven’t regulated other markets into the ground yet. But they can do the same thing with food, housing, clothing, etc.

    And especially if you look at the crappy plans they’ve put together for Obamacare, the best choice you can make is to buy catastrophic insurance and pay cash for everything else.

    I mean are you kidding me? The Bronze plans require you to pay $5-$6K out of pocket first anyway and then you’re still on the hook for 40% of the bill. The inflated bill you have to pay because you’re subsidizing all the other free riders they’ve created over the years. Now many millions more with Obamacare.

    It’s bizarre. They turn logic upside down and inside out. If you don’t have insurance they’ll say you’re a “free rider” even though you pay cash and have never stuck anyone with a bill. So now everyone has to buy insurance or else Obamacare won’t work because somebody has to subsidize the health care of the sick, the elderly, and the Medicaid patients. In other words, if you don’t have health insurance you’re not paying for all their free riders, and that just won’t work out.

    Oh, forgot, the illegal aliens. Who won’t be forced to enjoy the wonders of Obamacare (this administration has really cheapened the value of US citizenship). They’ll still get their free health care as always.

    Lots of doctors will be going to all cash businesses. They’re not going to put up with all the BS. If you think this website is hosed wait ’til you see the red tape Obamacae will inflict on the doctors. Plus if you opt out you don’t need to fill the feds database with all your personal information.

    Steve57 (022c57)

  70. You know, if you’re a devout Christian you don’t need to buy Obamacare insurance and you don’t need to pay a fine, either.

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/10/22/how-you-and-your-family-can-escape-obamacare/

    There is, though, a provision buried in Obamacare that provides a way out of having to comply with the individual mandate. Pages 107 and 128 of Obamacare stipulate that members of “healthcare sharing ministries” are exempt from the individual mandate.

    There are only three Christian healthcare sharing ministries that qualify. Links at the site.

    Steve57 (022c57)

  71. Oh crap. Another boo boo.

    http://weaselzippers.us/2013/10/22/hc-navigators/

    Giving away phones, easy peasy, doing something our supercilious selves?

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  72. So what’s Shinola Spokesmodel say about this anyway?

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/weaselzippers-l.html#comments

    ‘Bo ate my Healthplan’, natch.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  73. Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/22/2013 @ 8:26 pm

    Seems CNN and Cooper covered the suck in producing an Obama voter, 56 year old woman of color, $24K income, uninsured.

    Eager to sign up, she found her best option, with subsidies, was $350 per month and $6000 deductible.

    She’s disappointed. She’s going to continue going to the ER a la carte.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 10/22/2013 @ 9:11 pm

    it’s a given she voted for Obama

    She was probably produced by some organization connected to Obama or Obamacare.

    So now she’ll not only lack health insurance, but she’ll also be dinged with a yearly fine, courtesy of the bigger, bloated IRS.

    Probably not so, if the information is accurate.

    Nobody will be charged with a fine/penalty/tax if the average cost of all the silver plans available to that person is over 8% of annual income, and if her income is $24,000 a year that works out to $160 a month.

    A fine is also avoidable, in practical terms, by underwithholding rather than overwitholding, as most people do, and, if this goes on unchanged, you can expect to start seeing a slight trend toward that in 2015 after some people find they are not getting their tax refunds – and then see some people owing money to the IRS and not paying it in 2016, with the withholding rate getting even lower that year, as more and more people start underwitholding…they’ll do it also just to get more cash.

    It will still be small in 2016, but it will be possible to see a problem building up…

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  74. Sally Kohn at Fox News wrote about how she’s so happy with the insurance she got under the new law. There were 50 plans better than her current insurance with lower premiums, lower out-of-pocket costs, and better coverage. Ten plans had higher premiums, but lower deductibles than her currrent insurance.

    The catch is that she lives in New York State, where an individual plan is now (2013) over $1,500 a month.

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  75. Please, Sammy, don’t make it sound like Sally Kohn ‘works’ for FOX News. She’s a left-wing hack that FNC occasionally has on to spew the latest Stalinist talking point.

    Icy (1b8eb0)

  76. They just posted their prices online. And started a bidding war.

    Good ol’ fashioned supply and demand combined with open, transparent competition is one basic component of any solution to the question of “how do we modify and improve healthcare in the US?”

    Nobody will be charged with a fine/penalty/tax if the average cost of all the silver plans available to that person is over 8% of annual income, and if her income is $24,000 a year that works out to $160 a month.

    It apparently applies to bronze plans, per below, which actually means the cut-off point will be lower than you suggest, meaning the qualification to receive a “waiver” isn’t quite as generous as “silver” would be. IOW, a person runs the risk of incurring a tax if he or she doesn’t pay the required amount for insurance even at the lowest acceptable level.

    Thanks, generous liberals!

    kff.org:

    2014: Penalty is $95 per adult and $47.50 per child (up to $285 for a family) or 1.0% of family income, whichever is greater.

    Income is defined as total income in excess of the filing threshold ($10,000 for an individual and $20,000 for a family in 2013). The penalty is pro-rated by the number of months in a year. The penalty cannot be greater than the national average premium for Bronze coverage in an Exchange. After 2016 penalty amounts are increased annually by the cost of living.

    csmonitor.com:

    You can be exempted from the requirement to buy health insurance – and hence, from the penalty – if you meet one of the following requirements:

    •You are uninsured for less than three months of the year.

    •You live illegally in the United States.

    •You’re incarcerated, and not awaiting disposition.

    •You’re a member of a recognized Indian tribe.

    •Your income is officially deemed too low.

    •The lowest-priced converge would cost more than 8 percent of your household income.

    •You’re a member of a recognized religious sect with religious objections to insurance, including Social Security and Medicare.

    •You’re a member of a recognized health-sharing ministry.

    ^ Since the left loves to give exemptions to the “undocumented” (eg, recent legislation in California allows illegal immigrants to practice law, and the LAPD exempts the confiscation of cars driven by such people who’ve violated traffic laws), we should all become “undocumented.”

    Mark (58ea35)

  77. Comment by Icy (1b8eb0) — 10/23/2013 @ 6:51 am

    Please, Sammy, don’t make it sound like Sally Kohn ‘works’ for FOX News. She’s a left-wing hack that FNC occasionally has on to spew the latest Stalinist talking point.

    She was mentioned by the Atlantic Monthly’s Five Best Columns for October 22. It did surprise me a litle bit that someone who works for FOX News might say that.

    I see that she’s technically, a “contributor”

    Google says, but the link is broken:

    Sally Kohn | Biography | Fox News
    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/personalities/​sally-kohn/bio Cached
    Sally Kohn joined the Fox News Channel in 2012 as a contributor. Most recently, Kohn was the senior campaign strategist for the Center for Community Change.

    This is the column:

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/10/21/was-obamacare-guinea-pig/

    Now, there’s one thing wrong here: She writes:

    All this plus the plan [she currently has] has very limited out-of-network coverage that, I found out the hard way, is subject to such a gauntlet of procedural hurdles that my family has spent thousands of dollars in so-far-unreimbursed out-of-network expenses.

    The New York Post writes today, on page 6 – the actual 6th page – not “Page Six” which is on page 12 today – that none – NOT ONE – of any the medical plans listed on the New York Health Exchange have ANY out-of-network coverage AT ALL!! Not even the platinum plans.

    http://nypost.com/2013/10/23/out-of-network-not-an-option-in-individual-obamacare-plans/

    (You can’t find this article from the home page. You have to know it exists, and search for it)

    Empire Blue Cross will honor out-of-network coverage for existing policy holders who have it, but only through 2015. Newcomers signing up on the exchange are out of luck, except for emergency cases.

    “As we’ve seen in New York, the cost of out-of-network care can be extremely high. Interestingly, our company surveyed 55,000 people on a number of issues related to our plan offerings and found that price without exception was the priority,” said Empire spokeswoman Sally Kweskin…. Several insurers do offer out-of-network coverage in the new small-group market

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  78. SF: Nobody will be charged with a fine/penalty/tax if the average cost of all the silver plans available to that person is over 8% of annual income, and if her income is $24,000 a year that works out to $160 a month.”

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 10/23/2013 @ 7:38 am

    It apparently applies to bronze plans, per below, which actually means the cut-off point will be lower than you suggest.

    That might be higher. For someone in her income bracket, the cost of silver plans will be reduced by the subsidy/tax rebate (only “silver” plans get subsidies)

    Or when evaluating whether it is 8% of higher, they don’t look at the sibsidy? Maybe.

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  79. The navigators list looks like an inventory of every leftist advocacy group extant.

    This is just awful.

    Patricia (be0117)

  80. The $1500 for an individual is I think for an Empire Blue Cross policy.

    Sally Kohn writes she is now paying $965 per month for family coverage….with a $7,000 deductible, a $36,000 out-of-pocket max per year, an annual coverage limit of $2,000,000, a $35 co-pay for doctor’s visits ($55 for specialists) and a $15 co-pay for generic prescriptions.

    She complained about limited out-of-network coverage but somehow didn’t notice (?) that the new plans have even less out-of-network coverage.

    She said her previous at the same provider where she now has a $965 policy cost $1,687 per month and had a $3,000 deductible, a $6,000 out-of-pocket max and $25 doctor’s co-pay, but “didn’t process any of my reimbursements either” (meaning what – didn’t have much out-of-network coverage?)

    If she didn’t realize these exchange policies don’t either, she could start a class action lawsuit – if Obamacare was a private entity. If she did realize it, and decided to get one of those policies anyway because what she has now is no better at that, she’s hiding something very important from the reader.

    Her new plan will cost $931 a month, compared with her current plan’s $965 (which she touts as a whopping $408 a year) and has a $2,000 total deductible (compared with her current $7,000) an
    out-of-pocket max of $12,500 (compared with her current $36,000) a $30 co-pay for visits to their primary care doctor (compared woth her current $35) no annual coverage limits (because that’s now outlawed – her current plan tops out at $2 million) and child dental, which she didn’t have before.

    No mention of the absence of out-of-network, which is her biggest complaint about her current insurance. No question that it is absent, except for emergency care – it is from Empire Blue Cross, which was cited by name in the New York Post article.

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  81. 78. Comment by Patricia (be0117) — 10/23/2013 @ 8:35 am

    The navigators list looks like an inventory of every leftist advocacy group extant.

    This is just awful.

    Patronage by another name.

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  82. CBS News reported this morning that the new browsing feature at healthcare.gov gives people inaccurate information, giving most people lower prices than they really would be charged.

    That is because it has only two options for age, up to 49, and 50 and older.

    For the 49 and under category, it quotes prices for a 27-year old, and for the 50 and over category it quotes prices for a 50-year old.

    Someone 48 years old could pay 50% more than a 27-year old. Someone 62 years old could pay over 60% – they said double but their example is only about 61% higher) what a 50-year old is charged.

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  83. Copied (with typos corrected) from the other thread:

    <blockquote 14.So…Kathleen or Obama is a liar? Both? (Don’t think Obama is going to correct her narrative)

    Comment by DejectedHead (a094a6) — 10/23/2013 @ 9:14 am

    15.She lied by omission or got fooled by the website insurance policy documents into not realizing her new policy also had no out-of-network coverage.

    I’m inclined to think she lied by omission, but since it wasn’t her lie, she did the minimum lie.

    She mentioned that no out-of-network coverage was a big factor in her disliking her current insurance.

    I think, as a result, she could mislead people into thinking the new insurance does cover it.
    But she realizes herself that it doesn’t.

    Since neither her old nor her new plan covers it, and her old-old plan didn’t seem to either, it’s a wash for her.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a) — 10/23/2013 @ 9:21 am

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  84. Patterico in post:

    What was not “distinct” about my answers?

    They were not distinct from each other

    Now those were your previous security questions, but perhaps this software is so bad that you can’t change them, even if your answers are rejected.

    But you have to start all over wth a new user ID.

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  85. 82. Am I making stupid errors! The comment from Dejected Head was about Kathleen Sebelius, not Fox News contributor Sally Kohn, whom I had never heard of and forgot the name, and was not in the wrong thread. I was in the wrong thread.

    Sammy Finkelman (e9b54a)

  86. It appears that all these new policies are basically catastrophic policies. No reimbursement until you go over really high deductibles. Of course, one should be able to buy this herself on the open market, but this is the only choice presented by 404Care.

    BTW I don’t see a problem with Patrick’s answers. I think it’s just a random error message. I still want to know what a collateral child is though.

    Patricia (be0117)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5005 secs.