Patterico's Pontifications

3/27/2014

Just 3 Little Questions…

Filed under: General — Dana @ 8:26 pm

[guest post by Dana]

The White House gleefully announced today that enrollment for coverage through the Health Insurance Marketplaces is at 6 Million and Counting!

The surge is being attributed to the open enrollment period closing in just four days.

According to the White House, on Wednesday alone, HealthCare.gov received 1.5 million visits and 430,000 calls were made to its call centers.

In light of the surge and the administration’s goal being reached just four days before the deadline, certain questions have been raised. The Foundry neatly narrows them down.


1. Have they paid premiums?

Far more important than the number of people who have picked a plan is the number of people who have paid their premiums. Without paying the premium, they have not effectively gained insurance coverage. It is likely that there will be a significant portion who do not pay their premiums in time to gain coverage, meaning actual enrollment numbers will turn out to be lower.

2. How old are they?

The last detailed report released showed that the demographics weren’t adding up the way the Obama administration wanted. It had pegged the goal for the proportion of young adults (18-34) at 40 percent of total enrollees, and the latest report showed them accounting for only 27 percent.

3. What’s their health status?

This question is closely related to the age question. The reason young people are needed is because they are generally healthier than older people. They pay into the system with premiums but have relatively low medical claims, helping to balance out costs for insurers. Are the exchange enrollees the type of patients usually found in a high-risk pool, or are healthy people attracted to Obamacare, too?


–Dana

108 Responses to “Just 3 Little Questions…”

  1. I believe them not on the signup numbers and I’d bet large bucks that premiums have not been paid on many many of the policies they are trying to count. As to the age and health status of those attempting to use the exchanges I’d also bet big bucks that they are not the healthy “young invincibles”. The administration would not be going through such asinine gyrations to entice them to sign up if it were going well with that demographic.

    elissa (c27fef)

  2. A fourth question: what’s the subsidy load?

    Sick old people with $20/month premiums or young, healthy people paying full fare?

    Kevin M (b11279)

  3. And a 5th question: did they all use the internet to sign up?

    Colonel Haiku (869a85)

  4. that crap is SO expensive I can’t see myself spending that much money for crappy obamacare insurance

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  5. Similarly, I look fw to Sears and Macy’s counting revenue from window shoppers in their next annual reports.

    ras (1b2ec9)

  6. The not-funny thing, though, is the real catastrophe will only be realized after the mid-terms.

    The architect of this mess has written a book and pretty much said as such.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  7. I would also ask if they were previously uninsured, because after all, that was the original major goal of Obamacare, to provide opportunities to obtain coverage to the uninsured.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  8. It is abundantly clear that the Obama admin is lying about not knowing how many people have paid premiums.

    But focusing on this BS aspect of the numbers loses sight of an even larger steaming pile of BS. This whole travesty was premised on a contrived scenario where the uninsured were driving healthcare costs and that it was supremely important to fix this problem. Let’s say they get to 7M by mid-April. That number is slightly better than the current break even point when considering the number of people who liked their plan but lost their plan. This 7M does not indicate that they were previously uninsured, a metric that curiously they had no interest in tracking.

    JD (5c1832)

  9. were these enrollments “created” or “saved”?

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  10. PS: how many people “enrolling” were doing that because they had just lost their previous coverage due to Obamacare?

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  11. Would it be so wrong to call it Obamacrap? It only changes out one letter and seems to be a more accurate name somehow.

    elissa (b8618d)

  12. The world’s always been messy.

    AZ Bob (533fbc)

  13. yes, but only the dumbest of animals foul their own nest.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  14. The much prettier Dana wrote:

    It had pegged the goal for the proportion of young adults (18-34) at 40 percent of total enrollees, and the latest report showed them accounting for only 27 percent.

    Except that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act specified that parents could carry their children on their health insurance up to age 26, or the midpoint of that 18 to 34 demographic, so a good chunk of that demographic became unavailable to enroll.

    With two daughters in the Army Reserve, it was still less expensive for them to dump Tricare and have my wife’s health insurance plan cover them, and that’s exactly what we did. They were covered before the PP&ACA, and they are covered after the PP&ACA, but simple and practical economic concerns means that they aren’t covered in the way that the government expected.

    The economically practical Dana (3e4784)

  15. I’d guess that the six million number is accurate enough, because the Administration knows that, if they lie about it, it’ll be exposed before election day. As to how many have actually paid, a surge in late enrollments means that at least some haven’t paid yet; the check’s in the mail. :lol:

    The stories about the botched roll-out have created an atmosphere of scoffing amongst conservatives, but the PP&ACA, while it looks to me like it will eventually fail, has a reasonable chance to at look successful initially, and the Administration will do all that it possibly can to make it look successful at least through November 4th.

    The practical Dana (3e4784)

  16. 1. Obviously not, and the visits don’t mean people decided anything.

    2 & 3. Maybe not as much as earlier enrollees.

    Sammy Finkelman (2c707f)

  17. redc1c4 wrote:

    yes, but only the dumbest of animals foul their own nest.

    And how appropriate that those animals are called pigeons.

    The ornithologist Dana (3e4784)

  18. I’d guess that the six million number is accurate enough, because the Administration knows that, if they lie about it, it’ll be exposed before election day.

    What in the world would make you guess this?! We already know it includes those who have not paid premiums. It also includes those who had placed a plan in their virtual shopping cart. At one point they were including Medicaid signups in that number. In short, there is no reason to think that number is accurate in any meaningful way.

    JD (5c1832)

  19. 15. I’d guess that the six million number is accurate enough, because the Administration knows that, if they lie about it, it’ll be exposed before election day. As to how many have actually paid, a surge in late enrollments means that at least some haven’t paid yet; the check’s in the mail. :lol:

    The stories about the botched roll-out have created an atmosphere of scoffing amongst conservatives, but the PP&ACA, while it looks to me like it will eventually fail, has a reasonable chance to at look successful initially, and the Administration will do all that it possibly can to make it look successful at least through November 4th.

    Comment by The practical Dana (3e4784) — 3/28/2014 @ 3:36 am

    The usually practical Dana, what makes you think that that this administration is worried about getting exposed before election day even if these numbers are wildly inaccurate?

    An administration that can stonewall, as in the IRS case, and say it will take “months or years” to comply with a Congressional email that you or I would have to comply with in days, should the IRS require those business records from us, can easily lie through November.

    Based upon past data, typically their data is overinflated by 20-30%. And like Mr. Feets says the most common reason is that people look at these plans and say they’re way too expensive and too crappy. What are you paying for if you’re young and healthy when you have to shell out %150 a month and get a plan with a $6k deductible? These people will never pay for $6k worth of medical care in a year anyway. Sure, they might get hit by a bus but that’s why bus companies carry liability insurance (In most of these catastrophic cases the Obamas cite as to why young healthy people need insurance, they’d be covered by someone else’s insurance. If you don’t believe me, check your state’s financial responsibility law for car insurance).

    So if they’re claiming 6M sign ups, then it’s more like 4.2-4.8M who actually paid a premium. Note I didn’t say bought insurance. A lot of people paid premiums and then found out they still didn’t have insurance.

    But the most important thing is that the real reasons conservatives are against Obamacare had nothing to do with the website. This country won WWII in four years. We thought they could at least build a website in that amount of time.

    The real reason can be summed up by saying health insurance is not health care.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  20. *…comply with a Congressional email subpoena…*

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  21. Mr 57 asked:

    The usually practical Dana, what makes you think that that this administration is worried about getting exposed before election day even if these numbers are wildly inaccurate?

    That’s easy enough: the President is a politician, first and foremost, and an unfortunately very good one, and his people are all a whole lot better at politics than in actually doing their jobs. They know that the House is going to stay under republican control, but, at least right now, it’s close to even odds as to whether the Democrats retain or lose the Senate, and they are very concerned with that! The President is getting about half of what he wants through the Congress, but if the GOP wins control of the Senate, his policies will be almost dead in the water for his last two years, and he knows it.

    The always pracical Dana (3e4784)

  22. Mr 57 pointed out:

    So if they’re claiming 6M sign ups, then it’s more like 4.2-4.8M who actually paid a premium. Note I didn’t say bought insurance. A lot of people paid premiums and then found out they still didn’t have insurance.

    Your point is well taken, in a logical sense, but not nearly as good in a political one. The six million sign ups is a number they have, or claim to have, but whatever the number of non-payees or not-quite-yet payees happens to be, we don’t know what that is, and we’re left with guesses. (If the Administration knows that number, they will never tell us, unless it happens to be a pretty high one.)

    The politically practical Dana (3e4784)

  23. 21. …That’s easy enough: the President is a politician, first and foremost, and an unfortunately very good one…

    Dana, that’s not true.

    …and his people are all a whole lot better at politics than in actually doing their jobs…

    Comment by The always pracical Dana (3e4784) — 3/28/2014 @ 4:18 am

    This is a lot closer to the truth. Obama is a good frontman for his handlers as long as his handlers keep him on teleprompter. But it’s the puppetmasters who are the good operatives. I don’t know if you’ve been following the story of that WaPo hit piece on the Koch brothers and its attempt to tie them to the Keystone pipeline. If not, you should.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/03/bombshell-in-wapokeystone-scandal-did-the-post-coordinate-with-congressional-democrats.php

    Bombshell In WaPo/Keystone Scandal: Did the Post Coordinate With Congressional Democrats?

    Short version: two WaPo reporters wrote a completely false story smearing the Koch brothers, and attempting to attach that stench to the Keystone XL pipeline. In their obvious attempt to support the Democrats’ talking point that the GOP that does the Koch brothers’ bidding in everything are pushing for the Keystone XL pipeline to make their rich benefactors richer.

    When John Hinderacker challenged them, they didn’t dispute the fact that he was right and they were wrong. And when Hinderacker asked why they wrote it, one of the reporters admitted they wrote it for political reasons.

    The Powerline article itself, and its tone, is strong evidence that issues surrounding the Koch brothers’ political and business interests will stir and inflame public debate in this election year. That’s why we wrote the piece.

    That reporter is Juliet Eilperin. She’s married to Andrew Light, who writes on climate policy for the Center for American Progress. If you’re not familiar with the Center for American Progress, that’s John Podesta’s think tank. In fact, Eilperin has access to John Podesta. He’s her go to guy on Green energy giant Tom Steyer. She co-wrote a piece (same guy as who collaborated on the Koch smear) in February 2013.

    John Podesta, who chairs the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, said Steyer has “got the right skill set, the understanding and attitude to lead an energy transformation in this country.”

    “I think he would be a fabulous choice for energy secretary,” Podesta added, “and I’ve let my friends in the administration know that.”

    John Podesta is special adviser to the President. You don’t have to be a good politician when your handlers have direct access to the press. In this case, a WaPo reporter’s husband’s boss is her authority on energy issues. (As an aside, note that Steyer became a billionaire by rent-seeking in government subsidized green energy and would actually be hurt if the Keystone XL pipeline was built while the Koch brothers would not. And they’re pushing him for energy secretary where he can self-deal more easily!)

    And then two days or so after Eilperin wrote her hit piece the Democrats in Congress sent accusatory letters to the Koch brothers demanding all sorts of documentary evidence based entirely on the WaPo hit piece. Coincidence? Think not.

    Sharyl Attkisson who was doing great work on several Obama cover-ups but especially Benghazi no longer works for CBS news. Do you think it might have something to do with the fact that CBS news president is David Rhodes. Want to know who his brother is? Dan Rhodes, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor. So Attkisson is doing great work uncovering what happened at Benghazi, and Dan Rhodes is Arse deep in covering up what happened at Benghazi. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think it’s a coincidence his brother didn’t approve of Attkisson’s work.

    I could cite numerous examples the press literally in bed with administration officials. As in husband and wife. And let’s not forget it Axelrod worked for the Chicago Tribune for 8 years before becoming a political operative. It was Axelrod who got the Tribune to sue to open his opponents’ divorce and child custody records to eliminate Obama’s opponents in the primary and general elections, clearing the way for Obama to become Senator.

    Obama isn’t a good politician. Neither are his aides. But then, they don’t have to be when they have direct access to the press and can get them to write what they want. Such as a puff piece on a billionaire who stands to make billions more if the Keystone XL pipeline is killed (and billions more if the green energy billionaire becomes Obama’s energy secretary). And a hit piece on a couple of rich brothers who don’t even have a position on Keystone, even though their interests would actually be hurt.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  24. Oh, lookie here at what Juliet Eilperin wrote last month.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/environmental-advocates-target-climate-change-as-democratic-election-issue/2014/02/22/05d486be-9b01-11e3-ad71-e03637a299c0_story.html

    A Democratic fundraiser last week at billionaire Tom Steyer’s home amounted to a summit between Washington’s liberal elite and San Francisco’s climate intelligentsia.

    Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), six other senators and a 2014 Senate candidate took in views of the Golden Gate Bridge with former vice president Al Gore and some of the nation’s richest environmentalist donors.

    The $400,000 fundraiser, held for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, included remarks from Gore, who said the party needs to make global warming a central issue during the midterms, participants said. And Gore called Steyer, who has vowed to raise at least $100 million,“Mr. Tipping Point.”

    “How do you inject this into the debate in a meaningful way?” Steyer said in an interview during a visit last week to Washington, where he lobbied a gathering of Democratic governors. “That changes what can happen in Washington D.C.”

    They just care, Dana.

    With the end of President Obama’s tenure now in sight, wealthy environmentalists are pushing Democrats to take bolder positions on climate change — vowing to emphasize the issue in swing-state contests and threatening to withhold money from candidates who support the Keystone XL oil pipeline.

    In the Senate, Reid has pledged to allot time to anyone who wants to discuss climate change during weekly party lunches or on the Senate floor. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) is laying plans for an all-night talkathon on the subject.

    “What was really energizing is everyone understood clean energy would be at the forefront of the Senate agenda,” Wade Randlett, a renewable energy entrepreneur who co-hosted the San Francisco fundraiser, wrote in an e-mail. “It wasn’t back-away; it was clearly lean-in.”

    You’d never know from Eilperin’s piece just how much these “environmental advocates” would profit if Keystone is killed. No, Eilperin will only tell you, falsely, that the eeevil Koch brothers will profit if it’s built.

    With that kind of cover how good of a politician do you need to be?

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  25. We’re doomed with Obama:

    http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=84823

    The unilateral declaration of independence by the breakaway province of Kosovo in 2008 is being recruited by both sides in the Ukraine dispute, as evidence of the legality or otherwise of the secession of Crimea.

    …Urging European nations to back NATO on the standoff with Russia, Obama went on lambaste Russian leaders who, in defending their actions, “have further claimed Kosovo as a precedent, an example, they say, of the West interfering in the affairs of a smaller country, just as they’re doing now”.

    “But”, said Obama, “NATO only intervened after the people of Kosovo were systematically brutalized and killed for years. And Kosovo only left Serbia after a referendum was organised not outside the boundaries of international law, but in careful cooperation with the United Nations and with Kosovo’s neighbours”.

    …But where Obama has gone very badly wrong is that the referendum was not organised “in careful cooperation with the United Nations and with Kosovo’s neighbours”. In fact, the UN was not involved then, and Serbia refused to recognise the referendum. No other member of the United Nations, apart from Albania, recognised the poll.

    It was not until after the three-month NATO bombing of former Yugoslavia in June 1999 that Kosovo was finally placed under administration of the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) and a NATO-led peacekeeping force, KFOR, was authorised to enter the province, then leading to recognition of Kosovo’s independence.

    Thus, the history is much closer to the situation in Crimea, where the referendum was carried out in defiance of the governing state, which then refused to recognise it. If President Obama is to recognise the legitimacy of Kosovo’s independence, then on the same grounds he might have difficulty not recognising the legitimacy of Crimean independence and its wish then to join the Russian federation.

    But how bizarre it is that Obama should have made such a fundamental error on such a sensitive issue, even if both sides have actually got it wrong. What on earth are things coming to when such mistakes are made by a president of the United States?

    Or, rather, the Ukraine is doomed. First.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  26. Big Question: Was ObamaCare designed to ruin the lives of all Americans?

    “Ezekiel Emanuel, Rahm’s elder brother, is a physician who helped design ObamaCare and has been one of its most intense champions. So you may be surprised to learn that in his new book, “Reinventing American Health Care,” he predicts that tens of millions more Americans will lose their medical plans in the coming decade.

    In its “You’re the Boss” small-business blog, the New York Times quotes his prediction that by 2025, “fewer than 20 percent of workers in the private sector will receive traditional employer-sponsored health insurance.” As of March 2013 such benefits were available to 85% of full-time private-sector workers, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. If Emanuel is right–and especially if, as he implies, ObamaCare was designed to produce such an outcome–the president’s repeated pledge that “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan” was a far more widespread fraud than has yet been realized.”

    Colonel Haiku (36c214)

  27. 26. …Big Question: Was ObamaCare designed to ruin the lives of all Americans?

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (36c214) — 3/28/2014 @ 5:53 am

    Short Answer: Yes.

    Reagan talked about how the leftists would use socialized medicine to “fundamentally transform” America to socialize the entire economy in 1961.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYrlDlrLDSQ

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  28. I’d guess that the six million number is accurate enough, because the Administration knows that, if they lie about it, it’ll be exposed before election day.

    This fascinates me. What in the world suggests this figure is even remotely accurate?

    JD (2f5d3c)

  29. This fascinates me because why would anyone think that even if wildly inaccurate it’d be “exposed” before election day? To paraphrase: “It’s the lying and dishonest narrative, stupid!”

    Say, what’s the current unemployment rate anyway?

    elissa (89f75d)

  30. Mr 57 wrote:

    21. …That’s easy enough: the President is a politician, first and foremost, and an unfortunately very good one…

    Dana, that’s not true.

    While I know that you gave the credit to his political team, it’s just not reasonable to claim that Barack Obama isn’t a great politician. He defeated the inevitable Hillary Clinton, who had the backing of a powerful political machine and gobs of money, and while his victory over John McCain isn’t terribly impressive, given Mr McCain’s campaign and the state of the economy, to have won re-election over a man who had been successful at everything, with a strong track record for executive leadership, while having presided over trillion dollar deficits and 8% unemployment was damned impressive. The man is a master politician, by the only scoreboard I know: he wins.

    The politically realistic Dana (3e4784)

  31. It’s easier to be a master politician when you have no scruples and a dumbed down electorate. We must face facts.

    elissa (89f75d)

  32. Corporal Haiku asked:

    Big Question: Was ObamaCare designed to ruin the lives of all Americans?

    Depends on how you look at it. If by “ruin(ing) the lives of all Americans” you mean destroying the private insurance system, you could answer that one, “Yes!” But the liberals actually think that would be a good thing, that the private health insurance system should be ended, and everyone covered by single-payer; to them, Obamacare is designed to help all Americans, because they think that single-payer is the only way to go, but there’s no real way to get to single-payer without destroying the private insurance system first. The first step in remodeling is always the demolition phase.

    To the left, Obamacare will cause some temporary problems, and some people will wind up getting hurt, but after it’s done and we have single-payer, everyone will be better off.

    The Democrats’ current meme is “income inequality,” and single-payer fits right into that. Since single-payer would be financed by taxes, the more you earn, the more you’ll pay, and the left love that notion. At least under the PP&ACA, people’s insurance premiums aren’t based on their income, though the subsidies are.

    The politically savvy Dana (3e4784)

  33. elissa wrote:

    It’s easier to be a master politician when you have no scruples and a dumbed down electorate. We must face facts.

    Oh, that’s absolutely right, and that’s a problem we conservatives have: we have actually assumed that the voters are reasonably intelligent and can be persuaded by rational arguments. President Obama believed that the majority of the voters are not reasonably intelligent, and can be bought off with food stamps and Obamaphones and blaming a guy four years out of office. He won with that, which pretty much proved that we were wrong, and he was right.

    The saddened Dana (3e4784)

  34. For a good idea of how Dr. Emanuel thinks our medical system should evolve, go here: Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions. It wouldn’t be quite so bad, except that with Øcare, all medical interventions will be scarce.

    As someone over 50, I no longer warrant any care other than basic, because I won’t earn enough to pay enough taxes to justify society wasting resources on me.

    During the run-up to the Unaffordable Insurance Act vote I pointed out to most of the seniors I know that if this thing continued, they wouldn’t get those hip replacements and pace makers, but they kept gazing starry-eyed towards Washington, and saying in a hypnotized-sounding voice “But no one would ever do that! It’s not what the people want so the politicians would never support that sort of thing.”

    LibraryGryffon (1996ab)

  35. To them the end justifies the means. Unfortunately, in destroying the private insurancs system they are also destroying the medical field, the doctors, researchers, and any reason to innovate medical therapies and products, which would be needed to provide decent services under single payer. Their goal is even more insidious.

    elissa (89f75d)

  36. In the instant circumstance, Elissa, the 7M metric is the Big Lie, as it does not measure what they claim it measures, and does in no way make ObamaCare a success.

    JD (2f5d3c)

  37. So true, Library Gryffon. And when you bring these unassailable truths up in polite company they look at you like you’re the kook.

    elissa (89f75d)

  38. politically realistic Dana, but not due to any great inherent political skill. He almost certainly would have lost to long-time Ill. state senator and Obama mentor Alice Palmer in a heads up race. So he made sure it wasn’t a heads up race by challenging and disqualifying the signatures on the petitions that qualified for the race. That’s an example of legal skill perhaps, not political. His political skill was such that he needed to make it a one horse race.

    True he was reelected twice for state Senator, but that’s the power of incumbency. And I suppose being in a district where a Republican has a snowball’s chance in hell.

    While in the Ill. Senate he ran for US Congress (he has a habit of reaching for higher office while in a safe one) and lost to Bobby Rush.

    He never would have been elected US Senator in 2004 unless Axelrod sicced the press on his primary and general election opponents. Again, there’s not much skill in winning one horse races.

    As far as defeating Hillary! there’s one thing that has haunted me about that. When people doubted his qualifications to run a large organization since he had never run one, he’d counter and say he had. His campaign. Yet once in office and he never knew what his administration was doing, he and his apologists would lament the executive branch was too large for anyone to manage. There was and is a disconnect that tells me King Putt the Vacationer has never run anything including his campaigns. And it was his campaign that beat Hillary!

    And money.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/us/politics/22funds.html?_r=0

    Of all the candidates, Democratic or Republican, Mr. Obama, of Illinois, is in the strongest financial shape. Of the $38.8 million in cash on hand, a total of $31.5 million is earmarked for the primary race, with only $7.3 million set aside for the general campaign. This primary war chest is more than Mrs. Clinton’s and Mr. McCain’s combined.

    On top of that, Mr. Obama’s campaign is almost debt-free. He ended the month owing only $625,059. Over all, Mr. Obama has raised $190 million since he began his campaign, and spent $158 million — the most of any candidate.

    And let’s not forget one thing. In a moment of rare candor, Obama admitted that had he been a white first term Senator from Ill. he’d never have been in his position.

    I won’t even discuss McCain or Romney because they were just lousy candidates. And they couldn’t use AF1 and all the other means a Preezy has available to run around the country or get on TV and campaign while pretending to govern. All this guy does is campaign while pretending to govern.

    I’m sorry, but I have to put his mad political skillz, first class temperament, incredible speaking ability, and his genius-level intelligence all in the same category as Sasquatch or the Loch Ness monster. I’ve never seen any sign of any of them.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  39. Steve57, you don’t have to argue with fellow commenters and push back about everything, you know. You have an opinion about obama’s inherent political skills– and the Dana has an opinion about Obama’s inherent political skills. Is the distinction really all that important? I mean does it, at this point, really matter? He won.

    elissa (89f75d)

  40. Mr 57 wrote:

    politically realistic Dana, but not due to any great inherent political skill. He almost certainly would have lost to long-time Ill. state senator and Obama mentor Alice Palmer in a heads up race. So he made sure it wasn’t a heads up race by challenging and disqualifying the signatures on the petitions that qualified for the race. That’s an example of legal skill perhaps, not political. His political skill was such that he needed to make it a one horse race.

    And how does that indicate that he doesn’t have inherent political skill? You say that he couldn’t have won straight up against Alice Palmer, so, like Starfleet Cadet James T Kirk in the Kobyashi Maru game, he changed the conditions of the test. Bottom line: he won! He figured out what he needed to do, thinking outside the box (to use an overused cliché), and got it done.

    In politics, there’s no playing nice and there’s no playing fair; there’s only winning or losing. As Vince Lombardi so aptly put it, winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.

    Or, perhaps you’d prefer Viper from the movie Top Gun: This school is about combat; there are no points for second place.

    The sadly realistic Dana (3e4784)

  41. This is sort of a blast from the past, but it’s part of what shapes my view of Obama.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/richkarlgaard/2012/09/03/did-the-new-york-times-just-get-obama-fired/

    New York Times Proves Clint Eastwood Correct — Obama Is Lousy CEO

    I won’t quote too heavily from the piece, as is my habit. The author was amazed to find in deceivingly friendly titled article from the always liberal-friendly NYT a devastating hit piece.

    But I will quote a few short paragraphs:

    …Kantor’s piece is full of examples of Obama’s odd need to dominate his peers in everything from bowling, cards, golf, basketball, and golf (104 times in his presidency). Bear in mind, Obama doesn’t just robustly compete. The leader of the free world spends many hours practicing these trivial pursuits behind the scenes. Combine this weirdly wasted time with a consistent overestimation of his capabilities, and the result is, according to NYT’s Kantor:…

    …Kantor’s portrait of Obama is stunning. It paints a picture of a CEO who is unfocused and lost.

    Imagine, for a minute, that you are on the board of directors of a company. You have a CEO who is not meeting his numbers and who is suffering a declining popularity with his customers. You want to help this CEO recover, but then you learn he doesn’t want your help. He is smarter than you and eager to tell you this. Confidence or misplaced arrogance? You’re not sure at first. If the company was performing well, you’d ignore it. But the company is performing poorly, so you can’t.

    With some digging, you learn, to your horror, that the troubled CEO spends a lot of time on — what the hell? — bowling? Golf? Three point shots? While the company is going south?

    I give credit to Obama’s campaign for getting him elected twice. It was well led and well organized. But could Obama possibly have had anything to do with that? Hell no. That was the most infuriating thing about him claiming as a qualification in ’08 the fact he had run a large organization, his campaign.

    I knew then he didn’t have anything to do with it because even during the primary every once in a while there was a candid piece. I forget if it was in The Atlantic or The New Republic (hardly right leaning), but there was an article called “The End of the Affair: Barack Obama and the Press Break-Up.”

    Essentially the author was venting his frustration that the Obama campaign was the least press friendly of any campaign anyone had ever covered. It never let anyone near Obama, because as the author admitted candidate Barack Obama was really Axelrod’s media creation. And therefore something of a lie. Which is why as the author put it they “closely guarded the crown jewels.” They told all his old friends not to talk to the press, revealed nothing about his past, and Robert Gibbs would only allow press access if he thought he could use you. He’d cut off people if they wrote the least thing critical. In fact in at least one case they called a reporter in the middle of the night and yelled at him for what he wrote. If a reporter wanted what little access they offered, that reporter had to write what they wanted. And reporters dutifully did.

    Ironically while the Obama campaign was running on the promise to be “the most transparent administration in history,” the lapdog MFM dutifully repeated the talking point while knowing it was the least transparent campaign in history.

    Point being, Obama’s great political skill was to read off a teleprompter well, stay away from the press as much as possible, and otherwise do what his handlers told him. Lest he risk a “Joe the Plumber” moment.

    But fortunately Democratic operatives along with the Stockholm-syndrome MFM would pull his beans out of the fire by persecuting a Joe the Plumber and making him the story.

    But where’s the skill? Obama had a lot of people carrying him over the finish line. It isn’t that he lies. He’s a lie.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  42. I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all. — Ecclesiastes

    “There is a tide in the affairs of men,
    Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune.
    Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries.” — Shakespeare

    “Ey, kid. You gotta know the righta peoples. You know the righta peoples, everything come upa roses.” — Vito “Cool Lips” Chericola

    nk (dbc370)

  43. Have blast guys!

    elissa (89f75d)

  44. Preezy Onana is just going through the motions, if you get my drift…

    Colonel Haiku (36c214)

  45. 50. …Is the distinction really all that important? I mean does it, at this point, really matter? He won.

    Comment by elissa (89f75d) — 3/28/2014 @ 8:09 am

    According to Sun Tzu it is, elissa. And I don’t mean to be flip. Since I don’t have his book at hand, you have to know the true nature of your enemy, and your own true nature. If you neither, you’ll never be victorious. If you know one but not the other, you’ll be successful in half your battles. But if you know your enemies true nature as well as your own, you’ll never lose in 1000 battles.

    If I’m right, and the source of Barack Obama’s two presidential victories had nothing to do with Barack Obama’s political skills, then the next GOP candidate will be facing the exact same situation.

    Of course, I’m not saying Barack Obama had nothing to do with it. He was as Biden and Reid would put it (but no Republican could get away with) a clean articulate black man with no negro accent unless he wanted one. But those aren’t actually political skills.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  46. #43:

    “The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that’s the way to bet.”

    Damon Runyan

    Chuck Bartowski (11fb31)

  47. Without knowing the answers to the first question in the post “Have they paid premiums?”, the 6 million number is essentially just that: a number. The proof is in the pudding. The optics are great and it helps politically (Yay, goal met! We deliver! Si su puede!…), but in the long run, will it be sustainable?

    As an analyst, who is tracking the rollout, observed,

    It matters politically. It doesn’t matter from a market perspective.

    Dana (9a8f57)

  48. “The competition is not always to the swift, nor is it to the strong, but if you break one of your opponent’s legs that improves your odds.”

    Tonya Harding

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  49. ==If I’m right, and the source of Barack Obama’s two presidential victories had nothing to do with Barack Obama’s political skills, then the next GOP candidate will be facing the exact same situation.==

    I’ve noticed over the months that it seems to be very important to you to be right, Steve57. And to achieve that, someone else has to be wrong. I think we all pretty much get that.

    I would guess, though, that most of us on the thread here today are more interested in the practical matter of what he is doing and not doing with his current power– and what he’s still capable of doing with his power, than how he got there over 25 years.

    Of course any future Republican presidential candidate will be up against the progressive media and spin machine. That’s a given.

    elissa (89f75d)

  50. I still think there need to be four questions.

    It’s not good enough to know if they submitted a payment through healthcare.gov. But does the insurance company know about it?

    http://www.wkow.com/story/24970829/2014/03/13/52-wisconsin-residents-dont-have-insurance-they-signed-up-for-through-obamacare

    52 Wisconsin residents don’t have insurance they signed up for through Obamacare
    Posted: Mar 13, 2014 5:35 PM CST
    Updated: Mar 13, 2014 5:40 PM CST

    By Greg Neumann – bio | email

    That is due to another problem with the federal agency in charge of the Affordable Care Act, more commonly known as Obamacare.

    Officials in the Obama administration have talked at length recently about how the problems with Healthcare.gov have been fixed. While that is mostly true on the front-end, where consumers sign up, insurers say the problems on the back-end are still rampant.

    To understand this story, you have to learn a new term, known in the insurance industry as an “834″.

    “Which are basically file transfers between the insurance companies and HHS,” said Dan Schwartzer, Wisconsin Deputy Insurance Commissioner….

    This is another example of the Sebelius’/the Obama administration’s dishonesty. They talk about something called a “front-end” and a “back-end.” The back-end is the website. Without that essentially all you’ve built is a GUI.

    So, yeah, HHS can brag about how many people played with their GUI and pressed “put in cart.” That’s one number, which is the one they seem to be using. They can even brag about how many people went through all the pages after pressing “check out now” and got so far as to press the “submit payment” button. That’s another meaningless number.

    But if nothing happened with the information because they still haven’t built a functioning website, those people haven’t enrolled in insurance. That’s the only number that counts.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  51. > They talk about something called a “front-end” and a “back-end.” The back-end is the website. Without that essentially all you’ve built is a GUI.

    “Front End” and “Back End” are normal terms in web development. Or, for that matter, any software development which involves communication between users and some process which is opaque to the user.

    That said, the “back end” is *not* the website – it’s the database that the website sits in front of. That database should be running on an entirely different machine than the machine the website itself is hosted on.

    aphrael (5cffd4)

  52. No, elissa, it’s important to me that the GOP takes the Senate in 2014, and the WH in 2016. I don’t care if I’m wrong. But it dismays me to watch the Republicans hell bent on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Again!

    So if I’m strident, it’s because I’m worried I’m not wrong.

    As an aside, it seems to me this whole Wendy Davis thing here is an attempt to duplicate the Barack Obama formula. Fortunately she doesn’t have the organization to ride herd on her and keep her mouth from getting her into trouble. And the press isn’t so compliant. And the electorate more conservative than it is nationally.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  53. Thanks for correcting my terms, aphrael. It’s been over a decade since I had anything to do with it. And I didn’t do development. Just testing and training.

    But my main point is that if the insurance companies never get the payment, then HHS can’t claim to have a functioning website.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  54. “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” — Joe Biden

    nk (dbc370)

  55. Steve57 – yeah, I agree with your main point here. The website doesn’t “function” unless enough of the components are functioning that the insurance companies get the enrollment and the payment.

    I just couldn’t resist the urge to jump in and clear up the jargon – while i don’t do web stuff, I do software development for a piece that has a front end and a back end. :)

    aphrael (5cffd4)

  56. I pay for my family’s insurance… And Anthem (California) is just about expensive enough/high enough deductables (after a 25% increase this month; $1,800/mnth 2x$9.5k deduct) that I am either going without insurance or looking at Christian affinity (religious exemption) group:

    http://www.openmarket.org/2014/03/25/how-matt-drudge-and-other-obamacare-victims-can-escape-the-liberty-tax/

    Buried in Section 1501 on page 148 of the so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is an exemption from the individual mandate for a “health care sharing ministry,” a group whose members “share a common set of ethical or religious beliefs and share medical expenses among members in accordance with those beliefs.” For any member of such group, the law says, “No penalty shall be imposed.”

    It’s somewhat of a mystery how those pushing the law allowed such a potentially large exemption to the individual mandate to be inserted in the first place. This is definitely a case in which the law’s supporters, four years after the law has passed, don’t seem to know what’s in it. But fortunately, many Americans are finding and utilizing this escape hatch.

    Health care ministries have been around since the 1990s, but they have grown by leaps and bounds since Obamacare passed and especially since the disastrous launch of the exchanges last fall. According to FoxNews.com, “Since the launch of HealthCare.gov on Oct. 1, membership at each of the ministries has exploded, with nearly 30,000 new enrollees — more than the number of people who selected a plan through Obamacare in 24 states.”

    The four health-care sharing ministries are:

    Christian Healthcare Ministries, http://www.chministries.org
    Liberty HealthShare, http://www.libertyhealthshare.org
    Medi-Share, http://www.mychristiancare.org
    Samaritan Ministries, http://www.samaritanministries.org

    I am not sure if all of the share plans are “Obamacare legal” or if just two are… Need to do more research.

    BfC (a1cf00)

  57. @ aphrael

    That said, the “back end” is *not* the website – it’s the database that the website sits in front of. That database should be running on an entirely different machine than the machine the website itself is hosted on

    Upon reading your comment with regard to Obamacare, I would think even a person with limited tech experience would follow it up with, Shouldn’t *both* vital ends be up and running and fully functional *before* making it public?

    Dana (9a8f57)

  58. Dana – There were only a few “glitches.”

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  59. Sick old people with $20/month premiums or young, healthy people paying full fare?

    Comment by Kevin M (b11279) — 3/27/2014 @ 9:02 pm

    CoveredCA pegs a silver plan for me and my wife near $18K in premiums – at 60 and 61 respectively.

    in_awe (7c859a)

  60. This weekend I am going to boost Ford’s sales numbers for the first quarter. I’m going to drive three different model cars and tell the salesman that I’ll think about it.

    Watch Ford stock soar on the surge in sales!

    in_awe (7c859a)

  61. How much was your premium before the “affordable care act?”

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  62. Dana, at 57: oh, absolutely.

    I’m a tech guy. I found the rollout of the exchanges to be horrifying. But I view it as a symptom of a general problem with government-overseen tech projects, not as a partisan issue specific to this administration or even this program.

    aphrael (5cffd4)

  63. aphrael, it’s partisan to the extent that liberals think that this is the kind of mammoth enterprise that government can and should be doing.

    Conservatives know that government can’t.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  64. I wasn’t just talking about the tech project but the entire program. Which is not fixable BTW.

    Steve57 (a017ec)

  65. “I’m a tech guy. I found the rollout of the exchanges to be horrifying.”

    aphrael – Absolutely. I think the Administration was so terrified about the political unpopularity of Obamacare they held off issuing major final regulations until after the 2012 elections to avoid giving the opposition ammunition and kept tinkering with website requirements right up until the end, exacerbating problems with the rollout.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  66. in_awe wrote:

    This weekend I am going to boost Ford’s sales numbers for the first quarter. I’m going to drive three different model cars and tell the salesman that I’ll think about it.

    Watch Ford stock soar on the surge in sales!

    Thank you in advance!

    The shareholder Dana (3e4784)

  67. Aphrael wrote:

    while i don’t do web stuff, I do software development for a piece that has a front end and a back end.

    I thought that you were going to be an attorney.

    The puzzled Dana (3e4784)

  68. Obama met briefly with The Pope today at the Vatican.
    I imagine the Pope was surprised to discover that he didn’t have to wait until he passes through the pearly gates of heaven in order to meet the Messiah.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  69. CoveredCA pegs a silver plan for me and my wife near $18K in premiums – at 60 and 61 respectively.

    My wife’s bronze/HSA plan is $460/month here in L.A. Only good thing is that there was a plan with UCLA in the network if she ever really needs care.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  70. Dear Pope Francis,

    I don’t understand why Moses parted the sea. I would have just lowered the sea level.

    Signed,

    Barack Obama

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  71. 61:

    Before: $350/mo for catastrophic+HSA
    After: $460/mo for bronze+HSA

    Note that total OOP is higher for the bronze plan, but they pay a little bit along the way. Maybe. OTOH, there is NO COVERAGE for out-of-network, unlike before.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  72. 4. What percentage are the very same people who lost their former coverages because of Obamacare itself, e.g., involuntary part-time converts or people who were laid off so their employers could get under the 50-employee threshold of the law?

    5. How many of them simply are people who are gaming the system? Sign up, pay the first month’s premium, get some work done they’ve needed for a while, then let the coverage lapse.

    6. How much of this “enrollment surge” (cough) is being accounted for by the firm of Corzine, Yee, Berger & Tammany Hall?

    Lawrence Westlake (4fc30a)

  73. Dana – I graduated from law school and have passed the bar in CA, NY, and NJ.

    The summer after I graduated from law school, we moved to NY so my husband could go to graduate school.

    As an out-of-stater in the severely overcrowded NY legal market, I’ve not been able to find a job that would pay me enough to allow my husband to not take on debt while he’s in grad school (which I can do while working as a software engineer).

    So i’m still a software engineer. I’m licensed in three states and do volunteer legal work, but I’m not paid as an attorney.

    aphrael (5cffd4)

  74. I’m a tech guy. I found the rollout of the exchanges to be horrifying. But I view it as a symptom of a general problem with government-overseen tech projects, not as a partisan issue specific to this administration or even this program.

    Granted. But which party is it that tends to push government-overseen solutions to all of our social ills? Can you think of any vexing social problem that the Obama Administration has not purposed addressing with a government-overseen program? To borrow the old cliche, to progressives every problem appears as a nail since all they have in their toolbox is a hammer.

    JVW (9946b6)

  75. @ Kevin M,

    Before: $350/mo for catastrophic+HSA
    After: $460/mo for bronze+HSA
    OTOH, there is NO COVERAGE for out-of-network, unlike before.

    Is that across the board?

    Dana (9a8f57)

  76. New York Times Op-Ed piece March 26, 2014, on page A23 :

    Why I’m Jealous of My Dog’s Insurance by Eric L. Wee I did that using Firefox.

    This contains a perhaps obligatory paragraph about how good, or not bad, Obamacare is: (number 12 of 17)

    I know that Obamacare is helping a great number of people. I understand that for the first time millions of people are getting health insurance. It’s the one thing that gives me solace.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  77. The author of the article is in California.

    Previously, their existing Anthem Blue Cross plan cost $263-a-month with a family deductible totaled $13,600 for outpatient care and $6,600 for hospital care (with a maximum combined out-of-pocket cost of $13,600).

    The least expensive premium on the exchange for a couple in their 40s like them would be about $620 a month. Their adjusted gross income for 2014 is likely to be over 62,040 so they won’t get any subsidy.

    The new plan, has a deductible of $10,000 (and an out-of-pocket maximum of $12,700). In both cases the high deductible means this is largely insurance to make sure that they don’t go bankrupt if they become very ill – and still have income or disability I guess.

    And if you see a doctor outside your network, look out. We found this out the hard way. My wife and I both had to see a doctor in January. Our old policy and our new Covered California policy were both with Anthem Blue Cross, so a representative there told us to use our old ID cards for our visits since our new cards hadn’t arrived yet. We were covered, he assured us. At the medical center, we gave our ID cards to the receptionist, who accepted them as valid, and went in to see our regular doctors. But later we found out that they were not in our new network’s plan. The out-of-pocket cost for my simple 30-minute office visit: $303. My wife’s annual exam and a couple of minor procedures: $918.

    He has mild asthma. He ran out of inhalers. He’d held off refilling them since his new insurance would reduce the costs of the $58.99 inhalers only by a little more than $9.

    He also knew from past experience that I probably needed a prescription for antibiotics, so I tried frantically to find a medical facility that would take our new Covered California Anthem Blue Cross bronze plan. When he did, they said it would be three weeks before I could see a doctor.

    Instead, he went to the drugstore and bought all the nonprescription medication that might help.

    But his dog? His dog has Nelson’s $40.42-a-month pet insurance (excluding pre-existing conditions)

    His 11-year-old brown Labrador dog named Nelson developed a skin infection. He got an appointment at the vet’s the next day. They prescribed an antibiotic and did some blood tests. The medication caused diarrhea so he called his internist at his vet hospital, PetCare, and she prescribed a probiotic.

    They found the bulge in his abdomen on a Monday. An ultrasound and CT scan showed that a mass was crowding out his stomach and kidneys. It was one of the largest the doctors had ever seen. If they didn’t do something, he’d be dead in a couple of days.

    The hospital gave him a blood transfusion because he was anemic. A radiologist noticed that something might be wrong with his adrenal gland. His surgical team removed what turned out to be a 12.5-pound tumor, lifting it out like an overgrown newborn. Nelson’s intensive care nurse called his family that night, and his internists gave them regular updates until he was discharged.

    Nelson’s health insurance covered 90 percent of the costs after a reasonable $500 deductible.

    I’m happy he has such good health coverage. He’s my dog. And I’m jealous of him.

    It’s not clear if the skin rash happened before the tumor, or after.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  78. Look, this thing is a total disaster, but NOT a train wreck. It will be kept alive, and it will limp along, with temporary fixes, lawless decrees, and glowing press, for decades – much as it has been doing so far.

    This is not a train wreck. This is a cancer.

    We do not have a living constitution. We have a zombie constitution.

    Amphipolis (d3e04f)

  79. Is that across the board?

    Not sure what you mean.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  80. Weather: It was cold three daays Tuesday to tghirsday. Snowstorm missed NY. On tuesday night there was what I thought was a drizzle. In the light of headlights and streetlights you could see it was snowflakes. Which melted.

    27 degrees yesterday at 10 am. Warmer today.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  81. WSJ ed said Obama’s people seem to think there’s aliving law. Not just constitution.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  82. There is something new that will may hit the news soon:

    At least in California, when policies were cancelled last year, replacement policies were offered to at least some of those policyholders.

    It turns out that: these were not “offered” as such; these policies were automatically issued on Jan 1 unless the policyholder opted out. And even sometimes if they DID opt out. These seem to be counted as Obamacare policy signups.

    My wife’s old company did exactly this, and even though we got an alternative policy through CoveredCA and twice wrote to the old company (Blue Shield) to cancel when they billed for the unwanted policy, they persisted in sending more bills. Apparently, calling the long-wait phone line is the only way to cancel, and can only be done by my wife, not by me (I tried). When she finally got through they said that she owed them for past months even though she never agreed to any coverage and repeatedly attempted to cancel the policy they assigned her.

    More to come, I guess.

    But I always thought the CoveredCA numbers were high, now I understand why. It includes pushed policies that may not have been wanted and might never be paid for.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  83. Dana, the policy type is “EPO” which is like a PPO except that utterly no payment of credit is given for any provider out-of-network. This can be a problem if a procedure results in outside lab work and such. I cannot tell what happens in an emergency. But it does cover the largest medical group in the area and two of the 4 best hospitals, which was more than anyone else offered.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  84. …payment of or credit…

    Kevin M (b11279)

  85. Who many are prisoners signed up by their respective state?

    jurisram76 (efc08f)

  86. Did anyone actually believe they would not make the number? We are talking about Obama. Saying you made the number is the same as honestly making the number.

    If they do make the number it is the same as saying the ACA is a failure. And now that the numbers have been made it is success. The people who will die as a result of this are insignificant.

    highpockets (bc30e9)

  87. @ Kevin M,

    You answered the question at 83. My wording was poor. Thanks.

    Dana (9a8f57)

  88. “I know that Obamacare is helping a great number of people. I understand that for the first time millions of people are getting health insurance. It’s the one thing that gives me solace.”

    That guy needs to have the crack pipe pried out of his hands and to be put down like a rabid dog.

    Colonel Haiku (cd2f41)

  89. 2014 Ford Fusion in white on white with ecotech and a 6 speed manual… Sweet car.

    Colonel Haiku (cd2f41)

  90. there’s nothing new under the sun, we were warned we would face such aberrant behavior, starting with Romans 1;21 and moving forth;

    Would he even attempt this argument, with a real leader, no.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/03/putin-calls-obama-complains-about-extremists-intimidating-civilians-in-ukraine/

    narciso (3fec35)

  91. No discussion of Obamacare numbers can be complete without this recent column from National Review, which discusses the current administration’s consistent reliance on questionable math:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/374303/untruthful-and-untrustworthy-government-victor-davis-hanson

    Whitey Nisson (7f2263)

  92. Obama had a private audience with Pope Francis. Did they discuss the Ukrainian situation? No, the ME situation. They exchanged gifts. The Pope gave Obama a copy of his Apostolic exhortation (Evangelii Gaudium) and two medallions. Obama gave Francis a package of seeds from the WH garden. Obama said “‘You know, I actually will probably read this when I’m in the Oval Office, when I am deeply frustrated, and I am sure it will give me strength and will calm me down,’ Obama said. ‘I hope,’ the Pope responded.”

    Classy President we got here.

    felipe (6100bc)

  93. Obama gave Francis a package of seeds from the WH garden

    It’s Friday, why not some cans of tuna from the WH kitchen? Geebus, but this seems lame. I guess it’s better than the mix tape he gave the Queen, and at least it wasn’t a boxed set of Rev Wright’s sermons.

    He’s been on in the job for five years now and he still has no effing clue about protocol?

    Kevin M (b11279)

  94. Two practical things are going to hit American taxpayers like a ton of bricks dropped off a tall building with a slingshot starting January 1, 2015. In Massachussets taxpayers are required to provide the name of their insurance company, as well as an id number for every plan and every dependent. Logistically your pain in the ass tax return prep added another layer of complexity.

    But even bigger; the Obama Administration is being intentionally very vague about what makes any plan a “Cadillac” plan subject to making employer contributions taxable as income to employees. Such contributions are already in most people’s W2s for the last several years under code DD in box 12.There is no reason to include it unless…you’re going to tax it. Every year of the Obama Adminstration tax season has been delayed while they figured out various forms, procedures and rates. This will be far and away the most complex undertaking yet. But suspect the reason they are being so vague and deliberate is because they KNOW once working class taxpayers find themselves getting little or no refund at all or worse pay taxes the poop is going to hit the cooling device at max velocity.

    Bugg (f0dbc7)

  95. nudder erf cake

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  96. 2110hrs….that was a good little shaker, with just a little bouncing.
    They say it was about 6 miles from my location centered around LaHabra.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  97. They say it was about 6 miles from my location centered around LaHabra.

    I doubt it. much bigger and 8 minutes later

    Kevin M (b11279)

  98. 5.4 near La Habra @21:11pst, preceded and followed by two 3.x quakes.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  99. Have to go outside, and into the garage, and check.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  100. LAT has 5.3 centered near LaHabra.

    Dana (9a8f57)

  101. KFI is reporting initial shock as 5.1, with two or more followers at 3+

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  102. Wow! One of the cabinet doors in the garage opened – guess I shouldn’t have oiled those hinges.

    Just felt an aftershock.

    askeptic (8ecc78)

  103. askeptic, you were right, missed your timestamp.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  104. Definitely imagine that that you said. Your favorite justification seemed to be on the web the simplest
    factor to take into account of. I say to you, I certainly get annoyed while people consider concerns that they plainly
    do not know about. You controlled to hit the nail upon the top as smartly
    as outlined out the entire thing without having side-effects ,
    other people could take a signal. Will probably be again to get more.
    Thanks

    normal human temperature (7c2b51)

  105. Greetings from Ohio! I’m bored to death at work so I
    decided to check out your website on my iphone during lunch break.
    I enjoy the knowledge you present here and can’t
    wait to take a look when I get home. I’m surprised at
    how quick your blog loaded on my mobile .. I’m not
    even using WIFI, just 3G .. Anyways, fantastic blog!

    healthy turkey chili recipe (9e099a)

  106. You have your lunch break at 5:10 am Eastern time, on Saturdays?

    Sammy Finkelman (3bf07f)

  107. http://ace.mu.nu/

    Per Gabriel Malor at AoSHQ:

    …Oh, and as I write this Healthcare.gov’s login process is down. No, I’m not kidding. Maybe a late surge has overwhelmed the servers?…

    If you think the website, which has taken the Obama administration longer so far to figure out than it took the US to figure out how to win WWII in the Pacific, has been fun wait until you try the service!

    Steve57 (a017ec)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3532 secs.