Health Care Website Cost You Over 600 Million Dollars

11 years ago

Originally Posted by KingArthur

Cost of Obamacare Website to Date: $292 Million | The Fiscal Times

I bet you could have outsourced the building of the site to an expert coder in the Philippines and had it done for $1,000 and then charged him $300 per month to maintain it.

What do you think?

I think it's a lie.

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8616947].message }}

ThomM 11 years ago

Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre

I think it's a lie.

According to this article it's more like 87 million, at least that's how much the six contracts awarded to CGI Federal were worth.
By the way the parent company of CGI Federal, CGI Group was fired by the Canadian Govt, loosing a 46.3 million dollar contract for.......wait for it............creating a crappy website for their online medical registry for diabetes sufferers and treatment providers .
Interesting article.
Canadian officials fired IT firm behind troubled Obamacare website | WashingtonExaminer.com
- [ 2 ] Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8617077].message }}

whland

11 years ago

That sure is a lot of money for a website. I bet they didn't pay that much. If I paid that much for a website it better have no problems whatsoever.

Chad

Thanks

Signature

WebMasterBabble.com Webmaster Forum

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8616954].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Some of the information it was SUPPOSED to use cost about $30 BILLION! It was never fully delivered. BTW SUPPOSEDLY that was done like 9 years ago! INTERESTING, since it was ILLEGAL and technically still is!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8617112].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

First of all, I HAVE worked on similar things! ***I*** could have done a better job MYSELF! All the way from the database to the screen! Although I disagree that a working website like this could have been done for less than a few thousand, a MILLION is too much! For a million dollars, you should have been able to do the software, have a small redundant and EXPANDABLE high end database, really powerful servers, and been able to handle thousands of people over a narrow span of time.

of course, each user SHOULD have required maybe 10K for their records, so the database would have had to handle maybe 3000,000,000,000K, or about 3000TB. Allowing for mirroring and indexes, figure maybe 7000TB. HUGE, but they DO want to tie this into the IRS and all. The IRS ALREADY has general info on everyone, and they plan to store info on the plans and expenses. So HEY, the website may only need a database of a couple terabytes.

HECK, I was at a non profit that rolled out an app that was POORLY done! They had a couple thousand of their employees quickly test it. Too bad that it had EVERYONE going to a complicated login procedure. It was SLOW! They decided to redesign it, but it didn't crash, and they didn't release it until it ran well.

But HEY, HERE is a funny video about it!

Students Guess How Much It Cost to Develop the...

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8617217].message }}

Kay King

11 years ago

The number I've been reading is $500 million and counting.

Obamacare sites cost more than Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn ? RT USA

Too bad no one thought to run it through a test phase....

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8617700].message }}

MikeAmbrosio

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

The number I've been reading is $500 million and counting.

Obamacare sites cost more than Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn ? RT USA

Too bad no one thought to run it through a test phase....

That would have cost an additional $100 million. Haven't you heard? They're trying to be more fiscally responsible, now that the shutdown is over. :rolleyes:

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8617725].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio

That would have cost an additional $100 million. Haven't you heard? They're trying to be more fiscally responsible, now that the shutdown is over. :rolleyes:

Actually, in a case like this, the betatest should have been done by THEM! They could have simply told all federal government workers at a couple offices, like say the FDA, to do this at 11am on a given day and they would get an extra hours lunch. They would NOT have been missed. It would be virtually FREE! It is WORTH IT!

Steve

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8618567].message }}

Kay King 11 years ago

Much of the problem is in how the powers that be want this implemented. You can't get any information about the insurance until AFTER you have created an account.

Creating an account means submitting extensive personal information to a site administered by IRS - at a time when it's just been revealed IRS has been sharing personal citizen info with the administration in D.C.

It would have been so much simpler to create an insurance system where the coverage was A, B or C ONLY - and where the cost was based on income of the citizen. Instead this convoluted system sets fees and then "gives" subsidies to some and not to others...it's a convoluted mess and too intricate for most normal people to grasp.
It's not that people are stupid - they aren't. But they aren't interested in spending hours or days on something like this.

It's created distrust, too, because of the number of exemptions given to people who helped push this plan through and now don't want the new laws to apply to them and their workers.
- [ 3 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8619334].message }}

Dan Riffle

11 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Actually, in a case like this, the betatest should have been done by THEM! They could have simply told all federal government workers at a couple offices, like say the FDA, to do this at 11am on a given day and they would get an extra hours lunch. They would NOT have been missed. It would be virtually FREE! It is WORTH IT!

Steve

Steve, Mike was making a joke.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8619348].message }}

Unity96387 11 years ago

I heard it was about 680 million and this is from a source that really checks well before saying something.

I also heard that only one person in the state of Delaware signed up on that site after it was made available. Only one person.....
- [ 2 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8619484].message }}
- Brandon Tanner 11 years ago
  
  Guys, I don't think that website cost anywhere near what they say it did. Check out this job I just saw posted on Elance...
  
  [ 5 ] Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620071].message }}
  
  TimPhelan 11 years ago
  
  I must admit, that is pretty funny. Lol. Hey, they can always put a few adsense ads on there and then sell it on Flippa.
  
  Originally Posted by Brandon Tanner
  
  Guys, I don't think that website cost anywhere near what they say it did. Check out this job I just saw posted on Elance...
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  Over 50 Dating
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622559].message }}
seasoned 11 years ago

Originally Posted by Dan Riffle

Steve, Mike was making a joke.

YEAH!

I WASN'T! They have people doing virtually NOTHING, and they would JUMP at the chance to test this. HECK, some companies have people donate $20+ to ONLY wear casual clothes on a given day!

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620370].message }}

Sumit Menon

11 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Actually, in a case like this, the betatest should have been done by THEM! They could have simply told all federal government workers at a couple offices, like say the FDA, to do this at 11am on a given day and they would get an extra hours lunch. They would NOT have been missed. It would be virtually FREE! It is WORTH IT!

Steve

If they tested it and it didn't work, they could not have launched it in October, could they? They might have had to, I don't know, delay the individual mandate by an year or something.

It's far easier to sell, "We have a few technical glitches, but our aim is to provide affordable health insurance to all" than "We spent $300 mn odd dollars on a website and it doesn't work. So, we'll give you cheap health insurance next year."

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620129].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Sumit Menon

If they tested it and it didn't work, they could not have launched it in October, could they? They might have had to, I don't know, delay the individual mandate by an year or something.

It's far easier to sell, "We have a few technical glitches, but our aim is to provide affordable health insurance to all" than "We spent $300 mn odd dollars on a website and it doesn't work. So, we'll give you cheap health insurance next year."

You might be right! They KNEW all this would happen LONG ago! They KNEW, about this time, that they would be trying to leverage the budget against this, and that the changes made would likely be made. They have been discussing the need and timing since 2008. They have been discussing the concerns for about 3 years or so. This technique has been done for THOUSANDS of years, and in the US, before it was even officially the US, for almost 300 years! It is done to some degree ALL THE TIME in BOTH houses of congress, DESPITE what these people claim. GEE, you can watch it on CSPAN ALL THE TIME!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620397].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

The number I've been reading is $500 million and counting.

Obamacare sites cost more than Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn ? RT USA

Too bad no one thought to run it through a test phase....

Or even take a VERY cursory look! I think THIS is what happened.....

1. They worked to get the cheapest and least capable company to do it. This is often REQUIRED BY LAW!!!!!!!!!! They DON'T care about ability, but about CLASS, and put out an RFP for the LOWEST PRICE! If the company isn't owned by the right people, they are told not to respond, and will be REFUSED!
2. They created an artificial deadline(10/1/2013)
3. They didn't check.

What they SHOULD have done was the OPPOSITE!
1. Start when they could logically BEAT their deadline.
2. Hire the BEST company.
3. Test it EARLY, but AFTER the alpha tests were done. They have about the biggest test force on the planet. If it could handle say a mere 2-3 thousand people at once, they could call it a SUCCESS!!!!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8618556].message }}

Joe Mobley

10 years ago

Wisdom is folly to a fool.

Definition of folly (n)

Bing Dictionary
- fol·ly
- [ fóllee ]
1. unreason: thoughtlessness, recklessness, or thoughtless or reckless behavior
2. irrational thing: a thoughtless or reckless act or idea
3. eccentric building: a building of eccentric or overelaborate design, usually built for decorative rather than practical purposes
Synonyms: foolishness · madness · idiocy · silliness · craziness · recklessness

Madness? Idiocy?

Joe Mobley

Originally Posted by Kay King

Too bad no one thought to run it through a test phase....

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

.

Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636152].message }}

Unity96387

11 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

First of all, I HAVE worked on similar things! ***I*** could have done a better job MYSELF! All the way from the database to the screen! Although I disagree that a working website like this could have been done for less than a few thousand, a MILLION is too much! For a million dollars, you should have been able to do the software, have a small redundant and EXPANDABLE high end database, really powerful servers, and been able to handle thousands of people over a narrow span of time.

You say a million is too much, then I say it is criminal that they wasted so much money (600 million) on something that was flawed.

Can someone do the research and find out who was awarded the bid to do this project? Could it have been a huge campaign donor?

Throw the bums in prison.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8629181].message }}

Unity96387 10 years ago

I found out a Canadian firm that had a recent track record failure was awarded the contract.

FIVE MILLION LINES OF SOFTWARE CODE needs to be rewritten for the website to work.

I heard that the contracted company used outdated stuff to construct the site.

This whole thing was a disaster of a planned economy and not the child of free enterprise.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8631767].message }}

garyv

11 years ago

Here's an interesting theory, if it is one...
Obamacare's Website Is Crashing Because It Doesn't Want You To Know How Costly Its Plans Are - Forbes

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620281].message }}

LarryC

11 years ago

It sounds like possibly the most bloated, inefficient, costly and confusing government program ever. And that's really saying something!

[ 2 ] Thanks

Signature

Content Writing, Ghostwriting, eBooks, editing, research.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620312].message }}

ronrule

11 years ago

Why does anyone believe healthcare, or anything else, will be cheaper once government is involved? This once again proves that everything government touches becomes more expensive.

[ 5 ] Thanks

Signature

-
Ron Rule
http://ronrule.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620401].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Ron,

Many spoke about romneys plan, but I never heard of ANY cost increase measure, etc... HIS plan seemed to be a regulation requiring coverage of WORKERS, a bigger selection of methods/plans, and requiring generic when available. Did YOU know it is often, in most STATES, AGAINST THE LAW to dispense generic drugs unless specified or SPECIFICALLY indicated!?!?!?!!?? It's TRUE! I had a drug that was produced in FOUR FORMS!

1. EXPENSIVE NAME BRAND!
2. Brand #1 GENERIC
3. Brand #2 GENERIC
4. NONAME GENERIC!

My doctor prescribed #1, and the medical industry tried to scare me, LITERALLY!!!!!! Some suggested #2-#4, but could not give it to me! It was AGAINST FEDERAL LAW!

I went to MA, was then subject to Romneycare, and a doctor told me a company(the one that makes #1) LOBBIED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to come out with a new CLASS for drugs SPECIFICALLY to scare people like me, and some healthcare workers. RC FORBADE his prescribing anything but #4, and he prescribed #4. HE WAS RIGHT! That ONE act saves me over like $20/month on that ONE drug! I take TWO drugs. The OTHER is now generic ALSO. IT, however, was name brand ONLY and didn't have the special class label.

You get that? He worked WITH the market and PRIVATE insurance, with REASONABLE changes, and saved money. I almost WISH we got THAT instead of what we did. MEANWHILE, I had earlier paid MORE because the FEDERAL government INTENTIONALLY forced me to do so.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620476].message }}

HeySal

11 years ago

All I can say is that if I'd known that you could make that kinda dough building websites - I'd have said screw the writing and gone and learned technology. If you can make that much for something that is a disaster, think of how rich you can get if you're good at it.

I LOVE the smell of crony capitalism in the morning.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620484].message }}

TLTheLiberator

11 years ago

It's a quite early in the game. We'll see how the whole thing works out long term.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620509].message }}

ThomM 11 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

It's a quite early in the game. We'll see how the whole thing works out long term.

So is car racing. But at least they make sure the cars run before the race starts and know how to fix them if they brake down during the race.
- [ 2 ] Thanks
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620570].message }}
seasoned 11 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

It's a quite early in the game. We'll see how the whole thing works out long term.

OK, what have you been smoking......?

EARLY!?!?!?!?!? GEE, people HERE get angry and talk of conspiracy when someone that ADMITS they know little about technology manages to get only people on the periphery of an announcement and maybe 60% otherwise, and they have only a few WEEKS to do it. THESE guys had YEARS, and I have heard rumors from one source of signup successes of 1%, TOTAL. MOST claim rates as low as ZERO! The literal poster boy LIED! Frankly, he said he joined early, and used services that won't start for about another 74 days or so.

They apparently found some fools that are trying to rewrite HISTORY to say the problem is that it uses 10 year old web technology. BULL!!!! The web NEVER had a problem with cookies. Not on day one, and not now! Did some sites have cookie problems? YEP! Some STILL do! But that is because of the CODE!

But this is supposed to be the US! I work with a company that once bragged about hitting a new FAST benchmark with a LARGE database, etc.... The name of their client? The U.S. POST OFFICE!!!!!!!!! Or how about a little agency called the IRS? You would think they could leverage this, etc...

SERIOUSLY! If the other areas did as poorly as the subject of this thread, YIKES!!!!!!

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620618].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

On HANNITY, they CLAIM this was outsourced to a "canadian IT firm" that pirated opensource code! It IS illegal to sell opensource without attribution, etc...

Like the RC<>OC claim, you can BET that the opensource stuff was "*******ized"!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620653].message }}

ronrule

11 years ago

So the same Administration who talked about responsible government and saving American jobs, outsourced the creation of a website to a FOREIGN web company, and paid $500 million for OPEN SOURCE code that didn't work? And people want them in charge of health care? I'd rather take my chances without insurance.

[ 5 ] Thanks

Signature

-
Ron Rule
http://ronrule.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620703].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

I've got to say. I just saw someone saying this is HORRIBLE, but saying that it is overall a great improvement. HARD to believe. CBC says that Canada had the worst healthcare. I think the USA was the 15th worst, BEFORE OC. STILL, canada seems to have some bad fiscal problems:

What changes would you want to see in the way health care is delivered? | Cross Country Checkup with Rex Murphy | CBC Radio

Apparently, their healthcare costs about $5447.25/year per person. About 40-50% of the budget, and increases at 6%. For the US, this would be about: $1,797,592,500,000 assuming a 1:1 exchange rate and political parity(dream on). That is less than 3 times the current price of that website! you can see some of their problems here:

CBC.ca Search

BTW I love the last NON-social advice tat so few in the US now understand:

It's not so hard to bring costs down. Just put a $40 user fee no matter what you need from the health care system be it doctor visits, emergency room visits, clinic visits or surgery. All the useless, unnessary visits that are costing us a fortune will just go away.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8620971].message }}

HeySal

11 years ago

I read the damn bill - gonna go with being fined and just sit back and laugh my head off when the excrement hits the air conditioning. Wait til people find out they have to give 3% straight to Uncle Sammie, IRS if they sell their house. LMAO. That's just one of the goodies that didn't get edited out in one of the forty some Supreme court dates for it.

The day I get told I have to have it is the day I start packing to be an ex-patriot.

The only way to get cheaper health care is to render the medical industrial complex 501-C (non-profit). With a sometimes several thousand % mark-up on drugs, etc - insurance isn't going to do sh*t from shinola even if it's dipped in gold and served with 100 year old scotch.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8621380].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Well, it IS different from what I read. If you recall, they couldn't REALLY pass the act, and couldn't risk people getting wise to the scott brown delays, so they took an earlier senate bill passed and with the narrow super majority in the house "deemed IT as passed", and then ALL were forced to vote on a reconciliation to make it what it is TODAY. THAT is why the ACA bill at the following site is less than 1/2 the size, and why there is ALSO a reconciliation bill.

A lot of the bad rarely mentioned parts are STILL there. I don't know if you can really trust this version, but they say the official version is at: https://www.healthcare.gov/where-can...able-care-act/ They DO point to the GPO though.

Obama said I can keep my old plan if I like it, so I will try. I have heard rumors that that WHOLE CLASS of insurance will be SHUT DOWN! My employer said they were required to direct me to the new site! I even heard that I have a piece of mail waiting for me that says that. We'll see.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8621924].message }}

mojojuju

11 years ago

Originally Posted by KingArthur

I bet you could have outsourced the building of the site to an expert coder in the Philippines and had it done for $1,000 and then charged him $300 per month to maintain it.

What do you think?

Great idea - if the government needs to build a huge web site that handles citizens' personal information, they should just outsource it to some faceless coder from the Philippines at a bargain basement price. I don't see how anything could go wrong with that plan. :rolleyes:

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

:)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622378].message }}

ThomM

11 years ago

Originally Posted by mojojuju

Great idea - if the government needs to build a huge web site that handles citizens' personal information, they should just outsource it to some faceless coder from the Philippines at a bargain basement price. I don't see how anything could go wrong with that plan. :rolleyes:

Can't be any worse then giving the contract to a company that was fired by Canada for doing what they did with the obamacare website to the Canadian health website.

Nothing like checking references before awarding a multi-million dollar contract.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622468].message }}

Kay King

11 years ago

good article:

Tech experts: Health exchange site needs total overhaul

some excuses:

Why HealthCare.gov, the Obamacare Website, Doesn

When "navigator jobs" were announced I assumed people would apply for the positions created - but I'm not sure that's how it worked. The "navigator" money was allocated as grants to various groups and then they did the navigator hiring....including setting the standards for those hired.

So 67 million at least was awarded as grants to mostly liberal groups who then were to hire navigators to help signup people for the new health care. Wow - that's efficient - not.

Who got the "navigator" jobs? I wondered if there were ads placed so people could apply. No - not quite. The "jobs" were actually grants awarded to various community service organizations who were then to use that money to hire people to "navigate" and get citizens to sign up for the new health care plan.

So - did they hire qualified people for the jobs? Or did they pay their own people to do the jobs? What were the criteria to qualify for the jobs? We don't know. How knowledgable and well trained are the "navigators" WE are paying? We don't know.

http://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Programs-an...-8-15-2013.pdf

[ 2 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622564].message }}

Kay King

11 years ago

I just read an article that will confuse your brain at times and then cross your eyes - but the author has a full grasp of the history and future projections of Obamacare.

When I see a detailed opinion and critics of it can only say "it's wrong" - it makes me think there's substance there.

It's an interesting read.

Obamacare Will Increase Health Spending By $7,450 For A Typical Family of Four [Updated] - Forbes

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622595].message }}

TimPhelan

11 years ago

Well, the critics have more to say than simply "it's wrong". Did you read their arguments? They made sense to me. Here's one: "Between all the new taxes and the premiums from the newly insured, you can cover the total increase in health care spending. The typical, already insured family isn't going to see increases due to the rise in overall health care spending. "

Originally Posted by Kay King

When I see a detailed opinion and critics of it can only say "it's wrong" - it makes me think there's substance there.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622649].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Well, the critics have more to say than simply "it's wrong". Did you read their arguments? They made sense to me. Here's one: "Between all the new taxes and the premiums from the newly insured, you can cover the total increase in health care spending. The typical, already insured family isn't going to see increases due to the rise in overall health care spending. "

OH REALLY!?!?!?!?!?

Say I pay TWICE what I do now in premiums, and my deductible goes up to about $12,000, and my copay goes to 50%..... OH, OK.... YEAH, they DO make enough! BTW I didn't pick those stats out of thin air! But the "insurance" is WORTHLESS to me unless I get a fully catastrophic problem that they somehow cover, and I come into a lot of money. Coincidently, the stats I mention mean that I would pay MORE for yearly tests I am supposed to have than I would if I had NO insurance. That is assuming that hospital charges me the same either way.

As for taxes? Outside of the crazy penalty(That is on a sliding scale that is set to INCREASE), and the LUDICROUS tax on medical devices, what other tax is there? DON'T mention the two I just did, because the first is to pay for remedial care for uncovered as well as cover some other things, and the second will lead to increased prices that will be AT LEAST as high as the tax, so it makes NOTHING.

I was HAPPY to see providence land me in the plan I liked best. It looks like it will NOT BE AVAILABLE NEXT YEAR, FOR ANYONE! and it isn't a Cadillac plan or anything. I had the same plan when I had my aorta operation.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622705].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

good article:

Tech experts: Health exchange site needs total overhaul

some excuses:

Why HealthCare.gov, the Obamacare Website, Doesn

When "navigator jobs" were announced I assumed people would apply for the positions created - but I'm not sure that's how it worked. The "navigator" money was allocated as grants to various groups and then they did the navigator hiring....including setting the standards for those hired.

So 67 million at least was awarded as grants to mostly liberal groups who then were to hire navigators to help signup people for the new health care. Wow - that's efficient - not.

Who got the "navigator" jobs? I wondered if there were ads placed so people could apply. No - not quite. The "jobs" were actually grants awarded to various community service organizations who were then to use that money to hire people to "navigate" and get citizens to sign up for the new health care plan.

So - did they hire qualified people for the jobs? Or did they pay their own people to do the jobs? What were the criteria to qualify for the jobs? We don't know. How knowledgable and well trained are the "navigators" WE are paying? We don't know.

http://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Programs-an...-8-15-2013.pdf

Apparently ACORN got a chunk in the contract! The navigator job *************DEMANDS************ people WITHOUT an AGENDA, HONEST, NOT JEALOUS, etc.... because the government has seen fit to break SEVERAL laws and give them PRIVATE Financial and health info. So people like those at ACORN are ones that should be thrown in jail for KNOWING such info.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622629].message }}

TimPhelan 11 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Apparently ACORN got a chunk in the contract!

Oh really? That's interesting since ACORN is defunct!
- [ 1 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622659].message }}
- seasoned 11 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  Oh really? That's interesting since ACORN is defunct!
  
  Michelle Malkin | What a coincidence: ACORN founder’s organization serving as Obamacare navigators «
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622678].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

good article:

Tech experts: Health exchange site needs total overhaul

some excuses:

Why HealthCare.gov, the Obamacare Website, Doesn

When "navigator jobs" were announced I assumed people would apply for the positions created - but I'm not sure that's how it worked. The "navigator" money was allocated as grants to various groups and then they did the navigator hiring....including setting the standards for those hired.

So 67 million at least was awarded as grants to mostly liberal groups who then were to hire navigators to help signup people for the new health care. Wow - that's efficient - not.

Who got the "navigator" jobs? I wondered if there were ads placed so people could apply. No - not quite. The "jobs" were actually grants awarded to various community service organizations who were then to use that money to hire people to "navigate" and get citizens to sign up for the new health care plan.

So - did they hire qualified people for the jobs? Or did they pay their own people to do the jobs? What were the criteria to qualify for the jobs? We don't know. How knowledgable and well trained are the "navigators" WE are paying? We don't know.

http://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Programs-an...-8-15-2013.pdf

A lot of this is right. I HAVE seen an example of government employee programming, and learned how a lot of their stuff goes.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622644].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

BTW There are 316,668,567 people in the US. After getting rid of kids, really old, uninfomed, etc.... you figure only about 40% are likely to really think about looking at any particular time..., and you realistically have about 126,667,427 people. Maybe HALF will decide to stay, and may decide not to join. OK, we are down to 63333714 We had 91 days. If they were spread out EVENLY, that is about 695975 a DAY! IMAGINE! The average workday in the US spans MAYBE 14 hours. If it spanned 24 hours, there would only be 28999 people hitting the servers per hour. That is 483 a minute. OK, OK! If ALL were married, the number might be half as much. Since we have about a 14 hour day, and not 24, the number is almost twice of that. Still, that is a LOT!!!!

They should have planned it better. And WHY is there an open enrollment period ANYWAY!?!?!? I mean aren't ALL supposed to be covered? and since it is to start in 2014, shouldn't the deadline maybe be in 2015? If we did THAT, capacity would be FAR less of an issue! But capacity is currently the LEAST of its problems.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622675].message }}

Kay King 11 years ago

Tim - the founder of Acorn and several who were in charge there formed a different company and that company got a substantial grant for being "navigators". I'd say that's questionable judgment as there are millions of people out of work who could fill those navigator jobs in a way that helps the public and doesn't serve a political goal of any kind or any group.

ACORN founder’s new group to help with Obamacare rollout | Twitchy

The typical, already insured family isn't going to see increases due to the rise in overall health care spending. "

That's what I thought we were promised but it's not what is being reported by people trying to sign up.

I don't see any upside in pointing fingers - but we have to look at the very real problems right now. Small businesses that I KNOW of personally are canceling their insurance benefits for their employees effective end of this year. I've talked to those business owners and it's happening. We HAVE to get this working and that means leaving the political posturing aside and doing whatever is necessary to:

-get the system running properly - stop excusing and defending and get it working right

-display the pricing and the subsidies correctly

-speed up the signup process

-provide REAL HELP in the form of paid employees who fully understand and can explain the system correctly - best way would be an online site where there is INFORMED chat help available 24/7.

If this program fails - the public pays the price.
- [ 2 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622700].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

BTW MANY have been, as they asked, excluded from this requirement. The HR sent a budget to the senate that apparently had *****NO***** changes over the first one except that they got rid of the 2.3% or whatever device tax, and the subsidy and waiver for congress, and the senate TURNED IT DOWN!!!!!! WHY? Congress should NOT be an "uber class" ANYWAY! Who died and made THEM royalty!?!?!? It is rumored that GEORGE WASHINGTON was given the option to be king, and turned it down. Congress should have such people.

The bill had a trick, saying that full time would be considered 30 hours/week. That caused a LOT of laws to hit businesses. The government hoped that the businesses would simply fall for it, and place all their workers under this plan. Well, the businesses started reducing many jobs to 29 hours/week. They speak of how the minimum wage should be raised, but this had the effect of CUTTING IT! They call it an "unintended circumstance". I call it a STUPID GAME!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8622734].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

EVEN I did not consider this here, though I have for YEARS told people HERE to watch for this on software they have written:

administration caught in blatant software piracy; script powering Healthcare.gov ripped off from UK company

...has been caught red-handed engaged in software piracy. Computer code used on Healthcare.gov was stolen (and then modified in an effort to conceal the theft) from a UK company called Spry Media.

To my best knowledge, this story was broken by WeeklyStandard.com in a blog authored by Jeryl Bier.

The computer code that was stolen is called DataTables, and it is exclusively provided under a GPL v2 license which requires anyone who uses the software code to keep the copyright notice visible in the code itself. This allows the original author of the code to receive attribution for creating it.

An analysis of the code running Healthcare.gov reveals that the development team maliciously removed the copyright notice and credit attributions from the code while copying and using the rest of the code. In the field of journalism, this would be called "plagiarism." In the field of computer software, it's called "piracy" according to the U.S. government.

Will DHS now seize Healthcare.gov?

The Department of Homeland Security has seized hundreds of other websites that it says were engaged in piracy.

These website seizures are conducted completely outside of law and utterly without due process. When sites are seized by DHS, the following notice is placed on the website home page:

This notice reads, in part:

Willful copyright infringement is a federal crime that carries penalties for first time offenders of up to five years in federal prison, a $250,000 fine, forfeiture and restitution.

Will the developers of Healthcare.gov who pirated the DataTables software from SpryMedia now be sentenced to federal prison?

It isn't even a big part of the functional code, but wonders what ELSE is pirated: http://www.datatables.net/

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8625571].message }}

Kay King

11 years ago

Sometimes while the geeks confabulate a non-techie has a better solution.

John McCain is not internet savvy - but his suggestion is a good one:

"Take Air Force One out to Silicon Valley and pick up some smart people and bring them back to Washington and let them solve the healthcare site problems."

[ 1 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8627418].message }}

Horny Devil

Banned 11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Sometimes while the geeks confabulate a non-techie has a better solution.

John McCain is not internet savvy - but his suggestion is a good one:

"Take Air Force One out to Silicon Valley and pick up some smart people and bring them back to Washington and let them solve the healthcare site problems."

Or even a Yellow Cab to the OTF.

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8627451].message }}

Kay King

11 years ago

When you quote naturalnews you get the most inflated hype on a story - the basic story about the code is at

Obamacare Website Violates Licensing Agreement for Copyrighted Software | The Weekly Standard

"maliciously" removed the copyright notice is naturalnews take on it...but...

Could just as easily have been "ignorantly removed...." or "arrogantly removed".

They didn't steal the code - they violated the use agreement. Or - they obtained permission to remove that part of the code in the first place....

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8627459].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

When you quote naturalnews you get the most inflated hype on a story - the basic story about the code is at

Obamacare Website Violates Licensing Agreement for Copyrighted Software | The Weekly Standard

"maliciously" removed the copyright notice is naturalnews take on it...but...

Could just as easily have been "ignorantly removed...." or "arrogantly removed".

They didn't steal the code - they violated the use agreement. Or - they obtained permission to remove that part of the code in the first place....

if not for the type of people involved, and what we paid, ADMITTEDLY, I would NOT be so steamed! IMAGINE! They may, at some later date, bill me THOUSANDS for not doing something I shouldn't have to do because the "law" doesn't say I should and.....(I WOULD say more)..... And all the while I couldn't have done it ANYWAY because of the tight timeframe, low information, and the HORRENDOUSLY bad code and systems.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8628817].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Sometimes while the geeks confabulate a non-techie has a better solution.

John McCain is not internet savvy - but his suggestion is a good one:

"Take Air Force One out to Silicon Valley and pick up some smart people and bring them back to Washington and let them solve the healthcare site problems."

A LOT of bad assumptions there! Still, air force one REALLY needs a REST!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8628789].message }}

Sarevok

11 years ago

It was developed by a company called "CGI" who are known for their ineptitude and overpricing.

Hope you're happy with your service.

Here's your undercooked BigMac.

That will be $500,000 please.

Would you like fries with that?

Only $520,000 extra.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Check Out My Legendary Marketing Blog By Clicking This Beautiful Text.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8627487].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Not to speak to racism, class warfare, or religion...... It is INTERESTING to note that these people believe in EVOLUTION! They believe in a chance circumstance that created a being and others that made them disparate and rely on the idea that the better killed the weaker so that each propagated and became BETTER! This is what has come to be known as "survival of the fittest". Believing THAT, they strive to do the OPPOSITE!

Corporations and ESPECIALLY GOVERNMENT IRONICALLY work in REVERSE!!!!!! OH, MOST corporations may be weeded out through competition and/or bankruptcy, but THAT IS IT! They sometimes make KILLINGS in IPOs and pump and dump scams.

So WHY do I say that???????

1. Corporations and government are HUGE! They determine funding based on the last periods expenses! That means the groups within them treat the money like brewster on brewsters millions! They spend AS MUCH AS THEY CAN! Their goal is to spend EVERY PENNY! This means *******WASTE*******! If they spend 10% less, their budget may be reduced. If they spend every penny, they may actually blame their FAILURE on not having enough, and get a BIGGER budget.

2. Government contractors, and the government, are SPECIFICALLY TASKED to find people of protected classes to spend money on! If the best person is a white male, FORGET IT! A mexican may get it, but better a black man or black woman. And this is REGARDLESS of bid!

With all the garbage, it is amazing they do as well as they do. SO, got that? They throw the idea of cost, and ability, OUT THE WINDOW in such cases.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632315].message }}

ronrule

10 years ago

I think it's all B.S.

Has anyone considered the possibility that the HealthCare.gov website actually worked fine, and the whole "faulty website" was just made up to cover the fact that nobody actually tried to sign up? I mean, surely the organization that's going to be responsible for managing life and death medical coverage can handle one website... Actually, we KNOW they can, the IRS website gets more traffic every year at tax time than HealthCare.gov ever got and it doesn't crash.

The website worked fine.

It's either that ... or it was hacked, and this is the cover story because they don't want you to know all of your information was leaked.

But either way, the site worked fine. The "coding problems" of this nature, as they describe them, would have been apparent before the flood gates were opened, it wasn't a load issue.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

-
Ron Rule
http://ronrule.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632343].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ronrule

Has anyone considered the possibility that the HealthCare.gov website actually worked fine, and the whole "faulty website" was just made up to cover the fact that nobody actually tried to sign up?

NOT POSSIBLE! They are claiming that over 400K actually "registered" and that kids are getting enroled as spouses of their parents, etc....

I mean, surely the organization that's going to be responsible for managing life and death medical coverage can handle one website... Actually, we KNOW they can, the IRS website gets more traffic every year at tax time than HealthCare.gov ever got and it doesn't crash.

NORMALLY, I would agree with you, but I am in the industry. Just because they have a working system does NOT mean they know ANYTHING about it. It could have been programmed over a decade ago by consultants, and rolled out slowly. ALSO, most of the coding is ******NOT****** IRS specific, as most here should realize. Do they really do ANYTHING of this nature online? Maybe not. If they do, I can tell you, as someone that has used the IRS website HUNDREDS of times, I have never seen it! Indiana's site does that quite well. I HATE the navigation, but it handles taxes, payments, refunds, licenses, etc.... I have NEVER seen it crash! NEVADA has a similar site, that works well.

And HEY, one person said that the woman behind the president(that OBVIOUSLY was in GREAT danger and NOBODY tried to help) was diabetic and pregnant! WAY TO GO!!!!!!!!!

#44 laughed it off saying she is ALWAYS like that when he talks too long!!!!!!!!!

It's either that ... or it was hacked, and this is the cover story because they don't want you to know all of your information was leaked.

YEAH, it DID leak info. That kind have got lost in the news, but WAS reported!

But either way, the site worked fine. The "coding problems" of this nature, as they describe them, would have been apparent before the flood gates were opened, it wasn't a load issue.

Yeah, it was NOT a load issue. The programmers are claiming that they had tight schedules, weren't allowed to test code, etc... The error messages and all are CLEAR indications of problems. OH, how I could say SO much more! I heard a government spokesman used a word. A word ****************VERY****************
rarely spoken in English. VERY rarely! Until about 2003, I heard it maybe 3 times, in the DECADES preceding that, outside of overheard ads. I myself have NEVER used the word! And it NEVER had, and doesn't have, ANYTHING to do with technology or computers! In fact, I have perhaps NEVER heard it properly used since 2003! OH, that word was VERY telling, ONE WORD said SO much about where their minds were at, etc....! I just WISH I could say more. Suffice it to say that this did NOT help US unemployment!

STEVE

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632532].message }}

socialentry

Banned 10 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Yeah, it was NOT a load issue. The programmers are claiming that they had tight schedules, weren't allowed to test code, etc... The error messages and all are CLEAR indications of problems. OH, how I could say SO much more! I heard a government spokesman used a word. A word ****************VERY****************
rarely spoken in English. VERY rarely! Until about 2003, I heard it maybe 3 times, in the DECADES preceding that, outside of overheard ads. I myself have NEVER used the word! And it NEVER had, and doesn't have, ANYTHING to do with technology or computers! In fact, I have perhaps NEVER heard it properly used since 2003! OH, that word was VERY telling, ONE WORD said SO much about where their minds were at, etc....! I just WISH I could say more. Suffice it to say that this did NOT help US unemployment!

STEVE

Damnit you have me on the edge of my seat, just say what the word was!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632745].message }}

KimW 10 years ago

Originally Posted by socialentry

Damnit you have me on the edge of my seat, just say what the word was!

FUBAR? Makes sense to me.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632752].message }}
- seasoned 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by KimW
  
  FUBAR? Makes sense to me.
  
  FRANKLY, FUBAR would have made more sense!!!!
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632900].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

She was helped off the stage. Where do you get the idea she wasn't helped?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

She was also most likely embarrassed. I think the Pres used a self deprecating joke very effectively and to her benefit.

Originally Posted by seasoned

And HEY, one person said that the woman behind the president(that OBVIOUSLY was in GREAT danger and NOBODY tried to help) was diabetic and pregnant! WAY TO GO!!!!!!!!!

#44 laughed it off saying she is ALWAYS like that when he talks too long!!!!!!!!!

STEVE

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632879].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

She was helped off the stage. Where do you get the idea she wasn't helped?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

She was also obviously embarrassed. I think the Pres used a self deprecating joke very effectively and to her benefit.

She should have had the option to leave and help should have come BEFORE she nearly fell down! Were you not watching?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632898].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

I was watching. She didn't fall and she got help. What do you expect? Someone to suddenly appear to catch her?

Originally Posted by seasoned

She should have had the option to leave and help should have come BEFORE she nearly fell down! Were you not watching?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632927].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I was watching. She didn't fall and she got help. What do you expect? Someone to suddenly appear to catch her?

You mean NOBODY was watching, etc? HECK, I HAVE been in such positions, even at a military school, and THEY seemed more caring. as you might notice, some military events ARE long and some even lock their legs, etc... and faint. She was like rocking back and forth.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8632945].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

By the way, many of the state's web sites are doing much better. Something I haven't heard anyone bring up is that the expectation of those behind the ACA probably was that many more states would create their own web sites. Unfortunately many states didn't and I think that was for mostly political reasons.

Speaking of the states and how they can participate in the ACA, or not, there's one way any state can get a waiver from the major parts of the ACA. That way is to come up with another plan and get a waiver. A few states are talking about this including Vermont and Pennsylvania, and I believe California will get a bill up and going again soon. They had a few single payer bills pass in the last decade and they were vetoed by the Governor. I don't think one would be vetoed now.

[ 1 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8633062].message }}

Kay King

10 years ago

And HEY, one person said that the woman behind the president(that OBVIOUSLY was in GREAT danger and NOBODY tried to help) was diabetic and pregnant! WAY TO GO!!!!!!!!!

Steve, those folks standing in back of the President aren't there because they showed up early for a good spot. They are chosen - and she chose to be there - she was helped off so I don't see what the problem is.

I listened to Sebelius answers today and I have to admit I'm perplexed....she won't say how many have completed the signup process...she admits the testing did not go well but won't say who knew it didn't or explain why requests to delay or limit the rollout of the site were ignored or denied.

What struck me was her comment that "if we had 5 years we could have done it better". Over 3 years and over 600 million dollars wasn't enough?

There are times when you have to look into the camera and say "we got it wrong" - "we messed up"....or "I did a poor job of managing this process."

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8633237].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Steve, those folks standing in back of the President aren't there because they showed up early for a good spot. They are chosen - and she chose to be there - she was helped off so I don't see what the problem is.

Yeah, she chose for some reason to stand there. Oh well, I guess I should be happy for the fodder!

I listened to Sebelius answers today and I have to admit I'm perplexed....she won't say how many have completed the signup process...she admits the testing did not go well but won't say who knew it didn't or explain why requests to delay or limit the rollout of the site were ignored or denied.

What struck me was her comment that "if we had 5 years we could have done it better". Over 3 years and over 600 million dollars wasn't enough?

HECK YEAH! They passed it in like HOW many negative months? YEAH, it was passed BEFORE it was passed! The house passed something the senate wouldn't, so the senate changed it. THAT meant it had to be approved by the house, but it WASN'T! The senate CHANGED(One senator was NEVER legal, and was replaced with a person that would cast THE key vote as NO instead of YES!), making REAL passage impossible, so they had to RAM this through. They got enough votes for the house to "deem it as passed", etc... So they RAMMED it through! They didn't change ONE COMMA because, if they had, the ILLEGAL senate would have to vote on THAT, and they may REALLY have a problem! It was setup as a ticking timebomb timed to blow up in the next governments face.(The time was 1/1/2014)

And 3 years WAS long enough! They could have EASILY used the EXISTING IRS database, and dictated a format from all the insurance companies(A format that might have existed DECADES ago), and could have simply said YOU are qualified for these plans and send them to the selected site! BTW the government dictates such things ALL THE TIME! They ALREADY have a VERY similar plan called "medicare advantage"! WHY don't they use THAT format? HECK, why didn't they use THOSE plans? But they DO want poll info, etc... You know..... If a government "official" wants that, THEY should pay for it, and THEY should be thrown in jail for breaking applicable laws!

They could EVEN have had the IRS place the people into classes based on requirements met! That would take MORE strain off of the HC.O website, and would have made THAT programmers job a WALK IN THE PARK! MAYBE return a number based on income levels, and have a -2 for ILLEGAL ALIEN, and a -2 for INELIGIBLE RESIDENT. A 0 would mean eligible, but NO subsidy, etc...

There are times when you have to look into the camera and say "we got it wrong" - "we messed up"....or "I did a poor job of managing this process."

YEP! And I see signs that they STILL don't know what to do!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8633912].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

By the way, many of the state's web sites are doing much better. Something I haven't heard anyone bring up is that the expectation of those behind the ACA probably was that many more states would create their own web sites. Unfortunately many states didn't and I think that was for mostly political reasons.

Speaking of the states and how they can participate in the ACA, or not, there's one way any state can get a waiver from the major parts of the ACA. That way is to come up with another plan and get a waiver. A few states are talking about this including Vermont and Pennsylvania, and I believe California will get a bill up and going again soon. They had a few single payer bills pass in the last decade and they were vetoed by the Governor. I don't think one would be vetoed now.

So the states were doing better, WHOOPIE! DFGHJK shouldn't go bankrupt because TARGET saw an increase in sales! HUH!?!?!?!? And WOW, YOU are paying the other guys also! If you hire person A, person A is REALLY supposed to get paid and all because person B did the work for another area? HUH!?!?!?!? The other states ALL have better plans, TRIED AND TRUE, for DECADES! HECK, my mother availed herself of one in indiana. As for the states you mentioned? They should ****NOT**** be ALLOWED to provide another choice! They VOTED that ALL should PAY for this monstrosity! Let them be hoisted by their OWN petard! WHY should we pay MORE so THEY can escape the fate they said they WANTED!?!?!?!?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8633887].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

As for the states you mentioned? They should ****NOT**** be ALLOWED to provide another choice! They VOTED that ALL should PAY for this monstrosity! Let them be hoisted by their OWN petard! WHY should we pay MORE so THEY can escape the fate they said they WANTED!?!?!?!?

It's part of the law and will happen. Not only will some states create their own health care system and be granted waivers, but they will also continue to receive financial help from the federal government. Vermont is leading the way because of one doctor who has spent years of her own time promoting and educating people about a single payer system, which is what I have been wanting for our country for decades. Here's a story about her:

In 1998, Dr. Deb Richter began, almost single handedly, to revive the dream of universal health care in the United States--open to all and paid for by the government. A primary care physician from Buffalo, New York, Richter had become outraged by the barriers to accessing quality health care in the city's low-income communities.

After a rally with more than 1,000 people at the Capitol, Vermont in 2011 became the first state in the country to pass single payer health care legislation. (Photo: Vermont Workers' Center)
"I had people dying from preventable conditions like diabetes, high blood pressure, undiagnosed cancer with obvious signs," said Richter. "And they were young, in their 20s, 30s, people in their 50s, dying."

https://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/08/11-1

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8634577].message }}

Joe Mobley

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

they will also continue to receive financial help from the federal government.

That financial help will dissipate quickly as cost have been vastly under estimated and the US Government continues to run out of money.

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

a single payer system, which is what I have been wanting for our country for decades.

Unfortunately, if you get your wish, it is those in need of medical attention that shall go wanting.

"I had people dying from preventable conditions like diabetes, high blood pressure, undiagnosed cancer with obvious signs," said Richter. "And they were young, in their 20s, 30s, people in their 50s, dying."

That will not go away. You will have young people in their 20s, 30s, people in their 50s, dying from preventable conditions like diabetes, high blood pressure, undiagnosed cancer with obvious signs because of gross mismanagement and under funding.

Having foxes manage the henhouse is probably not a good plan for increased egg production.

Joe Mobley

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

.

Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636363].message }}

Joe Mobley

10 years ago

Tim, I have no doubt that, in your heart-of-hearts, you want the best for everyone. To you it seems that a single-payer health care system, ran by the state and federal governments will provide quality health care for all.

Let me suggest that governments are the least efficient entities on the planet. The idea that they can deliver even reasonable health care to a small portion of the populous seems a bit optimistic to me.

I hate to see our money and other resources wasted, if not fraud-ed away on this foolish endeavor.

But that's just me.

Joe Mobley

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

a single payer system, which is what I have been wanting for our country for decades.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

.

Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636405].message }}

Kurt

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Joe Mobley

Tim, I have no doubt that, in your heart-of-hearts, you want the best for everyone. To you it seems that a single-payer health care system, ran by the state and federal governments will provide quality health care for all.

Let me suggest that governments are the least efficient entities on the planet. The idea that they can deliver even reasonable health care to a small portion of the populous seems a bit optimistic to me.

I hate to see our money and other resources wasted, if not fraud-ed away on this foolish endeavor.

But that's just me.

Joe Mobley

Time magazine did a very indepth study about 6 weeks ago into why US health costs are so high. We actually have the highest health costs per capita of any country, yet we rank dead last (no pun intended) in health related issues for developed countries, such as life expectancy. You can't blame the US gov for us having the highest health costs and worst results.

Here's what Time found...by far the number one reason for such high costs are the CEOs of for profit hospitals gouging patients for medical supplies. These CEOs are hired to make profits and the health of patients isn't their primarcy concern. Money is.

So to make as much profit as possible, these hospitals charge patients $500 for a couple of aspirin, $200 for a bandaid, etc. They take advantage of a lack of free market and the inability of patients to get fair prices. When I was having a stroke, I didn't "shop around", I went to the nearest emergency room.

The truth is, Medicare and the VA refuse to pay these profiteer prices and dictate to the hospitals prices that are much closer to the fair market. And because of this, these gov run health agencies actually pay far less for health care.

There are other things involved, but price gouging was the number one reason.

[ 6 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636563].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Good points Kurt. I could post several studies by different organizations which have ranked the health care systems of countries and the US ranks around the mid 30s to as low as 42nd. We already spend the highest percentage of GDP of any country on health care and we still rank 42nd? This is before Obamacare! We can do better.

If you look at the countries that are ranked the highest, it's countries that have single payer universal health care in almost all cases. Single payer can work here and if we worked together we could take the best parts of all the most successful systems, including the ones in our system, and be ranked #1. The working together is the hard part though since some don't want to see any changes.

Originally Posted by Kurt

Time magazine did a very indepth study about 6 weeks ago into why US health costs are so high. We actually have the highest health costs per capita of any country, yet we rank dead last (no pun intended) in health related issues for developed countries, such as life expectancy. You can't blame the US gov for us having the highest health costs and worst results.

Here's what Time found...by far the number one reason for such high costs are the CEOs of for profit hospitals gouging patients for medical supplies. These CEOs are hired to make profits and the health of patients isn't their primarcy concern. Money is.

So to make as much profit as possible, these hospitals charge patients $500 for a couple of aspirin, $200 for a bandaid, etc. They take advantage of a lack of free market and the inability of patients to get fair prices. When I was having a stroke, I didn't "shop around", I went to the nearest emergency room.

The truth is, Medicare and the VA refuse to pay these profiteer prices and dictate to the hospitals prices that are much closer to the fair market. And because of this, these gov run health agencies actually pay far less for health care.

There are other things involved, but price gouging was the number one reason.

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8637029].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Good points Kurt. I could post several studies by different organizations which have ranked the health care systems of countries and the US ranks around the mid 30s to as low as 42nd. We already spend the highest percentage of GDP of any country on health care and we still rank 42nd? This is before Obamacare! We can do better.

If you look at the countries that are ranked the highest, it's countries that have single payer universal health care in almost all cases. Single payer can work here and if we worked together we could take the best parts of all the most successful systems, including the ones in our system, and be ranked #1. The working together is the hard part though since some don't want to see any changes.

Well, I'm pretty sure someone here DID. Anyway, it often comes up. With relative ranking, that is interesting. The CBC didn't agree.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8637615].message }}

Kay King

10 years ago

There are all sorts of "points" to make but the simple truth is out health care system began declining when profit became the health care god.

I have always thought this country should have a national health care system. My problem with the ACA is it's another layer of health care that piles another layer of costs and subsidies and entitlements on top of ones we have.

Medicare and Medicaid are less than 50 years old....does anyone realize that? I find people think Medicare is part of the original Social Security program from the 1930's...not true. Isn't it true that medical costs began rising soon after these programs were in place? Am I wrong about that?

When govt guarantees are in place, the profit on drugs and procedures and care is no longer limited by what individuals are able to pay.

Each program contains entitlements and freebies that are abused and the costs of both are much higher than anticipated when they were enacted. Over the years more goodies have been added to Medicaid; more companies have found ways to profit from Medicare; more entitlements have been added to Social Security that are far beyond the "retirement" system it was designed to be.

Wouldn't it make sense to create a public health system that REPLACES two health care programs that are highly abused?

How much more affordable would the ACA be if we eliminated the cost of Medicare and Medicaid and instead created one plan to provide health care for every age and income level?

Just saying - maybe we aren't thinking big enough?

[ 2 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8637959].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Medicare and Medicaid are less than 50 years old....does anyone realize that? I find people think Medicare is part of the original Social Security program from the 1930's...not true. Isn't it true that medical costs began rising soon after these programs were in place? Am I wrong about that?

Nope you are correct.
Before those programs the market dictated hospital and doctor costs. You also had charity hospitals and doctors would do charity work for those who couldn't afford the then low costs.
I still remember those days.
Two things that aren't covered by medicare or medicaid and very few health insurance policies are laser eye surgery and contact lenses. Both have their prices controlled by the free market. Both have become less expensive since they where introduced. Both have advanced significantly since their inception.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8638006].message }}

ThomM 10 years ago

Actually you can look at the introduction of medicare/medicaid as the beginning of what we have today.
Before those programs a doctor normally had one nurse-secretary working in his office, sometimes part-time depending on the patient load of the day.
They doctor would spend time with the patient often scheduling only two patients an hour. Health insurance was more like car insurance. If you where in an accident and needed repairs you could get insurance for that. But doctor visits and minor things where out of pocket, like regular maintenance on a car is out of pocket.
Paper work at the doctors was a few notes on your chart. Billing was simple bookwork.
Then the M's came in and said they would pay for the doctors visit, but at what the doctor was currently charging. Now the doctor needs to add someone to the payroll to take care of all the extra paper work. So the dr. either has to see more patients per hour or charge more to the patients without medi... So they see more patients which means more paper work which means adding another employee.
Then insurance companies see a new niche and offer insurance that pays for the doctor visit (or a portion of it).
So the doctors can now charge more to cover the (now) expense of seeing patients on medi...., of course it's more paper work so another employee is added.
Naturally as the pharmaceutical companies see they can now charge more for their pills and get paid, they do. Same with hospitals. Turning them into "for profit" industries. A
At this point health care went from caring for health, to turning a profit.
Medicaid and medicare don't produce a profit. In fact they don't even cover the overhead they create resulting in higher medical and insurance costs, and taxes for those who don't have them.
With ACA (if I remember right) they number of people buying ins. has to be higher then the number put on Medicare to offset the costs. So more young healthy people will have to buy into it then old sick folks. So far more people have been put on medicare then have bought ins.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8638183].message }}
- Kay King 10 years ago
  
  Thom - That was a great timeline!
  
  What is clear is once an entitlement program is in place - it stays no matter what. That makes the ACA a third health care program - complete with subsidies, waivers and another layer of administration between patient and doctor.
  
  Today's talking point phrase is "fix it not nix it". Sounds like something a cheerleader would come up with - and it's being parroted mindlessly today by one lawmaker after another. How silly - I'd give everyone who uses the "phrase of the day" a time out without pay.
  
  Most of all - we can't afford multiple programs. We can say "debt doesn't matter" and bluster around all we want....but there are limits and we are heading toward them far too quickly.
  
  US debt surges $328 billion in single day, surpassing $17 trillion for first time ? RT USA
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
  ***
  One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
  what it is instead of what you think it should be.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8638609].message }}
  
  ThomM 10 years ago
  
  It's amazing how often the government implements a program that is the end all and be all. then spends the next X amount of years "fixing" it and claiming it's not broke.
  When they can't do something as simple as hire a competent company to design and code a website, it makes you wonder how well they can design a national health care system that works.
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
  Getting old ain't for sissy's
  As you are I was, as I am you will be
  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8638661].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

I'm in agreement with you here Kay. Of course I would like to see some plans to replace what we have. Haven't seen any of those from those who want to repeal the ACA. They said "repeal and replace" but there isn't a real plan to replace. That's why I like the waiver option for the states. Let's see some states test out some ideas and see who can do a better job.

Originally Posted by Kay King

I have always thought this country should have a national health care system.
Wouldn't it make sense to create a public health system that REPLACES two health care programs that are highly abused?

How much more affordable would the ACA be if we eliminated the cost of Medicare and Medicaid and instead created one plan to provide health care for every age and income level?

Just saying - maybe we aren't thinking big enough?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8638957].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I'm in agreement with you here Kay. Of course I would like to see some plans to replace what we have. Haven't seen any of those from those who want to repeal the ACA. They said "repeal and replace" but there isn't a real plan to replace. That's why I like the waiver option for the states. Let's see some states test out some ideas and see who can do a better job.

Really? I've said many times that something like we have in NY called Family health plus would be a much better option. Monthly premiums are on a sliding scale based on your income and family size. Also take away the subsidies payed out to corporate farms and use that money to off set the cost. But we also need to focus on health like many European countries do. Ban or label gmo's. Ban rBGH. Promote organic foods and raw milk. Implement a healthy living and eating program as part of the healthcare.

[ 2 ] Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8639041].message }}

TLTheLiberator

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

I'm in agreement with you here Kay. Of course I would like to see some plans to replace what we have. Haven't seen any of those from those who want to repeal the ACA. They said "repeal and replace" but there isn't a real plan to replace. That's why I like the waiver option for the states. Let's see some states test out some ideas and see who can do a better job.

Tim, I just saw the two main architects of Romney Care on The Ed Show and they said things will work out fine with the ACA.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8639086].message }}

Kay King 10 years ago

Well, if they said that on The Ed Show, then we have nothing to worry about. Everything is fine. That's a relief. But - since they were from the other party...are you sure they know what they're talking about? Can you trust them to tell the truth? Hmmmm. Sorry, couldn't resist.
- [ 2 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8639272].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Tim, I just saw the two main architects of Romney Care on The Ed Show and they said things will work out fine with the ACA.

WOW, they must be GENIUSES, HUH!?!?? I guess THEY read ALL of the new law, etc...., HUH?

There were a LOT of *******GLARING******* differences with romney care! It DIDN'T change the school system, or the hospital system, or union relations, etc... It MANDATED generic when available. It didn't TRAP YOU into a circumstance. It didn't change the definition of full time!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8640079].message }}

TLTheLiberator

10 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

WOW, they must be GENIUSES, HUH!?!?? I guess THEY read ALL of the new law, etc...., HUH?

There were a LOT of *******GLARING******* differences with romney care! It DIDN'T change the school system, or the hospital system, or union relations, etc... It MANDATED generic when available. It didn't TRAP YOU into a circumstance. It didn't change the definition of full time!

Steve

Yea, you probably know more about the law than they do.

Who the hell are they anyway?

Chances are they're just brown nosing in order to get a contract to fix the ACA.

I'll take your word & knowledge of the ACA over theirs any day.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8640243].message }}

Kay King 10 years ago

I think Congressman Barton has made a good suggestion - make the signup for the first year voluntary. Let people choose whether they want this new health care plan and put of the mandatory aspect - and the fines imposed by IRS - for one year.

That makes the coverage available to those who need it. It makes it available to those who have been looking forward to it and supporting it. It gives time to perfect the system while having less pressure placed on it and gives the public time to be comfortable with it. It provides time to resolve issues at the IRS - to complete investigations and institute safeguards. Also provides time to address privacy concerns about the system.

The "full steam ahead" doesn't work with a damaged system.

The "stop it" doesn't work when people are losing their insurance.

Wouldn't this be a good alternative?
- [ 1 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8640298].message }}
- Joe Mobley 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  That makes the coverage available to those who need it...
  Wouldn't this be a good alternative?
  
  I love you Kay but No! I am not interested in making insurance "coverage available to those who need it" if it takes money out of my pocket.
  
  You pay for your cell phone, I'll pay for mine.
  If you don't have money for a cell phone, you don't get one.
  
  If I don't have the money for a cell phone, I don't get one.
  
  You pay for your food, I'll pay for mine. If you don't have money for food, you don't eat. If I don't have money for food, I don't eat.
  
  You pay for your insurance, I'll pay for mine. If you don't have money for insurance, you don't get coverage.
  
  Etc.
  
  Wouldn't this be a good alternative?
  
  Joe Mobley
  
  [ 3 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  .
  Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8641494].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

There are all sorts of "points" to make but the simple truth is out health care system began declining when profit became the health care god.

I have always thought this country should have a national health care system. My problem with the ACA is it's another layer of health care that piles another layer of costs and subsidies and entitlements on top of ones we have.

Medicare and Medicaid are less than 50 years old....does anyone realize that? I find people think Medicare is part of the original Social Security program from the 1930's...not true. Isn't it true that medical costs began rising soon after these programs were in place? Am I wrong about that?

When govt guarantees are in place, the profit on drugs and procedures and care is no longer limited by what individuals are able to pay.

Each program contains entitlements and freebies that are abused and the costs of both are much higher than anticipated when they were enacted. Over the years more goodies have been added to Medicaid; more companies have found ways to profit from Medicare; more entitlements have been added to Social Security that are far beyond the "retirement" system it was designed to be.

Wouldn't it make sense to create a public health system that REPLACES two health care programs that are highly abused?

How much more affordable would the ACA be if we eliminated the cost of Medicare and Medicaid and instead created one plan to provide health care for every age and income level?

Just saying - maybe we aren't thinking big enough?

Even THAT is a better idea! I have OFTEN said if medicare is so great, and we have such a need, why not open it to all. And medicare had problems, so they decided to go the PPO route. TRANSLATION? USE INSURANCE COMPANIES! MANY on medicare use that, AND LIKE IT! My mother did! My father does. It is called Medicare Advantage, and the ACA wants to gut THAT too!

I went on the HC.GOV website yesterday. Did YOU know they CHECK, and USE, you CREDIT REPORT!?!?!?!? They don't even tell you that! I found it in help and the terms.

They CLAIM this is to "protect your privacy". *****BULL*****! WHY protect privacy if, like BO says, "It is like kayak.com"? There would be NOTHING to protect. BESIDES, they want to DESTROY privacy by giving the IRS and others all your health information(violating HIPAA), and give that to the "navigators" breaking a LOT of laws, of which hipaa is only ONE!

My credit report isn't even right. Disregarding the credit info, my BIRTH DATE isn't even right! At one point, a company had my area code wrong for YEARS!

BTW do they do a SOFT PULL, as required by law for such things? Or do they do a HARD PULL like most do? A HARD pull can destroy your credit!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8640066].message }}

TLTheLiberator

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

By the way, many of the state's web sites are doing much better. Something I haven't heard anyone bring up is that the expectation of those behind the ACA probably was that many more states would create their own web sites. Unfortunately many states didn't and I think that was for mostly political reasons.

Speaking of the states and how they can participate in the ACA, or not, there's one way any state can get a waiver from the major parts of the ACA. That way is to come up with another plan and get a waiver. A few states are talking about this including Vermont and Pennsylvania, and I believe California will get a bill up and going again soon. They had a few single payer bills pass in the last decade and they were vetoed by the Governor. I don't think one would be vetoed now.

Tim, Ohio's governor of all people, has seen the light and used interesting measures to get the Medicaid expansion for the people of his state over the objections of the state legislature.

I love the crocodile tears pouring out from opponents of the LAW. It's a hoot.

Here's a correction from something someone wrote earlier in this thread:

They gave the impression that every sale of property will result in a surcharge to help pay for the ACA...

... when this is the reality...

So how does this (The ACA) affect the sale of a home?

Currently, when a person sells a home they have lived in longer than 2 years, they can exclude the first $250,000 of gains.

A couple can exclude the first $500,000 of gains.

For example, if a couple has a $1,000,000 home with $600,000 of gains, they would have to pay the (ACA) 3.8% tax on only $100,000 of the gain.

Given that very few people are sitting on large gains right now and the majority of home sales (not just gains) are for less than $250,000,...

... this tax will hit truly only a small number of people.

The above was taken from this article Forbes:

Taxes and the ACA: Home Sales Killer? - Forbes

All The Best!!

TL

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8633967].message }}

Kay King

10 years ago

I love the crocodile tears pouring out from opponents of the LAW. It's a hoot.

That attitude is grating to me. Where is the joy in a program that isn't working properly - that is confusing and frightening ordinary people? Are you so focused on being right and on your side "winning" that you just don't give a crap about anyone else in the country?

Every time cost of the new plans comes up there is reassurance of "you will qualify for a subsidy". Any idiot has to realize those SUBSIDIES come from somewhere other than thin air.

Blue Cross in my area has already made sweeping changes not beneficial for the insured...and those changes are already in place. A Florida health insurance company just cut 80% of its policies. This is happening all over the country.

Hundreds of thousands of people are being told they are losing their current health insurance plans. My own employer with thousands of employees announced they will continue to offer insurance to full timers - but only until the employees sign up for the new required plans.

Those people in D.C. need to get off their blustering high horse and get the job done! Otherwise there will be hundreds of thousands of people - or more - without ANY health insurance. There's nothing funny about it.

[ 2 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

One secret to happiness is to let every situation be

what it is instead of what you think it should be.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8634335].message }}

Kay King 10 years ago

It does have its funny moments, though....

Brosurance Is The New Obamacare - Business Insider

Best reader comment I found on this ad:

"Unless young people sign up in big numbers, the ACA won't have a keg to stand on"

Don't care what side you take - that's funny.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8634385].message }}

TLTheLiberator

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

That attitude is grating to me. Where is the joy in a program that isn't working properly - that is confusing and frightening ordinary people? Are you so focused on being right and on your side "winning" that you just don't give a crap about anyone else in the country?

Every time cost of the new plans comes up there is reassurance of "you will qualify for a subsidy". Any idiot has to realize those SUBSIDIES come from somewhere other than thin air.

Blue Cross in my area has already made sweeping changes not beneficial for the insured...and those changes are already in place. A Florida health insurance company just cut 80% of its policies. This is happening all over the country.

Hundreds of thousands of people are being told they are losing their current health insurance plans. My own employer with thousands of employees announced they will continue to offer insurance to full timers - but only until the employees sign up for the new required plans.

Those people in D.C. need to get off their blustering high horse and get the job done! Otherwise there will be hundreds of thousands of people - or more - without ANY health insurance. There's nothing funny about it.

I really couldn't care less what "grats" on you.

I was talking about some pols that act like they care if people are having trouble signing up for the ACA or not - when they're rooting to the program to fail and would kill it in a heartbeat - if they could.

No one wants the problems to go away more than yours truly.

Once again, I'll take the BIG PICTURE/long view and treat with caution all the doomsday scenarios and predictions that seem to almost always be over the top and devoid of reality - especially when it come to the ACA.

Thanks

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8635101].message }}

garyv

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ronrule

I think it's all B.S.

Has anyone considered the possibility that the HealthCare.gov website actually worked fine, and the whole "faulty website" was just made up to cover the fact that nobody actually tried to sign up? I mean, surely the organization that's going to be responsible for managing life and death medical coverage can handle one website... Actually, we KNOW they can, the IRS website gets more traffic every year at tax time than HealthCare.gov ever got and it doesn't crash.

The website worked fine.

It's either that ... or it was hacked, and this is the cover story because they don't want you to know all of your information was leaked.

But either way, the site worked fine. The "coding problems" of this nature, as they describe them, would have been apparent before the flood gates were opened, it wasn't a load issue.

I tend to agree that this is much closer to the real issue. Because if it was a "load" issue, we all know that it's an easy fix, and could have been fixed over night if they really wanted to. But it's not a load issue.

Their biggest problem still awaits them. And that is how to get young people to pay enough to keep this behemoth going. It's not economically feasible for a healthy young person to pay the full amount for care when they can pay less for the penalty. And if most young people decide to go with the penalty, the system is not sustainable. This will lead to more drastic measures to get the money needed, and this will lead to a sharp decline in their largest demographic.

And here's a little math for those complaining about insurance CEOs making too much...

There are only around 35 private health insurance companies that serve the American public, not including medicare providers. With the money we just spent on the website alone, we could have paid every single CEO over 18 million dollars.

And whoever is pulling out of their keister these crap reports about the US having the worst healthcare system = must have never been to a hospital anywhere else.

My spider-senses sense another keester pulling report or study being dug out as we speak...

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636730].message }}

MSF9587

10 years ago

I don't know if this is appropriate or not, BUT I MUST SAY;
This is ****ed up! , but lets look at the good side of it shall we? At least they didn't gave those 400,000,000 dollars to Wall Street to lose in a couple of trades nor financing Terrorists in the middle east in the name of freedom. right? But Still ****ed up!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8634633].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by MSF9587

I don't know if this is appropriate or not, BUT I MUST SAY;
This is ****ed up! , but lets look at the good side of it shall we? At least they didn't gave those 400,000,000 dollars to Wall Street to lose in a couple of trades nor financing Terrorists in the middle east in the name of freedom. right? But Still ****ed up!

We will NEVER know! But WHAT is the difference? It WAS STOLEN! It WAS paid to terrorists!

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8635832].message }}

thunderbird

10 years ago

Originally Posted by KingArthur

Cost of Obamacare Website to Date: $292 Million | The Fiscal Times

But we know now that the total costs are much more than 292 million.'

Whatever it cost, there is definitely a professional looter class, sort of the invasive lionfish of society.

Originally Posted by KingArthur

I bet you could have outsourced the building of the site to an expert coder in the Philippines and had it done for $1,000 and then charged him $300 per month to maintain it.

What do you think?

Indonesian webmasters are proving to be very good as well and also adept at incorporating cutting edge technology.

Thanks

Signature

Project HERE.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8635495].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

BTW there is now talk of maybe delaying it. IRONIC, since that was one option turned down only a few weeks ago. Anyway, they said that if it IS delayed that the insurance companies may reprice the premiums. The reason? As I have OFTEN SAID! Insurance works because it is a GAMBLE! The idea is that you bet AGAINST YOURSELF! If you stay healthy, you LOSE the premium, the INSURANCE COMPANY wins!! If you DON'T stay healthy, YOU get more money.

That is IMPORTANT, since it means that the uneven spread of risk due to "preexisting conditions" must somehow be countered, and that is what the penalty and requirements were supposed to be for. So the insurance companies are upset at the prospect of change here. Don't forget, they rely on actuarials that are now fully WORTHLESS! I wonder how they deal with THAT!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636254].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

People have NO idea of the costs! MY problem cost almost $300K!!!!!!!!! That was about 9 YEARS ago! I originally had to pay over about $175/month!!!!!!!! With OC, NAME BRAND would be MANDATED! so that is $2100/year! That ALREADY push me over my deductible! THEN, I am supposed to have tests every years that cost about $14,000+!!!!!!!! That is a LOT! To be honest, I have only had the tests about 3 years. I have to basically take a day off of work and ALL they do is give me a meager chance at a second chance if things go south again. So HEY, the insurance company saved over $70K JUST ON THAT! OH YEAH, I FORGOT! I needed to WORK! That meant $2500 for a testing device, and an extra $416/year for supplies!

My insurance actually TURNED ME DOWN once because of a "preexisting condition". That was against the law LONG AGO, because I WAS covered earlier. Frankly, the government should have FINED the stupid agent that sold my company that policy. It was HIS job to make this seamless and tell the truth, and he DIDN'T! LUCKILY **I** managed to get everyone to toe the line and set things right, NO thanks to the government!

And look at KIM! It cost HIM a fortune ALSO! Do you think the insurance companies will pay all this, for EVERYONE, forever? YOU'RE DREAMING!(History is RIFE with examples where they capped or stopped) If they keep STEALING MONEY, do you think IT could go on forever? YOU'RE DREAMING!(This is stopping a LOT! Many left the country) Do you think the population will fall? YOU'RE DREAMING!(It is SKYROCKETING from ALL ANGLES) Do you think the government will keep paying? YOU'RE DREAMING! They are cutting back! Do you think DOCTORS will accept it? YOU'RE DREAMING! They are retiring, cutting back, etc....

HECK, my mother was on medicare! IT RAN OUT! She went on medicaid! She was originally DECLINED! THAT RAN OUT! They cleared out EVERYTHING!

And if insurance is free to the patient, they may go in for the SNIFFLES! They may EVEN *******INSIST******* on antibiotics and ****YOU**** could die from a bacterial infection you catch from them that is IMMUNE to antibiotics, etc... OH, you say! THAT is SCI FI! That will NEVER happen, you say..... Well, it has happened a LOT! HERE is but ONE example:

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hospital patients[edit]
Many MRSA infections occur in hospitals and healthcare facilities. When infections occur in this manner it is known as healthcare acquired MRSA or HA-MRSA. These Rates of MRSA infection are also increased in hospitalized patients who are treated with quinolones. Healthcare provider-to-patient transfer is common, especially when healthcare providers move from patient to patient without performing necessary hand-washing techniques between patients.[8][13]

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636557].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

I have NO doubt there is price gouging, though MANY things make the prices higher in the US, and several ARE due to the government. Many people in healthcare say that medicare is a LOSS! They handle it ONLY because they can, if they gouge OTHERS. Do forget all those that DON'T accept it though!

CBC only a few months ago said CANADA had the WORST healthcare! The US WAS on the list, but shown as BETTER than canada, sweden, france, and one other, as I recall. The list had the 15 worst. BTW CBC is canada broadcasting corporation and I saw the show LIVE, since they got it in Buffalo NY.

You want a low price? Go into the deepest regions of india or something. Care is CHEAP, but not all that great!

Back to gouging and the US government though. If the new insurance is so great, why did congress FLAT OUT REFUSE to go on it? Why did they FLAT OUT REFUSE to not demand SPECIAL SUBSIDIES? WHY did their friends, and employees, get WAIVERS?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636578].message }}

Kurt

10 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

I have NO doubt there is price gouging, though MANY things make the prices higher in the US, and several ARE due to the government. Many people in healthcare say that medicare is a LOSS! They handle it ONLY because they can, if they gouge OTHERS. Do forget all those that DON'T accept it though!

CBC only a few months ago said CANADA had the WORST healthcare! The US WAS on the list, but shown as BETTER than canada, sweden, france, and one other, as I recall. The list had the 15 worst. BTW CBC is canada broadcasting corporation and I saw the show LIVE, since they got it in Buffalo NY.

You want a low price? Go into the deepest regions of india or something. Care is CHEAP, but not all that great!

Steve

Oh brother...here you go again.

You yourself in past posts has pointed out the exact point made by Time magazine, and that's how hospitals over-charge for many items. Again, you said it yourself. Why do you now disagree with your previous self?

Just because you want to be gouged for health care, doesn't mean the rest of us do. If you want to pay too much for health care and get your rocks off by paying $500 for a couple of aspirin, you don't have to do a thing, you can stay right here in the USA.

Back to gouging and the US government though. If the new insurance is so great, why did congress FLAT OUT REFUSE to go on it? Why did they FLAT OUT REFUSE to not demand SPECIAL SUBSIDIES? WHY did their friends, and employees, get WAIVERS?

Logic is your friend. Your point about ACA not being good is a straw man fallacy. My point was made directly to the point that health care isn't more expensive when the US gov handles it and had nothing to do with the ACA, other than anything has to be better than being both the worst and most expensive health care in the World.

The "problem" with ACA in this case is that rates are set by the free market, not the gov. The good news is, the health insurance companies will negotiate with the hospitals and doctors, and I doubt they will be willing to pay $500 for a couple of aspirin, either. Although, you still can.

The ACA is ****NOT**** a single payer system and the gov isn't over-seeing prices. Which is why some feel it doesn't go far enough.

And just for the record, the "mandate" is a very soft mandate. The IRS is not allowed to persue any typical remedy against those that don't register for ACA, including both civil and/or criminal charges. They can't take your property or anything else. I believe their only remedy is in the form of a tax deducting the penalty in the form of a tax return. It's still a penalty, but unlike any other involving the IRS. You won't go to jail or have any property seized for failing to comply.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8637102].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

Oh brother...here you go again.

You yourself in past posts has pointed out the exact point made by Time magazine, and that's how hospitals over-charge for many items. Again, you said it yourself. Why do you now disagree with your previous self?

I never changed what I said! HECK, I WORKED on a pricing system for a big health provider! If you needed ONE aspirin, you may LITERALLY pay for a BOTTLE of them! If it weer a bottle of 50, SO BE IT! But does that mean that they make a HUGE profit? NOPE!!!!!!

QUICK! What is worse? Stealing $5, for something that helps you, or $600, for something that DOESN'T? Well, $600/year is what is often claimed HERE, but NOT charged by the healthcare industry!

Just because you want to be gouged for health care, doesn't mean the rest of us do. If you want to pay too much for health care and get your rocks off by paying $500 for a couple of aspirin, you don't have to do a thing, you can stay right here in the USA.

As I said, about $5, NOT $500! And you suggest that I, and MOST OTHERS, should prefer getting gouged a LOT for inferior HC, then getting gouged far less, so people can get a bit of ink?

Logic is your friend. Your point about ACA not being good is a straw man fallacy. My point was made directly to the point that health care isn't more expensive when the US gov handles it and had nothing to do with the ACA, other than anything has to be better than being both the worst and most expensive health care in the World.

Were have YOU been lately!?!?!? Things have been SKYROCKETING! Of course, NOBODY knows what is covered, or the service they will get, because the website is doing absolutely FANTASTIC compared to everything else!

The "problem" with ACA in this case is that rates are set by the free market, not the gov. The good news is, the health insurance companies will negotiate with the hospitals and doctors, and I doubt they will be willing to pay $500 for a couple of aspirin, either. Although, you still can.

GEE, if the government is REALLY so magic, why can't they declare say open heart surgery to cost NOTHING!?!?!?!? Never mind that drug companies, part makers, etc... will stop providing things because THEY WON'T GET PAID, and hospitals will shut their doors beecause THEY WON'T GET PAID, and doctors will quit because THEY WON'T GET PAID! Funny how you talk about free and all. It is called SLAVERY!

The ACA is ****NOT**** a single payer system and the gov isn't over-seeing prices. Which is why some feel it doesn't go far enough.

YES IT IS! The NEXT step will happen within the next 10 years, after the insurance companies are gone or nearly so. SOME got an early taste! Just yesterday, I saw that 175,000 in ohio are on a SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM!

And just for the record, the "mandate" is a very soft mandate. The IRS is not allowed to persue any typical remedy against those that don't register for ACA, including both civil and/or criminal charges. They can't take your property or anything else. I believe their only remedy is in the form of a tax deducting the penalty in the form of a tax return. It's still a penalty, but unlike any other involving the IRS. You won't go to jail or have any property seized for failing to comply.

Even TL said they will be paid from property. And whether they bill you, or take away from what is paid by the employer, SAME THING! ALSO, the IRS is working towards, and did earlier get it in a round about way, to be able to restrict travel.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8637607].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

And I wish I had bookmarked the page talking about the rankings, but there are LOTS of pages like this:

Calling for change in Canadian health care | CBC Books | CBC Radio

The care is clearly not as good as what some HERE make it out to be.

Note to canadians...I KNOW we have problems. I am not disputing that. I am certainly not saying your nation is inept, etc... Just showing how similar problems are everywhere and even CANADIANS realize canada is far from perfect.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636593].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Did you read that article? The lady who is trying to make changes wants to do three things:

* "First, Devaney would like to see medical students receive more training in communication."

* "She'd also like to see health-care professionals get more support."

* "Finally, Devaney would like to stop the movement towards privatization."

So, she basically wants to make the system better and make sure it stays in public/government control! Lol.

By the way, I may have missed it but I haven't seen anyone brag HERE about the Canadian system. It is single payer, but in the rankings I saw it was usually around #20 to 30, so it can be improved, but still is better than what the US has.

Originally Posted by seasoned

And I wish I had bookmarked the page talking about the rankings, but there are LOTS of pages like this:

Calling for change in Canadian health care | CBC Books | CBC Radio

The care is clearly not as good as what some HERE make it out to be.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8637068].message }}

garyv

10 years ago

I'm not sure I'm getting the logic behind the thought that the government taking over the funding of health-care is going to make it cheaper. This is the same government that paid $400 for hammers and $600 for toilet seats.

They can turn a simple process, like getting your picture taken, into an all day miserable event. Being a former military man, I loath the day the government takes over any more of my health care. I've been there, it's not pretty.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8638125].message }}

TLTheLiberator

10 years ago

National Website Disaster on Vimeo

[ 1 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8640337].message }}

Kay King 10 years ago

I've heard of blinders but you really wear a pair of them!

The same card played time after time by those with nothing better to offer.

at least health care reform doesn't have slavery as a key flaw.

When you have to resort to cartoons and slavery references to support a bill implemented in 2013....maybe you don't have a platform to stand on.
- [ 3 ] Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
what it is instead of what you think it should be.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8640439].message }}
TimPhelan 10 years ago

Funny. I was actually thinking the same thing before seeing that video. The Constitution was flawed and has been tinkered with for over 200 years.

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

National Website Disaster on Vimeo
- [ 1 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8640567].message }}
- TLTheLiberator 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  Funny. I was actually thinking the same thing before seeing that video. The Constitution was flawed and has been tinkered with for over 200 years.
  
  Say Tim, the admin has a point person in charge of getting the site ready by the end of November. His name is Jeff Zeints.
  
  Zeints Announces New Contractor, Describes "Punch List" for Tech Fixes | New Republic
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8640992].message }}

garyv

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

National Website Disaster on Vimeo

LOL - that's way too funny. Comparing Obamacare to democracy. Especially since this country is a Republic - not a Democracy.

What do you think of this proposal?... Senator Proposes Law: 'If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep It Act' | The Weekly Standard

Especially since it was promised by the president and every democrat when passing this thing. Should the "You can keep it" act be signed into law?

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8641376].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by garyv

LOL - that's way too funny. Comparing Obamacare to democracy. Especially since this country is a Republic - not a Democracy.

What do you think of this proposal?... Senator Proposes Law: 'If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep It Act' | The Weekly Standard

Especially since it was promised by the president and every democrat when passing this thing. Should the "You can keep it" act be signed into law?

I hate to get all technical on you Gary, but that's not totally right.
A republic is any govt. that isn't a Monarchy.
What we have is a Constitutional Republic. The Constitution is suppose to protect the rights of the individual over the will of the majority. Why do you think libs dislike the constitution so much?

[ 3 ] Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8641491].message }}

seasoned

10 years ago

OK, they have a guy proven to be BELOW MEDIOCRE with FINANCES managing a TECHNICAL project, and have the consultant that apparently did NOT work on the remaining pieces doing THAT! Traditionally, this does NOT go well!

ALSO, the idea is to finish it *****LONG***** before it is needed. On projects like THIS, typically *****MONTHS***** before! WHY? So you can run it through unit tests, SUPPOSEDLY done, but CLEARLY NOT! System integration tests, NEVER DONE! And hopefully FULL END TO END TESTS, NEVER DONE!

WHY? The goal is to have it working for the CUSTOMER, who is the ONLY one that can properly do the full end to end tests(The HEALTH DEPARTMENT or CMS in this case)! THEY are to test it so that THEIR customer, the US population in this case, can use it with relatively few hassles!

This stuff is RARELY as simple as some think. And ANYONE in IT should understand that! You can't just hire anyone! You CAN'T just sit back and wait! You CAN'T expect PERFECTION, but should demand far better than this. THIS case is different though, because the CMS should have started testing MONTHS ago and, BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION, NEVER DID!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8641535].message }}

Health Care Website Cost You Over 600 Million Dollars

Trending Topics

Are Solo ADs the Most Cost Effective Way to Promote your Product?

How do I effectively build and nurture an email list for affiliate marketing purposes?

Been a while! Any of you Old Timers here?

How much does the rebranding affect CR ?

Are billboards still effective in driving customers?