How Well Do You Understand Your Health Insurance Policy?
SodaHead Living
2012/07/11 22:56:27
|
|
|||||
|
321 votes
|
|
39% | |||
|
270 votes
|
|
33% | |||
|
133 votes
|
|
16% | |||
|
103 votes
|
|
12% | |||
Signing up for insurance can be a pain the neck, but without it you could end up footing a bill you can't afford. Health insurance has taken a prominent spot in politics lately as the government attempts to get basic coverage for more people, but good coverage will never be completely free, and selecting a plan that's understandable and affordable can still be a chore. Let us know your thoughts on insurance with this six-question Quick Poll. We'd love to hear from you!
Brought to you by 2insure4less.
Brought to you by 2insure4less.
















Once the ACA passed, and since it was a gradual phase-in vs immediate implementation, insurance firms frequently used it as an excuse to make larger than necessary premium increases as a hedge against future requirements they justify all increases. I know this for a fact, as I saw it (and heard it explained thusly) at the insurance firm I worked at.
The $500 billion is a reduction in Medicare Advantage, which is a GOP program that the GOP put in place, and which is a total waste of taxpayer money. It was a GOP experiment in partial privatization, but the only way they could get a single healthcare provider to even participate was to promise them Medicare rates plus 30%! Here is how non-partisan factchecker Politifact described this one:
"The claim? The law "will cut $500 billion from Medicare" and "hurt the quality" of care for seniors.
PolitiFact National found the law does not take $500 billion out of the current Medicare budget, but reduces the growth of Medicare spending by just over $500 billion over 10 years.
In rating the claim Mostly False, our colleagues noted that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects Medicare spending will rise to $929 billion in 2020, an increase of $430 million over actual spending in 2009.
So, Medicare spending continues to increase, but not by as much as it would have without the reform law."
As to the myth the bill is $2 trillion, twice what was claimed...Per Politifact, that got a "False" rating (meaning, flat out lie by conservatives).
The ad, running in FL against Democrats by GOP group American Commitment says:
"Fact: Bill Nelson was the deciding vote. The bill...
The $500 billion is a reduction in Medicare Advantage, which is a GOP program that the GOP put in place, and which is a total waste of taxpayer money. It was a GOP experiment in partial privatization, but the only way they could get a single healthcare provider to even participate was to promise them Medicare rates plus 30%! Here is how non-partisan factchecker Politifact described this one:
"The claim? The law "will cut $500 billion from Medicare" and "hurt the quality" of care for seniors.
PolitiFact National found the law does not take $500 billion out of the current Medicare budget, but reduces the growth of Medicare spending by just over $500 billion over 10 years.
In rating the claim Mostly False, our colleagues noted that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects Medicare spending will rise to $929 billion in 2020, an increase of $430 million over actual spending in 2009.
So, Medicare spending continues to increase, but not by as much as it would have without the reform law."
As to the myth the bill is $2 trillion, twice what was claimed...Per Politifact, that got a "False" rating (meaning, flat out lie by conservatives).
The ad, running in FL against Democrats by GOP group American Commitment says:
"Fact: Bill Nelson was the deciding vote. The bill could cost up to $2 trillion, double what we were promised. Nelson’s health care vote imposes the largest tax increase in history on the middle class, cuts $500 billion from Medicare to pay for new government programs, and millions could lose their current coverage. Tell Bill Nelson: Protect Florida patients, repeal the health care law."
What does Politifact say about it?
"Here, we’ll examine the claim that the law "could cost up to $2 trillion, double what we were promised."
We asked American Commitment for evidence for its charges, but we didn’t hear back. Tiny print that flashes by on the screen -- we read it only by pausing the YouTube video -- says the claim is from "Congressional Budget Office Estimate."
Even though American Commitment didn’t respond to our queries, we easily found similar statements about the health care law costing up to $2 trillion.
" Though the claim is repeated often, it’s not accurate...Actually, only part of the health care law -- the gross costs -- could cost up to $1.76 trillion. That’s only a slight increase from what was originally promised -- not close to double.
The number also doesn’t account for the portions of the law that pay for that spending, both new taxes and cost reductions.
The ad’s source -- the Congressional Budget Office -- specifically rebutted the charge that the costs had doubled, and they issued that rebuttal months ago. The CBO said that its latest estimates "are quite similar to the estimates we released when the legislation was being considered in March 2010.""
So its not $2 trillion, its $1.76 trillion. And that's very close to the project total cost over 10 years when the law was originally proposed. And that's BEFORE accounting for revenue and cost reductions,which will lower the final net cost considerably.
Curiously, neither has or is going to happen. Hence, your claim is wrong on its face...