Obamacare site keeps crashing... fears of epic failure in implementation comng true

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anal_Hershiser

1. 18-26 year olds are generally healthy and don't have any insurance at all. The very foundation of Obamacare is to get young people to enroll to offset the cost of older people. Young people won't do that, which at this point is fairly obvious given Obamacares hilarious enrollment numbers. The fact that you don't understand this almost makes the rest of your post not worth reading.

2. Yes, she is fucked.

3. Care to back that up with facts or sources? Of course not.

4. No, they can't. Their employer will simply put them under 30 hours so they don't qualify. Employers aren't going to pay for this. Their customers and employees will.

5. Any sources to back that up? Didn't think so.

6. Simply more idiotic rambling.

7. Any sources to back that up? Didn't think so.

Republicans wanting to starve children? Sigh........more idiotic rambling.

Anyone who calls Obamacare anything but a complete clusterfuck is either blind or stupid. I don't care if the president has an R or a D next to his name. It's a complete fucking mess with no end in sight. Gee, who would have thought electing the feel good candidate with ZERO experience would turn out this way? You wanted him, you got him.

Pokerfraudalert- Where Warren Buffet hasn't paid his share of taxes and Republicans want to starve children.

Idiotic posts like this are why I can't post here anymore. Barry arguing that Warren Buffet hasn't paid his "fair share of taxes" in his life was the end. You can't argue or even have an intelligent discussion with someone like that.

---

Don't worry Anal Cancer is covered under ObamaCare.


:outright

Quote:

---

FR1GHT: Druff's assets potentially cut in half vs couple hundred buck a month?

---

You ever heard of a prenup?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Got the bad news in the mail today.

Plan is bring canceled.

Premium going up from $172 to $276 for the suggested plan which is similar to my existing one.

---

Sorry, but you have no real argument here unless you tell us your income level.

It gets very annoying when people who have multi-million dollar net worth, bitch about paying
a couple of bucks more for health insurance.


:lol3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeerAndPoker

Quote:

---

FR1GHT: Druff's assets potentially cut in half vs couple hundred buck a month?

---

You ever heard of a prenup?

---

Like I said, "Druff's assets potentially cut in half vs couple hundred buck a month?"

There is always the risk that it doesn't hold up especially in a state like California. I'm pretty sure he official residency is in Nevada, but there is always a chance he could get dragged into a California court. You have risk into account. The risk here even if measured at a very small percentage verse his assets is not worth risking for a couple hundred bucks a month.

Legal fees and hassle to uphold it, need I say more?

Again, a couple hundred bucks a month vs at least hundreds of thousands of dollars maybe even millions. I have not clue what Druff has. Also, this will probably raise the cost of her insurance so the net effect isn't that great.

Also, it can be very awkward to have that conversation especially with a woman that you decided to have a child with, but don't want to worry about potentially splitting assets with in the case of a divorce.

Because you're hell bent (only a douche quotes and replies to reps) on him being such a Jew that he'd marry to save a couple hundred bucks on insurance I guess you forgot about how expensive weddings can be. If you were going for the LOL, because Druff is such a cheap Jew angle you should have used this line:

"I'm extremely surprised you haven't got married yet to get on her plan and save that extra money, but we all know you are too big of Jew to pay for a wedding."

Ever heard of continuing on with your nonsense and looking like a fool? Just stop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FR1GHT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeerAndPoker

You ever heard of a prenup?

---

Like I said, "Druff's assets potentially cut in half vs couple hundred buck a month?"

There is always the risk that it doesn't hold up especially in a state like California. I'm pretty sure he official residency is in Nevada, but there is always a chance he could get dragged into a California court. You have risk into account. The risk here even if measured at a very small percentage verse his assets is not worth risking for a couple hundred bucks a month.

Legal fees and hassle to uphold it, need I say more?

Again, a couple hundred bucks a month vs at least hundreds of thousands of dollars maybe even millions. I have not clue what Druff has. Also, this will probably raise the cost of her insurance so the net effect isn't that great.

Also, it can be very awkward to have that conversation especially with a woman that you decided to have a child with, but don't want to worry about potentially splitting assets with in the case of a divorce.

Because you're hell bent (only a douche quotes and replies to reps) on him being such a Jew that he'd marry to save a couple hundred bucks on insurance I guess you forgot about how expensive weddings can be. If you were going for the LOL, because Druff is such a cheap Jew angle you should have used this line:

"I'm extremely surprised you haven't got married yet to get on her plan and save that extra money, but we all know you are too big of Jew to pay for a wedding."

Ever heard of continuing on with your nonsense and looking like a fool? Just stop.

---

I was under the impression that the whole 50% thing only applied to assets accumulated during the marriage. Druff had his wealth long before he got in this relationship.

Three 20-year-olds created a website that duplicates the function of what healthcare.gov was supposed to do (without the need to enter your personal info).

They did it for free.

You know, as opposed to $635 million.

http://thehealthsherpa.com

It works. According to the data I was given, my cheapest catastrophic plan is $214, while my cheapest "bronze" plan is $250.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Three 20-year-olds created a website that duplicates the function of what healthcare.gov was supposed to do (without the need to enter your personal info).

They did it for free.

You know, as opposed to $635 million.

http://thehealthsherpa.com

It works. According to the data I was given, my cheapest catastrophic plan is $214, while my cheapest "bronze" plan is $250.

---

The government loves to waste money.

At least this was posted on a Monday.
http://www.jumpintoabook.com/wp-cont...-landing-1.jpg

State Obamacare exchanges enroll 3 pct of target so far -report

Mon Nov 11, 2013 4:08pm EST

Nov 11 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's healthcare reform has reached only about 3 percent of its enrollment target for 2014 in 12 U.S. states where new online health insurance marketplaces are mostly working smoothly, a report released on Monday said.

States with functioning exchanges have signed up 49,100 people compared with the 1.4 million people expected to be enrolled for 2014, according to the report by healthcare research and consultancy firm Avalere Health.

With enrollment in the federal HealthCare.gov website serving 36 states stalled by technical failures, the weak sign-ups for functioning insurance exchanges could be due to the administration's difficulty to promote the program as a success, Avalere said.

The government is due to release national enrollment figures for the month of October this week. Open enrollment ends March 31, 2014.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...areNews&rpc=22

http://i811.photobucket.com/albums/z...a-facepalm.jpg

I was just about to post about that sherpa site. Good article about it:

It Took Three 20-Something Programmers a Couple of Nights to Come up With an Obamacare Website Alternative

Nov. 11, 2013 9:45am Becket Adams

"As the Obamacare website continues to confound both users and government officials, three 20-something San Francisco-area programmers say they’ve created a much simpler and cost-effective version of the site.

Ning Liang, George Kalogeropoulos and Michael Wasser put their heads together and created thehealthsherpa.com, a website that addresses the biggest problems with the glitch-ridden healthcare.gov.

“They got it completely backwards in terms of what people want up front,” Liang told CBS News. “They want prices and benefits, so that they could make the decision.”

Indeed, whereas healthcare.gov requires users to enter a plethora of sensitive personal information before offering information on health insurance plans, thehealthsherpa.com offers area plan information almost immediately."

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...-to-taxpayers/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bukowski72

I was just about to post about that sherpa site. Good article about it:

It Took Three 20-Something Programmers a Couple of Nights to Come up With an Obamacare Website Alternative

Nov. 11, 2013 9:45am Becket Adams

"As the Obamacare website continues to confound both users and government officials, three 20-something San Francisco-area programmers say they’ve created a much simpler and cost-effective version of the site.

Ning Liang, George Kalogeropoulos and Michael Wasser put their heads together and created thehealthsherpa.com, a website that addresses the biggest problems with the glitch-ridden healthcare.gov.

“They got it completely backwards in terms of what people want up front,” Liang told CBS News. “They want prices and benefits, so that they could make the decision.”

Indeed, whereas healthcare.gov requires users to enter a plethora of sensitive personal information before offering information on health insurance plans, thehealthsherpa.com offers area plan information almost immediately."

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...-to-taxpayers/

---

Actually, Obama's people didn't get it backwards.

They wanted it difficult for the data about the health plans to be easily viewable and harvested by Republicans.

Basically, in their ideal world, they wanted each person to be able to see their own rate, while everyone else's rate would be a mystery.

Kind of like how you know your own salary at work, but know very few other salaries in the company.

In order to get this done, they had to process each person's info, look up their subsidies, and do a bunch of other crap, which bogged down the servers and made the site unusable.

Rather than back all of this shit out and put up something equivalent to what the guys at thehealthsherpa did, they just shut down healthcare.gov for a long time.

This was seen as a better alternative than just making all of the info accessible to everyone. You know, because it's more important to look good politically than for the American people to know what the F is going on with their health insurance for more than a month before the whole thing is mandatory.

:facepalm3

I just tried to use healthcare.gov.

It is incredibly confusing. I'm still trying to figure out how to see the plans there.

What a mess. If I'm having a hard time with this, I can imagine how this is going to be for the average 55-year-old in middle America.

:facepalm4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bukowski72

I was just about to post about that sherpa site. Good article about it:

It Took Three 20-Something Programmers a Couple of Nights to Come up With an Obamacare Website Alternative

Nov. 11, 2013 9:45am Becket Adams

"As the Obamacare website continues to confound both users and government officials, three 20-something San Francisco-area programmers say they’ve created a much simpler and cost-effective version of the site.

Ning Liang, George Kalogeropoulos and Michael Wasser put their heads together and created thehealthsherpa.com, a website that addresses the biggest problems with the glitch-ridden healthcare.gov.

“They got it completely backwards in terms of what people want up front,” Liang told CBS News. “They want prices and benefits, so that they could make the decision.”

Indeed, whereas healthcare.gov requires users to enter a plethora of sensitive personal information before offering information on health insurance plans, thehealthsherpa.com offers area plan information almost immediately."

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...-to-taxpayers/

---

Actually, Obama's people didn't get it backwards.

They wanted it difficult for the data about the health plans to be easily viewable and harvested by Republicans.

Basically, in their ideal world, they wanted each person to be able to see their own rate, while everyone else's rate would be a mystery.

Kind of like how you know your own salary at work, but know very few other salaries in the company.

In order to get this done, they had to process each person's info, look up their subsidies, and do a bunch of other crap, which bogged down the servers and made the site unusable.

Rather than back all of this shit out and put up something equivalent to what the guys at thehealthsherpa did, they just shut down healthcare.gov until November 30th.

This was seen as a better alternative than just making all of the info accessible to everyone. You know, because it's more important to look good politically than for the American people to know what the F is going on with their health insurance for more than a month before the whole thing is mandatory.

:facepalm3

---

HHS also wrote the regulation forcing tens of millions of Americans to sign up for Obamacare, the dirt bags should be tarred and feathered imho, read it and weep suckers:

Obama Officials In 2010: 93 Million Americans Will Be Unable To Keep Their Health Plans

Avik Roy, Contributor

On October 30, 2013, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius testified before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on the continuing problems with the Affordable Care Act's insurance exchanges.

On Wednesday, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius testified before Congress about the continuing issues with the rollout of Obamacare’s health insurance exchanges. “Hold me accountable for the debacle,” said Sebelius. “I’m responsible.” I attended the hearing, and I was struck by the scope, scale, and depth of the health law’s problems, problems that far exceed any one political appointee. But Obamacare’s disruption of the existing health insurance market—a disruption codified in law, and known to the administration—is only just beginning. And it’s far broader than recent media coverage has implied.


Obama administration knew that Obamacare would disrupt private plans

If you read the Affordable Care Act when it was passed, you knew that it was dishonest for President Obama to claim that “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan,” as he did—and continues to do—on countless occasions. And we now know that the administration knew this all along. It turns out that in an obscure report buried in a June 2010 edition of the Federal Register, administration officials predicted massive disruption of the private insurance market.

On Tuesday, White House spokesman Jay Carney attempted to minimize the disruption issue, arguing that it only affected people who buy insurance on their own. “That’s the universe we’re talking about, 5 percent of the population,” said Carney. “In some of the coverage of this issue in the last several days, you would think that you were talking about 75 percent or 80 percent or 60 percent of the American population.” (5 percent of the population happens to be 15 million people, no small number, but let’s leave that aside.)

By “coverage of this issue,” Carney was referring to two articles. The first, by Chad Terhune of the Los Angeles Times, described a number of Californians who are seeing their existing plans terminated and replaced with much more expensive ones. “I was all for Obamacare until I found out I was paying for it,” said one.

The second article, by Lisa Myers and Hanna Rappleye of NBC News, unearthed the aforementioned commentary in the Federal Register, and cited “four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act” as saying that “50 to 75 percent” of people who buy coverage on their own are likely to receive cancellation notices due to Obamacare.


Mid-range estimate: 51% of employer-sponsored plans will get canceled

But Carney’s dismissal of the media’s concerns was wrong, on several fronts. Contrary to the reporting of NBC, the administration’s commentary in the Federal Register did not only refer to the individual market, but also the market for employer-sponsored health insurance.

Section 1251 of the Affordable Care Act contains what’s called a “grandfather” provision that, in theory, allows people to keep their existing plans if they like them. But subsequent regulations from the Obama administration interpreted that provision so narrowly as to prevent most plans from gaining this protection.

“The Departments’ mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013,” wrote the administration on page 34,552 of the Register. All in all, more than half of employer-sponsored plans will lose their “grandfather status” and become illegal. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 156 million Americans—more than half the population—was covered by employer-sponsored insurance in 2013.

Another 25 million people, according to the CBO, have “nongroup and other” forms of insurance; that is to say, they participate in the market for individually-purchased insurance. In this market, the administration projected that “40 to 67 percent” of individually-purchased plans would lose their Obamacare-sanctioned “grandfather status” and become illegal, solely due to the fact that there is a high turnover of participants and insurance arrangements in this market. (Plans purchased after March 23, 2010 do not benefit from the “grandfather” clause.) The real turnover rate would be higher, because plans can lose their grandfather status for a number of other reasons.

How many people are exposed to these problems? 60 percent of Americans have private-sector health insurance—precisely the number that Jay Carney dismissed. As to the number of people facing cancellations, 51 percent of the employer-based market plus 53.5 percent of the non-group market (the middle of the administration’s range) amounts to 93 million Americans.

Will these canceled plans be replaced with better coverage?

President Obama’s famous promise that “you could keep your plan” was not some naïve error or accident. He, and his allies, knew that previous Democratic attempts at health reform had failed because Americans were happy with the coverage they had, and opposed efforts to change the existing system.

Now, supporters of the law are offering a different argument. “We didn’t really mean it when we said you could keep your plan,” they say, “but it doesn’t matter, because the coverage you’re going to get under Obamacare will be better than the coverage you had before.”

But that’s not true. Obamacare forces insurers to offer services that most Americans don’t need, don’t want, and won’t use, for a higher price. Bob Laszewski, in a revealing blog post, wrote about the cancellation of his own health coverage. “Right now,” he wrote, “I have ‘Cadillac’ health insurance. I can access every provider in the national Blue Cross network—about every doc and hospital in America—without a referral and without higher deductibles and co-pays.”

But his plan is being canceled. His new, Obamacare-compatible plan has a $500 higher deductible, and a narrower physician and hospital network that restricts out-of-town providers. And yet it costs 66 percent more than his current plan. “Mr. President,” he writes, “I really like my health plan and I would like to keep it. Can you help me out here?”


http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth...der-obamacare/

the rest of the article in Forbes is quite fascinating, enjoy learning the truth about the biggest swindle in world history

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XU1QttlPMLk#t=15

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bukowski72

I was just about to post about that sherpa site. Good article about it:

It Took Three 20-Something Programmers a Couple of Nights to Come up With an Obamacare Website Alternative

Nov. 11, 2013 9:45am Becket Adams

"As the Obamacare website continues to confound both users and government officials, three 20-something San Francisco-area programmers say they’ve created a much simpler and cost-effective version of the site.

Ning Liang, George Kalogeropoulos and Michael Wasser put their heads together and created thehealthsherpa.com, a website that addresses the biggest problems with the glitch-ridden healthcare.gov.

“They got it completely backwards in terms of what people want up front,” Liang told CBS News. “They want prices and benefits, so that they could make the decision.”

Indeed, whereas healthcare.gov requires users to enter a plethora of sensitive personal information before offering information on health insurance plans, thehealthsherpa.com offers area plan information almost immediately."

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...-to-taxpayers/

---

Actually, Obama's people didn't get it backwards.

They wanted it difficult for the data about the health plans to be easily viewable and harvested by Republicans.

Basically, in their ideal world, they wanted each person to be able to see their own rate, while everyone else's rate would be a mystery.

Kind of like how you know your own salary at work, but know very few other salaries in the company.

In order to get this done, they had to process each person's info, look up their subsidies, and do a bunch of other crap, which bogged down the servers and made the site unusable.

Rather than back all of this shit out and put up something equivalent to what the guys at thehealthsherpa did, they just shut down healthcare.gov for a long time.

This was seen as a better alernative than just making all of the info accessible to Severyone. You knouse it's more important to look good politically than for the American people to know what the F is going on with their health insurance for more than a month before the whole thing is mandatory.
:facepalm3

---

Website is a HUGE failure for now.

ObamaCare isn't going anywhere even though Republicans have this sexual fantasy of
some how repealing it.

By next year, it will be fixed and you'll be able to buy health insurance policies that actually
covers you when you get sick that can't be cancelled.

It's better than the current Republican health care plan, which is...

You can spend as much (if your a millionaire) as you like on your health care,
if you make under $100K a year, then FUCK YOU!!!

Hospitals, doctors, insurance and drug companies want to charge as much as they want for their
services, they don't want to be regulated by the government.

Fuck the patients, you have no rights you dumb fucks, just bend over and continue to take it up the ass.

If your stupid enough to get sick, the insurance company will just cancel your policy.


:lol

ACORN IS BACKKKKK:

There is no federal requirement for background checks on navigators. It shouldn’t surprise anyone then that some people have found a way to form new “navigator” groups out of the ruins of ACORN, the notoriously corrupt left-wing “community organizing” group that saw dozens of its employees in multiple states convicted of fraud before and after the 2008 election. Fox News reported this month that the United Labor Unions Council Local 100 “was created by ACORN founder Wade Rathke after ACORN went bankrupt amidst widespread scandal.” The new group, which was reconstituted from old ACORN affiliates, has been accepted as part of the navigator program in several states.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...tors-john-fund



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUsUWFANPS8

more people trust foxnews than the president on obamacare lol:

by Peter Moore in Front Page and Politics

Tue November 12, 2013 7:34 a.m. PST

Fox News is the most trusted source of information on the new health care law for 19% of Americans – ahead of President Obama and other major networks.

The fight over President Barack Obama's health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), has been one of the most contentious and bitter battles in domestic politics in recent memory. Media coverage of the issue has been particularly important, with the ins and outs of the passage and enactment of the law often dominating headlines. But information from politicians, government officials and insurance companies has also played a prominent role, with President Obama recently coming under fire after a key health care-related campaign promise – that Americans who liked their existing healthcare insurance plans could keep them – was cast into doubt.

The latest research from YouGov shows that when Americans are asked to pick the one source of information about the new health care law that they trust the most, Fox News Channel (also known as Fox News) tops the list. Most trusted by 19% of Americans, the basic cable news channel narrowly beats out 'friends and family' (17%).

President Obama (11%) is the third most trusted source, followed by National Public Radio (10%) and people's own insurance companies (9%).

http://www.airingnews.com/articles/2...a-on-Obamacare

in other Obamafail news out of the 106,185 signed up so far only 26,000 came from the Obamacare website including those that had a plan in their basket just like the stimulus jobs reports "jobs created or saved":

By DANIELLE KURTZLEBEN US NEWS & WORLD REPORT

November 13, 2013 RSS Feed Print


A woman looks at the HealthCare.gov insurance exchange internet site Oct.1, 2013 in Washington, D.C.
Many state-run health insurance marketplaces are performing better than the federal version, Healthcare.gov.
The enrollment figures from healthcare.gov have fallen far short of the administration's initial expectations, the government reported Wednesday.

The Department of Health and Human Services reported Wednesday that 106,185 Americans have thus far made it all the way through the enrollment process of Obamacare, a mere shadow of the 500,000 the Obama administration had said it hoped to enroll in the month of October alone. It is also less than 2 percent of the 7 million the White House hopes to sign up by March 31, 2014.

What's more, the majority of enrollees have come on the state health care insurance exchanges and not on the federal healthcare.gov, the website that has been plagued by technical difficulties and become the scorn of Republicans and late-night TV comics. Around 21 percent of the estimated eligible population in states running their own websites have selected plans, compared to only 3.8 percent in states relying on healthcare.gov.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...amacare-so-far

lol you know you are in trouble when Bill Clinton tells you to keep your commitments

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9yVy-RXhxQ

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

this one is making the rounds on facebook today

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co7BZAQV2sg