More Obamacare fuckups

[cwolff]

It can be any number they want to claim, since they are the ones with all the information.

Doesn't mean that 18 million people who didn't previously have insurance now do.. which was the goal of the ACA.

Do we even know how many people have paid their premiums yet? I can't believe for a 1 billion dollar computer system, we still get the "We don't have those numbers yet" all the time.

Insuring the uninsured is just ONE goal of the PPACA and it's not a one and done proposition. It sounds like you're judging the entirety of the law on it's debut while we already know the rate of uninsured is projected to decrease but will never be zero.

Looks like 85% are paying. This chart is from late March. Not all states report and they don't report the same way. The 100% states purge their rolls if people don't pay which is why they show 100%.



This chart is from Charles Gaba's blog. He breaks down the reporting, the math and his opinion on what conclusions can be drawn.

[Parkbandit]

Fantastic. We now have the official numbers because of a liberal blog.

I'm convinced. The ACA is a gigantic success.

The Democrats obviously should campaign on this success in 2014 and 2016.

[Latrinsorm]

"We don't even know the numbers!"
"Okay, here are the numbers."
"Those numbers are bullshit!"

Good times.

[Back]

C'mon Latrin. We all know "reality" has a well known liberal bias.

[Latrinsorm]

Accursed reality!!!

[Tgo01]

"We don't even know the numbers!"
"Okay, here are the numbers."
"Those numbers are bullshit!"

Good times.

The problem is you have the arguments wrong.

A better recap would have been:

"The numbers are bullshit."
"Here are some fake numbers I just made up!"
"Those numbers are bullshit too."

Because let's face it, the numbers are bullshit.

QED

[Kembal]

PB, I'm not sure what you're looking for. Media reporting on the numbers has been abysmal. Gaba's blog is the one source I've seen referenced that has a fairly good handle on what's going on.

In any case, for the open enrollment period, premiums aren't due for the last minute signups until April 31, so we won't have final numbers on that front for another couple of weeks.

[Parkbandit]

PB, I'm not sure what you're looking for. Media reporting on the numbers has been abysmal. Gaba's blog is the one source I've seen referenced that has a fairly good handle on what's going on.

I'm looking for official numbers. We paid A BILLION dollars for a computer program to deal with ACA and the only numbers that show the ACA is doing "well" (of course, if only 80% of my clients paid their bill, I wouldn't be in businesses long...) is from a liberal blog who looks like he is guessing? Why can't HHS give us actual numbers? They've been playing this game from the onset.

In any case, for the open enrollment period, premiums aren't due for the last minute signups until April 31, so we won't have final numbers on that front for another couple of weeks.

So what you are saying is premiums are never, ever due.

THANKS OBAMA

[NinjasLeadTheWay]

I'm looking for official numbers. We paid A BILLION dollars for a computer program to deal with ACA and the only numbers that show the ACA is doing "well" (of course, if only 80% of my clients paid their bill, I wouldn't be in businesses long...) is from a liberal blog who looks like he is guessing? Why can't HHS give us actual numbers? They've been playing this game from the onset.



So what you are saying is premiums are never, ever due.

THANKS OBAMA

That's enough out of you.

[Latrinsorm]

I'm looking for official numbers. We paid A BILLION dollars for a computer program to deal with ACA and the only numbers that show the ACA is doing "well" (of course, if only 80% of my clients paid their bill, I wouldn't be in businesses long...) is from a liberal blog who looks like he is guessing? Why can't HHS give us actual numbers? They've been playing this game from the onset.

Have you asked HHS for the numbers? The government can't intuit your every request.

As for the bloggeur, he has links throughout the piece. I recognize that you don't care if someone cites their sources or not, but you're usually a little more subtle in your intentionally erroneous criticisms.