More Totally Bogus Obama Excuses

Here is his new excuse for his "you can keep your health insurance" promise being broken.  It is -- wait for it, you will never guess -- insurance companies' fault.

"One of the things health reform was designed to do was to help not only the uninsured but also the under-insured," Obama said. "And there are a number of Americans, fewer than 5 percent of Americans, who've got cut-rate plans that don't offer real financial protection in the event of a serious illness or an accident.

"Remember, before the Affordable Care Act, these bad apple insurers had free rein every single year to limit the care that you received or used minor pre-existing conditions to jack up your premiums or bill you into bankruptcy."

This is absurd.   Kaiser Permanente cut zillions of policies.  Are they a bad apple?  My policy was cut by Blue Cross / Blue Shield of Arizona.  Are they some fly-by-night cut-rate insurer?

  • Elam Bend

    5%, isn't that the size of the individual market out of all insured? So, is he saying all individual policies were 'bad'?

  • http://devilish-details.blogspot.com/ mesaeconoguy

    It’s worse than that.

    These assholes are apparently confused as to what constitutes a voluntary market, and how regulatory restrictions limit participation.

    Not a huge Megyn Kelly fan, but check this bizarre exchange out –

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/30/megyn-kellys-extremely-frustrating-obamacare-interview-with-dem-congressman-but-15-million-people-did-buy-it/

    Note: This will be the same bizarre rationalization given when insurance co’s drop out of/are pushed out of the artificial government-run marketplace entirely.

  • HenryBowman419

    Obama is like a spoiled kid or teenager: nothing bad happens because of him: it is always someone else's fault. The amazing part is that the sycophantic media lapdogs have always gone along with this dreck...until, perhaps now, when they (often independent contractors) have to go through he same process.

  • wrc

    You're missing the big picture. It's a Chicago tradition. What was he going to do? Take away your hope? The President took the liberty of bullshitting you.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080455/quotes?item=qt0320027

  • MingoV

    It is the insurance companies fault. Two years ago they should have switched all their policies to ones that would conform with ObamaCare requirements. If they had done that, no one would have to switch now. Of course, third-party insurance premiums would have skyrocketed in 2012 and 2013, and there would have been no subsidies or tax breaks. Naturally, Obama and the democratic legislators don't care about that.

  • Methinks1776

    Yes. That is the entire individual market. All of our plans were total crap, apparently. That's why we bought them.

    Note that he's brushing us off as "only' 5% of the insured who are getting screwed. However, we were urged to shit our pants and hand over control of the entire health care industry to these power-hungry liars because 0.5% of the the population (12.5% of the individual market) was forced to either pay higher premiums because of pre-existing conditions that increased their risk or were denied insurance (i.e. since they were already sick, the premiums would cost as much as the care).

    So, a recap of Obamalogic: if 13 million people get screwed by Obama, it's not a problem. If 1.5 million people have to face reality, it's a catastrophe that can only be fixed by a total government takeover.

  • Methinks1776

    agreed. He's perpetually 11 years old. And a whiney, nasty, bully of an 11-year-old at that.

  • Methinks1776

    You are not seriously surprised by the inability of a slightly left of Karl Marx media to work out what "voluntary" means, are you? "Voluntary" is when our Dear Fuhrer relieves you of the burden of thinking for yourself and the even heavier burden of a full wallet.

  • Simon Fraser

    Obama is now in a league all of his own. He is a much better liar now than even Bill Clinton.

    And that is major league.

  • Canvasback

    And gosh, if the govt. couldn't effectively monitor 5% of the market, what do we expect when they own the whole thing?

  • Canvasback

    But Obamacare requirements are almost bizarrely out of sync with what a lot of people need. You can't expect rational decision makers to blindly follow along. NOBODY knew what to expect when this excrement was passed.

  • Matthew Slyfield

    Change you can believe in!

  • http://EasyOpinions.blogspot.com/ Andrew_M_Garland

    All insurance is minutely regulated by the states, and 50% of medical care is insured by Medicare and Medicaid. We already have a government managed insurance industry and medical care delivery rules.

    Lefties present this fact as "we already have a regulated system, so why the fuss about ObamaCare?"

    The current situation is the result of government management, rules, and "crony-coverage" (lobbying in the states for including treatments like accupuncture and meditation as insured treatments).

    Governments have screwed up medical care. The Progressive response is to solve this problem by tightening its grip and adding larger implied taxes to do more wealth redistribution.

    It is a laugh to blame the insurance companies for delivering substandard policies, policies reviewed and approved by government.

    The Medicare Tomato Market

    This is an explanation of current Medicare economics by analogy, and also of ObamaCare. Say that tomatoes were declared vital to life and made available free through the Medicare National Tomato Bank. This translates the story of health care to the availability and price of tomatoes.

    Healthcare is expensive and scarce because it is being distributed mostly as a free good. Whatever people pay for it, payment is mostly in advance. Then, people demand unlimited services, and have no incentive to save money by lessening their demands. A benefit administered this way is always rationed by detailed rules. Those rules will not be better for the patient. Worse, the rules slow any changes in the way care is provided, slowing the process of finding more efficient less expensive ways of delivering the truly needed services.

    EasyOpinions

  • LarryGross

    How does your view fit in with the rest of the OECD world including Canada where virtually all medical procedures and appliances are cheaper by 1/2 or more than here - and anyone is free to buy more/better care if they so desire?

    the "free market" approach to Health Care works that way - where in the world?

    are there countries where there is no govt involvement in health care - that as a result have developed
    a true "free market" system that achieves the goals that the free market advocates seek?

  • Methinks1776

    They left the barn door open and you got out again, didn't you?

  • Methinks1776

    Andrew,

    They're doing a marvelous job at redistribution too. In the U.K.'s NHS hospitals dialysis patients are dying because they don't give them water and here the uninsured poor have better health care outcomes than Medicaid patients.

  • Captain Profit
  • http://EasyOpinions.blogspot.com/ Andrew_M_Garland

    Is that true about Canada? What is your source and specific data.

    How does the rest of the world work? What are their costs? Make your case.

  • LarryGross

    http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2009/08/never-mind-the-anecdotes-do-canadians-like-their-health-care-system.html

    but the point is the rest of the OECD world has universal health care and there is no movement in any of those country's to go to a free market system.

    Every one of those countries started out with no govt involved in health care and every one of them now have govt-sanctioned health care and none are going back.

  • http://EasyOpinions.blogspot.com/ Andrew_M_Garland

    What exactly do you want me to get from your Tribune link, If I should read it?

    Are you sure there is "no movement" in OECD countries for more freedom in healthcare? What is the source for that?

    Really, none are going back? Well, maybe when they go broke there will be some change.

  • http://EasyOpinions.blogspot.com/ Andrew_M_Garland

    In support of your comment.

    The British have had 30+ years to perfect the greatest socialist healthcare system in the world.

    A Doctor Describes the British National Health Service
    === ===
    [edited]  My time in the British National Health Service in the 1980s was a tremendous learning experience. England still has incredible clinicians who can do remarkable work with scarce resources. However, working at an NHS hospital is like going back 20 years. The infrastructure, equipment, surgical tools and medications are backward by comparison to any medium-sized hospital in the United States. The irony is that many nations afflicted with Obamacare systems have moved toward private, decentralized approaches.

    When teaching medical students about health care economics, I point out that the cell phone revolution began when President Ronald Reagan dismantled the market monopoly of AT&T.
    === ===

    EasyOpinions

  • LarryGross

    No.. we're not going back. You can't go broke when you pay 1/2 what we do for health car and everyone has to pay for it - like social security.

    It's an individual mandate. Everyone has to contribute toward their health care costs. They cannot, not pay, then get sick, and expect others to pay.

    more and more countries are headed this way - with Singapore among the latest.

    Not a single country has gone the other way and there is no evidence of any "movement" in any country to do that.

    Other countries spend 1/2 what we do for health care and all of their people are covered. If anyone goes broke it will be us - first.

    the right wing wacko birds will not win this issue. common sense will and it's common sense that most people will need health care and most people should be setting aside money to pay for it.

    we do not turn people away from hospitals. When we start to do that - I'll believe in the "predictions" ... until then... no way.

    there has to be some connection with reality here. Not what you believe or want to believe but instead what most others believe and will support.

    otherwise -you are a minority and will stay that way.

  • LarryGross

    Margaret Thatcher did nothing about the English health care system. Nor has any Conservative since her. What does that tell you?

    the US has English style healthcare in our VA system. right? How many Libertarian types are arguing that we should dismantle the VA and give veterans money to go buy the best health care they can in the free market? How many Libertarians are saying that?

  • Ron H.

    I'm not sure I would say "better". Far more prolific, for sure, but better? That's REALLY major league.

  • Methinks1776

    The only thing your internet ramblings tell me is that you're a clueless idiot, Hee Haw. Thanks for playing. Run along now.

  • Methinks1776

    You don't bother checking your moronic ramblings on the internet, do you, Gross Hee Haw?

    " Health-sector changes have moved all ten countries away from centrally planned health systems and toward varying degrees of private-sector involvement in health care financing and coverage, in the context of social health insurance (SHI) systems."

    http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/27/2/478.full

    Growing in Europe - both private coverage and private health care expenditures:

    http://www.insuranceeurope.eu/uploads/Modules/Publications/private-medical-insurance.pdf

    85% of the French carry private health insurance. The physicians are in private practice and there are for-profit hospitals:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_France

    During the heat wave in the mid-oughts French hospitals and ambulances stopped picking up the phones they were so overwhelmed. If memory serves, around 14,000 people died as a result of the heat wave in Germany and France.

    Hee Haw Gross dribbles on an on about "connections to reality" and a lack of private provisioning in "other OECD Kuntries" in the same meandering stream of unconsciousness.

    And you wonder why you call you a moron, moron. Back to your barn, Hee Haw.

  • markm

    What that tells me is that "Conservative" is only a name for the not-quite-as-socialist party.

  • LarryGross

    well it also tells you that no govt started out originally doing health care and over time more than 50 with all kinds of governments including conservatives like Thatcher started doing health care - and not a single country has gone back. This is over the last 200 years.

    It's one thing to hold a belief or a principle, it's another to deny/ignore, refuse to accept the history and realities.

  • Gdn

    In regards Canada, in addition to their health care system operating as a parasite off the US healthcare system (see especially the pharmaceutical industry), they account for health care expenses differently, such as counting hospitals and major medical equipment/facilities not as health care costs, but as infrastructure....like roads and bridges.

  • Gdn

    Health insurance plans were grandfathered first, and then the requirements were laid out afterwards...with many requirements not providing significant benefit to the vast majority of purchasers. From documents it appears that the conflict was intentionally created by the regulators...and the folks doing the regulating we certainly aware of the effect.

  • Gdn

    No major elections this year. Same reason for the scandal-storm earlier this year largely based on investigations completed last year.