This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Obamacare "Approval" Drops To Record Low

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/11/2014 15:17 -0400

For the current administration, now with a fresh developer to fix all the problems (with the website), the reality of public perception over Obamacare has gone from worst to worster-er this week. As Gallup polls show, nearly half of Americans say the Affordable Care Act will make the healthcare situation in the U.S. worse in the long run.

When asked more broadly if they approve or disapprove of Obamacare, Americans come down on the disapprove side by 54% to 38% - a new record low for 'approval'.

So despite the full court press marketing of this great new must-have product - and in light of the fact that the 'risk-pool' looks to be disastrous, things are not improving at all.

Perhaps not surprisingly though, Gallup concludes,

...remarkably, there has been little fundamental change in most of these attitudes over the past year or two -- and especially in recent months, despite the highly contentious and visible introduction of the ACA's major features. Americans' views of the healthcare law seem to be fairly well established, and largely rooted in partisan politics.

Of course, we look forward to the next month as bills come due and people realize that "affordable" means something different than they were promised (i.e. not free)...

- advertisements -

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:20 | 4323129 kaiserhoff

If you bother to understand Obamacare,

you will hate Obamacare.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:27 | 4323148 Anusocracy

If you bother to understand the people that support Oblundercare,

you will see nothing but a dismal future for America.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:35 | 4323152 PrecipiceWatching

And yet America is FAR from having cornered the market on obtuse, thieving Socialists.

See...well...the rest of the entire world.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:42 | 4323435 TeamDepends

Greened you for providing a glimmer of hope....

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 18:46 | 4323602 negative rates

Hey, we had to financialize your health, after that public education beating you took back there, we we're certain you we're gonna need the extra care cause that's the way we planned and, executed it. But hell, we had to pass it so you could find out what's in it.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:41 | 4323173 Skateboarder

If you bother to read Obamacare, you will likely die from seizures.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:48 | 4323184 Long-John-Silver

I tried to read it once. It might as well have been written in Klingon.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:51 | 4323192 Ignatius

It's written in Klingon 'cause that's where the money is.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:44 | 4323438 TeamDepends

Ever tried to remove a Klingon?

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:52 | 4323193 Yen Cross

If you bother to read Obamacare, you'll likely die of "old age" first.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:26 | 4323258 Skateboarder

It would be a wiser use of one's time to memorize the dictionary. ;)

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 01:31 | 4324248 StychoKiller

Most dictionaries don't run to 2000+ pages.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:55 | 4323201 NIHILIST CIPHER

Skateboarder If you REALLY bother to read Ozerocare you could die by execution. Take a look into the Ocare treatment code: ICD 9 E978 Legal execution built into Ocare (just to make it look legal). Sanctioned forms of execution: Gassing, beheading, hanging, lethal injection. WTF? If this code ends up on your chart at the doctor's office, run like hell.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:24 | 4323255 Skateboarder

And Zero's private army, of course (factcheck.org says "don't worry, silly pleb. All is well.").

SEC. 5210. ESTABLISHING A READY RESERVE CORPS.

Section 203 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 204) is amended to read as follows:
SEC. 203. COMMISSIONED CORPS AND READY RESERVE CORPS.

(a) ESTABLISHMENT:
(1) IN GENERAL.–here shall be in the Service a commissioned Regular Corps and a Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency.

(2) REQUIREMENT.–All commissioned officers shall be citizens of the United States and shall be appointed without regard to the civil-service laws and compensated without regard to the Classification Act 2 of 1923, as amended.

(3) APPOINTMENT.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall be appointed by the President and commissioned officers of the Regular Corps shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

(4) ACTIVE DUTY.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall at all times be subject to call to active duty by the Surgeon General, including active duty for the purpose of training.

(5) WARRANT OFFICERS.–Warrant officers may be appointed to the Service for the purpose of providing support to the health and delivery systems maintained by the Service and any warrant officer appointed to the Service shall be considered for purposes of this Act and title 37, United States Code, to be a commissioned officer within the Commissioned Corps of the Service.

(b) ASSIMILATING RESERVE CORP OFFICERS INTO THE REGULAR CORPS: Effective on the date of enactment of the Affordable Health Choices Act, all individuals classified as officers in the Reserve Corps under this section (as such section existed on the day before the date of enactment of such Act) and serving on active duty shall be deemed to be commissioned officers of the Regular Corps. [Note here that those personally appointed by BO -- without the advice and consent of the Senate -- automatically become a part of the Regular Corps. Ed.]

(c) PURPOSE AND USE OF READY RESERVE:
(1) PURPOSE. The purpose of the Ready Reserve Corps is to fulfill the need to have additional Commissioned Corps personnel available on short notice (similar to the uniformed service’s reserve program) to assist regular Commissioned Corps personnel to meet both routine public health and emergency response missions.

(2) USES: The Ready Reserve Corps shall–

(A) participate in routine training to meet the general and specific needs of the Commissioned Corps;
(B) be available and ready for involuntary calls to active duty during national emergencies and public health crises, similar to the uniformed service reserve personnel;
(C) be available for backfilling critical positions left vacant during deployment of active duty Commissioned Corps members, as well as for deployment to respond to public health emergencies, both foreign and domestic; and
(D) be available for service assignment in isolated, hardship, and medically underserved communities (as defined in section 399SS) to improve access to health services.

(d) FUNDING.—For the purpose of carrying out the duties and responsibilities of the Commissioned Corps under this section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to the Office of the Surgeon General for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014. Funds appropriated under this subsection shall be used for recruitment and training of Commissioned Corps Officers.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:52 | 4323307 kchrisc

Nice! Very nice!
Few are aware of the "Brownshirts" section.
Now more know.
My bet is that the "down-trodden" in the ghettos will make up most of this "Ready Reserve."
Better go check the arsenal.

"Silly rabbit, Constitutions are for sheeple."

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 19:07 | 4323650 SWRichmond

When the emergency finally happens the sheeple will be shocked by thenumber of armed, uniformed alphabet-agency federal agents on the streets claiming life-and-death authority.

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 01:41 | 4324251 StychoKiller

Lots of 30.06 deer rifles have powerful scopes on them in the sticks, just saying.

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 23:48 | 4326279 kchrisc

Agree, but that didn't shock'em in Boston.

"Guns don't kill people, mostly people in uniform do."

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 15:35 | 4325070 roadhazard

"...Constitutions are for sheeple".

As BushCo said, "It's just a piece of paper".

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 18:32 | 4323568 bunnyswanson

My prediction is that the one million people who are too obese to leave their home will be leaving their home eventually and if they cannot keep up with the New World, their new home will be a disposable coffin.

One size fits all - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4F4Ye05dwfE

Wed, 01/15/2014 - 18:27 | 4335512 humtum

Wed, 01/15/2014 - 18:29 | 4335517 humtum

Wed, 01/15/2014 - 18:34 | 4335529 humtum

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:24 | 4323138 lolmao500

There's always 30-40% of people who are total freaking retards and will always support the president no matter what.

In other news, China is doing it again.

http://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/china-imposes-new-access-rules-over-...

China imposes new access rules over sea, angering neighbors, US

Vietnam, Taiwan, the Philippines and the United States have criticized China for imposing new access rules for the vast South China Sea, saying Beijing's demand that foreign vessels get approval to enter the disputed maritime area is provocative and potentially destabilizing.

But Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying retorted Friday that the rules that went into effect at the start of the year are simply "technical revisions" of existing laws governing the resource-rich waters off China's Hainan province. She said foreign governments' complaints that Beijing is courting trouble spring from "ulterior motives."

The latest maritime dispute among the neighbors with overlapping claims to islands and resources in the busy East Asian waterways has ratcheted up tensions in the region, coming less than two months after China proclaimed an Air Defense Identification Zone over disputed islands in the East China Sea. Under the ADIZ, foreign aircraft flying through the zone are required to file flight plans with Beijing, although the United States, Japan and South Korea have flown military aircraft through the region without getting China's permission.

"The passing of these restrictions on other countries’ fishing activities in disputed portions of the South China Sea is a provocative and potentially dangerous act,” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters in Washington on Thursday. "China has not offered any explanation or basis under international law for these extensive maritime claims."

2014 will be very interesting in Asia...

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:40 | 4323169 Anusocracy

China should plant flags and anchor naval vessels on the islands.

And tell Japan to bite the big one.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:49 | 4323188 Boris Alatovkrap

China is have posterior motive.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 18:49 | 4323608 negative rates

Cool, banana insert into butt, good time had by all.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:24 | 4323141 DaveyJones

Obama is certainly a corrupt and poisonous loser

but from food production to cancer treatment, the whole system is

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:25 | 4323144 Greenskeeper_Carl

Looks like people finally "saw what's in it". Oops

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:53 | 4323456 bunnyswanson

PELOSI: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail
JCT Confirms Failure to Comply with Democrats’ Mandate Can Lead to 5 Years in Jail“Criminal penalties

Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:

• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.

• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]

When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.

“The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting Medicare,” said Camp.

According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.

[link to waysandmeans.house.gov]

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message2453196/pg1

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 22:14 | 4324038 Ranger_Will

"Rebellion to Tyrants is Obediance to God."

-Benjamin Franklin

"...as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."

-Joshua 25:15

"I agree with Ben and Josh."

-Ranger_Will

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:28 | 4323149 Heroic Couplet

Get the Faux News Rupert Murdoch buttcracks and the camera crew to Massachusetts, on a train, and conduct two sets of journalism: how many Massachusetts medical doctors have left practice because of RomneyCare, which has been in place for nearly a decade? the answer is the same shape as your butthole. Then how many end users have left RomneyCare? Same answer, the same shape as your butthole, zero. Megyn Kelly interviewing Bill O'Reilly, and Mike Huckabee interviewing Shaun Hannity is not "news." It's opinion.If you take the success of RomneyCare and have 49 other states, common sense says it will work in 49 other states.

Yesterday DHHS announcemed that Obamacare will cover preventative breast cancer drugs. I remember reading that if men suffered from cancer at the same percentage, it would be declared a national US emergency. It will be interesting to see how the GOP and their paymasters object to it.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:33 | 4323155 PrecipiceWatching

Sphincter obsessed aren't ye?

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:37 | 4323424 sunnyside

With a complete lack of understandind of what the costs of Romneycare are while still buying into the false red/blue divide. Complete and total idiot.

PS: I'd still like to do filthy things to Megyn Kelly, just not really listen to her too much.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 21:52 | 4324004 Excursionist

Hmmm.. Mr. / Mrs. Heroic made me think a bit just now. Doesn't happen often, but it just did.

I googled "Romneycare Meta Analysis" is see what popped up and came across two research publications that I found interesting. Their punch line is that (i) coverage for Massholes increased after 2006, (ii) poor Massholes earning up to 300% of the poverty level benefited disproportionately and (iii) costs have not been contained.

It's the third takeaway re: costs that made me realize that Romney's 'reform' was effectively a lucrative expansion of an addressable market for the medical industry in his state. The expansion was achieved through a transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor, which in turn was achieved via higher insurance premia, etc., etc.

So no, I wouldn't expect the medical industry to retreat in MA when post-2006 it became more lucrative.

Interesting aside: I learned 40% of the state's budget is dedicated to Medicaid and private insurance for state employees. Seems Romney, likely goaded by strategic contributions by the medical industry (pure speculation on my part.. don't feel like looking this up right now), enacted a bailout of his state's onerous medical costs. Really, truly altruistic on his part.

Thank you, Mr. / Mrs. Heroic. You (indirectly) solidified my belief in an eternally corrupt representative democracy that somehow passes as a standard bearer the world over, thanks to non-thinking cretins like yourself.

Sources:

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:52 | 4323194 denverdolomte

You do realize how much of an idiot you just made yourself out to be right? MSM is all birds of a feather flock together buddy. Apparently your news sources are feeding you the other side of the scheme.

If you want to make idiotic meaningless comments like this go to reddit where you will get more likes for going full retard.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:14 | 4323241 mrdenis

Reddit won't put up with that crap .......

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:58 | 4323205 Emergency Ward

h-cee Why are you trying to use Hand-it-to-me and O-Really as proof of your silly assertions -- at least throw in some Mad-and-How or Chris-Tingles. Only extremists and crackpots watch any of them....so who are you trying to convince?

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:00 | 4323213 donsluck

Considering a female born today has a 38% chance of developing cancer (http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2010/browse_csr.php?sectionSEL=2&pageSEL...) and a male has a higher, 44% chance, I think your sexism is misplaced.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:11 | 4323229 PrecipiceWatching

Pretty easy to see this attacking pervert suffers from both Misandry and Heterophobia.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:24 | 4323253 bidaskspread

I am still waiting for this massive economic pop that was promised from this law. This is a case in point example of raising the minimum wage. The cost of employees went up just like raising the minium wage, the only difference is they aren't buying ipads. So, let's see how successful this economic stimulus is. Excuses start in 3....2....1.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:30 | 4323409 disabledvet

"cure for cancer!" that was an alleged bullish market thesis to trade on back in 2008. so we spend a trillion on "care" and both prices AND taxes go up? sounds more like a policy cancellation....so to speak.

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 02:46 | 4324293 August

I am waiting for the new wave of twenty-something poets and film-makers whose talents will blossom forth, now that their federal government has freed them from such mundance concerns as paying for health insurance.

Or something like that. Anyhow, Nancy said so.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:33 | 4323272 humtum

the state department also used the warning to highlight the fact that a Russian law, much criticized by rights groups, that would make it a crime to publicly promote the equality of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:36 | 4323280 humtum

mailboxes with shotgun hanging out window on gravel roads at.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:42 | 4323290 A Lunatic

Oh Tylers, cleanup on aisle three........

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:50 | 4323301 Atomizer

LOL.

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 14:33 | 4324918 GetZeeGold

Banished to HuffPo.....

......the horror....the horror!

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 19:08 | 4323651 Emergency Ward

I'm still not clicking on the link humdrum....

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 08:55 | 4324457 The Shodge

Change the text into 'click here to spit on my grave', and maybe you'll get some hits, asshole!

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 15:40 | 4325077 roadhazard

hey, dumbass

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:11 | 4323355 CuttingEdge

"Yesterday DHHS announcemed that Obamacare will cover preventative breast cancer drugs"

Let me guess: Every male applying for ObummerCare has that cover included in his bronze, silver or gold coverage? Along with nuns paying for contraceptive treatment in their premiums? And there you have the ACA + Insurers buttfucking middle-class America summed up.

Quite hilarious that 54% disapprove of that Kenyan cunt's "you have to pass it to see what's in it" bill. There's some ex-Dems must be feeling pretty fucking stupid about now (or when that renewal drops in the letterbox like a ton of shit).

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:37 | 4323426 FredFlintstone

Here's an idea to reduce breat cancer: stop taking the pill.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:28 | 4323150 mobius8curve

Here is the Orwellian picture of the perfect dwelling for society:

http://www.jsmineset.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/clip_image0017.jpg

Revelation 13:10 If any man is for captivity, into captivity he goeth: if any man shall kill with the sword, with the sword must he be killed. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 15:59 | 4323209 One And Only

The sad thing...

People will never know how seamless and affordable the healtcare system was before medicaide, medicare, obamacare, and all the other regulation around it.

People born today will only know of DMV style healtcare.

(just like people will never know how awesome it was to live without an income tax in the US) It has just become a fact of life.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:19 | 4323245 donsluck

In 1951 the US started requiring prescriptions. Before then there were plenty of deaths from un-regulated drugs. Sure it was affordable, but then a man could only expect to live to 66 compared to today at 78. Do your own math.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:53 | 4323309 A Nanny Moose

What is the qualify of life, when you are renting your body from the Medical Industrial Complex, because you made poor choices? Plenty other people around the world live beyond 78 without the meds.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:55 | 4323311 Dingleberry

no shortage of peeps dying from legit prescriptions, in case you didn't know. Google vicodin.

the age increase has more to do with public health stuff than medicine.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:23 | 4323334 DaveyJones

funny you call it "unregulated drugs" given the FDA is bought and sold by the killer industries and dangerous crap gets out and stays out unlike a lot of the first world

" It is now an undeniable fact that the pharmaceutical industry weaseled its way onto key U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panels, which were instrumental in shaping the way drugs are safety tested and approved. According to The Washington Post (WP), a recent public records request has revealed that drug companies purchased special access onto these panels, where they were given the keys to the kingdom in swaying decision-makers about official drug policy.

Based on critical information gathered from hundreds of leaked emails, pharmaceutical companies have doled out hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years to attend private meetings with the FDA, many of which were geared towards the regulation and approval of painkiller drugs. Drug companies would reportedly shell out upwards of $25,000 or more per meeting to have their voices heard, a small price to pay for direct access to the $9 billion American painkiller market.

According to the WP, officials from both the FDA and the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) would regularly meet with pharmaceutical representatives in private to discuss regulatory protocols, co-write scientific papers and collaborate on various ways to help streamline the drug approval process. And the only parties who actually paid to attend such meetings were the drug companies, a fact that one official from the NIH expressed serious concerns about in an email, referring to the whole scheme as a "pay to play process."

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:32 | 4323411 FredFlintstone

Hey Donsuck, are you sure about that? Requiring prescriptions has increased our life expectancy fro 66 to 78 in the past 6 decades? Is that your thesis? Do you work for the FDA, pharma? How about the following ideas:

Better, safer working environments. Fewer black lung and asbestosis cases

Education about the dangers of tobacco use

Better automobile safety

Better sanitation and hygiene

Better nutrition

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 03:16 | 4324309 kareninca

Vaccines for polio, diptheria, tetanus

safer childbirth for the mother, and far fewer infants dying in childbirth (brings up life expectancy a LOT)

cleaner drinking water

antibiotics (invented earlier, but increased in use; sure they're overused today but they saved lives)

No, Donsuck you moron, I don't think our increased lifespan is due to our wonderful prescription drugs. All those millions of women who took hormone replacement therapy for decades, and then, ooops, turns out that it causes breast cancer. Lots of money they made, though, torturing those horses (Premarin and its copies were made from mare urine).

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 15:41 | 4325078 roadhazard

lmao

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:02 | 4323215 Atomizer

The Federal government sent this man his visa 6 months after 9/11. Yes, the same government that now runs your healthcare.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:12 | 4323234 mrdenis

time for Christie to do a prerp walk .....

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:49 | 4323300 Woodhippie

It's high time they ALL did a perp walk ... straight to the nearest lampost.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:22 | 4323250 A Lunatic

I know I've said it before, but it bears repeating; Fuck Obamacare........

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:40 | 4323287 Atomizer

Link dead – 404

House Democrats: Interactive Social Security Timeline

For Immediate Release: August 14, 2012

http://www.dems.gov/interactive-social-security-timeline

Think Tank Plans.

We have fewer workers paying into SS due to high unemployment, we must come up with an idea to kill off the baby boomers sooner. Our recommendation is to force ACA on the American public. Sending the baby boomers to their dirt beds earlier will shave off trillions of earmarked SS payments we would be obligated to disburse.

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 14:16 | 4324891 dizzyfingers

Atomizer: Link: page not found

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:44 | 4323296 f16hoser

Fuck Obama. He's not the problem. Valerie Jarrett is. she's damaged goods....

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:39 | 4323433 sunnyside

Her influence doesn't get near enough attention.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 19:22 | 4323695 sessinpo

16hoser "Fuck Obama. He's not the problem. Valerie Jarrett is. she's damaged goods."

Comment:

Oh please. If Jarret wasn't there, then it would some other progressive liberal with some chip on their shoulder. Same thing if Obama wasn't there. Then there would be some other person as President leading us further down the path of big government enslavement. It doesn't matter what party.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:48 | 4323299 Woodhippie

I would imagine that there are people that still support this but haven't either gotten their bill or tried to use it. Or worse, don't need it but think it's great for the "little people" and feel good about themselves for promoting it.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 16:59 | 4323319 stant

obama care is a bomb that went off. and you cant rewind it back. the damage is done , death follows. i hope it takes out those responcible . kaboom

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:33 | 4323412 Crash Overide

Looking forward to the Obama & Company perp walk... :)))))))

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:37 | 4323423 NoWayJose

This could be an election issue, but the Republicans too often insert their feet into their own mouths, and remove the focus from winning issues like this.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 17:39 | 4323431 Woodhippie

Elections???

Two party system???

Issues???

Bwahahahahahahhaah

Man this shit is funny when you don't drink fluoride.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 18:16 | 4323518 Hubbs

just got my wife's (age 37, healthy, no issues etc) and daughter's (who turned 10 today, also healthy etc) new premium " payment adjustments" with $5,000 deductible in the mail effective February 2, 2014 from our insurer:

Golden Rule

A United Healthcare Company

PO Box 31372

Salt Lake City, UT 844131-0374

After last year's 49.7% increase, I guess I should be thankful that it only went up 17% this year for a $5,000 deductible from $ 687.33 to $803.59

The math which doesn't lie: 803.59 - 687.33 / 687.33 = 17%

Just wait until people have to start PAYING for this unaffordable care act monster that Obama has unleashed.

This is what happens when someone who gets elected president who has never done a GOD DAMNED THING in his life except ride the affirmative action card and learn to read from both teleprompters.

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 14:26 | 4324906 dizzyfingers

Hubbs: we just gave up UHC, signed up with Mutual of Omaha. Check it out.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 18:39 | 4323591 dexter_morgan

But the people wanted socialized medicine. Be careful what you wish for.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 19:43 | 4323738 anefarious1

Yeah once they file their return in 2015 they will be in for a shock. Those curious can figure out their fine at http://obamacarefee.com which has an accurate penalty calculator for the "Shared Responsiblity Payment"

Those earning a decent living who happen to be healthy, rare nowadays, could be paying well over $1,000 to support this socialized mess of a healthcare system whether they like it or not (you too libtards)

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 19:54 | 4323760 lakecity55

"Comrades, I can tell you at last, we have installed a full Soviet under the disguise of the ACA. The Freedomz of these running dog Americans are dead at last. Soon, they will have no money and will live only at the whim of The State. Long Live Socialism! Long live the New Soviet!"

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 20:29 | 4323845 q99x2

Move in with SWAT teams and Navy Seals.

Sat, 01/11/2014 - 20:37 | 4323853 TrustbutVerify

It doesn't matter if the majority doesn't like Obamacare. America is not about majority rule anymore. The majority didn't want Obamacare before it was passed. The majority didn't want it when it was passed. A larger majority don't want it now. The vote was on strict party lines. Democrats foisted this down our throats. But then, Obama was elected wasn't he? So, it does matter for whom you vote for in regard to what they want to do legislatively - and, of course, with executive orders - (coughout-of-controlcough).

Obama was elected largely because of color - popular particularly among the consistently uninformed young hipster crowd - and the fact that people were just tired of G. Bush not being able to adequately form sentences - and subsequent candidates lacking any level of charisma and ability to get a coherent message across.

But, as is oh-so obvious now, what a candidate stands for does matter.

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 00:24 | 4324196 kareninca

Reading an interview with an insurance company executive today, I came on something new.

Originally, I thought that the Obamacare system wanted young people more than anything (the keg ads, after all). Then I realized that they wanted healthy people - a young person who is sickly is costly of course. So they want young, healthy people, right? Well, no, not their first choice. Young, healthy people, may not require much care, but their premiums are low; not much money to get out of them. What the system really wants are healthy people in their 40s and 50s, who will pay high premiums and require little care.

I don't want to think of the ads they will come up with, to tempt that demographic, male or female.

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 01:55 | 4324262 StychoKiller

Eets for da cheeldrun!

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 00:40 | 4324203 F.A. Hayek

Fuck Obama. Fuck all other politicians.

Sun, 01/12/2014 - 13:57 | 4324856 dizzyfingers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaxo3vGSTCY&feature=player_embedded

Obamacare "Approval" Drops To Record Low

Comment viewing options