<p>Merry Christmas to you all.</p>
<p>Hope Santa is good to everyone tonight.</p>
<p>The extension in California is not online. If a person started their application online, they can complete it using but they have to work with an enrollment counselor:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I tried to put in the link, but it’s to Facebook so the link didn’t work.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/25/us/politics/white-house-again-stretches-health-care-sign-up-deadline.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/25/us/politics/white-house-again-stretches-health-care-sign-up-deadline.html</a></p>
<p>"The announcement itself was vague, saying only that if website problems had prevented any consumers from enrolling, they might qualify for what the government has called “a special enrollment period.” The administration did not say how long that would last. Nor did it define what website errors might be involved. "</p>
<p>The LA Times reported that there were more than 25,000 sign ups in Cal on Dec 23. The covered ca problems hurt sign ups. </p>
<p>That is a lower number than I expected. </p>
<p>The total signups so far should be close to 440,000.</p>
<p><a href=“http://touch.latimes.com/#section/717/[/url]”>http://touch.latimes.com/#section/717/</a></p>
<p>Merry Christmas to those who celebrate it!</p>
<p>Happy New Year to all!</p>
<p>Been out of loop last few days, but confused by this bet. </p>
<p>Is the bet that a poster did not think there would be 500,000 signups, period? </p>
<p>Or 500,000 uninsured who can now get insurance? </p>
<p>Is the bet about 500,000 buying on exchange with subsidies? Or include off exchange purchases? </p>
<p>If we lost a few million in people who had insurance, but then lost their policy due to new ACA rules, then shouldn’t the bet focus on net gain of insured beyond those who prebiously had insurance? </p>
<p>It seems like logical questions are really for those previously uninsured, are they now covered? And those who had insurance but lost it, are they also insured? We should have millions who lost their plans be now covered by a replacement policy, and those who didn’t have it, now insured.</p>
<p>Hope you’re having a great Christmas, Samurai! Ours isn’t wonderful so far, husband has to work today, I work early tomorrow, already have one case of vomiting and one of diarrhea this morning, between dogs and kids.</p>
<p>Besides that, I wouldn’t mind getting the answer to your question either. Has been a little too much for me to follow!</p>
<p>Busdriver11, sorry to read your Christmas is off to a poor start.</p>
<p>The bet is will 500,000 people who get their insurance thru the exchange have their insurance paid for by May 1st?</p>
<p>GP thinks people in large numbers are going to sign up but not pay.</p>
<p>Oh no, bd :(. I hope everyone gets better!</p>
<p>Oh, no, bd. Sorry for all your problems.</p>
<p>The bet is that at least 500,000 will sign up for insurance on the California exchange by March 31 and pay for it by May 1st. It’s a virtual certainty that at least 500,000 people will sign up, but nobody knows what percentage won’t end up paying. We’re pretty sure that Covered California and the insurance companies will give us enough information to settle the bet.</p>
<p>Ah, the body fluids seem to be back under control around here. Found out the dog is sick because she climbed up on the table, opened up a tin of Christmas cookies and consumed the entire thing! Was wondering why she wasn’t badgering me for food. Kiddo’s stomach ailment seems to have been temporary, so it’s all good.</p>
<p>I can’t imagine people would sign up for insurance, but not pay…after all the hassle, but apparently some do, so who knows?</p>
<p>
I don’t think this wording is really accurate. Many – perhaps most - of us whose old policies were discontinued did not “lose” a policy – our insurance companies sent us a notice saying that policy X was being discontinued, and if we did nothing, we would be automatically enrolled in a similar metal level policy, policy Y. In terms of net impact that was no different than receiving a notice of a rate change or other change in terms of policy. That is something that has happened to me on a regular basis over the years – and often I initiated a change of policy on my own if the rates on the old policy were going up too much. (My insurance company typically sent a rate sheet that at least showed what I would pay with the same policy + higher deductible). </p>
<p>It is true that those notices prompted many of us to buy on the exchanges when we otherwise would not have changed policies, but it’s not a case of having “lost” insurance – it was just business as usual in the individual insurance market. (And the group market as well – I’m pretty sure that most smaller employers went through the same thing on a frequent basis.)</p>
<p>I realize that this does impact the overall numbers, but keep in mind that many of the uninsured were people who previously had insurance, but were priced out of the market years ago. So they, too, “lost” policies they previously had – it just happened sooner for them.</p>
<p>
I don’t think that’s going to happen at a significant level. Of course there will always be people on the lower end of the economic spectrum who intend to pay but simply don’t have the money, and other people who simply are bad at handling finances who manage to fall behind on payments – but I think the fraction will be fairly small, especially among the earlier signers.</p>
<p>“I don’t think that’s going to happen at a significant level.”</p>
<p>Calmom, do you want to join the above 500,000 side?</p>
<p>“I can’t imagine people would sign up for insurance, but not pay…after all the hassle, but apparently some do, so who knows?”</p>
<p>You dont have to know to know. ;)</p>
<p>“You don’t have to know to know.”</p>
<p>Show me the data, where are the links, how can you know if you don’t know? Next we’ll be hearing about those known knowns and the unknown unknowns! :D</p>
<p>:)…</p>
<p>I do know. Sorry. I have been in the number business long enough.</p>
<p>Busdriver11, I am sure you know how to fly a plane. ;)</p>
<p>^^But not all planes. It would be challenging to land a bug smasher when I haven’t done it in 30 years. I am never overconfident nor assume too much, at least not when it could be hazardous.</p>
<p>Well… </p>
<p>There are situations that are numerically challenging. </p>
<p>But this situation is not that difficult.</p>
<p>I dont like to do complicated things. </p>
<p>Busdriver11, you are very opinionated. Whether you assume or not assume too much is subjective. :)</p>
<p>Nah, not that opinionated. With a good enough argument, I can be swayed.</p>
<p>It sounds like you are pretty sure of your numbers, and we should bet on your side. Seeing that there’s nothing to lose but pride, I might just join your side.</p>
<p>Well count me as one of those signed-up-but-didn’t-pay people. I officially paid one more month on my old plan today (Merry Christmas?). </p>
<p>I do think I’m very unusual in my position. Most people have some idea of what they’re making next year and are not in a position to be paying about the same whether it’s an Exchange plan or their old plan. I’m in a <em>very</em> unique position. </p>
<p>However, I hope to be on an exchange plan once I get my tax returns for this year.</p>