<p>Good news for New Hampshire. The number of exchanges next year will increase from one to five:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.boston.com/health/2014/06/02/companies-offer-health-plans-new-hampshire/GmmhqI6s4GmTlMWN3HBLnM/story.html”>http://www.boston.com/health/2014/06/02/companies-offer-health-plans-new-hampshire/GmmhqI6s4GmTlMWN3HBLnM/story.html</a></p>
<p>“Of course, we know with certainty that the unsubsidized in the individual market are not paying less today than before Obamacare.”</p>
<p>I have posted numerous times that my sister and her H are paying $600/month less now then before ACA. She is not getting a subsidy, either. Her network is exactly the same, too. </p>
<p>And I’ve posted that my direct buy plan went down. Not much, but down. It really depends on particulars. </p>
<p>“lje: we lost our group coverage.
As for “you can keep,” that makes a nice ‘headline’ for the naysayers. Ever read the conditions under which you can keep it?”</p>
<p>Now come on, @lookingforward, you really don’t want to defend this, do you? The conditions were after the fact. They NEVER were specified when this was being sold. This is just a convenient after the fact fine print that was never brought up. It’s the fine print that wasn’t even whispered. Remember, “If you can like your plan, you can keep it. Period?” Not, “Read the fine print, there are conditions”. Don’t defend the indefensible, which are obviously lies of omission.</p>
<p>Long time since I’ve read this thread. Too much to read back now, but it’s kind of like a soap opera. You can leave for years, come back, and the same story is repeating, over and over again. Except the characters look a little older.</p>
<p>My gawd, BD. I may have a more direct answer brewing, but will say just this, for now: I am defending nothing. I am advocating some critical thinking. (And then some deeper digging.) </p>
<p>You really believe 9 out of 10 dentists prefer Crest, just because someone said it, definitively? As I always say, prefer it over what? Mud? My kids went through this when they were little: *but the commercial said… * Little in life is so simple. </p>
<p>It’s a shame LF, when the leader of the free world is held to no higher standard than a toothpaste commercial. But, it was it is, sadly. </p>
<p>No, Flossy. It is a shame when people don’t think, don’t vet- and then go haywire on a public forum, because they can. </p>
<p>Come on, lookingforward, there are plenty of defenses of this health care law better than that, but I think your salient point is that we should have known this was a lie and not believed it. Did you just assume it was a lie? And therefore you knew better? How exactly did you vet this? Was your critical thinking that this was such an obvious lie there had to be more to it?</p>
<p>Of course, after this amount of time watching what certain people do, I now make the assumption that everything is a lie. I believe nothing unless I see it with my own eyes. Like a rat, I do learn, eventually.</p>
<p>This is ludicrous. I suggest vetting and heads explode.<br>
“Critical thinking” doesn’t assume, one way or another. It’s inquiry. </p>
<p>^^Not at all, no exploding heads. You’re safe from that danger. But you didn’t answer my questions. How do you vet something like this? If the information isn’t available publically, and if you aren’t an expert in analyzing health insurance data, how do you vet? There seem to be an awful lot of people who were surprised, even those who were big supporters (when this affected them negatively). I now just expect that everything coming out of Washington DC is a lie, until proven otherwise. That’s how I vet.</p>
<p>That’s not vetting, that’s assuming. Judging before enough detail comes in. Easy, yeah. Too many are too happy with sound bites, headlines, some random anecdotes. Imo. You can run with the first bit of info you come across or you can explore for more. Some here hated it when others weren’t immediately swayed by their media links, pronouncements and predictions. As one said, more or less, why shouldn’t we trust that article, it was printed.
But we were looking for more info, details, something to explain- or substantiate. Some way to weigh. I’ve said enough on this detour.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You challenged those who referenced the ‘keep your plan’ and ‘save $2500’ as being google challenged so I provided the exact quotes and specific references. </p>
<p>
Even those in charged knew you couldn’t vet what didn’t exists…hence the infamous "…we have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what’s in it…”</p>
<p>Here, right here, is where the vetting is happening. And some of the results of the vetting point to direct and intentional misinformation for (what appears to be) the purpose of getting the thing passed.</p>
<p>There are two camps voicing their opinions here…one says…things were so unfair and unworkable that SOMETHING needed to be done. This something is good simply because it is something and is different than what was. Some people who were disenfranchised (good word huh?) before are now- enfranchised. That is good. The overall happiness has been increased even though some individual happiness may have decreased. So, in the end it doesn’t really matter what needed to be said in order to get us here, since here is clearly and morally so much better than ‘back there’. All the misleading and (okay…here goes…lies) which needed to be said are okay…because… now we are here in a better place.</p>
<p>The second camp opines …hey …this really really fluster clucked me! Oh and when we stick our heads up…it’s clear it’s had the same effect on those around us. What the heck! For all these years we’ve been paying not only for ourselves but also for the uninsured, we’ve sucked up the increased costs, the reduces benefits, the annual hours of investigation and …here goes…vetting… of our options and wrote the check once again. Now we find out that we get to foot MORE of the bill, for less. Oh, and we don’t necessarily get to keep our plans or our doctors as was clearly, distinctly proclaimed. The game has changed, businesses now need to strongly consider their decisions in light of additional costs. Yes, we know certain people in certain positions will bend and contort the truth in order to gain favor among those needed to make their own dreams come true…but this particular situation is particularly fraught with deceit. And, holding this position makes us selfish, uncaring and greedy in the eyes of group one.</p>
<p>So, you don’t like ACA. I get that and it’s fine. You have every right to your opinion. But what are you going to do about it besides complain about it on a message board? I am being serious in asking this. </p>
<p>Unless I’m misunderstanding, something a message board is a place for people to tell their personal stories and correct the misinformation coming out of Washington. There’s a lot of it these days. And, yeah, this has nothing to do with vetting. Wait and see seems to be what LF is saying but when something is secretly designed to have winners and losers, the losers will be unhappy and feel deceived. I mean, they were deceived, intentionally, after all, so it’s not at all surprising.</p>
<p>@dietz199, you completely nailed it! Post of the month, at least on this thread.</p>
<p>“Unless I’m misunderstanding, something a message board is a place for people to tell their personal stories and correct the misinformation coming out of Washington. There’s a lot of it these days.”</p>
<p>And I have seen a lot of misinformation coming from outside of DC. But ACA is now the law and I am very curious what those who are against this law are planning on doing from now on - instead of just complaining on a message board? It is obviously something you (and I mean that in a collective sense) have given considerable thought to. I know when I am extremely upset up about something, I try to do something actively to bring about change- even if I know it’s a lost cause. </p>
<p>The ACA is the law, but even the administration is not enforcing very much of this particular law for some reason. It’s a rather strange and some even say unlawful situation. So, mostly for now I’m watching with fascination. </p>
<p>Ah, so if it’s not being enforced very much why all the complaints? </p>
<p>The complaints are from people who are affected now or fear they will soon land in the loser pile. With all due respect, this is not rocket science, really.</p>
<p>“The complaints are from people who are affected now or fear they will soon land in the loser pile. With all due respect, this is not rocket science, really.”</p>
<p>So again, and with all due respect, what do those affected by ACA now, or fear they will shortly be in the loser pile, plan to do about it to effect change - besides complaining about it on a message board? </p>