Skip to comments.New McKinsey Survey: 74% Of Obamacare Sign-Ups Were Previously Insured
Posted on 05/10/2014 6:29:30 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
One of the principal flaws in the coverage of Obamacares enrollment numbers to date has been that the press has not made distinctions between those who have signed up for Obamacare-based plans, and those who have actually paid for those plans. A new survey from McKinsey indicates that three-fourths of enrollees were previously insured.
About 1 million people have gained coverage from Obamacares under-26 slacker mandate (not 3 million, as is commonly suggested); another 3 million or so have gained coverage from the laws expansion of Medicaid. Of the 8 million sign-ups on the exchange, we can only be confident that around a quarter2 millionwere previously uninsured.
My old plan was canceled under Obamacare, an exasperated Californian told me last week. The new Obamacare plan costs twice as much, and the deductibles are higher. And yet Obama is counting me as one of his 8 million people! But heyat least he has maternity coverage.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Rip it !
Seeing how the majority of enrollments were duplicate or triplicate, how are any of these numbers supposed to make sense?
Zombie-drones signing up to be taxed.
“At a tea at his house the year before, Perkins had sat beside Justice Harlan Stone, and he gave her a tip. She had confided her fears that any great social insurance system would be rejected by the court. Not so, he said, and whispered back the solution: The taxing power of the federal government is sufficient for everything you want and need. If the Social Security Act was formulated as a tax, and not a government insurance, it could get through.” - p.229; The Chicken Versus the Eagle; The Forgotten Man - Amity Shlaes
“One of the principal flaws “
what, am I smarter than everyone at forbes now. it wasn’t a “flaw” in press coverage, it was on purpose.
There is no doubt that the sign-ups have been grossly inflated. However, it is a mistake to use the metric of sign-ups as a measure of Obamacare’s success. We know the numbers will increase as employers drop health insurance and force employees on to the Obamacare exchanges. The numbers have to increase and will unless Obamacare is repealed.
The fact that many people were already insured before obamacare came about should be worrying people more than it currently is. It’s setting a very dangerous standard if the government can just kick a person off of something they voluntarily chose to use and replace it with something they didn’t want.
You mean! You mean! The Democrats have been trying to BS everyone! Say it ain’t so, Joe!
On the bright side, though, when the death panel in their area denies them treatment they'll have free contraceptives while their personal clock runs out.
And lost their coverage due to Obamacare. Period. Obamacare was NOT passed as a tax. If it had used the word ‘tax’ it would never have passed the Democrat House or Senate. It was argued in front of the SCOTUS as a tax. And ‘Justice’ Kagan kept saying ‘don't call it a tax.....why are you calling it a tax’. But the SCOTUS decided the ‘fee’ or ‘penalty’ actually was a tax, so the law was deemed Constitutional. The SCOTUS can ‘interpret’ words to make a bad law Constitutional. That's what happened in this case. TI believe the SCOTUS arguments were already written before Obamacare was passed......that's why it was so important to get Kagan onto the SCOTUS. We have been ‘punked’ so to speak. And the law wasn't started in the House. It started in the Senate when Reid, et al, took a previously passed law and gutted it, replacing the entire text with Obamacare and assigning it the number of the House law that they had gutted. All ‘tax’ laws MUST start in the House. This whole affair smells to high heaven. And when it came down to the wire, ‘Justice’ Roberts was rolled by Kagan......whispering in his ear ‘it really is a tax so it is Constitutional’. Lord, please help us save our country from those who are destroying it.
Indeed Obamacare is twice as expensive as what I had before and only half as good.
Fortunately I have thus far been able to avoid compliance, or I would be in trouble.
I know two people who have gone onto the exchange and gotten their insurance. Both are small business owners with no employees but themselves and spouse. They both claim they’ve saved a lot of money but both were paying obscene amounts per month before.
The ‘poor’ got free medical care from emergency rooms... with NO messy monthly payments. Why would they want to switch to something they have to pay for?
The only way to make a personal mandate plan work is for EMTALA to be repealed and that probably isn't politically possible.
Obamacare was NEVER about helping the poor. It’s about control over the middle class by effing liberal elites.
No, but it is certainly about buying off the poor with crumbs.
And, it is very much about making sure many, many millions stay poor and never enter the middle or upper middle class.
what % of that 74% say their monthly premium and copay deductible has gone down (as promised) and that they now have better coverage? I’d bet it’s up there with ZERO!
At best, 26% of 8 million is ~2 million.
...and can't afford!
Failure is assured.