Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-10-2013, 05:55 PM
RE: Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
I'm not interested in getting into this "gov vs. private sector" debate but I do agree with frankksj that this was absolutely embarassing. There is no excuse for the launch of the exchanges to be such a massive clusterfuck. This was basic web design with a back office system that is not vastly different than what a lot of other companies uese. Progressive Insurance runs a very similar thing and without a problem. This was an inexcusable, indefensible failure. And, if a private sector company did something like this for that much money, someone would be fired. And I don't mean some junior programmer. I mean someone senior would be cast into the abyss for pissing away that much money.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BnW's post
22-10-2013, 08:19 PM
RE: Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
(22-10-2013 05:43 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(22-10-2013 05:25 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Exactly. Drinking Beverage

Are you suggesting I was not specific? I provided a scanned copy of my notice from Anthem, I listed specific performance statistics for throughput of server requests, specific costs for colocation services, lease prices for servers, hourly rates for coders. What was I _NOT_ specific about? I'm happy to be as specific as you want.

Conversely, you guys (plural) have dismissed my posts, but I can't find _ANYTHING_ specific. I claimed that the number that Americans were 'saving 60% on insurance' was a scam because the reality is SOME Americans are paying less, and others, like myself, are being forced to pay much, much more to make up for it. Do you dispute it? If so, do you dispute my rates are going up 500%? I'm happy to post more scans to prove it. Do you dispute my numbers for server and development costs? If so, which one(s)? I'll provide links to substantiate them.

In my experience, liberals ALWAYS just dismiss everything you say, and when you ask for specifics, they run with their tail between their legs, where libertarians are thrilled when someone wants to talk specifics and like to address everything head on.

Quote:Yup. I'll take that bet. Except I'd wager that both premiums will be lower and profits higher. Supply and demand sorta shit and whatnot. Tongue

Fine, we'll touch bases in 5 years. But, you cannot cherry pick, like @Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver, where you look at ONLY the people who saw a rate cut, and ignore all the other people who are forced to pay for it through a rate hike. Sure, in 5 years, maybe you'll find some people, like those with costly pre-existing conditions, who are paying less than pre-Obamacare, but overall, when you look at the average that everyone is paying for health care, it will be much, much higher.

5 years from now the dingleberry clinging to the left side of my ass still ain't gonna be anymore differentiable from the dingleberry clinging to my right.The vast majority of people won't even notice Obamacare. Those that do, well that's what it's there for. Tongue

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2013, 08:35 PM
RE: Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
(22-10-2013 05:55 PM)BnW Wrote:  I'm not interested in getting into this "gov vs. private sector" debate...

Understood. But, it seems nobody is disputing that this was Obama's single most significant accomplishment, and the stakes couldn't have been higher (remember the whole government was shutdown purely over Obamacare), and he had essentially unlimited funds to spend more on this web site than has ever been spent on a website, and many millions of employees under him to call upon for the effort, more than ANY private company, and virtually unlimited resources, and _STILL_ he couldn't accomplish what your average startup does on a daily basis with almost no money and no resources.

Therefore, it is not unreasonable to question the competence of the people running the Federal government and to ask "If _THIS_ of all things, a basic web site that, according to USA Today jeopardizes his legacy is so badly bungled, what about all the countless other programs that nobody is paying any attention to? Imagine how well our tax dollars are being spent there."

Now combine that with comments made by guys like Thomas Sowell, who was a liberal, pro-big government lefty, until he worked for the Department of Labor and saw their internal reports which concluded the DOL was actually making unemployment HIGHER and hurting the labor force, and when he saw his superiors bury the report and ask for MORE money to expand their programs, is it not easy to see why many reach the conclusion that government needs to have healthy competition, just like the private sector does? Maybe shifting the power from one massive, central government that has no competition since people can't just leave no matter how bad it gets, to smaller, local governments that are competing with each other for residents and held accountable, is a good idea. That position is NOT even being anti-government, since local government is still government. It's just being anti-bad-government.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2013, 04:37 AM
RE: Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
Quote:Are you willing to take a bet? I will bet you, that if we flag this in our calendar's to follow up in 5 years, we'll find that the costs Americans pay for insurance will have risen substantially faster than inflation in the years 2014-2018, and the health insurance companies participating in the health exchange will post record profits in those years, unlike anything they ever made pre-Obamacare. You willing to take that bet? I'll flag it in my calendar, and if I'm wrong, I will gladly write a post saying that you liberals sure were right. But if I'm right, will you write a post and concede “You know the problem Americans are having with skyrocketing health costs? Yeap, we did that.” Will you agree now not to find some other excuse or cop out to blame it on anything but your support of Obamacare?

Yeah I'll take the bet. I predict about a 50-70% drop in health care costs as indicated in the USA Today article you submitted as well as statistics in insurance costs from NY State. Your comment about your insurance rates increasing 500% is also bullshit as the letter just said you would have to select an ACA compliant plan. If Blue Cross is jacking up their rates on ACA compliant plans by 500% and you're still stupid enough to buy from them, as opposed to using the exchanges to buy another plan, that's your problem.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2013, 06:43 AM
RE: Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
(21-10-2013 09:28 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Wikipedia.org is the 6th most popular web site, with 500 MILLION users each month.

Healthcare.gov (Obamacare) is the 3,395th most popular web site, with 500 THOUSAND users it's first month.

It took the libertarians at Wikipedia $2.7 million to launch the site for a year.

It took the government over $300 million to launch healthcare.gov link.

It translates to a cost of $0.004 per user for wikipedia, vs. $600.00 per user for healthcare.gov, 150,000 times more than wikipedia.

More efficient at doing what?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2013, 08:42 AM
RE: Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
(23-10-2013 04:37 AM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  Yeah I'll take the bet. I predict about a 50-70% drop in health care costs as indicated in the USA Today article you submitted as well as statistics in insurance costs from NY State. Your comment about your insurance rates increasing 500% is also bullshit as the letter just said you would have to select an ACA compliant plan. If Blue Cross is jacking up their rates on ACA compliant plans by 500% and you're still stupid enough to buy from them, as opposed to using the exchanges to buy another plan, that's your problem.

Great. But based on your response, we don't even need to wait 5 years to settle the bet. You claim that my "insurance rates increasing 500% is bullshit". I can also give you the math proving that Obamacare will cost me over $1 million during the course of my life, money which I could have left to my kids when I'm old, but which Obamacare is forcing me to give to the insurance companies that funded his campaign.

Will you agree that if I post the proof that this is the case, that my rates are going up 500% purely because of Obamacare and it will ultimately cost my children of their inheritance, then you will write a post in this forum stating that, when you were defending Obamacare, it was based on your being unaware of the severely damaging effects that Obamacare is inflicting on some people, and acknowledge that there is no free lunch and that whatever benefits SOME people get from Obamacare are merely coming at the expense of other people? And, if I cannot prove it and it's all bull-shit, then I will post in the forum my deepest apologies and tell you that I now embrace Obamacare.

Will you take that bet now?

You'll see in many of the other threads I made similar claims which liberals said were pure bullshit, and in the end when I posted proof, they usually just went silent and refused to admit that they were wrong. So, let's bring this one to a conclusion where one of us admits he was wrong, and don't just run when the proof is presented and it's not what you like.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2013, 09:43 AM
Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
(23-10-2013 08:42 AM)frankksj Wrote:  
(23-10-2013 04:37 AM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  Yeah I'll take the bet. I predict about a 50-70% drop in health care costs as indicated in the USA Today article you submitted as well as statistics in insurance costs from NY State. Your comment about your insurance rates increasing 500% is also bullshit as the letter just said you would have to select an ACA compliant plan. If Blue Cross is jacking up their rates on ACA compliant plans by 500% and you're still stupid enough to buy from them, as opposed to using the exchanges to buy another plan, that's your problem.

Great. But based on your response, we don't even need to wait 5 years to settle the bet. You claim that my "insurance rates increasing 500% is bullshit". I can also give you the math proving that Obamacare will cost me over $1 million during the course of my life, money which I could have left to my kids when I'm old, but which Obamacare is forcing me to give to the insurance companies that funded his campaign.

Will you agree that if I post the proof that this is the case, that my rates are going up 500% purely because of Obamacare and it will ultimately cost my children of their inheritance, then you will write a post in this forum stating that, when you were defending Obamacare, it was based on your being unaware of the severely damaging effects that Obamacare is inflicting on some people, and acknowledge that there is no free lunch and that whatever benefits SOME people get from Obamacare are merely coming at the expense of other people? And, if I cannot prove it and it's all bull-shit, then I will post in the forum my deepest apologies and tell you that I now embrace Obamacare.

Will you take that bet now?

You'll see in many of the other threads I made similar claims which liberals said were pure bullshit, and in the end when I posted proof, they usually just went silent and refused to admit that they were wrong. So, let's bring this one to a conclusion where one of us admits he was wrong, and don't just run when the proof is presented and it's not what you like.

I would really like to see evidence how a US president made executive board decisions for certain private insurance companies to raise their rates.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2013, 11:00 AM
RE: Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
(23-10-2013 08:42 AM)frankksj Wrote:  
(23-10-2013 04:37 AM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  Yeah I'll take the bet. I predict about a 50-70% drop in health care costs as indicated in the USA Today article you submitted as well as statistics in insurance costs from NY State. Your comment about your insurance rates increasing 500% is also bullshit as the letter just said you would have to select an ACA compliant plan. If Blue Cross is jacking up their rates on ACA compliant plans by 500% and you're still stupid enough to buy from them, as opposed to using the exchanges to buy another plan, that's your problem.

Great. But based on your response, we don't even need to wait 5 years to settle the bet. You claim that my "insurance rates increasing 500% is bullshit". I can also give you the math proving that Obamacare will cost me over $1 million during the course of my life, money which I could have left to my kids when I'm old, but which Obamacare is forcing me to give to the insurance companies that funded his campaign.

Will you agree that if I post the proof that this is the case, that my rates are going up 500% purely because of Obamacare and it will ultimately cost my children of their inheritance, then you will write a post in this forum stating that, when you were defending Obamacare, it was based on your being unaware of the severely damaging effects that Obamacare is inflicting on some people, and acknowledge that there is no free lunch and that whatever benefits SOME people get from Obamacare are merely coming at the expense of other people? And, if I cannot prove it and it's all bull-shit, then I will post in the forum my deepest apologies and tell you that I now embrace Obamacare.

Will you take that bet now?

You'll see in many of the other threads I made similar claims which liberals said were pure bullshit, and in the end when I posted proof, they usually just went silent and refused to admit that they were wrong. So, let's bring this one to a conclusion where one of us admits he was wrong, and don't just run when the proof is presented and it's not what you like.

Please do generate the math on that one. That figure of $1 million is absurd. Unless you are absurdly rich, you will never pay that much money in health care costs for the ACA.

People aren't going silent because you're raising good points, people are going silent because you keep living in this libertarian fantasyland where the government and the fed should run like your bank account. That's not the nature of the monetary system and the current fiat currency system we operate with has benefits which far outweigh previous financial systems.

But. I'll put in one caveat to the bet: If the numbers show you to be in the top 10% of earners and are complaining about having to pay more in tax and would prefer the current system where you can enjoy a Cadillac health plan at $25k a year while the poor, or unemployed, or those suffereing from pre-existing conditions suffer and die because the insurance companies won't cover them in order to make insane profits, you get nothing from me and I don't want to hear another peep from you about how inconvienced you are when we attempt to provide a publice service that benefits 95% of us. You want to be a member of the club called the United States of America? Pay the club dues or hit the road! We all had a vote on this and this is what we decided to do.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2013, 04:48 PM
RE: Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
(23-10-2013 09:43 AM)I and I Wrote:  I would really like to see evidence how a US president made executive board decisions for certain private insurance companies to raise their rates.

That's simple. The same way the club-wielding Neanderthals always get people to do things against their will: violence. Tell the board that if they don't comply you will send agents with guns and shoot them if they continue to resist. It works every time.

What you're forgetting is that Obamacare actually made health insurance illegal, and any companies that continue to offer health insurance WILL be dealt with violently. Remember insurance, by its definition, is there to cover large, catastrophic, unplanned events--it's a managed risk pool where everybody knows that, on average, they will pay more with insurance, but it mitigates the risk that they're unlucky and face costs they cannot handle. Car insurance, for example, covers accidents. Obviously we all know the car insurance companies make a profit, collecting more in premiums than they pay in claims, so, on average everybody would pay less to cover any claims themselves. But it mitigates the risk that you are not average, but that you have an unpredictable event. Car insurance doesn't cover your car's scheduled maintenance--if it did, it wouldn't be insurance, it's a maintenance plan. Similarly, homeowners insurance covers fire, flood, earthquake, etc.. It doesn't cover mowing your lawn--if it did, it wouldn't be insurance, it's a maintenance plan.

In the US you used to be able to get health insurance, meaning it only covers the big unexpected things, like an accident, cancer, heart attack, etc., and you take care of routine maintenance (checkups, etc.) yourself. It was very affordable, btw, less than $50/month. These companies also offered plans that they called 'health insurance', but is misleading because they were actually outsourced health management because the company takes over everything, including your 'scheduled and routine maintenance'. The health management plans cost 5-10x higher than the health insurance plans.

Obamacare makes health insurance (which they call 'catastrophic insurance') illegal, except under specific circumstances, and has a mandate that everyone must buy a health management plan.

What would happen if Blue Cross's board said "Fuck you, Obama. We're going to keep offering everyone the $50/month 'catastrophic insurance' plans like we used to?"

Serious question, I and I. If you were a Blue Cross board member and you refused to give in and cancel all the 'catastrophic' plans per Obamacare, and you kept doing this despite court orders, contempt of court notices, etc., what would ultimately happen? Would the Obama administration give in and say "Ok, we'll let you get away with it", or would violence be used to force compliance? Please answer that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2013, 04:55 PM
RE: Private sector 150,000 times more efficient than the government?
Quote:Please do generate the math on that one. That figure of $1 million is absurd. Unless you are absurdly rich, you will never pay that much money in health care costs for the ACA.

Gladly. I did the math and have attached an Excel sheet as well as the .pdf printout. All I ask is that, since I invested the time to prove this to you, don't just do the typical liberal thing and run away and ignore the facts. Address them. If there's a flaw in my data, be SPECIFIC and point out the flaw.

Obamacare costs the average American earning a typical wage $3.5 million, but more importantly, it means the difference between being free to make your own decisions and get any cutting edge care you may need no matter how costly, vs. being dependent on a private, for-profit corporation that holds you life in their life hands and rewards their employees for killing you off if you get sick. You don't need to be rich or born into privilege to use this system; just have some basic math skills and an open mind.

Here are the assumptions. First, although health care costs are outrageous in the US, when you go to medical tourism facilities, like in India and Mexico, you get care that is, in my experience, much better, and costs less than 10% of what it does in the US. You can go to India and get a hip replacement for $8k at a top-rated hospital that ranks better than most US hospitals which charge $80k for the same thing. Ditto for chemotherapy, organ transplants, etc.. I can give you the studies if you question any of this.

The 'PreObamacare' sheet starts calculating at age 20, and goes until death at age 80. It takes the cost of a gold plan under Obamacare, cell E1, and assumes that you set it aside in a tax-free health savings account (IRS LINK---------) which you invest, and that you pay for your routine medical expenses yourself (which is now illegal thanks to Obamacare). It also assumes that you buy 'catastrophic insurance' which covers just the major unexpected items (cancer, accident, etc.), and cost about $50/month pre-Obamacare (E7). Thus neither you or society is at risk if you get a sudden, unexpected medical problem, and nobody will pick up the tab for you. These plans are illegal now except for the very poor.

It factors in inflation at 2%/year (E6) and that you can get a 7%/year return on investments. It assumes that each year when you go for a routine checkup, you do it while you're away on vacation at a medical tourism facility and are spending $500/checkup (cell E1). Remember, this is like spending $5,000 at a US facility, and it assumes that by age 40 your costs go up 5x to the equivalent of $25,000/year in today's dollars, and that they go up again 5x at the age of 60, to $125,000/year in today's dollars. These numbers are VERY high. I actually don't know any 20 year olds that spend $5,000/year on medical expenses, or 60 year olds who spend $125,000/year, and at age 40, my checkups cost $90 and I don't think I've ever spent $500/year on medical in my life, and my grandmother is 90 and has never even been in a hospital except for child birth. But to be sure you weren't dismissing my case because I'm healthy, I put in very high medical costs, and I added in catastrophic insurance and in column G, I even added in 'major events', like heart attacks and cancer at $50k and $100k at 10 year intervals, starting at age 49 (again a worst case scenario), since I drop the 'catastrophic insurance' coverage once the HSA hits $250k. Column H shows the balance in your HSA, which is almost $4 million at age 80, the average life expectency. For someone like myself who eats well and exercises regularly and is in good health, I hope to live to 100, and if I stay healthy like my grandma, I would have had over $30 million.

But most important, why my system YOU are in charge of your own life. If when you hit 80 you want to live in a nursing home that costs $500,000/year and includes daily massages from super models, it is YOUR perogative. If you want some cutting edge, super expensive treatment, you can have it. With Obamacare, your shit out of luck. If you need some procedure offered in Germany that's non-FDA approved, with my system you'll get it. With Obamacare, you'll die.

With my system the average person can be a financially independent multi-millionaire at retirement and choose to either leave their kids a big inheritance, or enjoy their golden years in luxury with peace of mind. With your Obamacare system, by contrast, they hand all this over to the health insurance companies that are more interested in their profit margin than your quality of life, and you're totally dependent on them.

To make it fair, I also did a postObamacare sheet which assumes you buy the cheapest bronze plan allowed under Obamacare, but still set the cost of a gold plan into the HSA. You only end up with $450k, meaning it costs you the ability to have $3.5 million in savings when you die. And if you do buy the gold plan, you end up with ZERO because that whole $3.5 million goes to the insurance company.

Do you dispute this? If so, be specific.


Attached File(s)
.zip  Health Savings2.zip (Size: 201.24 KB / Downloads: 13)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: