patrick.net

curious2 says

BTW, @YesYNot, 20% of customers have no choice about switching insurers, because they have only one government-approved insurance corporation in their market.

This is a big problem. If there is no competition, it's failed in that market. How do the prices look in states like these compared to states with options? In general, the map of which states didn't expand medicaid is similar to the map that shows only one insurer option. Ironically, I live in state that did not expand medicaid, but has multiple options.
http://familiesusa.org/product/50-state-look-medicaid-expansion
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/20/upshot/obamacare-options-in-many-parts-of-country-only-one-insurer-will-remain.html?_r=0

I'm not going to try to find numbers to back this up, but most of these states have Republican governors. Is it a coincidence that these Republican governed states refused to expand Medicaid and their citizens now have a non-working market for health insurance?

YesYNot All Polls are Rigged says

How do the prices look in states like these compared to states with options?
***
Is it a coincidence that these Republican governed states refused to expand Medicaid and their citizens now have a non-working market for health insurance?

Almost every state is reporting double-digit percentage increases, on top of spending that was already the highest of any jurisdiction in the history of the world. If you want to say the Republicans are worse, fine, there is plenty of evidence to support that argument. Obamneycare was first enacted as Romneycare, and first proposed as HeritageFoundationCare. The Democrats though have consistently enabled the Republicans, from Johnson's 1965 escalation of what became Nixon's War in southeast Asia (Viet Nam, Cambodia, Laos...) to Hillary's vote for W's war in Iraq, to enacting Obamneycare on a party-line basis, to enacting NPVIC on a party-line basis. For the really huge feasts, the Republicans get the Democrats to set the table and prepare the meal.

And, the Penalties for Declining Mandatory Insurance (without Price Controls) are increasing Substantially this year. More than double!

The Obamacare tax is set to hit particularly hard this year, and federal and state officials are hoping the threat of a $1,000 tax bill will finally be enough to prod reluctant Americans to sign up for the president’s controversial health law.

California officials spotlighted the “individual mandate” in particularly blunt terms Wednesday, saying time is running out before Uncle Sam asks them to pay “their fair share” for the health overhaul.

The minimum penalty in 2016 will be $695, and the average penalty will be $969, the government estimates, as wealthier taxpayers who exceed the minimum must pay a 2.5 percent tax on their income above the filing threshold.

In 2015 the minimum tax was just $325, and the tax rate for wealthier families was only 2 percent.

“For 2016 that penalty is going up, and it’s going up a lot,” Covered California Executive Director Peter V. Lee said in a conference call devoted to the “costly gamble” that consumers take by remaining uninsured.

The majority of people get nothing in return for their health insurance, so the penalty cannot dissuade Working Class Americans from opting out, until it is higher than the cost of insurance. Listening to CNN radio on my drive this morning, that's exactly what they were whining for; that the penalty must be much higher. That and how it is bullshit that Trump has a valid position opposite Hillary (we sll know how much they loathe having to talk about real issues, especially when it doesn't help their Statist candidate).

The other thing the Oligarchs lackeys go on and on about, is that "20 million more people have coverage under Obamacare!". Any thinking person wonders, And?

Why is that sold as a good thing?

Then, the caveat that low income folk don't see a difference, because subsidies. Again, we wonder, who funds the subsidy?

Remember Folks:

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/obamacare-hikes-hammer-swing-state-voters/
Obamacare Hikes Hammer Swing-State Voters

ut Matt Schlapp, chairman of the American Conservative Union, said the notices people are receiving in the mail are more powerful than all of the "micro-targeting" that Democrats famously employed in President Obama's presidential campaigns to tailor specific messages to individual voters.

"What is more targeted than a letter from the government to the head of a household telling him that his second-biggest expense is going up by 50 percent?" he said. "It just blows by all the other communications they're getting."

Repeal and Repell.