Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Obamacare Software Glitch Will Limit Penalties Charged To Smokers

Soulskill posted 1 year,15 days | from the software-engineers-1,-democracy-0 dept.

Software 490

turbosaab writes "The Obama administration has quietly notified insurers that a computer system glitch will limit penalties that companies may charge smokers under the new healthcare law. The underlying reason for the limitation is another provision in the health care law that says insurers can't charge older customers more than three times what they charge the youngest adults in the pool. The government's computer system has been unable to accommodate the two. So younger smokers and older smokers must be charged the same penalty, or the system will kick it out. A fix will take at least a year to put in place."

cancel ×

490 comments

I know the government loves to lie to us... (2, Interesting)

intermodal (534361) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228759)

but this is just lack of effort.

Re:I know the government loves to lie to us... (2)

major_handicap (2882291) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228769)

I feel bad for the programmers...I mean...how junior do they have to be? :)

Re:I know the government loves to lie to us... (2, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228779)

This is what you get with lowest bidder solutions.

Sometimes bringing stuff in house is better.

Re:I know the government loves to lie to us... (4, Insightful)

intermodal (534361) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228827)

Sometimes, but given who "in house" would be in this case, they might be better off with a group of enthusiastic 13-year-olds.

Re:I know the government loves to lie to us... (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228909)

Are we talking about the programmers or the government? Both seem to be the "lowest bidders" here...

Re:I know the government loves to lie to us... (1)

TsuruchiBrian (2731979) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229367)

When it comes to computer programmers, hiring the more experienced ones usually ends up being less expensive because they finish in less hours and the final product has lower upkeep and maintenance costs and fewer bugs that take 1 year to fix.

Re:I know the government loves to lie to us... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229003)

It sounds like the problem is being blamed on the code, when really the problem is the rules they set up.

They likely set up the rules this way specifically to prevent penalty stacking, and even more specifically age dependant penalties.

Re:I know the government loves to lie to us... (3, Insightful)

slartibartfastatp (613727) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229273)

Or the rules wasn't implemented correctly, and the clients lacked the proper tests so it managed to get through till production*.

* assuming there were testing routines in their process**

** assuming there was a process

Ah yes, government control of health care (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228775)

Ain't it wonderful?

And I'm sooo certain it'll never be abused. Oh not. Not by such a wonderful government, where senior administration officials just love the Constitution, especially the Fifth Amendment....

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228805)

hey, you live in daddy's house, you live by daddy's rules.

skateboarders have a higher risk of injury, you will see a penalty.
gun owners? penalty.
rock climbers? penalty.
over BMI? penalty.

socialism. ideas so good, they have to be mandatory.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228845)

This is not socialism at all, that would be a lot better.

Go look at european healthcare systems, they do not charge extra for any of those things.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228899)

This is not socialism at all, that would be a lot better.

Go look at european healthcare systems, they do not charge extra for any of those things.

Hence the state of their economy with several members of the EU on the brink of bankruptcy.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (2, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228933)

The ones who always are and always will be. Has nothing to do with healthcare.

I invite you to travel the world, you will learn a lot.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (-1)

jedidiah (1196) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229091)

Yes. You get to see for yourself just disorganized and undisciplined the Italians are. I can just imagine them engaging in some sort of freeloader feeding frenzy. It does put the Spanish and Greeks into perspective. It's a nice contrast to the English and Germans.

The whole thing makes it easy to imagine the disaster that would ensue with a social welfare system that has to govern a mixture of both.

The Germans themselves seem doubtful about the prospect of them being able to bail everyone else out.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (3, Informative)

Merls the Sneaky (1031058) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228965)

Then I invite you to look at Australia with a similar system and an economy not in the toilet.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229033)

Then I invite you to look at Australia with a similar system and an economy not in the toilet.

That's because it's a resource-based economy selling megatons of crap to the Chinese. Wait for the China bubble to burst and tell us how well it's doing.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229249)

Using Australia as an example is like using Saudi Arabia.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229217)

Hence the state of their economy with several members of the EU on the brink of bankruptcy.

That's primarily because they don't have their own currency, and can't operate on debt the way normal countries do.

I read someone's analysis which said that the eurozone came about due to the reunification of Germany, and the resulting need to create a sense of community so that Poland and France wouldn't be nervous about being invaded again. So there was a bandwagon attempt to get everyone on board. The problem is that the system requires participating countries to operate in the black, but the aforesaid bandwagon brought in countries that have *never* operated in the black. And now the chickens are coming home to roost.

And BTW, a number of eurozone countries have good healthcare and are *not* on the brink of bankruptcy. We need to set aside all the political scaremongering so that the USA can develop a sensible healthcare policy.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (3, Insightful)

JDG1980 (2438906) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229229)

Hence the state of their economy with several members of the EU on the brink of bankruptcy.

Yet it's not the most socialist European countries that are going broke. The Nordic nations, for example, are doing just fine. It's Mediterranean Europe that is having trouble, and they've had fiscal problems for decades. Putting them in a single currency union with the likes of Germany was just asking for a disaster to happen.

Re: Ah yes, government control of health care (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229237)

We're number 1! Woo USA USA usa

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (4, Interesting)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229063)

They sure as hell would like to. There's already talk of charging smokers and overweight people an additional premium. Not being a smoker and being just a tad overweight, I say HELL NO unless the people with an unhealthy lifestyle also get a larger cut on their state and private pension premiums. The BBC doc. "the cost of dying" ought to be mandatory viewing for anyone contemplating such penalties, as it has shown that the super healthy people are the most expensive overall, and only slightly below in health care costs as they will often suffer from similarly expensive ailments, just a bit later in life.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229311)

Yeah, if you look at total lifetime costs smokers are saving everyone money. They die of horrible diseases that are cheap to deal with until they cause death.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (1)

ThreeKelvin (2024342) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228861)

You know, that doesn't sound like socialism at all. More like capitalism and egoism taken to the extreme.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229119)

Government control of the markets IS by definition socialism.

The government took over the entire healthcare market, ergo it is socialized medicine.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (-1, Troll)

Sperbels (1008585) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229341)

Government control of the markets IS by definition socialism. The government took over the entire healthcare market, ergo it is socialized medicine.

Yeah, but since the corporations own the government, it works back to capitalism.

Re: Ah yes, government control of health care (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229359)

actually, socialism would be government *as* the market. government control of markets is what characterizes mercantilism.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (5, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229301)

You know, that doesn't sound like socialism at all.

In US political dialogue, "socialism" is just a vague term used to smear people or plans that you don't like. I suspect only a tiny minority of Americans could give a reasonably accurate definition.

Oddly, it has moved to fill the niches formerly occupied by both "communism" and "fascism".

high risk job wait your an 1099 now so that fee (-1, Troll)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228921)

high risk job wait your an 1099 now so that added fee is on you now.

BMI is junk and gun owners THE NRA WILL NOT LET THAT HAPPEN AS WELL the 2th amendment

Re:high risk job wait your an 1099 now so that fee (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229109)

You better get your keyboard checked out. Your shift key seems to be sticking.

Oh, your English sucks too.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229025)

That's funny, during the Bush administration my HMO hiked my rates because I rode a motorcycle.

Of course, they phrased it as a "discount" if I would assert that I didn't partake in a list of "high risk activities" or whatever, then raised the rates such that the "discount" was the old rate.

But hey, since it was the private sector doing it I guess it's okay, even though that was the only HMO that the company would do business with so I didn't actually have a choice.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (1)

BlueStrat (756137) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229247)

socialism. ideas so good, they have to be mandatory.

Great minds...(see my sig)

Strat

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (1)

GodInHell (258915) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229283)

over BMI? penalty.

Somehow you think the penalty was not higher (i.e. NO insurance) before Obamacare? You must have had group insurance.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (1)

GodInHell (258915) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228879)

Control of healthcare? You mean control of health insurance.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229031)

Don't forget the 1st, 2nd and of course the 4th.

In fact, the 3rd amendment is the only one that I'm aware of that they haven't tried to violently violate, yet.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229297)

You could argue that forcing telcos and ISPs to incorporate wiretapping equipment into their systems constitutes a quartering of government agents on private property in violation of the 3rd Amendment.

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229349)

Maybe the US govt can start twampling the 6th through 10th amendments next year

Re:Ah yes, government control of health care (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229305)

Some cops tried to violate the 3rd recently, believe it was in Utah or Nevada. Don't have the link but you can google if you want to.

I'm sorry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228777)

I'm sorry, I can't do that, Dave.

A year? (5, Insightful)

MAXOMENOS (9802) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228783)

I'm hoping that this is because there's too many other things in the pipeline that are more critical to get done first, and not because, say, the system is so badly written that this one relatively minor looking task will take a year.....

If it's the latter, then I'm in the wrong business.

Re:A year? (4, Interesting)

Shados (741919) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228841)

Translating the US tax code into software is probably a task rivaling some of the most complex software problems out there...and no one in their right mind will take that job if they can go elsewhere...

So you have a ridiculously complicated problem, worked on by several rejects (I'm not saying all of them are rejects, but probably a non-trivial amount. I'm sure SOME good devs actually work there willingly....).

The result must be an insane mess of crappy code...

Re:A year? (1)

shentino (1139071) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228953)

Indeed, the problem is that the tax code is too complicated.

I'm fine with job security for accountants and lawyers, except for the fact that a complicated tax code makes things *harder* for everyone else.

The key part of pareto optimizations is you don't screw over anyone else in the process.

Re:A year? (3, Insightful)

PapayaSF (721268) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229205)

Translating the US tax code into software is probably a task rivaling some of the most complex software problems out there...

Absolutely. This is just one of the early signs of the train wreck that is Obamacare. You just can't have a bunch of different Congressional staffers write different parts of a gigantic, complex bill involving a huge part of the economy, cram it through Congress along party lines, and expect the thing to work. They've already had to kill three sections of it, and delay the employer mandate. [spectator.org]

Far, far simpler government IT projects (internal systems for single departments, e.g. the FBI's Virtual Case File) have failed miserably. Obamacare requires a public-facing system that connects to many other systems at the federal and state level, and complies with HIPAA requirements. I'm no expert on huge IT projects, but I don't see how this is going to be up and running in October, if ever.

Re:A year? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228885)

The scale and distribution of the fix may be the issue. Perhaps the system is only updated once a year throughout the network?

In true /. manner, that is me speaking out my ass and barely skimming the summary.

Re:A year? (1)

Trepidity (597) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229047)

Welcome to Enterprise IT.

Re:A year? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229115)

My girlfriend has talked about the obamacare software some from where she's using it in her new job. The software rates health plans into a silver, gold or platinum tier based on different inputs based on plan features. She says sometimes the inputs don't line up with the way the plan features are specified on her end.

Based on that, my guess is that they have to rekajigger some of the demographic inputs to put old smokers and young smokers in separate bins while still maintaining the existing input constraints. Given that this is both government and healthcare it will probably take 6 months for the appropriate committees to amend the requirements to deal with this.

Re:A year? (4, Funny)

ggraham412 (1492023) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229361)

Silver, Gold or Platinum?

This is proof that Obama is better than Bush. When color coding was applied to terror threat levels, the Bush Administration failed miserably at taking something as complex as terrorism and boiling it down into 5 colors. The Obama Administration is pure genius because they can take health care insurance, arguably even more complex than terror threat assessments, and boil it down into 3 colors. Amazing!

Re:A year? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229123)

I'm hoping that this is because there's too many other things in the pipeline that are more critical to get done first, and not because, say, the system is so badly written that this one relatively minor looking task will take a year.....

That's on par for CMMI, which is probably specified in the contract. It would take about that long to get a HelloWorld through CMMI4.

Re:A year? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229271)

There's nothing quite like the process meetings that you get on CMMI level 5. After our Initial Critical Design Review we'd better free up some time for the Process Improvement Process Improvement Process meeting.

Obamacare (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228797)

The people get fucked even harder, and the healthcare system still makes obscene profits. I guess its a win-win situation, right?

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:Obamacare (2)

mi (197448) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228951)

The people get fucked even harder, and the healthcare system still makes obscene profits. I guess its a win-win situation, right?

Lose-lose, actually. Because the profits you are talking about simply do not exist. So much so, health-insurers close the shop and simply withdraw [wsj.com] from certain (highly progressive) states.

Re:Obamacare (5, Informative)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228995)

better then the old system where you can pay in to plan for years and when you get real sick they drop you or say you hit the max pay out cap (easy to do when acetaminophen sold for $1.50 a tablet (you can buy 100 of those for the same price at Amazon); $77 for a box of sterile gauze pads (Amazon’s prices vary between $6 and $11); $18 for a single diabetes test strip (sold for 54 cents by Amazon); $108 for antibacterial Bacitracin ointment (Amazon’s prices vary between $2.50 and $6.50)

Re:Obamacare (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229269)

I think you're confused. There is no 'new' systems, it's merely the old system with a white wash.

Re:Obamacare (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229303)

new as in can't be dropped or said no health care for you NEXT!

Not to worry... (0, Troll)

mi (197448) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228809)

With any luck the next President will be from the sensible party and officially postpone implementation of Obamacare [washingtonpost.com] indefinitely.

Re:Not to worry... (5, Insightful)

intermodal (534361) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228855)

No, the sensible party doesn't stand a chance. We only elect Republicans and Democrats to the presidency these days.

Re:Not to worry... (1)

MAXOMENOS (9802) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228867)

Considering that two of these delays have an ETA of 2015, almost all of the rest of the law is expected to come online in 2014, and the next President isn't sworn in until January 2017, I'd say that's some tall wishing.

Re:Not to worry... (-1, Troll)

h4rr4r (612664) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228877)

Which party is that?

The one who wants to limit peoples civil rights and thinks you can't get pregnant from rape? Is that the one you are talking about?

Re:Not to worry... (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228957)

Saying everyone in the Republican party believes you can't get pregnant from rape is like saying every Slashdot poster spams about hosts files and goatse.

Re:Not to worry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229137)

What? There are Slashdot posters who don't spam about irrelevant things?

Re:Not to worry... (0)

Hatta (162192) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229183)

No, it's not like that at all. We mod APK down. Republicans elect these people to represent them at the national level.

Re: Not to worry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229293)

Yeah but is every /. Poster spamming goatse in public debates?

Re:Not to worry... (1)

dougmc (70836) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228901)

With any luck the next President will be from the sensible party

Which party is the sensible party again?

Re:Not to worry... (1)

compro01 (777531) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228975)

Which party is the sensible party again?

Justice.

Re:Not to worry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229101)

Green.

Re:Not to worry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229175)

Which party is the sensible party again?

These guys [sensibleparty.com] , I guess? Start voting them in.

Re:Not to worry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228999)

Why would a Democrat postpone ObamaCare? I know you can't consider Republicans sensible with their Christianist problem, bigotry, and reverse-meritocracy that promotes adherence to dogma and punishes clear-thinking.

Re:Not to worry... (1)

compro01 (777531) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229061)

Why would a Democrat postpone ObamaCare?

To implement a sensible single payer system?

Re:Not to worry... (1)

Nadaka (224565) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229133)

Democrats are not sensible either. Nor are the libertarians and greens. And most of the rest of the other parties are even more batshit insane than the republicans.

Re:Not to worry... (1)

ganjadude (952775) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229235)

they just want to wait til after the mid term elections before they continue to rape us

Re:Not to worry... (2)

Hatta (162192) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229121)

Yes, I too hope the next president will be from the Green party and postpone implementation of Obamacare in favor of implementing single payer. It's not going to happen, but it's nice to hope.

Keep printing Ben (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228817)

There aren't enough lawyers on the planet to keep these wheels on.

So how many packs a day you want to bet? (1)

oxnyx (653869) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228821)

As a Canada with Government Health Care and nothing from work I must say this isn't that terrible and I am glad that US is tip toeing into prevent its citizens going broke when their health fails them. Though I really like to know how many packs a day the programmer who wrote that bug into the system smoked and how he/she/it demo around it at review and demos.

Re:So how many packs a day you want to bet? (1)

jedidiah (1196) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229167)

Except going broke is not something that should be feared in a civilized country. It shouldn't even be terribly shocking. Business entities do it all the time.

Of course we all know that there's 2 different standards for real people and corporations.

obamacare does not go far enough (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228823)

should of been more on the lines of other systems.

At least the 30 hour rule fixes B.S like having an 39.5 hour work week with no benefits.

also helps contractors and temps get real plans as well killing off the joke care mini med plans.

Re:obamacare does not go far enough (1)

ganjadude (952775) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229255)

it does? you mean they wont just give you 29.5 hours?

Re:obamacare does not go far enough (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229313)

yes but's is part time vs just under full time an hour or less (aka we have long lunch times at this office).

its a conspiracy (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228829)

america is run by smokers

Re:its a conspiracy (1)

compro01 (777531) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228991)

And what else is new? They're called "smoke-filled rooms" for a reason.

Audits (1)

EMG at MU (1194965) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228857)

After the story about the Govt. department smashing mice and keyboards because of malware and now this story I really think independent audits of technology vendors should be required in government. Obviously the auditors could be just as crooked as the contractor who suggested smashing mice with a hammer but I would hope if we got some real oversight the quality of technology products in the government would increase.

As a software engineer, this bug seems like it should have been caught early. I also don't really believe it would take a year to fix (imagine how many man hours that is). If there was a competitive company reviewing the code (or if it was open source), hopefully someone competent would be able to call B.S. on the "It will take a year to fix" statement. Without that oversight it is just speculation.

Re: Audits (1)

KMnO4 (684253) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229337)

agreed - this is exceptionally pathetic. I could probably fix it myself with a long sql statement that would take 30 min to write. But then some contractor would be out a 5 million change order.

Build a complex system... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228869)

...find complex bugs.

Without the insurance companies in the middle of this Republican proposed and Democrat commandeered bastard faux-single-payer system, this would not have been an issue.

Until people realize that we effectively have two single-payer systems already in place - one for those under 65, aka the commercial insurance market, and one for those over 65, aka medicare - things will be more complex and more expensive than it needs to be.

Re:Build a complex system... (1)

jedidiah (1196) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229211)

...in other words, you believe that handing off something to a large government beaurocracy is going to magically make that thing more efficient and cheaper.

Do you fall for telemarketers and Nigerian scams too?

My health is none of the government's business (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228871)

So Slashdotters object to government collecting their metadata, but sticking its nose into every health decision is A-OK?

ObamaCare has 100x the potential for abuse the NSA does.

Even apart from socialized medicine starving people to death [dailymail.co.uk] .

who is better a CEO who wants a new BMW or GOV? (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229019)

who is better a CEO who wants a new BMW or the GOV?

Re:My health is none of the government's business (1)

Trepidity (597) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229087)

Nothing is stopping you from choosing to pay for your own healthcare in cash, out of pocket, ye olde free-market way.

Re:My health is none of the government's business (4, Interesting)

pete-classic (75983) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229253)

Your sig suggest that you're a thoughtful person, but your post seems as if you didn't think about what you were saying at all.

Surely you don't really think that a market wherein the vast majority of consumers use an optional (subsidized) system will treat outlier, "pay-as-you-go" consumers equitably.

easier to jack up the pre pack tax then to bill ea (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228887)

easier to jack up the pre pack tax then to bill each user on there tax forums.

Re:easier to jack up the pre pack tax then to bill (1)

uCallHimDrJ0NES (2546640) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229353)

...which would make sense, if collecting state-level stamp taxes had anything whatsoever to do with this problem.

Software Glitch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228907)

This sounds more like a problem with the law than a problem with the software. It seems that it contradicts itself.

You voted for it (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228929)

Can't say you weren't told it would be a fiasco.

Re:You voted for it (1)

jedidiah (1196) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229289)

What fiasco? Any insurance is a shared risk pool. That includes the careless jack*sses. It doesn't matter if this is a government imposed system or one from the allegedly free market. You still have to account for the people that make poor choices.

Piling on "consequences" completely defeats the entire point of government meddling to begin with.

We don't need to add yet another layer of inefficiency if the final result is going to be that some class of insured is told "tough luck". The free market can do that all by itself.

The fact that the system avoids punishing poor choices should be a surprise to NO ONE.

It's an obvious design requirement.

Chaos (2)

John Jorsett (171560) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228937)

With each new story on this or that problem with implementing some part of the Affordable Care Act, and given how the various parts of it interlocked to keep it from breaking down, I just get the impression that there's going to be chaos when it really gets going. Assuming that it's allowed to. At some point maybe everyone agrees that it's not implementable in its present form, like one of those gigantic software projects that crashes to the ground because it was ill-conceived to begin with and nobody can figure out how to make it work.

obamacare will never happen (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228939)

mark it.

The Hat Trick (1)

Schnapple (262314) | 1 year,15 days | (#44228949)

Obama, software glitches, and smoking.

It's like the holy trilogy of contentious Slashdot topics.

All we need now is to tie this into movie or music piracy somehow, and maybe sprinkle in some Scientology for good measure.

BRB, making popcorn.

Re:The Hat Trick (1)

ArcadeX (866171) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229131)

you left out railing against the military and guns

Obama smokes (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44228993)

I bet it's because Obama smokes, so he doesn't want to penalize himself.

It's not a glitch (1)

senorpoco (1396603) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229015)

it's a feature

Re:It's not a glitch (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229169)

any loser who smokes deserves to get cancer

WTF? Who cares what the law says?!?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,15 days | (#44229083)

We can ignore it?!?!?!

Sue them (1)

DarkOx (621550) | 1 year,15 days | (#44229287)

The government not comping with its own laws for technical reasons or otherwise is unacceptable.

I hope someone in a position to file a suit for not being able to setup the benefits as desired and legal way under the law will sue.

 

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...