51–60 of 93 posts
8K transactions / second is hardly extreme load. It's good they can support it, and I doubt they need more, but many, many sites handle more load than that.
Agreed, it is good they can support it. However, is 8k TPS really a big deal? The team I work with handles 1M TPS.
The number of requests per seconds doesn't matter, what matters is the complexity of the logic behind the request.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's the government, we're thrilled they can do anything.
I know it's just a throw away joke, but this persistent idea that government is incompetent, no matter what is really damaging. When it comes to health care systems there is no evidence whatsoever that less government means more efficiency, if anything the US is a huge example to the contrary.
With a single payer system, at least it would be fair to lay all blame on the single payer. It'd still be beuqacratic and political, but at least there'd be direct responsibility.
Removing the regulations, at least the customer would be able to choose a provider themselves and people could sue over pricing disagreements. There would be issues with pre-existing conditions and low income that would still need to be addressed, though.
Either option is better than where we are today, which is, well I'm not sure. There's not really a term to define the mess we've created. It's not socialist, it's not capitalist, it's just a mess of special interests, political concessions, and reactionary legislation. I guess the one thing we can definitely call it is bureaucratic.
I wonder if this healthcare.gov will exist a year from now. It is nice to see how far it has come in 2 years.
Doubtful Trump is getting rid of it. Personally I preferred the previous way of signing up for coverage ... call up a private insurer and sign up? The cost was less too as I wasn't paying for insurance for lazy sally or Joe Schmoe! So for me Obamacare/social medicine forced those who do and work to pay and cover for those who don't. See ya Obamacare(love obama though). Also the $300 plan I paid each month for sucked.…
With everyone left to their own devices, the elderly/unhealthy are strongly incentivized to have insurance, and the young and healthy might reasonably conclude that their best bet is to not pay for insurance, that results in higher average premiums.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AFAICT it's actually a Cigna bug report yeah? Happy to make sure it gets to the right place if I'm wrong. (/me doesn't work for nava, does work on healthcare.gov)
There is a persistent error message on my 2016 profile on healthcare.gov after that button was clicked (despite it also showing it's active on that side of things). My understanding is that the bug is the integration point between the two. From past issues and what I've been told on this one, is that the only way things get fixed and made right is to have healthcare.gov retransmit the correct data/status. Cigna can't…
I wonder if this healthcare.gov will exist a year from now. It is nice to see how far it has come in 2 years.
Doubtful Trump is getting rid of it. Personally I preferred the previous way of signing up for coverage ... call up a private insurer and sign up? The cost was less too as I wasn't paying for insurance for lazy sally or Joe Schmoe! So for me Obamacare/social medicine forced those who do and work to pay and cover for those who don't. See ya Obamacare(love obama though). Also the $300 plan I paid each month for sucked.…
For many (most?) cases you can still buy individual market directly with the insurer via phone/website. My understanding is you have to go through exchanges for certain subsidy situations.
> The cost was less too
> Also the $300 plan I paid each month for sucked
First off, the old way was for an employer to handle it for you. If you had your own solo insurance before, I'm impressed. I had a hard time finding health coverage as a freelancer years ago.
But more to your point, the cost was less, and sucked, because insurers could offer barebones, high-deductible plans that didn't really cover much except for catastrophic needs. Hence why you encountered high payments every time you actually needed healthcare.
In addition, premiums cost more now because:
- The highest risk and most expensive people were excluded from coverage entirely, either because they couldn't afford it or insurers refused to cover them, which they are no longer allowed to do. As a result, insurers are paying out more to cover medical treatment.
- Providers and drug companies continue to raise prices, while insurance premiums are regulated and locked annually.
- Government subsidies that were initially promised to insurers to help them cover gaps as they figured out the first few years of the ACA market were eliminated prematurely (cf. Marco Rubio).
As a result, annual increases have jumped dramatically as they adjust to increased care, increasing costs, and drops in subsidies.
So premiums are up because (a) you have better coverage (due to regulated minimum levels of coverage), (b) there are more sick people being covered (either because they couldn't afford coverage before or were excluded), and (c) net costs have risen.
> forced those who do and work to pay and cover for those who don't
I think that's an overly simplistic way of interpreting the situation.
Healthcare.gov is the absolute worst. They had a button "End coverage for 2017" I clicked it around the end of November because I chose a non-marketplace plan for 2017, and the end result of that click was Cigna my current marketplace insurer for 2016 received a transmission from them, and interpreted it incorrectly, which made my 2016 plan inactive and retroactively terminated me back to 08/31 despite having paid al…
Now we see the real test of whether healthcare.gov has reached the level of consumer tech: Does bug-report-via-top-ranked-HN-comment get anything done?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a persistent error message on my 2016 profile on healthcare.gov after that button was clicked (despite it also showing it's active on that side of things). My understanding is that the bug is the integration point between the two. From past issues and what I've been told on this one, is that the only way things get fixed and made right is to have healthcare.gov retransmit the correct data/status. Cigna can't…
I'm almost positive you mean "I'll shoot you an email." but the idea of someone being so frustrated with healthcare.gov they want to shoot the messenger (yet still get the problem resolved) is in-line with what I've heard. (and gave me a hearty chuckle)
Healthcare.gov is the absolute worst. They had a button "End coverage for 2017" I clicked it around the end of November because I chose a non-marketplace plan for 2017, and the end result of that click was Cigna my current marketplace insurer for 2016 received a transmission from them, and interpreted it incorrectly, which made my 2016 plan inactive and retroactively terminated me back to 08/31 despite having paid al…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doubtful Trump is getting rid of it. Personally I preferred the previous way of signing up for coverage ... call up a private insurer and sign up? The cost was less too as I wasn't paying for insurance for lazy sally or Joe Schmoe! So for me Obamacare/social medicine forced those who do and work to pay and cover for those who don't. See ya Obamacare(love obama though). Also the $300 plan I paid each month for sucked.…
> call up a private insurer and sign up? For many (most?) cases you can still buy individual market directly with the insurer via phone/website. My understanding is you have to go through exchanges for certain subsidy situations. > The cost was less too > Also the $300 plan I paid each month for sucked First off, the old way was for an employer to handle it for you. If you had your own solo insurance before, I'm impr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a persistent error message on my 2016 profile on healthcare.gov after that button was clicked (despite it also showing it's active on that side of things). My understanding is that the bug is the integration point between the two. From past issues and what I've been told on this one, is that the only way things get fixed and made right is to have healthcare.gov retransmit the correct data/status. Cigna can't…
Got it, it sounds like there is some issue on the healthcare.gov side. I work at Nava so feel free to email me as well. I totally understand your frustration, and though it sounds like we don't work on the components of healthcare.gov that are leaving you in the lurch just reach out and we can try and route your issue to the right people.