This is quite a long article here but now it appears that in some areas and states there were errors with the calculations and numbers from the wrong year were used.  People were getting quotes “higher” than what should have been presented.  In addition, the transparency here is questioned too as enrollees received  yes or a no instead of a more detailed explanation.  California was said to be spot on as was the Kaiser Permanente calculator that they provided on their website. 

Using the wrong year’s data for the calculations seems to be the crux of the matter.  We live in a very complex world today and finance and healthcare has too much math at times.  Don’t take my word for that though and scroll down and watch video #2 where the #1 quant in the world says exactly that, “finance has too much math” and of course with buying insurance we have healthcare and finance combined here. 

US Consumers and Government Are Learning a Cold Hard Reality Lesson About IT Infrastructure Complexities With Models and Algorithms Thanks to Health Insurance Exchanges

The article is correct in the fact that most will not understand this more than just “one more screw up” and again I keep telling all that the problem with Obamacare is the algorithms that all have to work and calculate such.  Government and insurance algorithms are not working together as they should.  When I made this post below I had like a record 5000 hits on this one, as it’s the truth.  You can’t blame it on anything else and the more complex the system are, the long it takes to create the math models and the subsequent operating algorithms that do the work. 

Those Damn “Killer Algorithms” Keep Screwing Up Obamacare, One more Delay Added for Small Businesses, Static Text Laws and Digital Technology Crossing Hairs, We Continue To Endure the Constant Rise And Fall Of The Machines…

Again I think it’s a slow soak here with both government and consumers on the fact that we don’t live in “data silos” anymore and I missed those days too, and the complexities are growing on top of each other as that’s software and algorithms work, one on top of another, using data and queries from outside of what you or your group have “personally” created and tested.  Why else do you think we have on delay after another with the ACA?  The data has to work and folks need to write more code…that’s real end of this as there’s no algorithm fairies out there to make it happen quickly, it’s still all humans writing code and verifying accuracy and hoping it works with the code the “guy over there” wrote. 

In short, this error factor may have ran off some individuals applying for insurance via the exchanges due to high pricing that appeared. 

Obamacare: The Continuous Rise and Fall Of The Machines With Complex Insurance Math Models Resulting In Spasmodic, Executing “Killer Algorithms”–And Gov Can’t Model…

Health insurance has become just like the stock markets as the outcomes all rely on “those algorithms” for things to work and we can’t jump into a repeal and replace as all we would have would be more mass confusion with news glitches adding to and replacing old glitches.  It’s the way data works in the complex world we live in.  Even an insurance industry made a comment here that he too probably would have made a similar or same mistake, the complexities make it very difficult to be spot on.  BD

Whether It’s An Insurance Exchange or stock exchange Nobody Knows for Sure What You May See When The Screeching & Sometimes Spasmodic Algorithms Come Out To Play..

Nearly six months after the disastrous launch of, with the website running smoothly and more than five million people signed up as open enrollment heads to a close, a new glitch has come to light: Incorrect poverty-level guidelines are automatically telling what could be tens of thousands of eligible people they do not qualify for subsidized insurance.

The error in the federal marketplace primarily affects households with incomes just above the poverty line in states like Pennsylvania that have not expanded Medicaid. The mistake raises the price of their insurance by thousands of dollars, making insurance so unaffordable many may just give up and go without.

"It is almost impossible to work back from a decision and see what they did," said Judy Solomon, vice president for health policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington. Ideally, she said, a notice would say, "We have found that your income for 2014 will be X, and based on that income your tax credit will be Y."

But the official determination letters simply state the amount of your tax credit and resulting insurance premium. "I would have no idea if it's right or wrong," Solomon said.

Analysts outside CMS, however, said many if not most visitors to the site probably heed the government's advice and use the tool before applying. If it responds "not eligible," they might not go any further.

He predicted the public would react to the news with a sense of deja vu: "They screwed it up again. Can't do anything right."

Though many of the website's early issues had to do with its complexity, in this case the error was simple: It's the wrong year's data.

Though 400 percent of poverty is the ceiling for subsidies, 100 percent is the floor. A couple who enter an income of $15,600 - 101 percent of poverty in 2013 - into the window-shopping calculator get this response, in big, bold letters: "Not eligible for help paying for coverage."

Some states chose to run their own marketplaces. It was unknown Thursday night whether any had made the same error; a spot check of Covered California found that state-run marketplace was correct. All those states have opted to expand Medicaid, so the impact would be minimal anyway.


Post a Comment