Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except that one can get a subsidy if one is making ~$100,000 a year, since subsidies cover people up to 400% of the poverty rate.
Who pays for the subsidy? The tax payer does. Nothing is being done to address the actual cost, the expense is being passed along. This is not a viable solution, the costs continue to go up and be shifted to a collective group that cant afford it either, but its easy to gloss over it when you just say "oh its a subsidy" as if that erases the huge cost increases.
Except that one can get a subsidy if one is making ~$100,000 a year, since subsidies cover people up to 400% of the poverty rate.
Nonsense. For a single person it has to be less than $40k. How do I know? I was playing around with coveredcalifornia for my kid and she gets not subsidy. None.
I think the system needs to be retooled. I don't think taking away peoples health insurance at this juncture is the answer. This is the first time in US history an administration has addressed the issue outside Medicare/Medicaid. Politicians are always talking about it, but never doing anything. Hopefully, once Hillary is in office and has a Democratic House and Senate they will be able to come up with a more reasonable, cost-effective adjustment strategy.
I think you are right. Instead of trying to repeal Obamacare 100x, the Congress should have raised the penalty for those who chose not to buy insurance and instead paid the fine. That would encourage the young and healthy to add themselves to the pool.
This is a must-read when dealing with the misinformation about Obamacare:
I think you are right. Instead of trying to repeal Obamacare 100x, the Congress should have raised the penalty for those who chose not to buy insurance and instead paid the fine. That would encourage the young and healthy to add themselves to the pool.
This is a must-read when dealing with the misinformation about Obamacare:
I think you are right. Instead of trying to repeal Obamacare 100x, the Congress should have raised the penalty for those who chose not to buy insurance and instead paid the fine. That would encourage the young and healthy to add themselves to the pool.
This is a must-read when dealing with the misinformation about Obamacare:
An opinion piece from a staunch Obama supporter like Krugman is nothing even close to a "must-read" its just political propaganda supporting his candidate.
Who pays for the subsidy? The tax payer does. Nothing is being done to address the actual cost, the expense is being passed along. This is not a viable solution, the costs continue to go up and be shifted to a collective group that cant afford it either, but its easy to gloss over it when you just say "oh its a subsidy" as if that erases the huge cost increases.
A good piece of the ACA legislation addresses costs -- such as reducing unnecessary tests. On the subsidy, it is being paid by special taxes on the wealthy and the fines that those who refuse to buy insurance are penalized.
Giving Americans with pre-existing medical conditions access to health insurance is a goal. Governments can, if they choose, require that insurance companies issue policies without regard to an individual’s medical history. But we know what happens next: many healthy people don’t buy insurance, leaving a relatively bad risk pool, leading to high premiums that drive out even more healthy people.
To avoid this downward spiral, you need to induce healthy Americans to buy in; hence, the individual mandate, with a penalty for those who don’t purchase insurance. Finally, since buying insurance could be a hardship for lower-income Americans, you need subsidies to make insurance affordable for all.
So there you have it: health reform is a three-legged stool resting on community rating, individual mandates and subsidies. It requires all three legs to work.
I think the system needs to be retooled. I don't think taking away peoples health insurance at this juncture is the answer. This is the first time in US history an administration has addressed the issue outside Medicare/Medicaid. Politicians are always talking about it, but never doing anything. Hopefully, once Hillary is in office and has a Democratic House and Senate they will be able to come up with a more reasonable, cost-effective adjustment strategy.
See... this is what happens when a party pushes a bill through underhandedly without one vote from the other. Then when Republicans tried to tell Democrats this isn't going to work but they were mocked. Yes as we are told the bill needed passed so we can see what's in it. THAT should have been your first clue it wasn't good.
People getting subsidies mocked us, called us liars, ignored us, when people like me were getting screwed so really I don't give a damn.
The Obamacare MESS is Democrats fault and we need to start from scratch because Obamacare stinks! I don't care how it gets done. I've paid my way all of my life including insured me and my family and frankly I'm tired of getting screwed?
An opinion piece from a staunch Obama supporter like Krugman is nothing even close to a "must-read" its just political propaganda supporting his candidate.
Your criticism that 'Krugman supports the ACA, so he has nothing to offer,' is a silly argument. Why don't you read it and tell us where Paul is wrong. If you can't, then his words have merit.
A good piece of the ACA legislation addresses costs -- such as reducing unnecessary tests. On the subsidy, it is being paid by special taxes on the wealthy and the fines that those who refuse to buy insurance are penalized.
Giving Americans with pre-existing medical conditions access to health insurance is a goal. Governments can, if they choose, require that insurance companies issue policies without regard to an individual’s medical history. But we know what happens next: many healthy people don’t buy insurance, leaving a relatively bad risk pool, leading to high premiums that drive out even more healthy people.
To avoid this downward spiral, you need to induce healthy Americans to buy in; hence, the individual mandate, with a penalty for those who don’t purchase insurance. Finally, since buying insurance could be a hardship for lower-income Americans, you need subsidies to make insurance affordable for all.
So there you have it: health reform is a three-legged stool resting on community rating, individual mandates and subsidies. It requires all three legs to work.
Interesting...so there I have it. I guess we just have to wait through a few more years of double and triple digit premium increases before we see the cost savings?
This is a manipulated system that picks winners and losers. It flies in the face of the general concepts of a free market economy that lets consumers make educated and smart decisions on their own, based on their own specific needs.
Your criticism that 'Krugman supports the ACA, so he has nothing to offer,' is a silly argument. Why don't you read it and tell us where Paul is wrong. If you can't, then his words have merit.
Its simple, he supports something that is as anti-capitalistic as it gets, he supports something that puts government in control of something they have no business trying to control. His opinion is that our government is set up to be an administrator of a nationwide vastly complex health care plan when they can hardly even figure out the VA. Its not one point where Paul is wrong, the whole concept that he supports is wrong.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
