Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Health Insurance
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-05-2017, 07:54 PM
 
7,889 posts, read 9,089,508 times
Reputation: 9223

Advertisements

I find it amusing how politically based arguments over this topic change based on which party is in charge. During the run up to Obamacare, proponents loved to point out how wonderful it would be to have the freedom to quit your job start a business and get your own insurance. Now, it is a terrible thing to get tax credits to get health coverage not tied into your employment status.

As a purchaser of my own insurance for 20 years, I have been told the individual market was horrible due to small, sick, and old pool size. Getting more young and healthy people into the pool is necessary to start lowering costs. Reducing or eliminating ties to employer provided insurance will help increase pool size, improve rates on the individual market and make a transition to single payer easier in the future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-05-2017, 08:01 PM
 
7,889 posts, read 9,089,508 times
Reputation: 9223
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
So you think that only union members receive employer paid health insurance? 177.5 million workers in the US have employer paid health insurance. In the entire US there are only 14.8 million union members. Sometimes it's good to fact check pesky little things like that.

And it was not the delay of the Cadillac tax that damaged the ACA, it was the refusal of congress to fund 'risk corridors' that caused most of the rate hikes and exit of several insurers from the marketplace.
Cadillac tax absolutely damaged Obamacare by not getting more people into individuals plans as was the plan. Risk corridor payments were to be temporary and would be fading out by now. They were meant to give insurers some leeway in setting premiums initially as they were unsure of the actuarial risk of all these individuals signing up. Most companies underestimated the cost, hence the losses.
Pools of un doctored folks needed to be offset with a huge increase in pool size of people of good health, which didn't happen because of delay of Obamacare tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 08:01 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,753 posts, read 25,971,458 times
Reputation: 33866
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSHL10 View Post
I find it amusing how politically based arguments over this topic change based on which party is in charge. During the run up to Obamacare, proponents loved to point out how wonderful it would be to have the freedom to quit your job start a business and get your own insurance. Now, it is a terrible thing to get tax credits to get health coverage not tied into your employment status.

As a purchaser of my own insurance for 20 years, I have been told the individual market was horrible due to small, sick, and old pool size. Getting more young and healthy people into the pool is necessary to start lowering costs. Reducing or eliminating ties to employer provided insurance will help increase pool size, improve rates on the individual market and make a transition to single payer easier in the future.
The goal of the ACA was to create larger pools, these plans do exactly the opposite. They place the young and the the healthy would in the pool. Older people, the sick and those with pre-existing conditions will be placed in high risk pools which have always been horribly expensive and quite limited in terms of the coverage they provide.

There is nothing in this plan about everyone getting tax credits for health coverage, it appears there "might" be some that are income limited and age limited with those under 55 getting $2,000 a year and those over getting $4,000. And the tea party caucus is having chickens over those tax credits calling it another entitlement program, but if you do get them, check back in and tell us about the plan you were able to buy with that $2,000..I'd love to hear the details
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Chesapeake Bay
6,046 posts, read 4,794,395 times
Reputation: 3544
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSHL10 View Post
I find it amusing how politically based arguments over this topic change based on which party is in charge. During the run up to Obamacare, proponents loved to point out how wonderful it would be to have the freedom to quit your job start a business and get your own insurance. Now, it is a terrible thing to get tax credits to get health coverage not tied into your employment status.

As a purchaser of my own insurance for 20 years, I have been told the individual market was horrible due to small, sick, and old pool size. Getting more young and healthy people into the pool is necessary to start lowering costs. Reducing or eliminating ties to employer provided insurance will help increase pool size, improve rates on the individual market and make a transition to single payer easier in the future.
Single payer certainly isn't the intent of the GOP but with their insistence on change, that could easily be the consequence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 08:16 PM
 
Location: SoCal
20,160 posts, read 12,677,681 times
Reputation: 16993
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
What are you talking about, Hillary did not get elected-didn't you get the memo?
I didn't but the liberal left has a hard time believe it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 08:16 PM
 
7,889 posts, read 9,089,508 times
Reputation: 9223
ACA didn'the create larger pools, that was the problem as I described above.

The cost of the high users is probably better spread over more people via taxes to cover expanded Medicaid. There are too many old unhealthy in the individual pool that they raise rates too high for young health to even consider joining the pool and the death spiral starts.

The question is how do you pay for the high users? Individual market can't handle them financially. You can bring it back to states but then you will have some states refusing to cover people which got us to Obamacare in the first place.

The most fair way is to use the money saved on eliminating the employer deduction for Healthcare and use that to help pay for it. Rates should be lower due to vastly increased pool size and cherry picking out of the high users.

Insurers want ratio of surcharge from young to old changed from 3:1 to 5:1 to get younger people to sign on. In trade for that an additional age related tax credit is proposed.

I don't think anyone should be able to get free health insurance, so no I don't expect coverage for 2k a year. I am on Obamacare and pay 1.5k per MONTH for my family now. I do expect a bigger pool, increased competition, and cleaning up the pool will help reduce the cost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 08:18 PM
 
14,249 posts, read 17,864,073 times
Reputation: 13807
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
I think if you read your link, it's the same as Obamacare's Cadillac tax. Many people from the left, yes it's hard to believe, want a single payer and want government to not give credit to employers plan. So which one is it that you are supporting. I don't hear anybody from the left complain about single payer or universal health care as long as somebody pays for it.
Given that the taxpayer is already paying 65% of health care costs, that the taxpayer is subsidizing health insurance companies by covering the poor and the old through Medicare and Medicaid and that, in addition, millions of Americans are paying health insurance premiums, it seems to me that we are already paying for the equivalent of UHC but we are not getting the benefit of it.

I was never a fan of the ACA because it effectively increased the subsidy to health insurance companies while only papering over the most obvious cracks in the system. We really needed a more systemic solution and one which involves taking cost out of our hopelessly fragmented, inefficient and expensive system. I am a fan of UHC as it has been proven to work in a number of countries and at a lower cost than we are paying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 08:18 PM
 
Location: SoCal
20,160 posts, read 12,677,681 times
Reputation: 16993
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
So you think that only union members receive employer paid health insurance? 177.5 million workers in the US have employer paid health insurance. In the entire US there are only 14.8 million union members. Sometimes it's good to fact check pesky little things like that.

And it was not the delay of the Cadillac tax that damaged the ACA, it was the refusal of congress to fund 'risk corridors' that caused most of the rate hikes and exit of several insurers from the marketplace.
Union employees have the best health care plan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 08:20 PM
 
14,249 posts, read 17,864,073 times
Reputation: 13807
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
I didn't but the liberal left has a hard time believe it.
I don't see how anyone who is remotely fiscally conservative can support the existing system which is inefficient, profligate and costs the taxpayer a fortune.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 08:20 PM
 
7,889 posts, read 9,089,508 times
Reputation: 9223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weichert View Post
Single payer certainly isn't the intent of the GOP but with their insistence on change, that could easily be the consequence.
Honestly I don't see Trump honestly being concerned about single payer. Old school R's yes.

I see these plans as Obamacare lite. Better pools, increased choices, lower costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Health Insurance
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top