Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-20-2014, 11:16 AM
 
2,672 posts, read 2,717,736 times
Reputation: 1041

Advertisements

The Tea Party has always wanted to take the ACA into the bathroom and hold its head underwater and drown it. Now the ACA has a face on it. Its somebodies brother, sister, parent, neighbor etc. The Tea Party doesnt have replacement plan only repeal. I think they are going to find it harder to take the ACA into the bathroom and drown it. According to Gallup 54% of ACA signups are Democrat, 24% Republican, and 22% Independent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-20-2014, 11:19 AM
 
46,951 posts, read 25,984,404 times
Reputation: 29442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharks With Lasers View Post
Do you think it would be an overall positive or an overall negative?
Depends on whether you need healthcare or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2014, 11:21 AM
i7pXFLbhE3gq
 
n/a posts
Millions kicked out of the insurance market.

No more pesky requirement that premiums actually be spent on healthcare.

Rates would continue to increase, and likely increase more rapidly. Costs have actually been rising at historically low rates since 2009. Most of that is blamed on the economy, but a significant amount is because of the healthcare law. Assessing the Effects of the Economy on the Recent Slowdown in Health Spending | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goinback2011 View Post
Most people's insurance rates would go down substantially.
Right, because insurance rates weren't going up and up and up for years before Obama was even a household name. Get out of your delusional fantasy world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2014, 11:56 AM
 
Location: DFW
40,951 posts, read 49,183,047 times
Reputation: 55008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
Except for sick people, of course. But that's not the concern of the insurance companies.
How many sick people are now covered that were not covered prior to ACA ?

No one has that info outside the Govt and they're not telling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2014, 11:57 AM
 
Location: DFW
40,951 posts, read 49,183,047 times
Reputation: 55008
Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonF View Post

Right, because insurance rates weren't going up and up and up for years before Obama was even a household name. Get out of your delusional fantasy world.
Mine would go up about 3-6% a year. After Ocare went into affect it went up 40% in 18 months.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2014, 12:43 PM
 
8,891 posts, read 5,369,571 times
Reputation: 5696
I wouldn't be paying for dental coverage on my children's health insurance. Dental coverage they are too old to utilize.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2014, 01:25 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,968,512 times
Reputation: 7315
Quote:
Originally Posted by borregokid View Post

The Tea Party has always wanted to take the ACA into the bathroom and hold its head underwater and drown it. Now the ACA has a face on it. Its somebodies brother, sister, parent, neighbor etc.

.
The reality is I do suspect ACA will be gone someday, but only when the US has single payer. I'd prefer ACA, and recognizing it will never be 2009 again, I know those faces you talk about have changed what is feasable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2014, 01:34 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,421 posts, read 6,503,624 times
Reputation: 1775
It would all depend on how it was repealed.

I don't think the ACA cured some of the most pressing problem's with America's healthcare, and in many respects made things worse.

For example, just because we expanded Medicaid to insure more people, that doesn't mean we have more doctors to treat people on medicaid. All we did was put more people on the list, increased the waiting times for everyone that was already on there. We didn't actually increase the amount of health care delivered though, we just redistributed it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2014, 02:01 PM
 
8,061 posts, read 4,885,133 times
Reputation: 2460
Default You would see!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharks With Lasers View Post
Like for real, the ACA was found to be unconstitutional, or we elected 70 percent Republicans to Congress in 2014 and they passed legislation to overturn it. Everything mandated in the ACA was now left to choice, so for example, an insurance company could choose to allow young people to stay on their parents' insurance until they turn 26, but would not be required to do so.

What do you think insurance companies would do? Do you think it would be an overall positive or an overall negative?
Some of the ideas that were not executed well under Obama care. Like past illeness and a new form of pooling Americans together.

We could expect Tort Reform which indeed would decrease the cost of Medical Care and Encourage Doctors to practice medicine.

Open state lines for healthcare Competition.

Determine what is the real cost of a average health car plan?

Obama Care never considered cost and will be forever a failure. If you can not figure cost you will not be in business long!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2014, 02:06 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,968,512 times
Reputation: 7315
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTRIDER AZ View Post
.

We could expect Tort Reform which indeed would decrease the cost of Medical Care and Encourage Doctors to practice medicine.
Tort Reform, an idea I support, is a zero sum game for the total economy.

These lawsuits ADD non medical jobs, are big profit centers for insurance corps, which means adding 6 figure actuary jobs, and obviously the money in these damage awards does get spent, generating jobs there as well. The loser-the plantiff, has less to spend, as do docs paying heavy malpractice which raises the cost of their services. But this is a ZERO SUM game in total. Any activity which fails to deplete natural resources or add value to them is ultimately a ZERO SUM game.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:55 PM.

© 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