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.
lol where would the uninsured get treatment before the ACA. Majority of hospitals require proof of insurance or paying upfront for cancer treatment. And no, showing up to the er isnt going to get you admited for cancer treatment either.
And the poor got shafted when it came to medical care. For many poor, Medicaid wasnt even an aoption. As many states reserved medicaid for poor adults with kids or the poor elderly, but never just the poor
You are simply wrong. Then answer me this: Why did the hospitals and the liberals continue screaming about unrecovered costs due to treating the poor and uninsured. I watched a young couple gain admittance and heard them state that they DID NOT have insurance and she was taken back anyway. They do not refuse to treat the poor. Story after story about poor illegals sucking up chemotherapy, dialysis at the expense of the tax payer. Again, then why the concern over hospitals eating the costs of the uninsured if they were refused.
That we have to pay more for because people can't take care of their own so they NEED us to sign up and then Obama can count us as people "who want" Obamacare. He's such a farce.
Obamacare supporters will say that the individual market only represents a small fraction of the total number of insureds in the US. This is true - most estimates place the number of individuals who buy their own insurance at 19 million, or about 9% of the total. So it's ok to slap these people with a huge increase in premiums?
conservatives use bogus think tanks who use bogus numbers to draw bogus conclusions. Here is reality
But a new analysis from a conservative health-care economist suggests that Obamacare sticker shock wasn't nearly as steep as other studies previously suggested. Consumers who bought their own coverage between 2010 and 2012 saw the average cost of their plan increase between 14 percent and 28 percent when they switched to new coverage under the Affordable Care Act, according to Mark Pauly, a professor of health-care management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business. That's smaller than the effect measured by other studies, including one from the Manhattan Institute this morning finding that individual premiums increased 49 percent between 2013 and 2014.
Pauly also noted his numbers don't account for discounts received by low- and middle-income families receiving federal subsidies when they purchase coverage through ACA exchanges. Those eligible for federal subsidies this year saw their premiums cut by 76 percent, on average, according to a new report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Obamacare
conservatives use bogus think tanks who use bogus numbers to draw bogus conclusions. Here is reality
But a new analysis from a conservative health-care economist suggests that Obamacare sticker shock wasn't nearly as steep as other studies previously suggested. Consumers who bought their own coverage between 2010 and 2012 saw the average cost of their plan increase between 14 percent and 28 percent when they switched to new coverage under the Affordable Care Act, according to Mark Pauly, a professor of health-care management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business. That's smaller than the effect measured by other studies, including one from the Manhattan Institute this morning finding that individual premiums increased 49 percent between 2013 and 2014.
Pauly also noted his numbers don't account for discounts received by low- and middle-income families receiving federal subsidies when they purchase coverage through ACA exchanges. Those eligible for federal subsidies this year saw their premiums cut by 76 percent, on average, according to a new report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Obamacare
Actually if you read the entire article, the author uses funky math to get to his 14-28% premium increase. "as the authors expain, the information available for pre-ACA plans is complex. It's hard to tell just how much coverage the plans provided"......."The authors also try to anticipate what kind of coverage people actually buy, versus just what was available"
essentially he re-added stuff people didn't need (like maternity coverage) back into what they were paying in 2010-2012 to arrive at the 2014 rates being only 14-28%.
conservatives use bogus think tanks who use bogus numbers to draw bogus conclusions. Here is reality
But a new analysis from a conservative health-care economist suggests that Obamacare sticker shock wasn't nearly as steep as other studies previously suggested. Consumers who bought their own coverage between 2010 and 2012 saw the average cost of their plan increase between 14 percent and 28 percent when they switched to new coverage under the Affordable Care Act, according to Mark Pauly, a professor of health-care management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business. That's smaller than the effect measured by other studies, including one from the Manhattan Institute this morning finding that individual premiums increased 49 percent between 2013 and 2014.
Pauly also noted his numbers don't account for discounts received by low- and middle-income families receiving federal subsidies when they purchase coverage through ACA exchanges. Those eligible for federal subsidies this year saw their premiums cut by 76 percent, on average, according to a new report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Obamacare
Our numbers are not bogus. The hit for us was painful, not as bad as we feared, but still painful. 먏
Actually if you read the entire article, the author uses funky math to get to his 14-28% premium increase. "as the authors expain, the information available for pre-ACA plans is complex. It's hard to tell just how much coverage the plans provided"......."The authors also try to anticipate what kind of coverage people actually buy, versus just what was available"
essentially he re-added stuff people didn't need (like maternity coverage) back into what they were paying in 2010-2012 to arrive at the 2014 rates being only 14-28%.
Of course, I did read it, and more importantly understood it. This widely available information from the insurance companies themselves that the ACA hasn't caused huge spikes in the cost of insurance, yet conservatives continue to lie about it. It's boring
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.
