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.
Yes it is but that was true before Obamacare. ERs are not the answer and I've seen first hand how expensive they are. Our son's finger got infected and he hid it from us. He winced, I grabbed his hand, saw it and grabbed the car keys. They had to cut it open to clean it, two different antibiotics plus a shot. Then the bill came. We are fortunate to have good insurance but that ER bill was quite an eye opener. ERs are necessary but they should not be the first stop when people have no insurance. Those doctors are on call 24/7 and it is the most expensive way to treat a patient. Taxpayers pay when patients have no insurance. Has anyone compared how much we spend on the uninsured to what UHC would cost? That should be part of the justification.
It seems like Republicans alternative is basically turning Medicaid into a block-grant program for the states and tax credits that would be $1,970 for adults ages 18-34, $3,190 credit for 35 to 49 and $4,690 for adults 50-64.
Looks like for families the credit would be $8,330 for 35-49 and $11,100 for 50-64.
The income limit under the plan is 300% poverty level.
It seems like overall that neither the Republican plan or Obamacare plan is appealing.
I give ZERO credibility to posters who use mis-lesading titles.
"Republicans unveil Obamacare replacement bill:", implies the majority of the repubs in the House.
Then the article title says "Conservative repubs" which implies a "group of repubs.
"It seems" is only your VERY BIASED opinion, which I give Zero credibility.
Family 4 at exactly 200% FPL gets credit $8330. on $48600 income.
Kaiser said family insurance is along the lines of 16K a year. 16000-8330-7670. 7670/12 = 639.
Lets say the 48600 family nets out at around 43000 after taxes, mostly payroll.
43000/12 = 3583.
639/3583= 17.8%. Sorry, just not seeing them being able to swing that.
Yes, I know. Not your problem. They are morons who should have stopped slacking and should be network engineers at 130K each.
I'll never understand why the cons have such a hard on over the idea that selling insurance across state lines will somehow magically make a lot of costs go away. Guess what, Obamacare already allowed that and no hospitals, insurance companies, patients, or states cared about it at all because it offered no advantages. This is like watching a trainwreck happen in slow motion although I'm actually quite curious to see just how bad our legislators can destroy what's left of healthcare.
"I'll never understand why the cons have such a hard on over the idea that selling insurance across state lines"
I'll never understand the lack of knowledge about "selling across state lines"
ANY insurance company can sell in ANY state as long as they apply to the states Insurance Commission, meet the requirements, and get a license to do so.
"I'll never understand why the cons have such a hard on over the idea that selling insurance across state lines"
I'll never understand the lack of knowledge about "selling across state lines"
ANY insurance company can sell in ANY state as long as they apply to the states Insurance Commission, meet the requirements and get a license to do so.
Regulations. Precisely. You are misunderstanding the idea of 'selling across state lines' that the GOP is trying to sell. They want companies to be able to sell across state lines with all of the regulations removed, because you know, 'it'd increase competition, thereby lowering costs'. Companies would be allowed to export the laws to everyone else across the country according to the states in which they were HQed--no need to apply to another state's Insurance Commissions and meet another state's minimum standards (because those are evil 'regulations').
Sounds familiar? That's because it is. The supreme court ruling of Marquette National Bank v. First of Omaha Corp. 1978 allowed banks to export their home states' laws to everyone else across the country. And guess what happened? Light bulbs went off in the heads that run banks and state governments. States raced to the bottom to deliver as minimal usury laws as possible. States competed to the bottom of the barrel to deliver as lax regulations as possible for things like housing loans as well, and what did we all get? Tons of people are now stuck with high APR credit cards entirely because of 2 states like South Dakota or DE which have virtually no usury laws (laws which have been enacted since practically the dawn of western civilization). Did you miss the whole story of Bill Janklow, the governor of South Dakota in 1980, who made a deal with Citibank? If Citibank would move its credit card business to South Dakota, the governor would literally let Citibank write South Dakota's credit card regulations:
Remember the whole 2008 subprime mortgage crisis? Subprime mortgages were allowed to be crafted because the mortgage industry followed suit with the credit card companies to find the state with the worst consumer protection laws for mortgages.
And guess what'll happen when the GOP gets their way--states will race to the bottom in order to craft laws with the lowest minimum amount of coverage allowed by law for a health plan in order to get the insurance industries to flock to their state. The insurance companies will then export that crap to everyone in the country and the only thing you'll get are terrible coverages for the same or higher price. Again, the only competition we'll see is a state race to see who can become the crappiest and there will be a grand total of $0 savings. That's why selling the idea of 'selling across state lines will increase competition and decrease prices' is nothing but trying to sell a unicorn. I'm sure the insurance companies are giving kickbacks behind closed doors to their friends in Congress and in state legislatures in order jam this through so that they can all relocate to a state that'll make the worst laws for consumers. It'll be another Bill Janklow story all over again, except the industry doing this time will be insurance related.
Last edited by fibonacci; 01-06-2017 at 07:39 AM..
300% of poverty level -- $35,640 -- would get a tax credit off the $3,330 they pay in taxes?
200% of poverty level -- $23,760 -- would get a tax credit off the $1,537 they pay in taxes?
100% of poverty level -- $11,880 - would get a tax credit off the $153 they pay in taxes?
How are these people supposed to buy health insurance with what they save on taxes? The person making $12K can only get a credit of $153. That won't go too far.
So happy to see people arguing over what we're going to put into place now that we know Obamacare is going to be repealed.
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.
