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.
The Individual states set the reimbursement rates for their STATE RUN MEDICAID program. Ironically, those states that are heavily republican controlled, have the lowest reimbursement rates of all. The states with the highest levels of Medicaid reimbursement rates have made substantial profits and are doing much better with Obamacare than before it was enacted.
Kaiser foundation did a comprehensive study of reimbursement rates for Medicaid, state by state.
If republicans state legislatures would pay the hospitals what the cost of services actually are for treatment under Medicaid, there would be no problem.
Also, Hoonose is right. Investors.com is a right wing partisan, financial rag, that's never said one good thing about Obama, his administration or the ACA.
This morning I spoke with a working guy who didn't have insurance because he can't afford it. He makes money but not enough to afford insurance. He is stuck in the middle. He will have to pay a fine come tax time and he is OK with that because he cannot come up with the $800-$1000 it would cost him each month to be insured.
I told him not to worry since when the Gov. subsidies to help pay for Obama care dry up the whole thing will collapse and we will be back to where we started.
There are still many people who are stuck. people who have a job but it is not enough to have insurance.
Insurance is expensive.
How can there be fewer no pays since the numbers of uninsured remains about the same and never projected to fall below 30 million?
Probably related to the demographics of other no payers compared to Medicaid. Medicaids tend to be higher medical/hospital risk, and most likely higher risk in general than those without coverage today.
This morning I spoke with a working guy who didn't have insurance because he can't afford it. He makes money but not enough to afford insurance. He is stuck in the middle. He will have to pay a fine come tax time and he is OK with that because he cannot come up with the $800-$1000 it would cost him each month to be insured.
I told him not to worry since when the Gov. subsidies to help pay for Obama care dry up the whole thing will collapse and we will be back to where we started.
There are still many people who are stuck. people who have a job but it is not enough to have insurance.
Insurance is expensive.
Ah yes........another "I know a guy who........." story.
So we have a guy who is working full time. His employer doesn't offer insurance but for some strange reason, he can't qualify for a subsidy through Obamacare. The best policy he can find cost him 1000.00 out of pocket. Straight up, I can tell you that a family of 4, making over 75,000 a year wouldn't be paying 1000 a month, out of pocket, for insurance coverage. He's fallen into a hole where he's too rich for Medicaid but too poor to get a subsidy. I say you're not giving all the facts and distorting the issue.
You do know that he is not required to buy insurance or pay a penalty if his insurance would cost more than 8% of his total gross income?
You do know that you wouldn't pay a penalty if you're in a state.............ah, why bother..........
Here are the exemptions allowed by the ACA to avoid paying the penalty. Since you made the statement as fact, please review them and then tell us all how your "{Friend"} doesn't qualify for any one of them.
Not so easy.
AZ hospitals contributed to and pushed for expansion. Our hospital predicted they would see a 3-5% bump in revenues with Medicaid expansion. Over the past few years however it turns out a wash. Fewer no payers, but lower reimbursements.
The bottom line is that our health care has been totally ruined by the Federal government interference. The Fed's screw up everything they touch and almost all of it is unconstitutional; i.e., outside the areas "actually granted to the Federal Government" by the Constitution which also goes on to state "Amendment X, States Rights, Section 1...The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the sates, are reserved for the states respectively, or to the people."
Get the Feds out and go back to free-enterprise. States are responsible to (notice I do not say "for") anyone living within that state. If State law/regulation/whatever screws up people who don't want to live with whatever States do, they can move to another State that has different ways of accommodating those that pay their way and those that can't.
The bottom line is that our health care has been totally ruined by the Federal government interference. The Fed's screw up everything they touch and almost all of it is unconstitutional; i.e., outside the areas "actually granted to the Federal Government" by the Constitution which also goes on to state "Amendment X, States Rights, Section 1...The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the sates, are reserved for the states respectively, or to the people."
Get the Feds out and go back to free-enterprise. States are responsible to (notice I do not say "for") anyone living within that state. If State law/regulation/whatever screws up people who don't want to live with whatever States do, they can move to another State that has different ways of accommodating those that pay their way and those that can't.
I would be in agreement for most things. But states simply cannot afford the HC needs and costs of their people.
HC needs, costs, availability and distribution of services do not so easily follow free market principles.
[I]The Urban Institute has used its Health Reform Monitoring Survey (HRMS) to examine trends in health insurance coverage since the first quarter of 2013. The HRMS provides early feedback on changes under the ACA to complement the more robust impact assessments that will be possible as federal survey data become available.2 HRMS data through December 2014, midway through the second Marketplace open enrollment period, show a decline of 4.9 percentage points in the uninsurance rate among nonelderly adults since September 2013, just before the first open enrollment period. In this brief, we use HRMS data to provide estimates of coverage changes between September 20133 and early March 2015, just after the close of the second open enrollment period.4
We find a further drop in the uninsurance rate since December 2014: according to HRMS data, the uninsurance rate among nonelderly adults has declined 7.5 percentage points between September 2013 and March 2015, representing 15 million fewer adults without health insurance.[/i]
[I]The Urban Institute has used its Health Reform Monitoring Survey (HRMS) to examine trends in health insurance coverage since the first quarter of 2013. The HRMS provides early feedback on changes under the ACA to complement the more robust impact assessments that will be possible as federal survey data become available.2 HRMS data through December 2014, midway through the second Marketplace open enrollment period, show a decline of 4.9 percentage points in the uninsurance rate among nonelderly adults since September 2013, just before the first open enrollment period. In this brief, we use HRMS data to provide estimates of coverage changes between September 20133 and early March 2015, just after the close of the second open enrollment period.4
We find a further drop in the uninsurance rate since December 2014: according to HRMS data, the uninsurance rate among nonelderly adults has declined 7.5 percentage points between September 2013 and March 2015, representing 15 million fewer adults without health insurance.[/i]
When you start the count AFTER those who LOST insurance, you will find the uninsured rate fell.
conservatives are normally very quiet about the ACA now a days. Nothing like when they were making bold predictions about the impact the ACA would have on American society.
But the conservative dedication to mendacity is impressive. No matter the daily positive data that's comes in from multiple sources, the CBO, individual states, Urban Institute, Pew, Gallup, all documenting tremendously reduced uninsured, conservatives have not rethought anything about the ACA. Not one thing.
I mean every prediction they made about the law didn't happen, but darn it they feel it in their gut the ACA sucks because President Obama sucks. Simple as that objective reality be damn.
Again the collective mass delusion of conservatives to completely and totally ignore any good news about the laws impact, is truly awe inspiring and a political strength for conservatives.
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.
