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.
To me, the PPACA created more problems than it solved. Prior to the PPACA we just had some windows knocked out and a few busted walls. Now a tank has driven through the city.
Strange analogy, right? I agree.
Before the PPACA, we had the issue of pre-existing conditions and a few other issues. Now that the government has forced insurers into accepting those pre-existing conditions, but having the power of the governemtn to force everyone to buy insurance, why would they ever go back?
Yes, insurers are dropping ot of marketplaces. It's obviously not profitable, but how do you go back after these companies have spent countless dollars? It's almost like a poker hand you're so far into that you have to see it through. Going back and making a few changes is just not possible. That was the whole point.
The PPACA wasn't about healthcare. Insurance is NOT healthcare. Leave the partisan mess out and look at this whole thing with a strategic view. It was always about bringing about single-payer.
What works in other countries is not a guarantee it will work here. The United States is different from every other country out there. We're different by design. It's a shame some people see that design as a defect.
LOL... trump could offer free health care and the Dems would have an issue with it only because it was Trump who proposed it.
You just described every Republican here who thought RomneyCare was a brilliant idea when it was hatched by the oh-so-very-conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation, but hated Obamacare, even though it was exactly the same program, simply because it was proposed by Democrats. Or who loved the ACA, but hated Obamacare.
Will some one who supports the ACA, please explain to me how it's being funded. All the people that now have insurance thats being subsidized, where's the money coming from to do that?
Forgot to mention the elimination of lifetime maximums. I am really worried about this. What if you have survived something serious and are left with a chronic condition?
I am worried about this too. Through my husband's employer, who is self-insured, I have had the same insurance since 1989. When I was 31 years old, I had thyroid cancer. This required 2 surgeries, several follow up treatments, and lifelong monitoring. Besides that, I also had two children (adding to my totals). I remember kind of nervously eyeing lifetime maximum think, hmmmm, I'm only 32 and I've got many years to go, when am I going to be dropped? It was a great relief when that cap was lifted.
Before the PPACA, we had the issue of pre-existing conditions and a few other issues.
That is a State issue.
That has to do with State insurance regulations.
A real Community Organizer and a leader would have convinced State legislators to repeal or rescind State insurance regulations related to pre-existing conditions, except Obama's neither a leader nor an organizer.
One way to have done that would be through federal regulations tied to Medicaid spending: in order to receive the maximum block grant for Medicaid, States would need to have altered their insurance regulations regarding pre-existing conditions (but then Obama's not really that intelligent).
It also has to do with federal government policies and laws over the years.
It was a Wage & Price Freeze levied by FDR to combat Wage Inflation that led to employers providing payments to health plan coverage at first, and then the 1949 Supreme Court In Re: Inland Steel decision that led to employer-sponsored group health plans.
A simple change in the IRS Tax Code would fix that.
If employers and employees want the healthcare tax credit they currently enjoy, then they'll have to purchase group health plan coverage through an entity that is not their employer.
So now you'd have health plan coverage at the State level with State-wide group plans instead of the very limited employer-based plans.
Forgot to mention the elimination of lifetime maximums.
Then you don't want insurance, rather you want fee-for-service, which actually costs more.
It's amazing how so many people are ignorant of how insurance actually works. Maybe the Supreme Court can help you:
Insurance is a contract whereby for a stipulated consideration, one party undertakes to compensate the other for loss on a specific subject by specified perils.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
The problem is many voters vote against their own interests.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
The problem is there are people out there that are voting against their own personal interests.
Thank you for taking the time to point out that those voters are selfless, instead of selfish, since they voted for good of this federal republic and not their own selfish interests.
The GOP line is now they want to provide access for all. They then list all these great bumper sticker lines. Me I will take the ACA and Medicaid as well as Medicare for all, then you will have a fair market. The current system the GOP is pushing will lead to the system that we had before with limits, pre-existing conditions and ridiculous pricing which those 20 million on the ACA will not be able to afford.
Right now the cost of an 80-20 policy with $4000 deductibles is around 20K for a family of 2. What do you think that would cost under the GOP plan.
Then you don't want insurance, rather you want fee-for-service, which actually costs more.
It's amazing how so many people are ignorant of how insurance actually works. Maybe the Supreme Court can help you:
Insurance is a contract whereby for a stipulated consideration, one party undertakes to compensate the other for loss on a specific subject by specified perils.
Thank you for taking the time to point out that those voters are selfless, instead of selfish, since they voted for good of this federal republic and not their own selfish interests.
You're right but, it's not called "fee for service"....that just describes how the policy pays claims (an PPO OR EPO, rather than an HMO with co-pays). In the past, they all had lifetime limits though...at least 2-3 million. What you're talking about is a "certificate of insurance" instead of an "insurance policy". A lot of people have certificates of insurance for their health insurance and don't even realize it....it says what it is on the cover page.....one or the other, an insurance policy or a certifocate of insurance. If your insurance card uses the term "cert, certificate or subscriber" when referring to your ID number on your card, you have a certificate of insurance.
The real solution to the problem is not a single payor or buying across state lines...it's one big risk pool for the entire country. The government would take your application and distribute them evenly among all the insurers participating. The rates and the plan would all be exactly the same regardless of the carrier. At the end of one year you get assigned to a new carrier....that way if you're a terrible no one carrier has to suffer with you for more than a year. The rates will be set to compensate for all the risk including pre-existings conditions and it gets adjusted each year. All those those that can't afford it get subsidized based on what they can afford. The subsidy is paid with tax money or it's built into the rates that everyone else pays.
It's unpopular because it uses the word tax money. If you don't do it that way, you have fo collect the funds with smoke and mirrors....which is the way the ACA was suppose to do it and hasn't so far (because they post-poned the the start date of the small business mandate.....nor have they collected any of the half trillion they were suppose to find in Medicare fraud).
You just described every Republican here who thought RomneyCare was a brilliant idea when it was hatched by the oh-so-very-conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation, but hated Obamacare, even though it was exactly the same program, simply because it was proposed by Democrats. Or who loved the ACA, but hated Obamacare.
That was different, it was a republican plan LOL
Funny how little that accomplishment was used during Romney's run.
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.
