Insurers Oppose Latest Republican Obamacare Repeal Effort

By | September 21, 2017

  • September 21, 2017 at 9:06 am
    david567 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 9
    Thumb down 5

    Of course they oppose it. The system that is in place now is good for insurers and bad for the people. Isn’t it convenient for the insurers that my Obamacare policy only pays 60% of medical costs but medical costs have tripled (that is gone up 66%) since Obamacare was enacted. I pay more to go to the doctor with insurance then I used to without it. What are the odds that the reason the prices skyrocketed are because the insurance agreed with the hospital owners to only pay 10%, and the hospital owners can raise their prices by 66% so that my 40% and the insurance 10% covers the real cost.

    • September 21, 2017 at 12:26 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 7

      Stop making sense! :)

      • September 21, 2017 at 2:36 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 10

        Everyone for Obamacare will oppose anything done to replace and repeal, simple as that. Meanwhile, the implosion continues. Stop playing politics and get this done.

        • September 21, 2017 at 3:01 pm
          Counterpoint says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 13
          Thumb down 5

          People seem to forget why Obamacare was implemented in the first place. Healthcare prices were skyrocketing and the availability of insurance was plunging (“imploding” as you put it). Obamacare tried to fix both of those but only ended up addressing one and the healthcare market is still “imploding”.

          Everyone trying to repeal it seems to think that it will fix the issue once and for all when it’s really like ripping off half a bandaid because it isn’t as good as a whole one.

          • September 21, 2017 at 3:12 pm
            Agent says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 14

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • September 21, 2017 at 3:33 pm
            Confused says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 2

            A “true believer” of Obamacare would not admit that the healthcare market is still imploding. They would try to argue Obamacare is great and perfect and wonderful and it fixed everything and everyone is happy.

          • September 22, 2017 at 8:54 am
            Doug Fisher says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 11
            Thumb down 1

            On the contrary, every ACA-supporter would love to see many fixes to it. Instead, congressmembers on the right side of the aisle just want to burn it all down for no reason other than to score political points.

            How enacting legislation that is worse in almost every way than the legislation it would be replacing is a good idea is beyond me.

            The best part of Graham-Cassidy is that it let’s Alaska keep Obamacare. If Obamacare is so bad, why would they be want to keep it there? Couldn’t be a Cornhusker Kickback style incentive to buy Murkowski’s vote, could it? I remember the outrage over buying Ben Nelson’s vote. Surely Republicans will now decry one of their own getting such an obvious bribe?

            LOL

          • September 24, 2017 at 8:47 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 8

            @#DougTroll: The only current ACA supporters are those who get their Health Care FREE. So, they’re a biased sample from which to base your assertions.

            Congressmen on the right side of the aisle AREN’T the only ones who’d like to burn it down. Again, TROLL, your asserion is based on a censoring of the population who want ACA GONE ASAP!

            Lying troll!

          • September 26, 2017 at 3:46 pm
            UW says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Lyin Polar. Support for Obamacare is higher than the % on it. Many here support it and aren’t on it, and most of the liberal states, which support the conservative states, support it. Please explain, with sources.
            Ready set, tard!

    • September 22, 2017 at 2:05 pm
      UW says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 0

      Insurance costs increased less than projected without Obamacare. Please learn the basics before criticizing and pushing stupid theories.

      • September 25, 2017 at 6:34 am
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 6

        “…less than projected WITHOUT Obamacare.”

        Correct. And WITH Obamacare, inflation of premiums was ‘through the roof’.

        But, Kim Jong UW, please cite YOUR stats. Hint: Huff & Puff POSt is not a credible source of health insurance stats. Huff & Puff POSt Administrators are liberal hacks who purvey liberal, socialist, communist propaganda.

        • September 25, 2017 at 1:25 pm
          UW says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 5
          Thumb down 1

          You are functionally illiterate.

          Rising less than they were projected to rise without Obamacare means that without Obamacare the projections were higher increases. For the 3 full-blown dotards here, that means it’s cheaper now.

          I’m skip the citation in this case. It’s a waste. You aren’t fully literate, have proven you don’t even know what an average is, lie about your qualifications and will dismiss anything you don’t agree with. If you want to see it, which you don’t and couldn’t comprehend it, look up Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman and the various studies he references. Or ignore them and circlejerk Fox with your imaginary degrees and inside sources.

          Get bent, genius. Ready, set go!

          • September 25, 2017 at 8:07 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 4

            Libitteral in full meltdown mode! Take cover! Insults will be flying in everyone’s direction!

      • September 25, 2017 at 3:04 pm
        bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 1

        This is factually inaccurate, factually misleading, and or lying.

        http://news.ehealthinsurance.com/news/average-individual-health-insurance-premiums-increased-99-since-2013-the-year-before-obamacare-family-premiums-increased-140-according-to-ehealth-com-shopping-data

        The issue here is without subsidies what has occurred, and note the deductible has gone up by nearly 4 times. Health insurance premiums have not slowed growth under Obama unless you count both individual and health insurance company subsidies, at which point, it is only a matter of time before the government cannot afford this regardless of who they tax, not only because of running out of money, but running out of people who want to move up through the income ladder as there will be no incentive to do so.

        As I pointed out here recently, you make more your entire life with 3 kids making $20k a year from McDonalds each married, than you would getting college educated and making $40k a year each married due to the tax benefits, free healthcare benefits, and other aspects. In WA State it is even worse, because we have a health insurance program which goes beyond the ACA’s percentage limitations, which would literally make the kid’s insurance free. It doesn’t apply to adults.

        We have gone too far in this push UW, when you are incentivized to survive, and that includes not getting into a high skill field, and we see that Apple cannot find high skill graduates here, we see that our population is not motivated to fill these tech areas, and it is no surprise why.

        • September 25, 2017 at 4:57 pm
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 3

          bob; this is the umpteenth time UW has been caught lying or faking something. He/ she has lost all credibility, and doesn’t deserve any response going forward. Don’t feed the troll.

          • September 26, 2017 at 1:39 pm
            UW says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 2

            Cite exactly what I said that was a lie. I don’t think you even know what your are taking about, you’re a step above a bot that just writes a few talking points after seeing code words. Ready, set, go duuuurrr!

        • September 26, 2017 at 1:37 pm
          UW says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 2

          That doesn’t address what I said, twice. Read again, and maybe one of the Deplorables can take a third shot.

          Once again, your level of reading-comprehension results in you calling me a liar after “researching” the wrong thing. That’s why you are a clown and I won’t waste time debating you. You aren’t competent.

          • September 26, 2017 at 2:00 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            “Once again, your level of reading-comprehension results in you calling me a liar after “researching” the wrong thing”

            This is so beyond ironic.

            Do you have zero self reflection? The first time you’re probably talking to Polar, but this one may be me unless you were mad enough to say it twice.

            So if you’re talking to me, with once again, I rarely call you a liar, I typically call you stupid, in some way or another.

            Regarding this particular time, I’m using sarcasm and talking like you intentionally, note the order I listed those things, and how I said them.

            “You are functionally illiterate”

            Was your phrase, I was doing a parody of you, and only one of those things is true that I mentioned. Note that one of them is that it is simply factually inaccurate. This would mean I did indeed draw the conclusion your research was inaccurate. Also, you’re throwing Polar’s phrase at him (or me) given that phrase above, and you’re not doing a very good job of it. I would say try harder but I think that is your problem. Calm down, clear your head, and then try slower.

  • September 21, 2017 at 3:54 pm
    Boonedoggle says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 2

    Medicare returns about 95 cents to 98 cents of premium to participants in the form of medical claim payments. Private insurers continuously whine about the ACA requirement that ONLY 80 cents be similoarly returned. If the private system is so efficient, why can’t it match the 98% payout of Medicare?

    • September 21, 2017 at 4:06 pm
      Sally Anne Fannymaker says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 10
      Thumb down 2

      Because the C-Suite demands multi-million dollar compensation packages.

    • September 22, 2017 at 12:48 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 4

      Who administers Medicare? Medicaid? The VA? Answer that, then re-do your calculations. Also, ask patients at your nearest VA hospital if they think they’re getting timely, adequate care.

      • September 22, 2017 at 2:06 pm
        UW says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 3

        This is irrelevant, and does not address the point.

        • September 24, 2017 at 4:34 pm
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 4
          Thumb down 3

          No, it’s spot on relevant.

        • September 24, 2017 at 4:39 pm
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 2

          I repeat my question about OVERHEAD COSTS borne by Medicare and Medicaid.

          WHO ADMINISTERS MEDICARE AND MEDICAID? How many employees of the Fed Govt are involved, along with the private insurers? WHAT ARE THE TOTAL OVERHEAD COSTS … NOT EXCLUDING THOSE COSTS drives up their combined ratio. I’ll wait for a reply to my question. Posting phony numbers won’t go unchallenged.

      • September 22, 2017 at 3:43 pm
        Don't Call Me Shirley says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 1

        I’ve gotten great care through the VA, and I live in Phoenix. The private sector is much worse. When there are any problems with the VA, it’s headline news. The death rate is higher in the private sector, but all of the mistakes and problems in the private sector aren’t as widely reported.

        What experiences do you have receiving care from the VA, that makes you an expert on this? Ready…Steady…GO!

        • September 23, 2017 at 12:44 am
          Doug Fisher says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 2

          Guaranteed crickets chirping is the only thing you will hear on this one, buddy.

          When confronted directly with his BS, Yogi always turns tail.

          If he does respond, it will now only be to my comment above, and nothing to yours. Unfortunately, now we have a paradox on our hands. LOL

          • September 24, 2017 at 4:39 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            !

    • September 26, 2017 at 2:02 pm
      bob says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 1

      And what happens with the rest?

      Yes, yes, I know you will focus on the pay checks to CEO’s and costs. However, there is another area these funds go to that you leave absent which is the reason they complain about the 80%.

      It goes to building capital.

      This is why the health insurance industry is so critical. In the point B: They pay as you said, tons of people a livable wage with 80% left over. This is one big part that is needed, however, the other, they grow capital over time. The government does not. They require taking from capital. A dual system of private options and public assistance is the clear choice, with private tax dollars paying toward the difference when needed. Not medicare for all.

  • September 21, 2017 at 6:04 pm
    Agency says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 9

    Notice how they say “insurers” but only mention one insurance company? Notice you will not read one good thing about President Trump or the Republican party in publications like this? I am certainly not saying the Republicans are the word, however what I am saying is readers are really getting one sided reported that meets the agenda of the writer and publication. It’s really hard to trust what you read anymore in some publications and while President Trump can be better as what he does in a number of ways, he is spot on when he says “fake news.” As for the insurance journal staff, if you are reading this, the people are really getting tired of this one sided reporting. I am not saying you need to plug the Republicans because this does the same thing, but you need to stop playing these games by pretending that everyone is opposed to repealing Obamacare when this is not true. You need to tell both sides, stop the dishonesty.

    • September 21, 2017 at 8:01 pm
      Andrew G. Simpson says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 14
      Thumb down 2

      Agency, just so you know, America’s Health Insurance Plans that opposes the bill is a trade association representing more than 1,000 health insurers, not just one. And BCBS is a group of 36 insurers. Since we are an insurance publication, what insurers think matters. Our agenda here at Insurance Journal is to report as fairly and accurately as possible for the industry.

      • September 22, 2017 at 8:38 am
        Doug Fisher says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 7
        Thumb down 0

        Did someone just see a mic drop?

        LOL.

      • September 22, 2017 at 12:52 pm
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 7

        You also owe a duty, if you consider your publication to be fair and unbiased, to report on consumers of health insurance opinions of prices, timeliness of service, and quality of health care outcomes. I haven’t seen any such survey. Let me know if there were any that I missed, and if none, when readers might expect some insight into consumer’s frustrations reported in IJ. Thanks.

        • September 22, 2017 at 2:10 pm
          UW says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 2

          You claim to work in the industry and are almost 100% incompetent when it comes to health care. A customer survey of uninformed people outside the industry who don’t even understand what a deductible is would be interesting, but almost completely irrelevant to actual health care results.

          • September 25, 2017 at 1:01 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 6

            I’ve searched a few article comment pages randomly and found NO meaningful comments by you on the specific articles. Conclusion: you are a troll and contribute NOTHING to these comment boards. Your goal is to troll (accidental rhyme).

            You offer only objections and insults, and offer nothing in support of your objections. You ask for EASILY discovered sources of info from posts others make as if they don’t have common knowledge or don’t have insight into insurance issues.

            Finally, your main objective is to censor conservative opinions. You won’t attain that goal, as you don’t have the technical tools or ability to carry it out because your socialist positions are flawed.

          • September 25, 2017 at 1:30 pm
            UW says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 1

            How much of this guy’s crap are you going to alow IJ? The majority of intelligent people have left and come to the site sporadically now, at best, because of 3 people. One of them here who has threatened to track people down which the mods joined in on and mocked the victim.

          • September 25, 2017 at 3:17 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 2

            “How much of this guy’s crap are you going to alow IJ? The majority of intelligent people have left and come to the site sporadically now, at best, because of 3 people. One of them here who has threatened to track people down which the mods joined in on and mocked the victim.”

            Flip this, and you have personally said I should be careful or someone in society might think I need to be taken out. You have harassed everyone, not just some on this site, have intentionally antagonized people, have called people mentally ill and said you won’t talk to them until they give you a certificate of such (if that were true, what you were doing would be enough harassment to get them to commit suicide through the extent of the bullying and supposed mental illness, but as I’m not mentally ill it doesn’t really matter) you have said violence is an acceptable method of civil discourse, in other words, rather than your claim someone threatened to track you down, you have made it clear, and have never recanted it, or apologized for said statement, that you are ok with violence if you think the person is a threat to society. I have numerous times however said violence is never ok. Even if our conversations have been out of control, as I’ve said before, I would not literally snap you in half, and violence is never ok. Will you right now say the same? That violence is never an ok part of civil discourse?

            Will you commit to that?

            I’m getting tired of you trying to manipulate the mods here. The one who shouldn’t be here is you.

          • September 25, 2017 at 3:20 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 2

            I might add even if what you said was true, (and it’s not, on the physical threats) you have numerous times continued to support what I just said on violence as a means of civil discourse.

            Sometimes people say things they regret. So can you point to one threat I’ve made in the last 15 articles when we debate?

            You’re bluntly lying. If someone here is so violent where are all the threats UW?

            You are basically just throwing fits because you want for these people to be labeled and removed, it fits your narrative nicely and gets rid of them.

            It’s time to stop.

          • September 25, 2017 at 3:22 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 2

            To add further: I have literally seen no threats to you, and you’re trying to say for one threat you keep claiming is so credible, (yet hasn’t been happening) 2 others are responsible due to association.

            This is dangerous UW. Association, grouping, remove them all! They are all violent, right? There is no violence here toward you! You’re the boy who cried wolf, only in this case, you are the wolf that cried wolf while eating the sheep.

          • September 25, 2017 at 3:49 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 2

            What specifically in his comment above should land him blocked from this site?

            I’ve copied it here.

            Copy the line and show your work.

            Or is it simply he says things you don’t like?

            “I’ve searched a few article comment pages randomly and found NO meaningful comments by you on the specific articles. Conclusion: you are a troll and contribute NOTHING to these comment boards. Your goal is to troll (accidental rhyme).
            You offer only objections and insults, and offer nothing in support of your objections. You ask for EASILY discovered sources of info from posts others make as if they don’t have common knowledge or don’t have insight into insurance issues.
            Finally, your main objective is to censor conservative opinions. You won’t attain that goal, as you don’t have the technical tools or ability to carry it out because your socialist positions are flawed.”

          • September 25, 2017 at 4:27 pm
            FrequentReader says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            As someone, who has read IJ on a regular basis, PolarBeaRepeal is more of a troll than any other commenter on this site. I often wonder how PolarBeaRepeal gets any work done commenting so frequently. I’m starting to think there is some $$$ involved with your political agenda. Probably here to create doubt where there is none for big corporations who have their own private agenda. It’s all in the $$$ isn’t it PolarBeaRepeal.

          • September 25, 2017 at 5:02 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            @bob; there’s nothing ABOVE that should get UW blocked. He should be ignored for what useless things he posts. However, he has taken up a crusade against conservative posters which leads to multiple insults, attempts to discredit, and to censor such opinions. For that type of incessant, repeat behavior, he should be ignored if IJ doesn’t ban him. I await IJ’s move on the matter.

          • September 25, 2017 at 5:33 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            Polar,

            Nothing about your post implied you want UW banned. I was talking to him, as he asked why you are still posting here, so he must want you banned. This is why I included your post asking what about it specifically was ban worthy. I actually believe UW should be at least kept somewhat in check, I’m not quite sure on the banned personally. I don’t like ever doing that.

            “@bob; there’s nothing ABOVE that should get UW blocked. He should be ignored for what useless things he posts. However, he has taken up a crusade against conservative posters which leads to multiple insults, attempts to discredit, and to censor such opinions. For that type of incessant, repeat behavior, he should be ignored if IJ doesn’t ban him. I await IJ’s move on the matter.”

          • September 25, 2017 at 8:10 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            ok, bob. I misread your post, in haste, between a few tasks.

            IJ would do well to upgrade this comment board to include an ignore feature, and perhaps remove votes up, down, the latter being used by some to censor others.

          • September 26, 2017 at 2:25 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            It’s ok Polar. I agree with many things you say. Sometimes I criticize you and looking on my wording it does indeed if taken quickly appear I was talking to you.

            My phrasing can be poor. I’ll try to be better on it.

  • September 22, 2017 at 2:00 pm
    Captain Planet says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 9
    Thumb down 1

    Yeah, reality doesn’t fit the Faux Newz narrative. Hannity is lying to you viewers. Rush is lying to you listeners. And both with such a wide brush, too. Just keep lining up to have your wool shaved. They love how you line their pockets. El Rushbo has a drug habit to support, after all.

    • September 25, 2017 at 5:03 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 2

      This isn’t an article about a specific news org. Stay on topic as best you can.

  • September 22, 2017 at 3:05 pm
    Captain Planet says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 6
    Thumb down 1

    Doesn’t sound like there will be enough votes. Maybe if some want to escape the PPACA, they can move to Nambia.

    • September 22, 2017 at 3:28 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 7
      Thumb down 0

      I guess I’m going to fade into Bolivian :)

    • September 22, 2017 at 3:46 pm
      Don't Call Me Shirley says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 0

      Or they can move to the nation of East Covfefe.

    • September 26, 2017 at 10:36 am
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 1

      Smart people are escaping ACA by not paying exorbitant premiums, thus the escalating Death Spiral.

  • September 23, 2017 at 12:49 am
    Doug Fisher says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 2

    This entire thread makes me smile. One ignorant post, then a smackdown of logic by a forum administrator. And then, the delightful piling on of reason and puns.

    This makes the site worth coming back for time and time again. Now imagine if there weren’t so many disingenuous trolls on the right posting here! The conversations would be involved with points and counterpoints and actual discussion.

    • September 25, 2017 at 6:46 am
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 4

      Nothing I’ve read from Libiterals has ‘smacked down’ anything on ACA being a disaster.

      Andrew Simpson is simply appeasing insurance companies that support the IJ publication by criticizing a poster who called out health insurance companies.

      US citizens adversely affected by ACA aren’t represented in any articles I’ve read here, but are WELL represented in their voices of opposition to ACA on unbiased sites that aren’t exclusively insurance oriented, thus they are less biased, or unbiased.

      Health insurance companies were and still are, for the meantime, receiving money from the Fed. When that soon dries up, they’ll jump ship from the Fed / ACA.

  • September 23, 2017 at 1:25 am
    Celtica says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 6
    Thumb down 0

    So — one can conclude there was really never a plan. The party of NO lives up to its name. All three houses huffed and puffed — and bluffed — but at the end of the day. they could not get the job done. Are you tired of winning yet?

    • September 25, 2017 at 6:47 am
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 5

      No, you can’t conclude any such thing. There are dozens of plans, with the great challenge being melding them together to satisfy 100 Senators.

      • September 25, 2017 at 8:34 am
        Ron says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 0

        This is an article from Fox prior to Inauguration Day.

        http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/16/trump-reportedly-insists-healthcare-replacement-will-have-insurance-for-everybody.html

        We’re still waiting for President Trump to unveil his great plan.

        “We’re going to have insurance for everybody. There was a philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going to happen with us.” – President-elect Trump

        This, nor any of the previous Republican bills or any free-market approach, would fulfill this specific promise.

        • September 25, 2017 at 11:36 am
          Captain Planet says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 4
          Thumb down 1

          Perhaps he should focus more on his great plan rather than swearing at our professional athletes who are exercising their right to free speech by non-violently protesting violence against their race.

          I would love to see his plan if it delivers on what he promised everyone along the campaign trail. He even said people would be willing to impoverish themselves in order to get it. It sounds like a phenomenal plan, let’s see it!

        • September 25, 2017 at 1:05 pm
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 5

          @Ron; TrumPresident can’t predict that Senators will realize some plans aren’t rich enough for the citizens in their states. What is best for the USA as a whole isn’t best for some Senators who are essentially RINOs or Mavericks.

          I predict ACA will NOT be repealed until after the 2018 elections, when the votes of a few Republican RINO/ Maverick Senators won’t carry enough weight to upset the apple cart… there will be a net gain of at least 5 seats by Republicans, to 57, and the three roadblock RINOs will be bypassed.

          • September 25, 2017 at 1:48 pm
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 0

            President Trump does not need anything from anybody in order to release his plan to the American people. He campaigned on the fact that he has one. Where is it? Or was he lying? There are no other options.

            We are waiting for at least one of your predictions regarding health care come to fruition.

          • September 25, 2017 at 2:13 pm
            SWFL Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Ron, you know there was no plan. His plan was to “negotiate” something once he got into office but then found out that this is way too complex. Sadly, many people fell for this and I guess I can’t blame them. We were desperate for someone who could really make a difference in Washington. Can’t really blame Trump either. Most things in his business have probably come easy to him but he was too arrogant and misinformed to know that he may get in over his head.

          • September 25, 2017 at 5:06 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            @Ron; your focus on campaign pledges shows your immaturity. No one took him literally, except perhaps you. The ‘plan’ was an outline which needed to be filled out by Congressional bill writers. Are you seriously suggesting TrumPresident had a full length bill in his briefcase?

          • September 26, 2017 at 7:51 am
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            He was no longer campaigning at the time, he was the president-elect. Big difference.

            Why can his supporters not accept and admit that he lied? He has nothing, never hand anything, and never will. It is all about PR and being the reality TV president. He does not care about the people, the country, or the world.

          • September 26, 2017 at 8:31 am
            SWFL Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 0

            Polar, you’ve finally lost all credibility. Of course we know that there is a bit of embellishment during the campaign process but the American people did assume he had a plan or at the very least would work hard to “negotiate” a plan. Which he has not done. He’s already blamed Congress for their lack of effort and done little on his part to contribute. Just like you have ideas, I’d be willing to see his ideas on healthcare via a daily twitter post instead of the other BS that he doles out. But he’s offered nothing and you know it. No, his voters did take him literally.

          • September 26, 2017 at 10:40 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            No, only his CRITICS take him literally – to enable (empty) criticism.

            NO businessman without insurance background could possibly craft an effective plan to fix the HYUUUUUGE mess left by ACA/ Dems/ Obama.

          • September 26, 2017 at 11:31 am
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            “NO businessman without insurance background could possibly craft an effective plan to fix the HYUUUUUGE mess left by ACA/ Dems/ Obama.”

            I agree with you 100%. So why did he campaign that he had a plan? Are finally ready to admit that Candidate Trump lied?

            Form the article I cited earlier,

            “The president-elect insisted that his plan for replacing the Affordable Healthcare Act is all but finished, and added that care would have “lower numbers, much lower deductibles.” He went as far to say that he’s ready to reveal it alongside Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan.

            ‘It’s very much formulated down to the final strokes. We haven’t put it in quite yet, but we’re going to be doing it soon,’ Trump said during the interview with the paper.”

            Still waiting.

          • September 26, 2017 at 3:35 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            @Ron; you incessantly harp on the fact ACA isn’t YET repealed. What’s the rush? Explain why your main concern is the excessive time it appears to you to be taking. I’m not concerned because it is either repealed or crashes after the Death Spiral comes to a conclusion in 10-15 months.

          • September 27, 2017 at 7:59 am
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 0

            The timeline is the least of my concerns. I only bring it up to prove that you and the Republicans have been lying to the American people.

      • September 25, 2017 at 12:34 pm
        SWFL Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 0

        Well Polar, could you share some of these plans with some important people so we could implement a feasible solution. Not being facetious here. Like someone stated earlier – Obamacare was implemented because we had citizens that were uncovered (price, pre-existing conditions)and prices were going up. We can debate the other reasons why Obamacare was passed but the state of healthcare pre-Obamacare is not debatable. It was a train wreck waiting to happen.

        • September 25, 2017 at 1:12 pm
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 4

          I await Senate disclosure of the details I heard of, and believe would work best. As Rand Paul said, the latest version is ACA-lite, and it won’t work as it stands. It needs to be a regulatory focused bill that enables the FREE MARKET to fix the underlying problems.

          That aside, the phrase HEALTH CARE SPPECIFICCS gives many of the key elements, but I am only at liberty to disclose those already discussed…. here they are:

          HEA – Health Expense (not savings) Accounts
          HCARESP – High Cost Ailing Risks Equitably (Equally) Shared in Pools; aka High Risk Pools, but with some new approaches using state of the art reinsurance mechanisms.
          IFIC – Interstate For Increased Competition – this is the least understood element. The increased competition lowers costs, but not only in insurance. It also contemplates increased competition in the medical care industry via increased support for education of med pros.
          CS – Cost Savings methodology including novel means that are currently proprietary, thus Congress cannot specifically include them in any bill they author.

          I’ll disclose other elements I omitted when I’m able/ legally permitted.

          • September 25, 2017 at 2:49 pm
            UW says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            I just made my below comment before seeing this. Yogi, you don’t have inside sources. You read Breitbart and random comments and pretend you are informed.

            The plan is do anything they can to cut taxes and take away as much subsidized health insurance as possible and if they can, make it easier for the richest companies to do whatever they want. It’s that simple. It’s not about death spirals, which you comically proved you don’t understand, high risk pooling, which doesn’t work, state lines, etc.

          • September 25, 2017 at 8:13 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            Troll. Little do you know about me. And little do I care about your useless comments and childish insults.

    • September 25, 2017 at 2:45 pm
      UW says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 3

      Yogi’s secret sources have the plan, they just can’t reveal it yet.

      • September 25, 2017 at 8:14 pm
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 0

        And you have a right to know for exactly what reason?

    • September 25, 2017 at 3:47 pm
      bob says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 1

      There have been numerous plans, all fairly good, the issue here is democrats won’t compromise, and the majority of these cannot pass through reconciliation. This has been a last resort issue for republicans.

      At this point, the ACA cannot be fixed due to the very nature of what it does. It does not encourage people to receive care, or shop care, and I used that word intentionally. Insurance is for catastrophic events, and the ACA has made people look at it entirely different. I have seen numerous people go to ER rooms thinking now insurance is better, for things that can be taken care of with clinics. In fact, my wife made this mistake before I had to explain it to her. She was not the only one, the majority of people who were mid range income to poor did this same thing, because they were used to not looking at the bill or thinking about the shopping.

      Quite the contrary, the ACA tries to blanket shotgun all care, messes things up and appeals to ignorance, and makes people not think. If I choose to go without maternity care, it might be because I found a local midwife who can do the whole thing substantially cheaper and I don’t want to pay the extra insurance sums, which will also translate to savings for the insurance industry. In fact, I did this very thing. My first birth which I let my wife take care of she want to a place without ever questioning anything the doctor said, insurance would take care of it after all. I believe that bill total was $10,000 to the insurance company and we paid $2,000. My last birth from the midwife center was $2,500 and we paid about $1,000. The point of the republican bill in 2009 was to encourage market based solutions so people would do this math. I’m not better off if I simply increase the coverage, and tell the insured there will be no restrictions, just go wherever, increase spending like crazy (which is what causes costs to explode) and many here seem to be advocating the government doing just that. You should be in the habit of picking and choose your plans, and should have the option to change anything you want, and the ACA gets in the way of that. If you wanted to buy a minimal policy and then shop around for the best provider of care, (not insurance) you could do so. The health insurance industry was far too regulated as it was. The premiums were not always exploding, that didn’t occur until after the 60’s when medicare started messing things up as well as regulations.

      • September 25, 2017 at 4:05 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 1

        Bob, what do you think about the Doc in a Boxes that have sprung up all over the country treating all the normal illnesses? Very cost effective vs Emergency Rooms that are still too crowded. That was the theory of HSA’s which have been criticized since the advent of the worst legislation in history.

        • September 25, 2017 at 4:55 pm
          bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 0

          A lot of people don’t understand your comment about emergency rooms or the HSA argument.

          It’s sad. There are a lot of people, specifically the poor, who since they will receive free care if they bring their child anywhere, simply go to an ER on things they shouldn’t because they don’t realize a clinic is cheaper. It’s not fair to anyone and increases costs for everyone. At some point, a voucher would make them think about this, and shop around. I highly advocate vouchers. I highly advocate for policies that can be barebones forcing people to shop around for procedures and doctors. People don’t seem to understand what the point of insurance is anymore. When we added all sorts of services, and more importantly made it so people don’t have to think about what services do or don’t go on a plan, people stopped shopping for them, and will continue to do so.

          So on your doc in a box, I’m not sure what I think, but I know that the right platform won’t be possible if people don’t use a market based solution.

          The ACA is most certainly not that, and cannot be fixed.

        • September 26, 2017 at 2:32 pm
          bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Agent,

          I’m going to put some links up. Unlike others here, I’ve mentioned how healthcare gets out of control in terms of habits. I’ve created this theory myself. This is also unlike many here, I’m going to use some data to back this up, and connect some dots.

          So do you recall I said how the healthcare system will incentivize people to rely on high cost methods, especially the poor?

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/10/19/more-evidence-expanding-medicaid-increases-emergency-room-visits/?utm_term=.5dcd2ef14371

          This shows we already have this occurring. I accused medicare and Medicaid of increasing health costs, and I stay true to believing that nationalized care does this too. The shopping around doesn’t happen much even with regards to insurance, more so since the ACA passed. I’ll give a few more links too.

          At one point UW said the point of the ACA was to reduce ER visits, when I said that. Intended is not the same as what actually occurred. I’ll get to that next.

        • September 26, 2017 at 2:49 pm
          bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          In essence what we have occurring when the government handles healthcare is shopping around doesn’t happen.

          Healthcare premiums explode, then more government spending is needed.

          We need a system that allows choice, pushes market based solutions, encourages shopping around, and then possibly gives vouchers toward getting care instead of just paying it.

          Yes, maybe your voucher will be $5,000 instead of $10,000. But if the procedure can be found for $2,000, which is often the case, than the government paying $10,000 is inflating the cost.

  • September 26, 2017 at 2:37 pm
    bob says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 0

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/mar/10/tom-price/hhs-chief-tom-price-correct-er-use-obamacare/

    So UW, my sources are inept? Politifact is terrible, CNN and MSNBC who I use is wrong, the .gov sites I use are absurd, and WAPO is imbalanced to the right?

    I must be missing something. I do this on purpose.

    ER and high cost use is up.

    This is why cutting Medicaid is needed and encouraging market based solutions.

    This is why I said grants won’t do what you think they will. Grants will allow different states different solutions, 50 states, and some may use this the proper way for a market based solution, say vouchers to shop around.

    We will then see 50 different results. Grants are a good method to this. The CBO cannot predict such things, obviously, and the argument that democrats make there that it is thus a bad plan is basically an idealistic one. It is “They won’t even allow the pros to look at it!” this is how UW is manipulated. Know your enemy UW. You despise bad things. This is good. Now know how bad works.
    The way you look at it is exactly how those at the top want them to.

    I could easily manipulate you with the mindset you have, if I was a part of one of these bad organizations and political groups. Myself however, I am extremely difficult to be mislead. There is a reason there is such strong push back to people like me by the leaders of ANTIFA and they try to scare us into our houses with violence.

  • September 26, 2017 at 3:48 pm
    Celtica says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 1

    P-ff-ttt..

    • September 26, 2017 at 4:41 pm
      bob says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 1

      The vast majority of responses I see from the left on issues like this are similar to yours:

      PFFFT

      They aren’t letting anyone into the bill process!

      They want people to die!

      They are cutting Medicaid! This is immoral! (Disregarding that Medicaid can be tied to rising emergency room visits, rising healthcare costs, and a voucher system while lower in the amount of government assistance would instead start lowering the cost of these services and encourage market based solutions, no no, it must be they are in league with the Russians, I meant the rich, I mean uh uh, Koch Brothers, corporations!)

      Racist!

      Misogynist!

      Etc etc.

      If you want to make a debate with conservatives with relevant data, you have to kind of you know, use data! Not ideals.

      Many young people support democrats specifically due to ideals.

      People shouldn’t die without care.
      People shouldn’t be trapped in poverty, things like this.

      However, they are clueless to how the government policies affect those same areas, willfully clueless, specifically because they label their opponents as WANTING these things. It is immoral to accuse the right of this, and the right coming back saying to hell with you, should be expected.

      If you want talk with the right and the left, you need to accept ideals being called stupid with facts, not people being called immoral for ideals. There is a huge difference, and one is indeed worse than the other, and isn’t productive.

      • September 26, 2017 at 4:44 pm
        bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 0

        I should have worded that better, you need to accept POLICIES would be the better wording, bad or stupid with facts.

        For the most part people on the right call the ACA bad, not morally, though that as well, they say it harms the healthcare industry and doesn’t work.

        For the most part the left says “all people should have care! You would take that away! People will die!” and question the morals of policies, and not the affect.

        I just showed how there is evidence that Medicaid increases costs and ER visits dramatically.

        Do you want to now have a debate on how to mitigate that, as well as how vouchers may be a solution, or do you instead want to accuse me of killing the elderly and being evil?

        Which debate do you commonly see on T.V.? Why?

        What side do you see doing this?

        Why?

        Think.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features