everybody appears to be viewing things thru rose colored glasses. simple economics says that if more people are insured, and they are heavily subsidized, and the health providers are happy – then the funds have to come from somewhere. somebody has to pay for all this success. please explain the money trail in simple terms for me.
A better measure of effect will occur in 2016 when Federal subsidies to insurers run out. In CA we have a considerable move to boutique MD plans out of the system completely. analysis on actual costs of providing care and service are difficult as there is no requirement to justify pricing. Will be interesting to see if CDI receives authority to regulate rates.
Pat,
Read the article. California has seen the slowest growth in health care since they implemented the legislation. In addition, the state has seen the number of uninsureds drop dramatically.
Health care under the ACA will resemble a model similar to Kaiser or a University health system where on a whole there is more integration across all lines and costs are dramatically cheaper than the average HMO/PPO.
Follow my advice Pat (actually Harry Truman and Bill Clinton as well)…”If you want to live like a Republican, vote for a Democrat!”.
Great for hospitals and insurance companies. Terrible for everyone else. After all, this plan was designed for the benefit of insurance companies and hospitals-not the common man right?
Oh poor Bobby,
I will go slow and not use big words too.
The COST of covering the uninsured used to have to be borne by the government.
NOW, under the ACA, as those who were uninsured now get insurance, and EVEN THOUGH, it is subsidized by the government, the OVERALL costs is much less than what the government had to pay before.
It is all quite simple if you would take your brain out of FOX noise and stop listening to the RWNJs who helped craft the law.
It REALLY takes hold when the law becomes fully SINGLE PAYER, as then the portion of the premiums that we still have to pay NO LONGER go to the disgusting insurance companies who do NOTHING to provide healthcare, and that money will be put BACK INTO the healthcare field by increasing coverage.
Imagine EVERYONE having coverage with no extra cost beyond what we would pay in our taxes which will be ridiculously low, since ALL would bear the same expense.
Wait a minute, this doesn’t fit the Sean Hannity narrative. D_mn you reality!
everybody appears to be viewing things thru rose colored glasses. simple economics says that if more people are insured, and they are heavily subsidized, and the health providers are happy – then the funds have to come from somewhere. somebody has to pay for all this success. please explain the money trail in simple terms for me.
Good for patients, good for doctors, good for America! Hooray, Obamacare!
well, everybody disliked my inquiry/observation, but nobody took a minute to explain the economics. still waiting.
wait, that wasn’t rhetorical?
Welcome to my world, bob!
A better measure of effect will occur in 2016 when Federal subsidies to insurers run out. In CA we have a considerable move to boutique MD plans out of the system completely. analysis on actual costs of providing care and service are difficult as there is no requirement to justify pricing. Will be interesting to see if CDI receives authority to regulate rates.
Pat,
Read the article. California has seen the slowest growth in health care since they implemented the legislation. In addition, the state has seen the number of uninsureds drop dramatically.
Health care under the ACA will resemble a model similar to Kaiser or a University health system where on a whole there is more integration across all lines and costs are dramatically cheaper than the average HMO/PPO.
Follow my advice Pat (actually Harry Truman and Bill Clinton as well)…”If you want to live like a Republican, vote for a Democrat!”.
Oops. My mistake. I forgot to give the link to the cost of health care and uninsured in California. My mistake.
http://www.dailyjournal.net/view/story/efa71f48594649099e9dec6e4531a313/CA–Health-Overhaul-California/
Great for hospitals and insurance companies. Terrible for everyone else. After all, this plan was designed for the benefit of insurance companies and hospitals-not the common man right?
I guess you didn’t actually READ the article before spewing your rhetoric.
Oh poor Bobby,
I will go slow and not use big words too.
The COST of covering the uninsured used to have to be borne by the government.
NOW, under the ACA, as those who were uninsured now get insurance, and EVEN THOUGH, it is subsidized by the government, the OVERALL costs is much less than what the government had to pay before.
It is all quite simple if you would take your brain out of FOX noise and stop listening to the RWNJs who helped craft the law.
It REALLY takes hold when the law becomes fully SINGLE PAYER, as then the portion of the premiums that we still have to pay NO LONGER go to the disgusting insurance companies who do NOTHING to provide healthcare, and that money will be put BACK INTO the healthcare field by increasing coverage.
Imagine EVERYONE having coverage with no extra cost beyond what we would pay in our taxes which will be ridiculously low, since ALL would bear the same expense.
Wow, Barak. Your rhetoric sounds sort of like the rhetoric that Hitler spoke to his followers. Please, sir!!! Can I have another cup of Kool-Aid???
Imagine all the people, living life in health…
Oh puh-lease, Shirley. What a bleeding-heart liberal you are. Does it HURT to be a liberal???
I hope some day, you’ll join us…
And the woo-oo-rld will be as one.
Only in your idiotic liberal mind would I EVER join you.
Bull.