When polled, a majority of Americans want protection for pre-x. The following won’t sit well with that majority of our citizens:
“An insurer would have to give you insurance if you have a pre-existing condition, but it could exclude any services associated with your pre-existing condition,” he said. “This would make protections for people with pre-existing conditions a bit of a mirage.”
When polled, the majority of Americans will always want something for nothing.
I don’t care if it sits well with people or not. I care about what works.
Pass a single payer option that slides with income, and I’m taking my wife out of work, and so will millions of other families, for example.
Where is the money going to come for to include pre existing conditions through the government in a cost effective way? The mandate itself isn’t enough. The CBO rated the plan would make insurance go up by 18% compared to the republican plan without the mandate.
You aren’t thinking in numbers, you’re thinking in cliché lines, and utopian scenarios which are impossible.
And the CBO in 2009 estimated this with the republican plan, which by the way still would have given credits for people to buy insurance who were poor, which would have been similar to subsidies.
Non group is most important here, I’ll explain more below.
“The CBO also confirmed that the cost of health insurance premiums would fall under the Republican plan, partly because of the medical malpractice reforms. In the market for individually purchased insurance policies, premiums would fall by 5 percent to 8 percent by 2016. For smaller businesses, premiums would fall by 7 percent to 10 percent. And in the large group market, for larger employers, they would fall by up to 3 percent. ”
I actually stated under the amount. The non group, and this is the most important part since this is most people who were not insured, would increase 10%-13% before considering subsides. Add this to the 5%-8% costs from before. It’s 15% to 21%. Considering I just showed they were pretty spot on this is a big deal.
“Thus, the amount that subsidized enrollees would pay for nongroup coverage would be roughly 56 percent to 59 percent lower, on average, than the nongroup premiums charged under current law. Among nongroup enrollees who would not receive new subsidies, average premiums would increase by somewhat less than the 10 percent to 13 percent difference for the nongroup market as a whole because some factors discussed below would have different effects for those enrollees than for those receiving subsidies. ”
What this all adds up to is a lot of inflated costs, for those who don’t receive subsidies. Now, you’re taking my wife out of work, and inflating the costs of health insurance 15%-21% while you remove her. This is why the pie is shrinking, this is what harmed the economy with Obama. This will over time destroy the middle class. Say all you want the middle class needs it, but what they need more is to be able to send their wives to work or the husbands in some cases, to earn much more money, and for these people to then pay less in insurance, receive more tax credits, and be included in premiums rather included in subsidies. This is how you will expand the non insured to some degree, at least by 2 million, as much as 4 million.
All the while you won’t be spending more, and you’ll be getting my wife’s payroll taxes. The thing is we need the taxes changed, we need them lowered considerably to get my wife to work as well as others. Next year I would watch for that LPR to go up, especially if Trump passes more middle class tax credits in the $80k-$150k range for example.
Too bad OBama missed the mark on this health care issue. he left a mess for others to clean up. When issues were obvious he should have fixed them instead of kicking the can down the road.
Well, he fell for the false premise that the price of insurance drops if you make it mandatory and increase the number of participants. Not all Obama’s fault, he was ill advised. Most non-insure people think that and it seems logical. But it’s counterintuitive and rates increase. Same thing happened with auto insurance as states passes mandatory auto insurance laws. It didn’t decrease rates like the public wanted but we feel better when we make the guilty party pay.
We can debate it forever but it’s not insurance when it covers everything and healthcare companies can’t price based on risk. Obamacare is not the only reason rates are rising. The medical community has done a fantastic job of identifying new medical conditions and developing the drugs to combat them. Just watch the commercials on the nightly news. The current recipients of Medicare are receiving a much different level of care than what they paid for out of their paychecks.
Medicare is not free. Premiums are taken out of Social Security. Then, the person can buy their Medicare Supplemental in the private market, also with premiums. It can pay many of the expenses that Medicare won’t pay. Nothing is free, no matter how badly the left want it to be.
The simple flaw in ACA was the focus on insuring everyone and not controlling costs. After all, that’s what the government does best; i.e. ignore cost control and increase taxes to cover them. Republican plans and other non-partisan plans I’ve seen/ heard discussed are focusing on cost control, market dynamics, economic theories proven in practice, and avoidance of adverse selection through greater freedom of choice of coverage.
It was obvious that ACA’s mandated comprehensive set of covers would only drive up the cost of insurance. HI CEOs wouldn’t object to those higher costs…. which fund their compensation. However, consumers of HI can lower their costs by walking away from high cost insurance companies with over-compensated CEOs to take their business to lower cost insurance companies …. as long as the barriers to entry into the market are regulated for the objective of greater competition.
With Single Slayer, er, Single Delayer, er, Single Payer healthcare, there is no choice and no cost control efforts by the gummint… it doesn’t have skin in the game in the form of fair profits sought by stockholders or policyholders of a mutual insurance company. It just taxes the participants more to cover the excessive, inefficient costs.
All the comments so far are premised on private-sector insurance companies continuing to be the delivery mechanism for coverage. Therein lies the flaw. As we can see, private companies strive to come up with all manner of innovative ways to prevent and deny coverage. The starting point should be removing private insurers from the mix, and beginning with a payer system that eliminates all profit motives — like Medicare. This will lower the cost of universal coverage. You can also fund a large portion of the cost of covering everyone by redirecting quite a few billions from defense spending.
Okay * Iran says, pull money from our defense. If you were an American, you would have said we could pay for it by reducing the pay for all our government employees and their benefits, starting with the House of Reps and Senators and working our way down. Now that I’d vote for.
Apparently, you missed the George Mason U study on the cost of Medicare-For-All per Buhnie & Pinnochi-ortez.
So, where does the $33T come from?
The private sector is the solution, via competitive pressures on costs, including the costs of claims, expenses, salaries of CEOs (Libitterals will like that!), and excessive profits. Note the adjective I used in front of the word profits. Risk takers must always be fairly rewarded for risk taking.
Finally, the Single Slayer, er, Single Delayer, er, Single Payer system approach is both a Ponzi Scheme that has failed in foolish Socialist countries like Britain, Canada, etc. There are CHRONIC SHORTAGES of health care due to the budgeting process and INSUFFICIENT COMPENSATION TO MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS. Do you care to explain why you’d support minimum wages for untrained workers but capped compensation for highly trained medical pros?
Universal coverage and single payor can be successful. Look at the Scandinavian countries which are “democratic socialist” societies. All that means, for those of you who want to conflate socialism with communism, is that the society agrees certain facets of life are handled better by government than private enterprise. These countries, incidentally, ALWAYS end up in the top 10 happiest countries…and why not? They get excellent health care, solid cost effective if not free education, liberal flexibility to work through work/life balance. There is a thriving capitalistic sector…just not for healthcare…more efficiently handled by government. If we took all the money that businesses and their employees paid for health insurance and stuck that back in the money pool, “Medicare For All” should do just fine. Of course, the Big Pharma would have to stop gauging us and hospitals would need to price for costs instead of having 8 price lists for various insurors, the uninsured, the charity insured (bet those costs are inflated) and get the ridiculous profits and obscene CEO salaries out of the picture. Healthcare is a human right (especially in the richest country in the world) and cannot and should not be trusted to corporations whose ultimate goal is profit. Different paths are needed here.
I am a Medicare recipient with chronic crippling condition. I pay, between what is taken from SS and my supplement and my drug supplement approximately $270/mo. And then there are the copays and drug copays, and donut hole costs. In all, in addition, I pay another $5,000 year (or more) for perscriptions. One on mine went from 315/mo to 880/mo over the course of a year and a half…for no reason…just cuz they can. There is only one drug supplemental insuror in this whole rich country that covers part of the cost. Next year…who knows? Maybe none, so I will be paying 1,000/mo for necessary medications.
I bless Medicare everyday I exist. Thankfully, I can afford the premiums and I am blessed to know my care will not bankrupt my family.
I think everyone deserves that peace of mind. Medicare delivers all this in an efficient way for about 4-5% of the total cost of the program. Imagine if all the millions paid to the CEOs were thrown back in the pot and we could all agree to stop greed from entering the equation. Imagine that1
PS…have you ever wondered how many Americans suffer from psoriasis? I guess it must be the whole population since drug companies keep advertising over and over and over their psoriasis drugs every night and day. This TV advertising has got to be expensive. Why keep doing it? For write offs/ Anybody have an answer? These are not new drigs, btw.
TV ads increase demand for products & services. Ads are no where near as expensive as government waste, inefficiency, and opportunity for fraud, that is exemplified by Medicare, Social Security, Welfare, Food Stamps, the VA, the USPS, Motor Vehicle Departments, ….
Call me skeptical, but ANY survey of politicians preceding an election by at least 9 months will be biased toward what the public wants to hear from them about their platforms and pledges.
So, consider the purpose of introducing a bill that divides Republicans into two camps; moderate and conservative. Next, divide those Republicans up for re-election into two camps; those in battle ground states where their race against a Dem is close and those where the state leans heavily toward Republicans. Now, reconcile any differences after comparing those two sets of lists for differences. I doubt there will be many discrepancies to reconcile.
il of 2017 I,had to take a medical leave from my job as a truck driver and have surgery on my shoulder and I ,also have Cancer Prostate Cancer” that led to more surgerys and I, coulden’t keep up with my weekly payments with Blue Cross Blue Shield so they canceled me and I, can’t get any insurance to cover me pre-exsitingly to cover my cancer and get treated and i’m a typ-2 diabetic , what health insurance coverage can I, get that will cover me i’m now on social security disability but the medicare don’t kick in till next year October 2020 for me and I,need help now i’m stage 2 whith cancer climming to stage 3 now is this how America treat their own people” the white house needs to get it together and take care of the people and stop wasting money on the moon and in space, scandales in washington, DC and lying to the American citizens!
Fabian’s story is WHY we need universal coverage. Polar, Medicare IS efficient. And, btw, there are cheats that take the private sector as well as Medicare. To my mind, the corporate cheatslike Big Pharma gauging prices, “charity” given by hospitals to keep property tax exempt status, and overweening profit greed are just as bad, if not worse.
No, Medicare isn’t efficient at anything….. except in getting votes for Dems. I see you got several liberal talking points into your post, in only 4 sentences…. thanks for not wasting much of our time reading your Fake Claims.
When polled, a majority of Americans want protection for pre-x. The following won’t sit well with that majority of our citizens:
“An insurer would have to give you insurance if you have a pre-existing condition, but it could exclude any services associated with your pre-existing condition,” he said. “This would make protections for people with pre-existing conditions a bit of a mirage.”
When polled, the majority of Americans will always want something for nothing.
I don’t care if it sits well with people or not. I care about what works.
Pass a single payer option that slides with income, and I’m taking my wife out of work, and so will millions of other families, for example.
Where is the money going to come for to include pre existing conditions through the government in a cost effective way? The mandate itself isn’t enough. The CBO rated the plan would make insurance go up by 18% compared to the republican plan without the mandate.
You aren’t thinking in numbers, you’re thinking in cliché lines, and utopian scenarios which are impossible.
Ergo your supply side Jesus crock nonsense.
Just some numbers coming. The CBO was surprisingly accurate on this too.
htt ps://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/111th-congress-2009-2010/reports/01-11-premiums_for_bronze_plan.pdf
So they said the average family premium would be roughly $12,500 per year with bronze in 2016, and that ended up being pretty accurate.
http s://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170113005102/en/Obamacare-Cost-eHealth-Reports-Average-Monthly-Individual
And the CBO in 2009 estimated this with the republican plan, which by the way still would have given credits for people to buy insurance who were poor, which would have been similar to subsidies.
htt ps://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/nov/05/gop-health-care-reform-simple-explanation/
Non group is most important here, I’ll explain more below.
“The CBO also confirmed that the cost of health insurance premiums would fall under the Republican plan, partly because of the medical malpractice reforms. In the market for individually purchased insurance policies, premiums would fall by 5 percent to 8 percent by 2016. For smaller businesses, premiums would fall by 7 percent to 10 percent. And in the large group market, for larger employers, they would fall by up to 3 percent. ”
htt ps://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10781/11-30-premiums.pdf
I actually stated under the amount. The non group, and this is the most important part since this is most people who were not insured, would increase 10%-13% before considering subsides. Add this to the 5%-8% costs from before. It’s 15% to 21%. Considering I just showed they were pretty spot on this is a big deal.
“Thus, the amount that subsidized enrollees would pay for nongroup coverage would be roughly 56 percent to 59 percent lower, on average, than the nongroup premiums charged under current law. Among nongroup enrollees who would not receive new subsidies, average premiums would increase by somewhat less than the 10 percent to 13 percent difference for the nongroup market as a whole because some factors discussed below would have different effects for those enrollees than for those receiving subsidies. ”
What this all adds up to is a lot of inflated costs, for those who don’t receive subsidies. Now, you’re taking my wife out of work, and inflating the costs of health insurance 15%-21% while you remove her. This is why the pie is shrinking, this is what harmed the economy with Obama. This will over time destroy the middle class. Say all you want the middle class needs it, but what they need more is to be able to send their wives to work or the husbands in some cases, to earn much more money, and for these people to then pay less in insurance, receive more tax credits, and be included in premiums rather included in subsidies. This is how you will expand the non insured to some degree, at least by 2 million, as much as 4 million.
All the while you won’t be spending more, and you’ll be getting my wife’s payroll taxes. The thing is we need the taxes changed, we need them lowered considerably to get my wife to work as well as others. Next year I would watch for that LPR to go up, especially if Trump passes more middle class tax credits in the $80k-$150k range for example.
Too bad OBama missed the mark on this health care issue. he left a mess for others to clean up. When issues were obvious he should have fixed them instead of kicking the can down the road.
Well, he fell for the false premise that the price of insurance drops if you make it mandatory and increase the number of participants. Not all Obama’s fault, he was ill advised. Most non-insure people think that and it seems logical. But it’s counterintuitive and rates increase. Same thing happened with auto insurance as states passes mandatory auto insurance laws. It didn’t decrease rates like the public wanted but we feel better when we make the guilty party pay.
We can debate it forever but it’s not insurance when it covers everything and healthcare companies can’t price based on risk. Obamacare is not the only reason rates are rising. The medical community has done a fantastic job of identifying new medical conditions and developing the drugs to combat them. Just watch the commercials on the nightly news. The current recipients of Medicare are receiving a much different level of care than what they paid for out of their paychecks.
Medicare is not free. Premiums are taken out of Social Security. Then, the person can buy their Medicare Supplemental in the private market, also with premiums. It can pay many of the expenses that Medicare won’t pay. Nothing is free, no matter how badly the left want it to be.
The simple flaw in ACA was the focus on insuring everyone and not controlling costs. After all, that’s what the government does best; i.e. ignore cost control and increase taxes to cover them. Republican plans and other non-partisan plans I’ve seen/ heard discussed are focusing on cost control, market dynamics, economic theories proven in practice, and avoidance of adverse selection through greater freedom of choice of coverage.
It was obvious that ACA’s mandated comprehensive set of covers would only drive up the cost of insurance. HI CEOs wouldn’t object to those higher costs…. which fund their compensation. However, consumers of HI can lower their costs by walking away from high cost insurance companies with over-compensated CEOs to take their business to lower cost insurance companies …. as long as the barriers to entry into the market are regulated for the objective of greater competition.
With Single Slayer, er, Single Delayer, er, Single Payer healthcare, there is no choice and no cost control efforts by the gummint… it doesn’t have skin in the game in the form of fair profits sought by stockholders or policyholders of a mutual insurance company. It just taxes the participants more to cover the excessive, inefficient costs.
All the comments so far are premised on private-sector insurance companies continuing to be the delivery mechanism for coverage. Therein lies the flaw. As we can see, private companies strive to come up with all manner of innovative ways to prevent and deny coverage. The starting point should be removing private insurers from the mix, and beginning with a payer system that eliminates all profit motives — like Medicare. This will lower the cost of universal coverage. You can also fund a large portion of the cost of covering everyone by redirecting quite a few billions from defense spending.
Okay * Iran says, pull money from our defense. If you were an American, you would have said we could pay for it by reducing the pay for all our government employees and their benefits, starting with the House of Reps and Senators and working our way down. Now that I’d vote for.
Apparently, you missed the George Mason U study on the cost of Medicare-For-All per Buhnie & Pinnochi-ortez.
So, where does the $33T come from?
The private sector is the solution, via competitive pressures on costs, including the costs of claims, expenses, salaries of CEOs (Libitterals will like that!), and excessive profits. Note the adjective I used in front of the word profits. Risk takers must always be fairly rewarded for risk taking.
Finally, the Single Slayer, er, Single Delayer, er, Single Payer system approach is both a Ponzi Scheme that has failed in foolish Socialist countries like Britain, Canada, etc. There are CHRONIC SHORTAGES of health care due to the budgeting process and INSUFFICIENT COMPENSATION TO MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS. Do you care to explain why you’d support minimum wages for untrained workers but capped compensation for highly trained medical pros?
Ignore ‘both’ in above post. Bear culpa.
Universal coverage and single payor can be successful. Look at the Scandinavian countries which are “democratic socialist” societies. All that means, for those of you who want to conflate socialism with communism, is that the society agrees certain facets of life are handled better by government than private enterprise. These countries, incidentally, ALWAYS end up in the top 10 happiest countries…and why not? They get excellent health care, solid cost effective if not free education, liberal flexibility to work through work/life balance. There is a thriving capitalistic sector…just not for healthcare…more efficiently handled by government. If we took all the money that businesses and their employees paid for health insurance and stuck that back in the money pool, “Medicare For All” should do just fine. Of course, the Big Pharma would have to stop gauging us and hospitals would need to price for costs instead of having 8 price lists for various insurors, the uninsured, the charity insured (bet those costs are inflated) and get the ridiculous profits and obscene CEO salaries out of the picture. Healthcare is a human right (especially in the richest country in the world) and cannot and should not be trusted to corporations whose ultimate goal is profit. Different paths are needed here.
I am a Medicare recipient with chronic crippling condition. I pay, between what is taken from SS and my supplement and my drug supplement approximately $270/mo. And then there are the copays and drug copays, and donut hole costs. In all, in addition, I pay another $5,000 year (or more) for perscriptions. One on mine went from 315/mo to 880/mo over the course of a year and a half…for no reason…just cuz they can. There is only one drug supplemental insuror in this whole rich country that covers part of the cost. Next year…who knows? Maybe none, so I will be paying 1,000/mo for necessary medications.
I bless Medicare everyday I exist. Thankfully, I can afford the premiums and I am blessed to know my care will not bankrupt my family.
I think everyone deserves that peace of mind. Medicare delivers all this in an efficient way for about 4-5% of the total cost of the program. Imagine if all the millions paid to the CEOs were thrown back in the pot and we could all agree to stop greed from entering the equation. Imagine that1
PS…have you ever wondered how many Americans suffer from psoriasis? I guess it must be the whole population since drug companies keep advertising over and over and over their psoriasis drugs every night and day. This TV advertising has got to be expensive. Why keep doing it? For write offs/ Anybody have an answer? These are not new drigs, btw.
TV ads increase demand for products & services. Ads are no where near as expensive as government waste, inefficiency, and opportunity for fraud, that is exemplified by Medicare, Social Security, Welfare, Food Stamps, the VA, the USPS, Motor Vehicle Departments, ….
Call me skeptical, but ANY survey of politicians preceding an election by at least 9 months will be biased toward what the public wants to hear from them about their platforms and pledges.
So, consider the purpose of introducing a bill that divides Republicans into two camps; moderate and conservative. Next, divide those Republicans up for re-election into two camps; those in battle ground states where their race against a Dem is close and those where the state leans heavily toward Republicans. Now, reconcile any differences after comparing those two sets of lists for differences. I doubt there will be many discrepancies to reconcile.
and after they are elected, how long until you start believing what a politician says they are for?
Three weeks, two days, and four hours. Maybe a few minute more than that.
Did you reconcile the differences between the two camps of R’s?
why would i do your homework for you? if you can prove your point, do it – don’t rely on others to show your work for you.
I need not prove a point that is widely accepted.
il of 2017 I,had to take a medical leave from my job as a truck driver and have surgery on my shoulder and I ,also have Cancer Prostate Cancer” that led to more surgerys and I, coulden’t keep up with my weekly payments with Blue Cross Blue Shield so they canceled me and I, can’t get any insurance to cover me pre-exsitingly to cover my cancer and get treated and i’m a typ-2 diabetic , what health insurance coverage can I, get that will cover me i’m now on social security disability but the medicare don’t kick in till next year October 2020 for me and I,need help now i’m stage 2 whith cancer climming to stage 3 now is this how America treat their own people” the white house needs to get it together and take care of the people and stop wasting money on the moon and in space, scandales in washington, DC and lying to the American citizens!
Fabian’s story is WHY we need universal coverage. Polar, Medicare IS efficient. And, btw, there are cheats that take the private sector as well as Medicare. To my mind, the corporate cheatslike Big Pharma gauging prices, “charity” given by hospitals to keep property tax exempt status, and overweening profit greed are just as bad, if not worse.
No, Medicare isn’t efficient at anything….. except in getting votes for Dems. I see you got several liberal talking points into your post, in only 4 sentences…. thanks for not wasting much of our time reading your Fake Claims.