+- Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory (http://generational-theory.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Fourth Turning Forums (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Current Events (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-34.html)
+---- Forum: General Political Discussion (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-15.html)
+---- Thread: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma (/thread-637.html)
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Eric the Green - 03-27-2017
(03-27-2017, 01:07 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(03-27-2017, 11:40 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:Trumpcare would have at least given them a heads up and a gradual transition period vs being completely blindsided when Obamacare abruptly comes to an end.(03-26-2017, 05:06 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(03-26-2017, 01:02 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:Trump isn't going to dump Republicans as you'd hope that he would in time. That would be silly. Nope, he should just chalk it up as a loss, move on and allow the Democrats time to accept the reality of twenty million blue voters loosing their free healthcare in a few years with no other options available for them. I can only imagine how nasty the town halls are going to be in Democratic districts.(03-25-2017, 08:49 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: The Republicans were placed on ignore during the process associated with Obamacare. Arrogant Democrats don't have to listen to or include Republicans when they have a super majority and a rubber stamp in the White House. Trump doesn't care if Obamacare fails and a bunch of older/younger OBAMA voters who didn't vote (seem to hate him) eventually lose their free healthcare. As he said, the proper thing to do as far as political interest go would be allow it to fail as it will and move on the passing other things leaving the Democrats to deal with their own mess. Well, he tried and the Democrats didn't seem to want anything to do with it or seem to care that's it's failing. So fuck them, it's their baby. The spent seven years presenting stuff that they knew wasn't going to get passed because that's what politicians do to keep their jobs. I'm sure Trumps election surprised them as much as it surprised the Democrats. Myself, I wouldn't bailout the Democrats. I'd let them deal with their own failure.
Republicans in 2009 (and most of the time for the last several decades) are only interested in one thing: blocking anything to be done. Their project is to reduce the government they don't like so it fits inside a bathtub, and building up the government they do like into an autocracy to protect the oligarchy. The Republicans never did anything but resist a compromise health care reform bill that was patterned after their own earlier plans and those of Gov. Romney. No Democratic leader can work with today's Republicans, because their only goal is to destroy and to oppose Democrats. They do not compromise or work with Democrats.
Ryan and Trump didn't "try;" they only want to protect free enterprise, not peoples' health. Their failure is their baby now. They have the majority in the government, and could have passed it by the reconciliation process just like the Democrats passed Obamacare, but their bill was so poor and unpopular that they couldn't even get their own Republicans behind them. The Republicans spent 7 years repealing Obamacare and offering no alternative. They still don't have an alternative to offer, and that's because they never wanted reform at all.
The only hope for Trump is to dump his Republicans after many failures in the coming months, and govern from the center instead by working with Democrats. But he probably can't do that, because he has surrounded himself with extreme right wingers, and has proposed an extreme right wing budget that he has to stand behind at least for a year or two. Because he can't admit that he is ever wrong or makes mistakes, making such an adjustment is personally hard for him. And since he does not understand the issues in any depth, he lacks much of the deal making ability he promised to bring to the job. He would have to portray his adjustment as a victory, somehow; an expression of his ongoing leadership in making America great again. And then work at being a real leader, not just a showman. I'm not optimistic. Can the impulsive and brash Mars in Leo the Lion rising change his spots? Or will his priority remain having his lion-colored mane combed and groomed?
Probably so. But the "no other options available to them" is just what they would have had either before Obamacare, or under Trumpcare.
All indications are that Obamacare will not abruptly come to an end. It has been collapsing in red and purple states that did not accept medicaid funding. Trump/Ryancare, however, would have meant an "abrupt end" for many of insurance and health care, and an abrupt whopping premium increase for many older Obamacare enrollees.
Quote: I hope you're not foolish enough to believe a Democratic voter (union worker or a yuppi) is going to be willing to sacrifice trips to Cancun that were paid for with hard earned dollars that Obamacare turns into tax dollars to support those who are now entitled to free healthcare.
If they are wealthy enough to pay the higher taxes imposed by Obamacare, it is unlikely that they are Democrats.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Galen - 03-27-2017
(03-24-2017, 07:29 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: The thing I don't think Eric realizes is that if Obamacare collapses in Red States and Purple States then it will collapse in the Blue States too. Maybe later than otherwise but it will collapse. It depends how much cash the states are willing to pump into a failing system--indeed a system that some think may have been designed to fail. The goal being to mess up private sector so much that people would clamor for a clearly inferior system as Crowder's video clearly demonstrates.
I have often thought that Obozocare was designed to fail but then I remember that between the general incompetence of government and the problems with central planning guarantee that such a system was bound to fail.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Bob Butler 54 - 03-27-2017
(03-27-2017, 12:31 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(03-26-2017, 10:41 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Looks like Bernie is going to throw out 'Medicare for Everybody', a simple place to start if one is thinking single payer. I feel confident that somebody on the D side will throw out a 'tune Obamacare' bill. I'm also not totally confident that the Republicans won't try to get back in the game.I'm not happy with either party at the moment. I can't stand (prefer to eliminate and replace it with a different party) one of them. I'm very disappointed with a portion of the other one right now.
But, meanwhile, it's finger pointing and blame game time. This forum illustrates this as well as anything. People living in different alternate realities will viciously attack assorted straw men. It seems wise to sit back until the garbage burns out, assuming it ever burns out.
But mild applause for Bernie for throwing out something that might be a starting point for talking.
I'm not sure whether to agree with you entirely for once, or hold out and insist on stronger terms than "not happy", "prefer to eliminate" or "very disappointed". We've got a mess.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Galen - 03-27-2017
(03-25-2017, 02:21 PM)Odin Wrote:(03-24-2017, 03:03 PM)Galen Wrote: or perhaps how bad Canada's healthcare system is.
Oh look, more right-wing propaganda about Canada's healthcare system. Note to Galen, actual Canadians FUCKING DESPISE FUCKERS LIKE YOU LYING ABOUT THEM.
If you think it is so wonderful then why don't you go to Canada and experience it for yourself. Molyneux certainly didn't make up his experience and it was his listeners that donated the money for his cancer treatments in the US. I suppose all of the Canadians Crowder interviewed were just making shit up.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Galen - 03-27-2017
(03-25-2017, 08:49 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(03-25-2017, 05:38 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:The Republicans were placed on ignore during the process associated with Obamacare. Arrogant Democrats don't have to listen to or include Republicans when they have a super majority and a rubber stamp in the White House. Trump doesn't care if Obamacare fails and a bunch of older/younger OBAMA voters who didn't vote (seem to hate him) eventually loose their free healthcare. As he said, the proper thing to do as far as political interest go would be allow it to fail as it will and move on the passing other things leaving the Democrats to deal with their own mess. Well, he tried and the Democrats didn't seem to want anything to do with it or seem to care that's it's failing. So fuck them, it's their baby. The spent seven years presenting stuff that they knew wasn't going to get passed because that's what politicians do to keep their jobs. I'm sure Trumps election surprised them as much as it surprised the Democrats. Myself, I wouldn't bailout the Democrats. I'd let them deal with their own failure.(03-25-2017, 05:25 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Well, I'd say the opportunity for the Democrats to tune up and stabilize has already come and gone at this point. So, we are pretty much stuck with a failing healthcare bill that will only get worse as time goes on. Woo hoo! The Democrats did a great job fucking everyone (especially those they claim to care about so much) who has healthcare by opting out of the process all together.
Or maybe it was the Republicans who fucked up, by never working with the Democrats on real reform, and instead doing nothing but voting to repeal it for 7 years without any replacement? Maybe it was the voters, who failed to put leaders in office who could have made Obamacare work and made it less dependent on the insurance industry, which is the cause of most of the problems in health care?
The political outcome of not passing Ryancare will no doubt be better because the Dims get to own this mess. After all the Dims created Obozocare and have been keeping it alive for the last seven years.
At this point I am looking forward to the debt ceiling battle myself because the Dims will not want to pass one because they want Trump to fail. The Freedom Caucus will no doubt use it for leverage to get actual spending cuts one way or another. Either way they win since a default would cut DC off from the debt markets for a number of years.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Snowflake - 03-27-2017
I wonder how many people would actually lose medical insurance.
I heard somebody mention around 14 million.
(What is that, like less than 5% of the population?)
Does the number reported include people that don't even want it?
Is it only Americans, or are other people included as well?
I have to admit that it's amazing to me that Pres. Trump came
out of this looking so reasonable. He sure seems to know how
to consistently land on his feet. # PrettyImpressive.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Eric the Green - 03-27-2017
(03-27-2017, 05:16 PM)Snowflake Wrote: I wonder how many people would actually lose medical insurance.
I heard somebody mention around 14 million.
(What is that, like less than 5% of the population?)
Does the number reported include people that don't even want it?
Is it only Americans, or are other people included as well?
I have to admit that it's amazing to me that Pres. Trump came
out of this looking so reasonable. He sure seems to know how
to consistently land on his feet. # PrettyImpressive.
lol If you call stumbling and falling down a golden escalator while holding hands with a bimbo "pretty impressive!"
Snowflake, this is a blizzard!
Obamacare covered those who aren't covered by their employer. The CBO said 24 million. That's just about everyone Obamacare covered!
Health insurance is too expensive unless "people that don't even want it" are required to buy it. That's how social insurance works. That's how social security and medicare work.
I'd be interested in looking at a true compromise bill, even tho I favor single payer. Somebody might have some good points. Maybe the approach of paying more if you sign up late might be better than a mandate; maybe tax credits might work.
But this wasn't it. It was not even the repeal and replace with nuthin that the extremists wanted. It was a big tax break for the rich, a 5x premium increase for middle-aged insured, and a see-ya-later approach for 24 million covered by Obamacare. So that's what the people said: see ya later, Paul and Donnie!
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Ragnarök_62 - 03-27-2017
(03-27-2017, 11:16 AM)tg63 Wrote:(03-25-2017, 02:48 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:(03-25-2017, 02:44 PM)Odin Wrote:(03-25-2017, 02:32 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: That was told to me today by a regular Snowbird.
Sure it was...
Hey just because you don't know any Canadians doesn't mean I don't. Strange animals Canadians. They seem to prefer our country to their own.
just FYI, our country of almost 40 million actually has a wide range of people with a wide range of perspectives ... but my experience has shown me that we're largely in agreement in that we like our own country just fine thank you.
Do you have a list of stuff the US does to y'all that:
1. Is an unfunded mandate. IOW, the US dictates that Canada spend x money on y, why y is garbage as far as Canada is concerned.
2. Forced alliances. This goes way back to grade school. This is like one kid telling another that he or she must play with and only with persons[1.2.3...] (If there are line items here, it clearly means that all US policy makers wrt Canada need to go back to grade school and get socialized properly. )
3. Oil payments: Why do y'all accept our trashy fiat money? I'm sure we can trade used Ishits,too small flat screens, a bunch of satellite TeeeVeee subscriptions, coal, if you need that, and any weapons you'd like to have.
PS.
For Qods sake, do something to keep your Canada Geese where they belong. Since the animal name starts with Canada, that's where they belong! We also need to send all of the lazy Canada Geese that just overwinter here. We have scads of the evil birds and their shit is messing with the water quality.
And, yes, that means the US has a migrant problem on both sides of the border. Trump shall build a 10,000 FT
bird net all along the Canadian border to keep those evil Canadian Geese out. ICE will be in charge of arresting all Canada Geese that flew the coop or are currently loitering without a passport or shitting up the waterways.
Kinser79 Wrote:That was told to me today by a regular Snowbird.
That's another thought. Florida has a sort of "snowbird". So, let's be nice and share our Canada Geese problem.
We can send some to Florida to be gator food or to trap some of those obnoxious snakes.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Snowflake - 03-27-2017
(03-27-2017, 05:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:(03-27-2017, 05:16 PM)Snowflake Wrote: I wonder how many people would actually lose medical insurance.
I heard somebody mention around 14 million.
(What is that, like less than 5% of the population?)
Does the number reported include people that don't even want it?
Is it only Americans, or are other people included as well?
I have to admit that it's amazing to me that Pres. Trump came
out of this looking so reasonable. He sure seems to know how
to consistently land on his feet. # PrettyImpressive.
lol If you call stumbling and falling down a golden escalator while holding hands with a bimbo "pretty impressive!"
Who are you referring to as a 'bimbo'?
EtG Wrote:Snowflake, this is a blizzard!
Obamacare covered those who aren't covered by their employer. The CBO said 24 million. That's just about everyone Obamacare covered!
OK. Even if that number is correct(which I highly doubt), we're up to 7.5%.
Sorry, not worth it.
EtG Wrote:Health insurance is too expensive unless "people that don't even want it" are required to buy it. That's how social insurance works. That's how social security and medicare work.
Healthcare(as well as Insurance) is a 'product'. Not the same as Social Security.
I don't want my government forcing me or anyone else to buy a product. Period.
EtG Wrote:I'd be interested in looking at a true compromise bill, even tho I favor single payer. Somebody might have some good points. Maybe the approach of paying more if you sign up late might be better than a mandate; maybe tax credits might work.
But this wasn't it. It was not even the repeal and replace with nuthin that the extremists wanted. It was a big tax break for the rich, a 5x premium increase for middle-aged insured, and a see-ya-later approach for 24 million covered by Obamacare. So that's what the people said: see ya later, Paul and Donnie!
No, that's not 'what the people said'. The Democrats pushed through the PPACA;
It should be their responsibility to fix it. But where are they? #IrrelevantParty
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Classic-Xer - 03-27-2017
(03-27-2017, 03:48 PM)Galen Wrote:I've never seen a liberal Dim own up to anything or admit that their systems are on the verge of failing. Nope, the liberal Dims act as if their systems are all peachy, act as if federal tax dollars grow on trees and act as if their programs will be adequately funded forever. I don't think it's very smart for a minority group like the Freedom Caucus to screw with a much larger group of Republican voters. A Libertarian seat in Congress ain't worth a shit as far as I can see. The Evangelical Caucus was wiped out when the Republican voters decided that they had had enough of their shit getting in the way of progress. As far as healthcare insurance goes, I've been fending for myself for years and I'm used to shopping for healthcare insurance. The bulk of employees aren't used to it and are used to it being provided for them by their employers. The Freedom Caucus better find a wall and bang their heads against it to get the idiot dust out that accumulated during the Obama (can't do shit) years. I didn't like the idea of being forced into a mess by a party of dip shits on the left. I don't like the idea of being stuck in the mess by a small group of greedy dip shits on the right.(03-25-2017, 08:49 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(03-25-2017, 05:38 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:The Republicans were placed on ignore during the process associated with Obamacare. Arrogant Democrats don't have to listen to or include Republicans when they have a super majority and a rubber stamp in the White House. Trump doesn't care if Obamacare fails and a bunch of older/younger OBAMA voters who didn't vote (seem to hate him) eventually loose their free healthcare. As he said, the proper thing to do as far as political interest go would be allow it to fail as it will and move on the passing other things leaving the Democrats to deal with their own mess. Well, he tried and the Democrats didn't seem to want anything to do with it or seem to care that's it's failing. So fuck them, it's their baby. The spent seven years presenting stuff that they knew wasn't going to get passed because that's what politicians do to keep their jobs. I'm sure Trumps election surprised them as much as it surprised the Democrats. Myself, I wouldn't bailout the Democrats. I'd let them deal with their own failure.(03-25-2017, 05:25 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Well, I'd say the opportunity for the Democrats to tune up and stabilize has already come and gone at this point. So, we are pretty much stuck with a failing healthcare bill that will only get worse as time goes on. Woo hoo! The Democrats did a great job fucking everyone (especially those they claim to care about so much) who has healthcare by opting out of the process all together.
Or maybe it was the Republicans who fucked up, by never working with the Democrats on real reform, and instead doing nothing but voting to repeal it for 7 years without any replacement? Maybe it was the voters, who failed to put leaders in office who could have made Obamacare work and made it less dependent on the insurance industry, which is the cause of most of the problems in health care?
The political outcome of not passing Ryancare will no doubt be better because the Dims get to own this mess. After all the Dims created Obozocare and have been keeping it alive for the last seven years.
At this point I am looking forward to the debt ceiling battle myself because the Dims will not want to pass one because they want Trump to fail. The Freedom Caucus will no doubt use it for leverage to get actual spending cuts one way or another. Either way they win since a default would cut DC off from the debt markets for a number of years.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Eric the Green - 03-27-2017
(03-27-2017, 07:45 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(03-25-2017, 08:49 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:I've never seen a liberal Dim own up to anything or admit that their systems are on the verge of failing. Nope, the liberal Dims act as if their systems are all peachy, act as if federal tax dollars grow on trees and act as if their programs will be adequately funded forever. I don't think it's very smart for a minority group like the Freedom Caucus to screw with a much larger group of Republican voters. A Libertarian seat in Congress ain't worth a shit as far as I can see. The Evangelical Caucus was wiped out when the Republican voters decided that they had had enough of their shit getting in the way of progress. As far as healthcare insurance goes, I've been fending for myself for years and I'm used to shopping for healthcare insurance. The bulk of employees aren't used to it and are used to it being provided for them by their employers. The Freedom Caucus better find a wall and bang their heads against it to get the idiot dust out that accumulated during the Obama (can't do shit) years. I didn't like the idea of being forced into a mess by a party of dip shits on the left. I don't like the idea of being stuck in the mess by a small group of greedy dip shits on the right.(03-25-2017, 05:38 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:The Republicans were placed on ignore during the process associated with Obamacare. Arrogant Democrats don't have to listen to or include Republicans when they have a super majority and a rubber stamp in the White House. Trump doesn't care if Obamacare fails and a bunch of older/younger OBAMA voters who didn't vote (seem to hate him) eventually lose their free healthcare. As he said, the proper thing to do as far as political interest go would be allow it to fail as it will and move on the passing other things leaving the Democrats to deal with their own mess. Well, he tried and the Democrats didn't seem to want anything to do with it or seem to care that's it's failing. So fuck them, it's their baby. The spent seven years presenting stuff that they knew wasn't going to get passed because that's what politicians do to keep their jobs. I'm sure Trumps election surprised them as much as it surprised the Democrats. Myself, I wouldn't bailout the Democrats. I'd let them deal with their own failure.(03-25-2017, 05:25 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Well, I'd say the opportunity for the Democrats to tune up and stabilize has already come and gone at this point. So, we are pretty much stuck with a failing healthcare bill that will only get worse as time goes on. Woo hoo! The Democrats did a great job fucking everyone (especially those they claim to care about so much) who has healthcare by opting out of the process all together.
Or maybe it was the Republicans who fucked up, by never working with the Democrats on real reform, and instead doing nothing but voting to repeal it for 7 years without any replacement? Maybe it was the voters, who failed to put leaders in office who could have made Obamacare work and made it less dependent on the insurance industry, which is the cause of most of the problems in health care?
The Freedom Caucus on the right helped to destroy the Obamacare lite bill. So we are left with Obamacare, and some say it will just crumble on its own. Some people have had to pay too much for their insurance under Obamacare. Others were unable to get insurance because private insurance companies pulled out of exchanges. Many in red and purple states have been unable to get medicaid because their Republican state governments would not accept the subsidies for them. In most cases, those are the states that are seeing people lose coverage or see premiums rising. The insurance costs many times more in those rural red states and counties than in urban blue states and counties. But many apparently got 25% increases just before the Drump election, which may have contributed to his victory.
Will Obamacare "explode" or "implode"? It is clear that Tom Price and Trump are going to try to explode it. If the ACA does fail in coming months and years, it will be because the Drump admin destroys it. Price has the authority to lessen requirements on insurance companies on what must be covered, and to defund subsidies and medicaid payments. Price has been trying to destroy Obamacare for years. Trump appointed cabinet officers with the expressed intention to destroy the departments to which they are appointed. No doubt this is what will happen. Obamacare will be eviscerated, cut back, weakened, defunded to the point of failure. Drump and the GOPfers are interested in one thing: the health of the insurance industry, rather than the health of the people. Americans need to make a choice about which they want to be healthy: the people, or "free" enterprise. They cannot choose both.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Eric the Green - 03-27-2017
(03-27-2017, 07:19 PM)Snowflake Wrote:(03-27-2017, 05:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:(03-27-2017, 05:16 PM)Snowflake Wrote: I wonder how many people would actually lose medical insurance.
I heard somebody mention around 14 million.
(What is that, like less than 5% of the population?)
Does the number reported include people that don't even want it?
Is it only Americans, or are other people included as well?
I have to admit that it's amazing to me that Pres. Trump came
out of this looking so reasonable. He sure seems to know how
to consistently land on his feet. # PrettyImpressive.
lol If you call stumbling and falling down a golden escalator while holding hands with a bimbo "pretty impressive!"
Who are you referring to as a 'bimbo'?
Just a typical Drump image to contrast with your amazing claim that Drump "landed on his feet." ha ha ha
Quote:EtG Wrote:Snowflake, this is a blizzard!
Obamacare covered those who aren't covered by their employer. The CBO said 24 million. That's just about everyone Obamacare covered!
OK. Even if that number is correct(which I highly doubt), we're up to 7.5%.
Sorry, not worth it.
I don't know what 7.5% referred to. What DID happen under Obamacare is that many more people got coverage. The CBO says 24 million would have lost coverage under Trump/Ryancare.
Now we have Obamacare as administered by Trump's alligators. It may amount to pretty much the same thing as the Obamacare lite bill that failed. Insurance companies will be let off the hook from requirements to cover people, and there will be less funding to help people buy insurance.
Quote:EtG Wrote:Health insurance is too expensive unless "people that don't even want it" are required to buy it. That's how social insurance works. That's how social security and medicare work.
Healthcare(as well as Insurance) is a 'product'. Not the same as Social Security.
I don't want my government forcing me or anyone else to buy a product. Period.
No, health insurance is not a product; it's the same as social security. Social insurance. I take it you are also opposed to medicare, which is also a "product" you are forced to buy, according to your definition.
Quote:EtG Wrote:I'd be interested in looking at a true compromise bill, even tho I favor single payer. Somebody might have some good points. Maybe the approach of paying more if you sign up late might be better than a mandate; maybe tax credits might work.
But this wasn't it. It was not even the repeal and replace with nuthin that the extremists wanted. It was a big tax break for the rich, a 5x premium increase for middle-aged insured, and a see-ya-later approach for 24 million covered by Obamacare. So that's what the people said: see ya later, Paul and Donnie!
No, that's not 'what the people said'. The Democrats pushed through the PPACA;
It should be their responsibility to fix it. But where are they? #IrrelevantParty
Democrats are not allowed to fix it. They have not had control of congress for over 7 years now. The Republicans have not been interested in anything except repealing Obamacare for 7 years. When given full control of the government, they give us this Obamacare lite baloney that nobody wants. I don't have much optimism that they can be the "relevant" party now and work with Democrats to create another makeshift, make-do compromise.
The product as passed in 2010 did not have a public option, and was not single payer medicare for all. So OF COURSE it was flawed. It was a compromise with the insurance industry, whose only goal is to make money by denying people coverage. As long as we aren't putting that industry out of business, our health care will be compromised, and whatever compromise is passed or proposed will be flawed.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Eric the Green - 03-27-2017
8 States Where Obamacare Rates Are Rising by at Least 30%
Brad Tuttle
Oct 18, 2016
http://time.com/money/4535394/obamacare-plan-premium-price-increases-2017-states/
The Affordable Care Act is getting a lot less affordable for many Americans. The landmark law, better known as Obamacare, has meant that 20 million previously uninsured people now have health coverage. Many of them have purchased insurance through state or federally run marketplaces. But insurance companies have been abandoning these marketplaces left and right because they say it's difficult to turn a profit, and the insurers that remain are asking for steep price increases all over the country.
In Michigan, for example, state officials just approved price hikes of 16.7%, on average, for individuals purchasing health insurance in 2017 through the state's Affordable Care Act exchange. Individual buyers can expect average increases of 20% in Colorado, meanwhile, and price hikes of 19% to 43% in Iowa next year.
Such price increases are actually on the low side compared with states like Minnesota and Oklahoma, where individual plans will shoot up 50% or more on November 1, which is when signups for 2017 coverage on marketplaces are opened.
According to the independently run, impressively comprehensive website ACASignups.net, the average increase for individual plans purchased through Obamacare marketplaces will be about 25% next year. This doesn't mean that everyone will be paying 25% more for health insurance in 2017. Not remotely.
HEALTH CARE
1 Million New Americans Have Enrolled in Obamacare
The increases don't apply to the vast majority of Americans, who get health insurance through work—and have their premiums partially covered by their employers. The figures cited also don't factor in how most individual plans purchased via Obamacare marketplaces are subsidized by the government. Nearly 85% of the plans purchased through marketplaces receive premium subsidies because those being covered don't surpass certain income thresholds.
The headlines "do not reflect what these consumers actually pay because tax credits reduce the cost of coverage below the sticker price and shopping helps consumers find the best deal," U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press secretary Jonathan Gold said recently, in a statement that's typical of the administration's response to news of skyrocketing insurance prices.
Read Next: Here’s What’s Happened to Health Care Costs in America in the Obama Years
This is all true. Yet it's also true that for Americans who don't get insurance through work, and who make too much money to qualify for federal subsidies, the cost of health coverage is about to soar dramatically, with premiums sometimes rising $1,000, even over $2,000 for the year. The list below is not comprehensive. It's just a sampling of states where regulators have already approved some astronomical price increases for individual health plans next year.
Alabama: 36%
Individual plan premiums from Blue Cross Blue Shield—the only company offering individual plans in the state in 2017—will rise an average of 36% next year. Roughly 165,000 Alabama residents bought insurance through the marketplace in 2016. The new price hikes come on the heels of BCBS increasing premiums 28% from 2015 to 2016 for individual plans purchased through the marketplace.
Georgia: 32%
Humana sought a price increase of a whopping 65% for individual plans sold on the marketplace in 2017, while other insurers planned smaller increases ranging from 7% to 44%. Altogether, the price increases will average 32% for 2017, according to ACASignups.net.
Illinois: 44%
Throughout Illinois, the price of health care premiums will increase 40% to 50%, on average, for plans purchased on the individual marketplace. Average price increases for mid-level Silver and the lowest-price Bronze plans are both increasing 44% for coverage in 2017.
For an example of how the increases translate to monthly bills for those purchasing insurance on the marketplace, a 21-year-old nonsmoker in Illinois will see the monthly premium for a Silver Plan rise 36% next year, from $229 to $312. That's the equivalent of paying nearly $1,000 extra for the year, from $2,748 in 2016 to $3,744 in 2017. The price increase would be higher for an older (presumably less healthy) individual, especially if that person is a smoker.
Read Next: One-Third of Counties Will Have Just One Obamacare Insurer by 2017
Minnesota: 50% to 67%
"Rising insurance rates are both unsustainable and unfair,” Minnesota Commerce Commissioner Mike Rothman said in late September, while releasing the details of individual health plan increases purchased on the marketplace. “Middle-class Minnesotans in particular are being crushed by the heavy burden of these costs. There is a clear and urgent need for reform to protect Minnesota consumers who purchase their own health insurance.”
He said that the individual marketplace was "on the verge of collapse," and that the "rates insurers are charging will increase significantly to address their expected costs and the loss of federal reinsurance support." The result is that premiums for the estimated 250,000 Minnesotans who buy individual insurance will rise 50% to 67% in 2017, though many of these individuals will receive subsidies to offset the price hikes. If individuals in Minnesota earn $47,520 or more annually, or families earn $97,200 or more, however, they are on the hook for the entire price increase if they're insured through the state marketplace.
Nebraska: 35%
Individual health insurance rate increases range from 12% to 50% for Nebraskans purchasing on the marketplace in 2017, for an average premium increase of about 35%.
Oklahoma: 76%
Individual Obamacare premiums rose 35% in 2015. That sounds pretty steep, but it pales in comparison to the 76% price increase, on average, the Oklahoma Insurance Commission expects for individual premiums in 2017.
According to HealthInsurance.org, "Oklahoma’s average rate increase for the individual market is by far the highest in the country for 2017."
Pennsylvania: 33%
Pennsylvanians who purchase individual Obamacare insurance without subsidies will pay 33% higher premiums, on average, for 2017. As a result, the cheapest plan from Geisinger for a 40-year-old nonsmoker will cost $441 per month next year, up from $247 in 2016. For the year, that's an increase of about $2,300, from $2,964 to $5,292.
Read Next: At Least 1.4 Million Americans Are About to Lose their Obamacare Health Plans
Tennessee: 44% to 62%
For 2017, the state approved individual plan increases of 44%, 46%, and 62% from Humana, Cigna, and Blue Cross Blue Shield, respectively. The state's head insurance regulator approved the price increases in August after describing Tennessee's individual marketplace as "very near collapse."
Note:
Among those 8 states, 5 are red, two are blue, and one is newly purple.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Eric the Green - 03-27-2017
Roy Rigordaeva
March 25 at 5:41am ·
NEWS you just won't see reported.
To get the insurance companies to go along with this danger of losing money, the ACA promised to make them whole for any losses in any of the first decade’s years. At the end of each fiscal year, the insurance companies merely had to document their losses, and the government would reimburse them out of ACA funds provided for by the law.
The possibility of their losing money was referred to as the “risk corridor,” and the ACA explicitly filled those risk corridors with a guarantee of making the insurance companies, at the very least, whole.
And then something happened. As The New York Times noted on December 9, 2015, “A little-noticed health care provision slipped into a giant spending law last year has tangled up the Obama administration, sent tremors through health insurance markets and rattled confidence in the durability of President Obama’s signature health law.”
Rubio and a number of other Republicans had succeeded in gutting the risk corridors. The result was that, just in 2015, end-of-fiscal-year risk corridor payments to insurance companies that were supposed to total around $2.9 billion were only reimbursed, according to Rubio himself quoted in the Times, to the tune of around $400 million. Rubio bragged that he’d “saved taxpayers $2.5 billion.”
So the insurance companies did the only things they could. In (mostly red) states with low incomes and thus poorer health, they simply pulled out of the marketplace altogether. This has left some states with only one single insurer left. In others, they jacked up their prices to make up their losses.
Time magazine wrote “8 States Where Obamacare Rates Are Rising by at Least 30%” without mentioning Rubio’s role in why. Ditto for NPR’s “22 Percent Hike in Obamacare Rates…” and CNN’s “Obamacare Premiums Soar By 22%.” If you date-limit just to October of 2016 – the month before the election – you can find hundreds of similar articles. It was a huge story, but somehow Little Marco’s role in it all – along with his friends in the GOP – never made it into any of the stories.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Eric the Green - 03-27-2017
![[Image: 17522807_10211086305746485_8111915348670...e=59995E93]](https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/17522807_10211086305746485_8111915348670110306_n.jpg?oh=cad56bf2910fd280e9dd010e859e7777&oe=59995E93)
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Snowflake - 03-28-2017
(03-27-2017, 09:01 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:(03-27-2017, 07:19 PM)Snowflake Wrote:(03-27-2017, 05:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:(03-27-2017, 05:16 PM)Snowflake Wrote: I wonder how many people would actually lose medical insurance.
I heard somebody mention around 14 million.
(What is that, like less than 5% of the population?)
Does the number reported include people that don't even want it?
Is it only Americans, or are other people included as well?
I have to admit that it's amazing to me that Pres. Trump came
out of this looking so reasonable. He sure seems to know how
to consistently land on his feet. # PrettyImpressive.
lol If you call stumbling and falling down a golden escalator while holding hands with a bimbo "pretty impressive!"
Who are you referring to as a 'bimbo'?
Just a typical Drump image to contrast with your amazing claim that Drump "landed on his feet." ha ha ha
Yeah, ha ha ha. It's fine to not like the president, but
you had to go and trash the First Lady, too? #Gutless
EtG Wrote:Snowflake, this is a blizzard!
Obamacare covered those who aren't covered by their employer. The CBO said 24 million. That's just about everyone Obamacare covered!
Me Wrote:OK. Even if that number is correct(which I highly doubt), we're up to 7.5%.
Sorry, not worth it.
I don't know what 7.5% referred to. What DID happen under Obamacare is that many more people got coverage. The CBO says 24 million would have lost coverage under Trump/Ryancare.
Now we have Obamacare as administered by Trump's alligators. It may amount to pretty much the same thing as the Obamacare lite bill that failed. Insurance companies will be let off the hook from requirements to cover people, and there will be less funding to help people buy insurance.
7.5% refers to that CBO 24M number you posted.
At worst that's only 7.5% of the US population.
EtG Wrote:Health insurance is too expensive unless "people that don't even want it" are required to buy it. That's how social insurance works. That's how social security and medicare work.
Me Wrote:Healthcare(as well as Insurance) is a 'product'. Not the same as Social Security.
I don't want my government forcing me or anyone else to buy a product. Period.
No, health insurance is not a product; it's the same as social security. Social insurance. I take it you are also opposed to medicare, which is also a "product" you are forced to buy, according to your definition.
Yes it is. Medicare is for 'the elderly' and 'disabled people', so it can stay.
EtG Wrote:I'd be interested in looking at a true compromise bill, even tho I favor single payer. Somebody might have some good points. Maybe the approach of paying more if you sign up late might be better than a mandate; maybe tax credits might work.
But this wasn't it. It was not even the repeal and replace with nuthin that the extremists wanted. It was a big tax break for the rich, a 5x premium increase for middle-aged insured, and a see-ya-later approach for 24 million covered by Obamacare. So that's what the people said: see ya later, Paul and Donnie!
Me Wrote:No, that's not 'what the people said'. The Democrats pushed through the PPACA;
It should be their responsibility to fix it. But where are they? #IrrelevantParty
Democrats are not allowed to fix it. They have not had control of congress for over 7 years now. The Republicans have not been interested in anything except repealing Obamacare for 7 years. When given full control of the government, they give us this Obamacare lite baloney that nobody wants. I don't have much optimism that they can be the "relevant" party now and work with Democrats to create another makeshift, make-do compromise.
The product as passed in 2010 did not have a public option, and was not single payer medicare for all. So OF COURSE it was flawed. It was a compromise with the insurance industry, whose only goal is to make money by denying people coverage. As long as we aren't putting that industry out of business, our health care will be compromised, and whatever compromise is passed or proposed will be flawed.
I bet you're not being screwed-over by the PPACA, are you?
Well, I sure am. And it has to go away one way or another
(even if I have to vote Republican to help make that happen).
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Ragnarök_62 - 03-28-2017
(03-27-2017, 09:01 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:(03-27-2017, 07:19 PM)Snowflake Wrote:Eric the Green Wrote:EtGSnowflake, this is a blizzard!
Obamacare covered those who aren't covered by their employer. The CBO said 24 million. That's just about everyone Obamacare covered!Quote:<snipped>
OK. Even if that number is correct(which I highly doubt), we're up to 7.5%.
Sorry, not worth it.
I don't know what 7.5% referred to. What DID happen under Obamacare is that many more people got coverage. The CBO says 24 million would have lost coverage under Trump/Ryancare.
Now we have Obamacare as administered by Trump's alligators. It may amount to pretty much the same thing as the Obamacare lite bill that failed. Insurance companies will be let off the hook from requirements to cover people, and there will be less funding to help people buy insurance.
Quote:EtG Wrote:Health insurance is too expensive unless "people that don't even want it" are required to buy it. That's how social insurance works. That's how social security and medicare work.
Healthcare(as well as Insurance) is a 'product'. Not the same as Social Security.
I don't want my government forcing me or anyone else to buy a product. Period.
No, health insurance is not a product; it's the same as social security. Social insurance. I take it you are also opposed to medicare, which is also a "product" you are forced to buy, according to your definition.
Quote:EtG Wrote:<snip>
No, that's not 'what the people said'. The Democrats pushed through the PPACA;
It should be their responsibility to fix it. But where are they? #IrrelevantParty
Democrats are not allowed to fix it. They have not had control of congress for over 7 years now. The Republicans have not been interested in anything except repealing Obamacare for 7 years. When given full control of the government, they give us this Obamacare lite baloney that nobody wants. I don't have much optimism that they can be the "relevant" party now and work with Democrats to create another makeshift, make-do compromise.
The product as passed in 2010 did not have a public option, and was not single payer medicare for all. So OF COURSE it was flawed. It was a compromise with the insurance industry, whose only goal is to make money by denying people coverage. As long as we aren't putting that industry out of business, our health care will be compromised, and whatever compromise is passed or proposed will be flawed.
1. Health insurance and some health care is a market providing private/public goods. The argument, I think should be "do you think health care be a purely private good or a public good?" The phrasing of the question makes a difference. That question provides openings for how I'd prefer health care as a public good as far as payment.
2. Providers(doctors, nurses, pharmacists) can opt in or not, just Like Medicare. That's where I'm going.
3. Patent reform and tort reform are needed to reduce cost drivers.
4. Folks can still buy some sort of health insurance if they want to. What's covered needs to be spelled out in plain English and not pages of lawyer words we have now.
5. Congress or Pres. need to enforce the anti trust laws. They're not at present. I have full faith and confidence that our current crop of Repugs will get to that... after legalizing robbery through forged mortgages. I think the cabinet has an expert, man.
PS:
Today marks a special time, Eric. I've joined the sub set of people who use the ignore function. I did it to reduce the clutter that appears from person of my personal banning.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Kinser79 - 03-28-2017
(03-27-2017, 11:16 AM)tg63 Wrote:(03-25-2017, 02:48 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:(03-25-2017, 02:44 PM)Odin Wrote:(03-25-2017, 02:32 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: That was told to me today by a regular Snowbird.
Sure it was...
Hey just because you don't know any Canadians doesn't mean I don't. Strange animals Canadians. They seem to prefer our country to their own.
just FYI, our country of almost 40 million actually has a wide range of people with a wide range of perspectives ... but my experience has shown me that we're largely in agreement in that we like our own country just fine thank you.
Perhaps. The ones I encounter tend to spend long periods of time down here though. Having been to Canada, and Europe myself I'll take the US of A any day. Even when Washington is a giant cluster fuck and nothing gets done, I can still say "Hey, at least we're not Europe."
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Kinser79 - 03-28-2017
(03-27-2017, 03:32 PM)Galen Wrote:(03-24-2017, 07:29 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: The thing I don't think Eric realizes is that if Obamacare collapses in Red States and Purple States then it will collapse in the Blue States too. Maybe later than otherwise but it will collapse. It depends how much cash the states are willing to pump into a failing system--indeed a system that some think may have been designed to fail. The goal being to mess up private sector so much that people would clamor for a clearly inferior system as Crowder's video clearly demonstrates.
I have often thought that Obozocare was designed to fail but then I remember that between the general incompetence of government and the problems with central planning guarantee that such a system was bound to fail.
In general I try to avoid attributing to malice those things more easily explained by incompetence. However, when you have Nasty Pelosi saying things like "We have to pass the bill to see what is in it" the argument for malice is substantially increased.
RE: ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma - Kinser79 - 03-28-2017
(03-28-2017, 12:07 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Irony - the GOP have been doing everything possible to set us up for Single Payer. First, they did not participate in ACA or present any credible alternative either before or after ACA. This goes back to the failed Hillary Care during the 90s. They have had 25 years to come up with something of their own. And now, they shit the bed.
Single Payer here we come.
There will never be single payer in the US. I've already posted reasons why.As for the GOP solution they've had a one page bill on the table for the last 25 years or so.
It goes something like this:
Buy your own damn insurance.