Community >> View Thread

Author
Norvell


Member Since: Sun Jan 02, 2011
Posts: 2,113


Maybe I don't understand American money, but it seems like the Republicans just traded (or at least crippled) affordable health care for what amounts to about $85 a month in Middle Class savings.

$85 would be a nice boost in income if you're on welfare, or selling pencils from a cup on the streets of New York.

The fact that Americans are even given this pittance is a testament to what politicians think of the American people and the middle class.

Merry Christmas?


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,791



    Quote:
    Maybe I don't understand American money, but it seems like the Republicans just traded (or at least crippled) affordable health care for what amounts to about $85 a month in Middle Class savings.



    Quote:
    $85 would be a nice boost in income if you're on welfare, or selling pencils from a cup on the streets of New York.



    Quote:
    The fact that Americans are even given this pittance is a testament to what politicians think of the American people and the middle class.



    Quote:
    Merry Christmas?


...affordable health care was not good for the middle class. My fees skyrocketed under it like no other time before.

In short as usual. The middle class will be screwed.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Norvell


Member Since: Sun Jan 02, 2011
Posts: 2,113


What are you going to do now that the mandate is gone? Healthcare is going to increase in price as a result of dropping the mandate. Without young and healthy people in the market, the price is going to be passed on to the sick and elderly, and those who choose to get insurance.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473



    Quote:
    Maybe I don't understand American money, but it seems like the Republicans just traded (or at least crippled) affordable health care for what amounts to about $85 a month in Middle Class savings.


Oh, they just took one of the main legs out from under it without any sort of plan to help prop the system up. None even on the radar at all.

The extra money to a middle class person could at least be argued for, at least I think. If we were in need of economic stimulus. At least that is money likely to be spent and put back into the economy to drive things along.

Much of the tax bill leans heavily towards companies, pass through companies and the wealthy. The doubling of the standard deduction helps the standard person, but it also has to offset numerous things that GOP took out that benefited the middle class or poorer individuals.

Removing the Estate tax did nobody any favors other than a very small few.


    Quote:
    $85 would be a nice boost in income if you're on welfare, or selling pencils from a cup on the streets of New York.


I would take an extra $85. Most people would. The irony is that the middle class tax cuts in the bill, or many of them, sunset eventually.


    Quote:
    The fact that Americans are even given this pittance is a testament to what politicians think of the American people and the middle class.


I think there are numerous hypocrisies here. This bill is uber unpopular. Most seem to know how bad it is for everyday people. Keep in mind it is tracking around 10-15% less popular than when the ACA was passed and there were numerous campaigns against it. That is telling. And the method they passed it was probably the most hyperpartisan rushed thing that has made it through in recent times. And for something as critical as the tax system.

They did not even pretend to reach across the isle.


    Quote:
    Merry Christmas?


It is something. Also, this thing goes into affect next year. So, the IRS and companies have 12 days to adjust their systems. On something that is fairly poorly written in places.

It also makes zero sense to do most of the stuff in the bill at the moment. At least in the sense that they are trying to sell it. More jobs or better paying jobs are not going to be created hand over foot by this. Nor massive economic growth. Some growth will happen, but the job market is already having issues finding people for some jobs.

So, not sure what the goal with that is going to be. And with the zeal to get immigrants out there will not be enough bodies to replace them. So, we get an increased defict and debt (something often harped on by the GOP) with no real clear benefit. I guess they could argue the under employed would move into better paying jobs but that still is not enough to make up for the difference is lost revenue.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473


The whole thing was something of a mixed bag depending on the region. At least in terms of premium cost. In some respects the bill was achieving its goal of getting more people insurance but affordability was hard. It always was.

Main reason being that tinkering with insurance and insurance markets can only do so much when health care costs themselves are still growing at very fast rates. Until that is addressed the core issue remains. That said, what the GOP did was really stupid.

IMO, it is hard to tell what is a failing of the ACA and just because of resistance to it. The system itself covered more people through the expansion of medicaid. That was neutered by the SCOTUS and states not buying in. This left a large number of people in limbo between medicaid and the expected exchange area that were meant to be covered.

The government also pulled out, recently, some of the offset measures to help keep premiums low. The government does help with subsidies but those are dependent on income and it makes this pretty expensive if you d onot qualify for those.

I think what many lose track of was that before the ACA the insurance markets were worse than they are. That may shock some of us with our short term memories but establishing a minimum set of requirements was critical to helping make sure people actually had useful insurance. There used to be plans where somebody paid next to nothing each month but all they had was a piece of paper. No coverage.

Not to say MM experience is wrong, depending on where you live the rates are still going up. But they always were. I think given the nature of it people are just very focused on it now.

What we get to look forward to now is a death spiral for the individual market place. Many more people losing insurance and insurance rates increasing. Any decrease we could see would be due to people leaving the market place.

As many American's get insurance through work, it is hard to say what happens to them but it is not likely positive.

Another aspect is while the mandate would be removed the restrictions on insurance remains. What insurers have to meet. So, one would expect the markets to go up higher than is useful and pricing most people out. One would also expect this to lead to increases for everybody at a rate higher than would otherwise be predicted.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
zvelf


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,494



    Quote:
    ...affordable health care was not good for the middle class. My fees skyrocketed under it like no other time before.


Except that the Affordable Care Act should help subsidize your healthcare no matter your rates up until you make about $50,000.




Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Norvell


Member Since: Sun Jan 02, 2011
Posts: 2,113



    Quote:
    I would take an extra $85. Most people would. The irony is that the middle class tax cuts in the bill, or many of them, sunset eventually.


What I mean is that $85 is not going to make a difference in most people's lives. It's like 3 days worth of groceries for a modest family. I'd absolutely take the money, but it's a pretty pathetic pay-off for a Middle Class family. And the actual estimate is more in the $700 dollar range for most families.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/06/republican-tax-plan-would-raise-taxes-on-many-low-income-families-slash-rates-for-the-richest-analysis.html


    Quote:
    I think there are numerous hypocrisies here. This bill is uber unpopular. Most seem to know how bad it is for everyday people. Keep in mind it is tracking around 10-15% less popular than when the ACA was passed and there were numerous campaigns against it. That is telling. And the method they passed it was probably the most hyperpartisan rushed thing that has made it through in recent times. And for something as critical as the tax system.


As our previous discussion went, the tax cut would have been enormously popular if it was skewed towards the Middle Class. But that's not the theory under which Republicans operate. Trump said the forgotten people will be 'forgotten no longer'. I'm not sure what class of people he was talking about. The Middle Class barely got crumbs this time around. They could have poured this money into infrastructure, which would have boomed the economy. Or training for getting people back to work (e.g. coal miners?).

Hearing them talk about needing to cut entitlements next year is maddening.


    Quote:
    They did not even pretend to reach across the isle.


Of course not. And McConnell said that if they couldn't sell this tax cut to the American people, the Republicans should enter another line or work. I think this was a prophetic statement. Paul Ryan is already looking for the escape hatch.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/12/14/paul-ryan-retire-speaker-ready-leave-washington-216103


    Quote:
    It also makes zero sense to do most of the stuff in the bill at the moment. At least in the sense that they are trying to sell it. More jobs or better paying jobs are not going to be created hand over foot by this. Nor massive economic growth. Some growth will happen, but the job market is already having issues finding people for some jobs.



    Quote:
    So, not sure what the goal with that is going to be. And with the zeal to get immigrants out there will not be enough bodies to replace them. So, we get an increased defict and debt (something often harped on by the GOP) with no real clear benefit. I guess they could argue the under employed would move into better paying jobs but that still is not enough to make up for the difference is lost revenue.


The debt and deficit are only bad under Democratic leadership. It would be nice if ideology was traded for responsible government. I think that's all people ask for.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473



    Quote:

      Quote:
      I would take an extra $85. Most people would. The irony is that the middle class tax cuts in the bill, or many of them, sunset eventually.



    Quote:
    What I mean is that $85 is not going to make a difference in most people's lives. It's like 3 days worth of groceries for a modest family. I'd absolutely take the money, but it's a pretty pathetic pay-off for a Middle Class family. And the actual estimate is more in the $700 dollar range for most families.


I got what you meant, it is not make or break for most people. A nice to have but that is it.


    Quote:
    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/06/republican-tax-plan-would-raise-taxes-on-many-low-income-families-slash-rates-for-the-richest-analysis.html



    Quote:

      Quote:
      I think there are numerous hypocrisies here. This bill is uber unpopular. Most seem to know how bad it is for everyday people. Keep in mind it is tracking around 10-15% less popular than when the ACA was passed and there were numerous campaigns against it. That is telling. And the method they passed it was probably the most hyperpartisan rushed thing that has made it through in recent times. And for something as critical as the tax system.



    Quote:
    As our previous discussion went, the tax cut would have been enormously popular if it was skewed towards the Middle Class. But that's not the theory under which Republicans operate. Trump said the forgotten people will be 'forgotten no longer'. I'm not sure what class of people he was talking about. The Middle Class barely got crumbs this time around. They could have poured this money into infrastructure, which would have boomed the economy. Or training for getting people back to work (e.g. coal miners?).


I think the thing is that Trump means what he says, but is willing to go along with anything. He also said this tax bill was going to hammer him. That was always a lie. I do think he believes it though.


    Quote:
    Hearing them talk about needing to cut entitlements next year is maddening.



    Quote:

      Quote:
      They did not even pretend to reach across the isle.



    Quote:
    Of course not. And McConnell said that if they couldn't sell this tax cut to the American people, the Republicans should enter another line or work. I think this was a prophetic statement. Paul Ryan is already looking for the escape hatch.



    Quote:
    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/12/14/paul-ryan-retire-speaker-ready-leave-washington-216103



    Quote:

      Quote:
      It also makes zero sense to do most of the stuff in the bill at the moment. At least in the sense that they are trying to sell it. More jobs or better paying jobs are not going to be created hand over foot by this. Nor massive economic growth. Some growth will happen, but the job market is already having issues finding people for some jobs.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        So, not sure what the goal with that is going to be. And with the zeal to get immigrants out there will not be enough bodies to replace them. So, we get an increased defict and debt (something often harped on by the GOP) with no real clear benefit. I guess they could argue the under employed would move into better paying jobs but that still is not enough to make up for the difference is lost revenue.



    Quote:
    The debt and deficit are only bad under Democratic leadership. It would be nice if ideology was traded for responsible government. I think that's all people ask for.


Yeah, although I think the next goal for them is to go after SS, medicare and so on. Because spending is out of control and we are broke. After borrowing $1.5 trillion to help off corporations and the wealthy. I guess the rest of us can just go away for the most part.






Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,791



    Quote:

      Quote:
      ...affordable health care was not good for the middle class. My fees skyrocketed under it like no other time before.



    Quote:
    Except that the Affordable Care Act should help subsidize your healthcare no matter your rates up until you make about $50,000.


Every year the cost got worse and worse...but never like it did under ACA.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,791


...how many of these insurance companies manage to wheedle out of paying their customers when to comes time to help the sick.

It's like home owners insurance and so on...a constant scam preying on us, with our government not protecting us at all.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Norvell


Member Since: Sun Jan 02, 2011
Posts: 2,113



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        ...affordable health care was not good for the middle class. My fees skyrocketed under it like no other time before.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Except that the Affordable Care Act should help subsidize your healthcare no matter your rates up until you make about $50,000.



    Quote:
    Every year the cost got worse and worse...but never like it did under ACA.


Incorrect. The ACA greatly slowed the rate of increase in healthcare cost. If the Republicans hadn't been hell-bent on sabotaging the ACA, the rate of increase would have been slower still.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/03/us-health-spending-grows-at-lowest-rate/19830573/


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 10
fearcalypse 

INfinity and BEyond

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,159




    Quote:
    ...affordable health care was not good for the middle class. My fees skyrocketed under it like no other time before.



    Quote:
    In short as usual. The middle class will be screwed.


Yup, mine skyrocketed as well. And the plans offered were worse. I'm glad it's gone.

Now what annoys me is the the tax deductible are gone for homes over 500k. Where i live if you want a home in a decent to good area 500k is the minimum cost.

And not being able to deduct state taxes has me annoyed as well.

Edit: Looks like they home deductible was changed to 750k Thank goodness







"James told me there's an old saying here on Earth: May you be in heaven half an hour before the devil knows you're dead.
Not sure if Turian heaven is the same as yours, but if this thing goes sideways and we both end up there, meet me at the bar."


Legion: "They will exterminate your species because their gods tell them to. You cannot negotiate with them. They do not share your pity, remorse, or fear."
Posted with Google Chrome 58.0.3029.83 on Linux
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473



    Quote:
    ...how many of these insurance companies manage to wheedle out of paying their customers when to comes time to help the sick.



    Quote:
    It's like home owners insurance and so on...a constant scam preying on us, with our government not protecting us at all.


I am not a fan of insurance companies in general. I agree with you, it seems odd that there is an industry making profits over not helping people pay for health care.

The system is messed up and there is nobody big enough doing much about it. The ACA was something, but it was not really enough. But we are about to see what worse is.

I am not defending insurance companies, I am just sort of accepting of the system that we currently have. As I do not think it is going away soon. Even with the ACA a ton more reform was needed but was also never possible with the political climate.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473


It is possible that his rate did increase more than before but it would be an exception more than the rule. In most places the rate did keep going up but more slowly. That is true.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
Norvell


Member Since: Sun Jan 02, 2011
Posts: 2,113



    Quote:


      Quote:
      ...affordable health care was not good for the middle class. My fees skyrocketed under it like no other time before.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        In short as usual. The middle class will be screwed.



    Quote:
    Yup, mine skyrocketed as well. And the plans offered were worse. I'm glad it's gone.


Worse in what way? A lot of the previous plans are literally junk, and didn't meet the new minimum standards.

Just curious.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 10
Norvell


Member Since: Sun Jan 02, 2011
Posts: 2,113



    Quote:

      Quote:
      ...how many of these insurance companies manage to wheedle out of paying their customers when to comes time to help the sick.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        It's like home owners insurance and so on...a constant scam preying on us, with our government not protecting us at all.



    Quote:
    I am not a fan of insurance companies in general. I agree with you, it seems odd that there is an industry making profits over not helping people pay for health care.



    Quote:
    The system is messed up and there is nobody big enough doing much about it. The ACA was something, but it was not really enough. But we are about to see what worse is.



    Quote:
    I am not defending insurance companies, I am just sort of accepting of the system that we currently have. As I do not think it is going away soon. Even with the ACA a ton more reform was needed but was also never possible with the political climate.


The ACA was a free market alternative to socialized medicine, and was ultimately a Republican-derived idea. It was the Republican healthcare solution of the 1990s. The various increased standards of health insurance are what Obama and the Democrats added.

I think Obama did what a centrist does. He ceded the liberal viewpoint of healthcare, and compromised from the center. Centrists always compromise with opposing party, and thus the actual solution was (in this case) a conservative one, using conservative ideas.

Obama is/was a centrist, not a liberal or even that progressive. The Democrats were punished, as always, for using ideas from the other side of the aisle.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 10
fearcalypse 

INfinity and BEyond

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,159



    Quote:

      Quote:


        Quote:
        ...affordable health care was not good for the middle class. My fees skyrocketed under it like no other time before.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          In short as usual. The middle class will be screwed.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Yup, mine skyrocketed as well. And the plans offered were worse. I'm glad it's gone.



    Quote:
    Worse in what way? A lot of the previous plans are literally junk, and didn't meet the new minimum standards.



    Quote:
    Just curious.


Before ACA passed I had a very good and affordable plan through my employer. After it passed my company changed insurer and got sub-par plans by comparison. My deductibles went up and the amount taken from my chk every pay period increased.








"James told me there's an old saying here on Earth: May you be in heaven half an hour before the devil knows you're dead.
Not sure if Turian heaven is the same as yours, but if this thing goes sideways and we both end up there, meet me at the bar."


Legion: "They will exterminate your species because their gods tell them to. You cannot negotiate with them. They do not share your pity, remorse, or fear."
Posted with Google Chrome 63.0.3239.84 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473


I also want to add that the insurance companies themselves blamed policy uncertainty as a reason for the higher increases this year. With the GOP trying to get rid of it most of the year.

So, the unstable political climate also had a fair bit to do with it this past year. And apparently for good reason. As they are about to get hit.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,791


More high-deductible insurance plans and increases in the percent of health care costs borne by consumers also contributed to the slower rate of increase, said Micah Hartman, a statistician in CMS' Office of the Actuary. The more people have to pay for health care treatment out of pocket, the less they tend to use.

So to clarify maybe it wasn't the rate.
So maybe it wasn't the rate...but the cost was much higher.
Basically...the PEOPLE had to pay more when they needed to use it.
costs borne by the consumer,


Posted with Google Chrome 52.0.2743.116 on Windows 10
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,791


Exactly the same.


Posted with Google Chrome 52.0.2743.116 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473



    Quote:
    More high-deductible insurance plans and increases in the percent of health care costs borne by consumers also contributed to the slower rate of increase, said Micah Hartman, a statistician in CMS' Office of the Actuary. The more people have to pay for health care treatment out of pocket, the less they tend to use.



    Quote:
    So to clarify maybe it wasn't the rate.
    So maybe it wasn't the rate...but the cost was much higher.
    Basically...the PEOPLE had to pay more when they needed to use it.
    costs borne by the consumer,


Which I think is a fair point but to date none of the plans really have addressed the deductible problem. In fact the GOP alternatives generally take the approach of decreasing premiums by increasing deductibles.

I think it is important to note the why question though. And that is the point people can debate.

I think this article sums up the pros and cons fairly well in many respects. Although one still has to keep in mind that all insurance is by nature more expensive now because it is more expansive.

http://time.com/money/4503325/obama-health-care-costs-obamacare/

Some disagree with that, however it is generally better for unexpected consequences to have coverage for more than less things. Some will disagree with me, but it is important to note that deductibles are high, co-pays are high and that prescription drugs are high. The later is also the fault in part by other regulatory and legislative decisions and actions.

Much more can be done in all of these areas for sure. They never will be done. And at the moment the alternative is apparently to flip back to before ACA. Meaning more people will just not have anything, premiums go up faster and insurance covers less.

The whole thing did a fair bit of good even if it did have its downsides. I have yet to find a piece of major legislation (in my life anyway) that has made everybody happy in every way. Just never going to happen. And there were honestly a ton of things to do differently with the ACA, but it will never happen. And what we will end up with would likely charge people even more. Particularly those that are sick.

Recall that the GOP plans for the most part often had those that were sick in the loser category for the potential laws. They were only good for people that were already healthy and did not need much healthcare.

Until we have actual reform of some things in the healthcare system the cost to consumers through whatever mechanism will keep going up at a very high rate.






Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473


While I am not arguing against your two examples, and higher deductible plans are the norm now, there are people with the opposite experience.

Again, I think the why is important a fair bit of the time. The coverage that insurance companies is much broader for every category now and so prices were going to go up.

Many companies are mixed between choices with high deductibles are somewhat higher premiums based on what they have to cover. The end result is that they are fairly similar. Not sure that makes them good or bad per se.

IMO, it is more a problem on relying on a strange market system approach to healthcare where at one point folks could get kicked from a plan. From a personal point I would wager that on average it costs more people more now but people are also getting more bang for their buck than in the past.

Many things are just covered by insurance including health screenings and so on that have no impact on anything but co-pay.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,791



    Quote:

      Quote:
      More high-deductible insurance plans and increases in the percent of health care costs borne by consumers also contributed to the slower rate of increase, said Micah Hartman, a statistician in CMS' Office of the Actuary. The more people have to pay for health care treatment out of pocket, the less they tend to use.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        So to clarify maybe it wasn't the rate.
        So maybe it wasn't the rate...but the cost was much higher.
        Basically...the PEOPLE had to pay more when they needed to use it.
        costs borne by the consumer,



    Quote:
    Which I think is a fair point but to date none of the plans really have addressed the deductible problem. In fact the GOP alternatives generally take the approach of decreasing premiums by increasing deductibles.



    Quote:
    I think it is important to note the why question though. And that is the point people can debate.



    Quote:
    I think this article sums up the pros and cons fairly well in many respects. Although one still has to keep in mind that all insurance is by nature more expensive now because it is more expansive.



    Quote:
    http://time.com/money/4503325/obama-health-care-costs-obamacare/



    Quote:
    Some disagree with that, however it is generally better for unexpected consequences to have coverage for more than less things. Some will disagree with me, but it is important to note that deductibles are high, co-pays are high and that prescription drugs are high. The later is also the fault in part by other regulatory and legislative decisions and actions.



    Quote:
    Much more can be done in all of these areas for sure. They never will be done. And at the moment the alternative is apparently to flip back to before ACA. Meaning more people will just not have anything, premiums go up faster and insurance covers less.



    Quote:
    The whole thing did a fair bit of good even if it did have its downsides. I have yet to find a piece of major legislation (in my life anyway) that has made everybody happy in every way. Just never going to happen. And there were honestly a ton of things to do differently with the ACA, but it will never happen. And what we will end up with would likely charge people even more. Particularly those that are sick.



    Quote:
    Recall that the GOP plans for the most part often had those that were sick in the loser category for the potential laws. They were only good for people that were already healthy and did not need much healthcare.



    Quote:
    Until we have actual reform of some things in the healthcare system the cost to consumers through whatever mechanism will keep going up at a very high rate.


Was referring top Nov's link.

The real problem is letting the pharmaceutical companies run rampant with their pricing...what they charge for some of these drugs is insane and they hold peoples lives hostage.

We definitely need better government oversight on these corporations and while I don't think Trump is as bad as the 20 posts here and the media portray him as...he is definitely part of this problem. He's a business/company man through and through...so that's all he cares about and that's his agenda...which is bad for all of us.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        More high-deductible insurance plans and increases in the percent of health care costs borne by consumers also contributed to the slower rate of increase, said Micah Hartman, a statistician in CMS' Office of the Actuary. The more people have to pay for health care treatment out of pocket, the less they tend to use.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          So to clarify maybe it wasn't the rate.
          So maybe it wasn't the rate...but the cost was much higher.
          Basically...the PEOPLE had to pay more when they needed to use it.
          costs borne by the consumer,

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Which I think is a fair point but to date none of the plans really have addressed the deductible problem. In fact the GOP alternatives generally take the approach of decreasing premiums by increasing deductibles.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          I think it is important to note the why question though. And that is the point people can debate.

          Quote:

            Quote:
            I think this article sums up the pros and cons fairly well in many respects. Although one still has to keep in mind that all insurance is by nature more expensive now because it is more expansive.

            Quote:

              Quote:
              http://time.com/money/4503325/obama-health-care-costs-obamacare/

              Quote:

                Quote:
                Some disagree with that, however it is generally better for unexpected consequences to have coverage for more than less things. Some will disagree with me, but it is important to note that deductibles are high, co-pays are high and that prescription drugs are high. The later is also the fault in part by other regulatory and legislative decisions and actions.

                Quote:

                  Quote:
                  Much more can be done in all of these areas for sure. They never will be done. And at the moment the alternative is apparently to flip back to before ACA. Meaning more people will just not have anything, premiums go up faster and insurance covers less.

                  Quote:

                    Quote:
                    The whole thing did a fair bit of good even if it did have its downsides. I have yet to find a piece of major legislation (in my life anyway) that has made everybody happy in every way. Just never going to happen. And there were honestly a ton of things to do differently with the ACA, but it will never happen. And what we will end up with would likely charge people even more. Particularly those that are sick.

                    Quote:

                      Quote:
                      Recall that the GOP plans for the most part often had those that were sick in the loser category for the potential laws. They were only good for people that were already healthy and did not need much healthcare.

                      Quote:

                        Quote:
                        Until we have actual reform of some things in the healthcare system the cost to consumers through whatever mechanism will keep going up at a very high rate.



    Quote:
    Was referring top Nov's link.



    Quote:
    The real problem is letting the pharmaceutical companies run rampant with their pricing...what they charge for some of these drugs is insane and they hold peoples lives hostage.


Sure, but that was also in part a choice of some of the free market folks. The government cannot really negotiate drug prices very effectively. Same with most other measures.


    Quote:
    We definitely need better government oversight on these corporations and while I don't think Trump is as bad as the 20 posts here and the media portray him as...he is definitely part of this problem. He's a business/company man through and through...so that's all he cares about and that's his agenda...which is bad for all of us.


I think he is about as bad or worse really, the focus just shifts a fair bit. I am not sure of one area where he is doing a bang up job. In most areas he is only listening to idealogues in his administration.

If we are only talking about the point in question than taking out a main portion of the ACA without replacing the act is cruel. It hurts American's for no other reason than because they can. They would likely argue that it forces Democrats to the table but even then it is cruel to use everyday people as political leverage because they are otherwise going to have more insurance issues because of the actions taken. That is a hostage situation. It is not how this is to work. Or shouldn't anyway.

The tax bill itself does have cuts for everybody for the first few years but is heavily weighted towards the top in terms of benefits. Particularly for guys like Trump. The middle class and lower cuts and many of the benefits gained sunset. With the only hope being that some future Congress keeps them.

We have a territorial system for coorporation that makes it more efficient to keep money earned elsewhere there. Why bring it back and get taxed at a lower rate and potentially taxed again on it?

I think the worst thing is how it was all sold in the first place. The idea that giving the rich leads to reinvestment and more jobs and wages has never been true but since the 80's there has been a major disconnect between wages and productivity.

In addition, where would the people come for this huge boom in jobs? The economy is around what is considered full employment and many companies are having trouble finding people as it is. At that to the zeal of keeping immigrants out of the country and there are even fewer workers. The incentive would then be to automate as much as possible. An increased pressure to do that to avoid paying workers too much more, save in the long term and take the tax credits available for that.

Not saying there will be no benefit, but this bill is not helping the average person too much. The biggest things for that would be the increase in the standard deduction and slight dips in the rates, but the loss of various other things and the sunset provisions will lead to this being very one sided.

Trump will sign anything that comes to his desk at this point. He is so desperate for a win that he really does not care about the state of the health insurance markets or what the tax plan may or may not do down the road. And it being passed in such a partisan way (hyper partisan by any standard) pretty much means that we get to look forward to more uncertainty in the tax code and every other thing in the near future.

Which is ridiculous. Same with judges at the moment. Some pretty unqualified people are getting in. A few have been stopped because there was no choice. That they are conservative is to be expected, but it is ironic they all yelled about Obama court packing. The whole thing is a joke.

Nobody ever cares about the standard person too much but for whatever reason many people will happily buy whatever the GOP is selling. Not sure if it sounds simple or the conservative media is just a better echo chamber that makes their base more rock solid.






Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
zvelf


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,494



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        ...affordable health care was not good for the middle class. My fees skyrocketed under it like no other time before.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Except that the Affordable Care Act should help subsidize your healthcare no matter your rates up until you make about $50,000.



    Quote:
    Every year the cost got worse and worse...but never like it did under ACA.


The whole point of the subsidies is that it doesn't matter how much costs go up, which they didn't skyrocket as a whole until the Republicans sabotaged ACA. If you make under a certain threshold income, the subsidies will protect you from cost increases.



Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
zvelf


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 9,494



    Quote:
    Before ACA passed I had a very good and affordable plan through my employer. After it passed my company changed insurer and got sub-par plans by comparison. My deductibles went up and the amount taken from my chk every pay period increased.


Correlation is not causation. I work in health insurance. Health insurers did not undergo some vast change to employer plans because of ACA. They were looking forward to the 20+ million new people who would get insurance and indeed they got. All your employer did was switch health plans to save money for themselves. It had nothing to do with ACA. That they changed plans around the time of ACA implementation is just coincidental.

By the way, the insurance industry in general hates hates hates what Republicans are doing with healthcare. Republicans once attacked Democrats for creating uncertainty in business. There has never been more uncertainty in the healthcare industry than right now.



Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 1,791



    Quote:
    While I am not arguing against your two examples, and higher deductible plans are the norm now, there are people with the opposite experience.


Well...the thousands of people I work with got the same bad plan. Basically...the rich don't need it, and it helped the poor (great)...but who pays for it? The middle class as usual.


    Quote:
    Again, I think the why is important a fair bit of the time. The coverage that insurance companies is much broader for every category now and so prices were going to go up.



    Quote:
    Many companies are mixed between choices with high deductibles are somewhat higher premiums based on what they have to cover. The end result is that they are fairly similar. Not sure that makes them good or bad per se.



    Quote:
    IMO, it is more a problem on relying on a strange market system approach to healthcare where at one point folks could get kicked from a plan. From a personal point I would wager that on average it costs more people more now but people are also getting more bang for their buck than in the past.



    Quote:
    Many things are just covered by insurance including health screenings and so on that have no impact on anything but co-pay.





Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,473



    Quote:

      Quote:
      While I am not arguing against your two examples, and higher deductible plans are the norm now, there are people with the opposite experience.



    Quote:
    Well...the thousands of people I work with got the same bad plan. Basically...the rich don't need it, and it helped the poor (great)...but who pays for it? The middle class as usual.


I cannot make a claim one way or another on those plans. The wealthy still get health insurance, they just can cover things easier.

I am more supportive of a system to cover everybody with or without the private market. Does not have to be a universal system, but there would at least be an option that would be funded similar to Medicaid. Folks would hate it because people do not like paying for other people to get anything in the US, but it would be one way to fix some of the issues.

That would still have deductibles and some sort of pay in though. At least I imagine.


I also think it is a matter of what people want now too. Things are more expensive in some respects, but they are also getting more coverage. Some will view that as bad and a waste, until they need it.

Pre the ACA many more people just went bankrupt outright or paid nothing for insurance that turned out to be worthless. Those sorts of predatory plans needed to go away.

And really the issue is more that we accept the current system we have more than the ACA per se. The law has its issues but just worked with the system that was already there.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      Again, I think the why is important a fair bit of the time. The coverage that insurance companies is much broader for every category now and so prices were going to go up.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Many companies are mixed between choices with high deductibles are somewhat higher premiums based on what they have to cover. The end result is that they are fairly similar. Not sure that makes them good or bad per se.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          IMO, it is more a problem on relying on a strange market system approach to healthcare where at one point folks could get kicked from a plan. From a personal point I would wager that on average it costs more people more now but people are also getting more bang for their buck than in the past.

          Quote:

            Quote:
            Many things are just covered by insurance including health screenings and so on that have no impact on anything but co-pay.





Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software