Obamacare...(new title): GOP DEATH PLAN: Don-Ryan's Express

[twa]

10 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

There are two kinds of insurance companies; the ones that are changing with the ACA and working within it and those who pine for the old ways.

 

The ones that pine for the old ways (or want to extract concessions from the government, see: Aetna) keep saying the ACA will fail, but they also actively attempt to sabotage it where they can.

 

On the whole, the ACA would do very well if all the states accepted expanded Medicaid and insurance companies stopped trying to actively sabotage it.

 

the providers are shrinking, premiums keep rising and state exchanges are going bust.

 

think it will get better?

medicaid reimbursement is dropping and the state share is going higher....sure seems like a bargain.

 

[killerbee99]

Not even that do you WHY Obama are is failing or will you continue to parrot your crap about it needing to fail.... Such idiotic thinking, fix Obamacare instead of trying to replace with that piece of **** legislation the GOP tried to pass.... But I am not stunned by myopic thinking from the GOP 

 

Here is one of the reason why rates are going up, thanks GOP

 

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/us/politics/marco-rubio-obamacare-affordable-care-act.html?

 

This aided in the acceleration of some insurance plans skyrocketing and some pulling out from the market all together

Edited March 25, 2017 by killerbee99

[mistertim]

26 minutes ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

Yeah, we are probably on opposite sides of the fence there.  I mean, the CBO has gotten a lot of this wrong all the way down the line.  They said that Obamacare would save money and it hasn't.  It's actually increased in cost.  CBO has said a lot of things that really haven't panned out IMO.  They assume that Insurance Companies will stay in with their projections but that may not be the case.  If we agree that Insurance Companies are ain this for the money, then it stands to reason that they will not stay in if there is no opportunity for them to maximize profits.  Really, to me this comes down to getting young people to buy in and I just don't feel like that's going to happen.  IDK, I'm not an expert on this stuff, I just feel as if the CBO is basing a lot of things on some preconceptions that may not pan out. 

 

It's OK that we disagree on this.  I can't say with 100% certainty that everything is going to go exactly as planned either way. 

 

Yeah that's fine. Fair disagreement. Obviously the CBO is going to be wrong sometimes, and it certainly could be on this matter. However, I can at least be relatively comfortable knowing that the CBO is pretty much nonpartisan and does it's best to provide analysis without spin or bias. On the other side, the insurance companies who are saying it will fail have a vested interest in it failing. I just can't ever trust that. Maybe their numbers will end up right, but I simply don't trust them to be in any way, shape, or form unbiased. To me it's kinda like believing climate change numbers provided by the oil industry. 

[ABQCOWBOY]

4 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Yeah that's fine. Fair disagreement. Obviously the CBO is going to be wrong sometimes, and it certainly could be on this matter. However, I can at least be relatively comfortable knowing that the CBO is pretty much nonpartisan and does it's best to provide analysis without spin or bias. On the other side, the insurance companies who are saying it will fail have a vested interest in it failing. I just can't ever trust that. Maybe their numbers will end up right, but I simply don't trust them to be in any way, shape, or form unbiased. To me it's kinda like believing climate change numbers provided by the oil industry. 

 

We agree on the distrust of Insurance Companies.  They are in it for them.  Insurance Companies, IMO, are not in the business of providing good healthcare.  They are in the business of providing the lowest possible cost to them while maximizing profits to the public, type health coverage.  This is the real problem with the ACA IMO.  It kinda relies on the idea that Insurance Companies will deal in good faith and work towards providing quality befits.   When has that ever happened?

[Captain Wiggles]

1 hour ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

You can make the argument that it provides healthcare for millions of people who would not have it otherwise but I don't really see that.  It provides insurance coverage but not actual healthcare. 

 

 

I can and will make that argument. Without the ACA I wouldn't even be able to get healthcare. I've had a preexisting condition for the past twelve years. My health insurance is actually quite good and affordable thanks to the subsidy I receive. So I see the effects of the ACA on a daily basis.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Just now, clietas said:

 

I can and will make that argument. Without the ACA I wouldn't even be able to get healthcare. I've had a preexisting condition for the past twelve years. My health insurance is actually quite good and affordable thanks to the subsidy I receive. So I see the effects of the ACA on a daily basis.

 

I am glad that you are receiving good healthcare at an affordable price.  I, on the other hand, also have a pre-existing condition for about 17 years and my experience has been exactly the opposite.  I pay very expensive prices for Insurance and Medication, I receive terrible service, often can't even see a Dr. and my medications are not covered by my Insurance so I have to pay retail in order to get them.  That costs me about 800 a month, just for medication. 

 

I am sorry to say that my experience with the ACA is very, very different then yours. 

21 minutes ago, killerbee99 said:

Not even that do you WHY Obama are is failing or will you continue to parrot your crap about it needing to fail.... Such idiotic thinking, fix Obamacare instead of trying to replace with that piece of **** legislation the GOP tried to pass.... But I am not stunned by myopic thinking from the GOP 

 

Here is one of the reason why rates are going up, thanks GOP

 

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/us/politics/marco-rubio-obamacare-affordable-care-act.html?

 

This aided in the acceleration of some insurance plans skyrocketing and some pulling out from the market all together

 

I am not certain if this is directed towards me or not but I do have a question.  When you say POS legislation, what are the reasons you don't like "Trumpcare"?  I will admit that I didn't really love that Bill either but it's because I see it as very similar, in many respects, to "Obamacare".   What are the things that lead you to believe it is a POS Bill but Obamacare is not? 

 

It could be that I simply don't understand Trumpcare well enough, I don't know.

[Springfield]

1 hour ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

I actually agree with this line of thought, to a certain extent.  In fact, I am amazed that more people don't identify this as the core problem.  However, I don't really believe that it's only one side who is chasing the dollar behind this issue.  If I look at Obamacare, it's a scheme to make money.  The actual service level is very poor.  Much worse, IMO, then what it used to be, before Obamacare.  What Obamacare really gives is the authority for Insurance Companies to force coverage.  It doesn't actually give you healthcare.  To me, it's a way to bill somebody for insurance and nothing more.  You can make the argument that it provides healthcare for millions of people who would not have it otherwise but I don't really see that.  It provides insurance coverage but not actual healthcare. 

 

I know that's probably not a very popular idea on this board but that's what I see here.

 

You don't have to argue with me that ACA is far from perfect, heavily flawed even.  I think that the only good thing about it is that it (attempts) forces younger, lower risk people into the system.  And the pre-existing clause, which is a win.

 

My main problem is that most people are still one major medical issue away from ruin.

[Captain Wiggles]

8 minutes ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

I am glad that you are receiving good healthcare at an affordable price.  I, on the other hand, also have a pre-existing condition for about 17 years and my experience has been exactly the opposite.  I pay very expensive prices for Insurance and Medication, I receive terrible service, often can't even see a Dr. and my medications are not covered by my Insurance so I have to pay retail in order to get them.  That costs me about 800 a month, just for medication. 

 

I am sorry to say that my experience with the ACA is very, very different then yours. 

 

I'm completely sympathetic. I was in a similar situation until the ACA was passed. My medication costs were $1200+ a month for nearly ten years and I couldn't see a doctor without paying insane prices. Luckily hospitals couldn't refuse to treat me but that wasn't cheap either.

 

The ACA needs work obviously but to say you don't see it helping the millions it claims to is BS IMO. Universal healthcare is the solution. A for profit healthcare system is disastrous. 

Edited March 25, 2017 by clietas

[ABQCOWBOY]

3 minutes ago, Springfield said:

 

You don't have to argue with me that ACA is far from perfect, heavily flawed even.  I think that the only good thing about it is that it (attempts) forces younger, lower risk people into the system.  And the pre-existing clause, which is a win.

 

My main problem is that most people are still one major medical issue away from ruin.

 

I assume, when you say "argue" you mean "tell you".  If, on the other hand, I am coming across as argumentative with you, then you have my apologies.  It is not my intention.

 

The problem of getting younger people on board is really the weak leg of the stole IMO.  I don't think you are ever going to get that and without it, any type of ACA model will fail. 

 

I agree with you on the main problem you refer to thou.  I agree that most people are still in much the same place as they were before, with regards to major medical issues.

[Larry]

10 minutes ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

I am glad that you are receiving good healthcare at an affordable price.  I, on the other hand, also have a pre-existing condition for about 17 years and my experience has been exactly the opposite.  I pay very expensive prices for Insurance and Medication, I receive terrible service, often can't even see a Dr. and my medications are not covered by my Insurance so I have to pay retail in order to get them.  That costs me about 800 a month, just for medication. 

 

And which of those statements would not be true, without Obama?  

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

4 minutes ago, clietas said:

 

I'm completely sympathetic. I was in a similar situation until the ACA was passed. My medication costs were $1200+ a month for nearly ten years and I couldn't see a doctor without paying insane prices. Luckily hospitals couldn't refuse to treat me but that wasn't cheap either.

 

The ACA needs work obviously but to say you don't see it helping the millions it claims to is BS IMO. Universal healthcare is the solution. A for profit healthcare system is disastrous. 

 

Yeah, I used to be right there at around 1200 a month but I changed to a different/cheaper medication in the hopes that I could get it covered.  No joy so the cost did go down but it's still expensive and it doesn't really work nearly as well as the other medication I was on. 

 

I think you might be missing the point I am actually trying to make.  I don't dispute that the ACA provides coverage.  What I am saying is that the ACA provides very poor coverage and I am also saying that for every person who it may be helping, it is also hurting.  We, IMO, are case in point. 

 

If this is what's really going on, then are we really better off then we were before, as a Nation?  All we've really done here is shift costs and disadvantage a different part of our society.  At least, that is what I am seeing.

3 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

And which of those statements would not be true, without Obama?  

 

 

I apologize Larry, I don't understand your question?

[Larry]

1 minute ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

I apologize Larry, I don't understand your question?

 

You make a big point about pointing out, in a thread discussing Obamacare, the fact that health care is expensive.  (For example, that prescription drugs cost a lot.)  

 

My point is that yeah, prescription drugs do cost a lot of people a lot of money.  But that has been true for some time.  It's been an ongoing trend for decades.  

 

The fact that Obama did not create a system in which everybody gets a pony does not make it a bad law that needs to be repealed.  

 

If you want to attack Obamacare, point at something that wasn't true, before Obamacare.  

[killerbee99]

So you arguing you want something better than Obamacare correct? 

 

Universal Healthcare

 

Also, the final version of Trump are included stripping Healthcare essentials like Ambulatory services and other essential service won't be part of the basic mandatory services that insurance policies must have..... It was a POS health care bill and that's why it died before ever being voted on

Edited March 25, 2017 by killerbee99

[Captain Wiggles]

@ABQCOWBOY The problem isn't the ACA the problem is Insurance companies. Their the ones providing the ****ty coverage at high costs.

[mistertim]

2 minutes ago, killerbee99 said:

So you arguing you want something better than Obamacare correct? 

 

Universal Healthcare

 

Also, the final version of Trump are stripping Healthcare essentials like Ambulatory services and other essential service won't be part of the basic mandatory services that insurance policies must have..... It was a POS health care bill and that's why it died before ever being voted on

 

Yeah but that's like, socialism or communism or something and would be the beginning of the downfall of our country and even the concept of freedom itself. Fox News told me so.

[ABQCOWBOY]

2 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

You make a big point about pointing out, in a thread discussing Obamacare, the fact that health care is expensive.  (For example, that prescription drugs cost a lot.)  

 

My point is that yeah, prescription drugs do cost a lot of people a lot of money.  But that has been true for some time.  It's been an ongoing trend for decades.  

 

The fact that Obama did not create a system in which everybody gets a pony does not make it a bad law that needs to be repealed.  

 

If you want to attack Obamacare, point at something that wasn't true, before Obamacare.  

 

If by some time, you mean since President Obama passed ACA, they yes I would agree with that.  If you mean that they were more expensive, prior to that, then I would not agree.  My experience is that they were much cheaper before.  So there is your pointer.  I can also say that prior to ACA, I could actually see Doctors.  Now, it's hit and miss and when I do see them, I can't get medications covered.  There is another pointer. 

 

Obamacare, for me, has been terrible.  I pay more now for way less and I don't think that's what we need out of our Government. 

5 minutes ago, killerbee99 said:

So you arguing you want something better than Obamacare correct? 

 

Universal Healthcare

 

Also, the final version of Trump are stripping Healthcare essentials like Ambulatory services and other essential service won't be part of the basic mandatory services that insurance policies must have..... It was a POS health care bill and that's why it died before ever being voted on

 

So is that the only difference, the Ambulatory Services?  You say there are other essential services and there may well be, I don't know to be honest.  I do agree with your statement that it was not great but then again, I don't see ACA as great either.  I think it's terrible.

[Larry]

Just now, clietas said:

@ABQCOWBOY The problem isn't the ACA the problem is Insurance companies. Their the ones providing the ****ty coverage at high costs.

 

I wouldn't automatically jump to that assumption.  

 

At least under Obamacare, (Trumpcare tried to get rid of this part), 80% of the money that the insurance companies took in, they had to pay back out, in the form of coverage.  

 

No, I strongly suspect that a big part of why your insurance costs that much, is because it actually costs that much.  (Maybe it doesn't cost that much, for you.  But it costs that much, for the average person you're lumped in with.)  

 

If you're paying $10,000 a year for health insurance, then the average person in your pool is getting $8,000/year in coverage.  

[ABQCOWBOY]

6 minutes ago, clietas said:

@ABQCOWBOY The problem isn't the ACA the problem is Insurance companies. Their the ones providing the ****ty coverage at high costs.

 

I agree but the ACA brought in the Insurance Companies and made them inseparable.  They are connected at the hip, at this point.

[Captain Wiggles]

If the ACA has been so detrimental to Insurance companies why do providers like Anthem and Aetna have billions of dollars to spend to acquire Cigna or Humana?

[ABQCOWBOY]

4 minutes ago, clietas said:

If the ACA has been so detrimental to Insurance companies why do providers like Anthem and Aetna have billions of dollars to spend to acquire Cigna or Humana?

 

Excellent question right?  I think the ACA has been the greatest thing ever for a lot of Insurance Companies.  They have cashed in and are now looking to get out before it cost them more money maybe?

Edited March 25, 2017 by ABQCOWBOY

[mistertim]

3 minutes ago, clietas said:

If the ACA has been so detrimental to Insurance companies why do providers like Anthem and Aetna have billions of dollars to spend to acquire Cigna or Humana?

 

The problem isn't that they don't have billions of dollars or aren't making billions each year. It's that now they could be making a bit less billions. And that WILL. NOT. STAND. 

Edited March 25, 2017 by mistertim

[Captain Wiggles]

Just now, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

Excellent question right?  I think the ACA has been the greatest thing ever for a lot of Insurance Companies.  They have cashed in and are now looking to get out before it cost them money many?

 

They've certainly cashed in I won't argue that. They were cashing in long before the ACA though.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Just now, clietas said:

 

They've certainly cashed in I won't argue that. They were cashing in long before the ACA though.

 

No argument from me.  I am not a fan, nor have I really ever been a fan, of Insurance Companies.  They are not out for us.  They are out for themselves and they always have been.  Always will be IMO. 

[Captain Wiggles]

1 minute ago, ABQCOWBOY said:

 

No argument from me.  I am not a fan, nor have I really ever been a fan, of Insurance Companies.  They are not out for us.  They are out for themselves and they always have been.  Always will be IMO. 

 

Which is why non profit Universal Healthcare is the only option IMO.

[mistertim]

It's unfortunate that Universal Healthcare basically has a zero percent chance of happening. Any time someone brings it up you get conservative pundits, politicians, and all the usual suspects coming out of the woodwork practically foaming at the mouth and screaming about socialism and telling people that this means the government will now be running their lives and that a bald eagle will die every time you go to the doctor for free. The whole thing has just been too ingrained in the American psyche through propaganda. 

 

On an unrelated note, I have no clue why my post decided to indent the way it did. weird

Edited March 25, 2017 by mistertim