Affordable Care Act - is it making people healthier?

[Azalin]

Pass a law making it illegal for employers to provide health insurance as a benefit.

 

 

 

A-men. Where the !@#$ is the logic in forcing every employer to become experts on health insurance?? Not to mention leaving the huge hole of tens of millions of people who don't actually have a full time job.

 

Since it's (or at least it was before the ACA) entirely up to an employer whether or not to offer health insurance as part of an employee's compensation, you would support making it illegal to do so? Don't misunderstand - they could always just offer the cash equivalent, but would you really support denying them the option to provide coverage as part of the employees' salary?

[IDBillzFan]

A-men. Where the !@#$ is the logic in forcing every employer to become experts on health insurance?

The only thing anyone ever needs to know about Obamacare is that the people who passed the law made sure they were exempt from it.

[Azalin]

The only thing anyone ever needs to know about Obamacare is that the people who passed the law made sure they were exempt from it.

 

Best one-sentence synopsis of the ACA I've seen to date.

[Boatdrinks]

Pass a law making it illegal for employers to provide health insurance as a benefit. Get rid of government mandated coverage levels. Get rid of state line restrictions. Allow all medical expenses and medical insurance premiums to be tax deductible. Once people become independent buyers and users of health insurance, they will choose and use coverage more wisely and the market for both insurance and care will evolve to more affordable options.

 

So the problem with insurance is that people use it? Lol .. Making medical expenses tax deductible will not do anything to control costs. I only use my insurance when I need it, not because I feel like going to the doctor because I can. The things you mention only help the insurance company, not the consumer. Insurance companies are part of the problem. I don't know what the solution is , but I know what it isn't. If the US is the only developed nation with a for profit health system , is it any surprise that system is the most expensive? And no need to make it illegal to offer health insurance when that is the system our government created, just make it unnecessary . Perhaps only the government can stop the runaway money orgy that our system has become. What would all the medical workers do, leave to go toCanada? Europe? Don't get me wrong, doctors etc should be well paid, but the system could be run with one or two private insurance companies, like say,Japan . Perhaps they have the best system, a blend of gov't and private.

[Joe Miner]

 

 

 

Since it's (or at least it was before the ACA) entirely up to an employer whether or not to offer health insurance as part of an employee's compensation, you would support making it illegal to do so? Don't misunderstand - they could always just offer the cash equivalent, but would you really support denying them the option to provide coverage as part of the employees' salary?

The sentiment that your employer shouldn't be your gateway to affordable insurance is the important part. Making it illegal is a bit silly.

 

But just as your employer shouldn't be the middleman, neither should the govt.

Edited August 15, 2016 by Joe Miner

[keepthefaith]

 

 

 

Since it's (or at least it was before the ACA) entirely up to an employer whether or not to offer health insurance as part of an employee's compensation, you would support making it illegal to do so? Don't misunderstand - they could always just offer the cash equivalent, but would you really support denying them the option to provide coverage as part of the employees' salary?

Employers should be free to compensate employees as they wish including stipends or increases to help cover health insurance. I'm quite sure that many employers would do so if they no longer provided coverage. Once people have to use and shop for health insurance like other forms of insurance, they will act and shop more responsibly and the market will offer new and more flexible plans if the providers aren't restricted by government.

[ExiledInIllinois]

The sentiment that your employer shouldn't be your gateway to affordable insurance is the important part. Making it illegal is a bit silly.

 

But just as your employer shouldn't be the middleman, neither should the govt.

Then who will manage the pool of people. Educating doctors is expensive, they have to be paid well. Then there is advancing medical technology. If you think solely that a free market will solve it all, IMO, you are very wrong.

 

It is like going back to the old amusement park days when we were children. Everybody buy a ticket and choose the crappy low tech ride you want. Or, pay one big admission price, get to ride any newest ride you want... BUT, you may have to stand in line all day just to get on that newest, coolest ride. Point? They got your money in one large pool and your price of admission my not be the best dollar value for you on somedays. Meaning, the other side comes out ahead. And young healthy people are kicking in too...

 

Anyway... Last 25+ years... I work for the Fed, the 40% I pay for premiums have skyrocketed. Since ACA, my premium has been cut in half for same benefits. Between my Agency and me, we were paying close to 20k a year just before ACA.

[keepthefaith]

Then who will manage the pool of people. Educating doctors is expensive, they have to be paid well. Then there is advancing medical technology. If you think solely that a free market will solve it all, IMO, you are very wrong.

 

It is like going back to the old amusement park days when we were children. Everybody buy a ticket and choose the crappy low tech ride you want. Or, pay one big admission price, get to ride any newest ride you want... BUT, you may have to stand in line all day just to get on that newest, coolest ride. Point? They got your money in one large pool and your price of admission my not be the best dollar value for you on somedays. Meaning, the other side comes out ahead. And young healthy people are kicking in too...

 

Anyway... Last 25+ years... I work for the Fed, the 40% I pay for premiums have skyrocketed. Since ACA, my premium has been cut in half for same benefits. Between my Agency and me, we were paying close to 20k a year just before ACA.

You would be one of the rare few that has seen a decrease but again you are not working in private sector.

[Juror#8]

 

Sure, repeal and replace - but replace with what? Another government-designed monstrosity? Insurance is one of the factors in rising health care costs, so less insurance? No insurance? Juror was asking for substantive alternatives - I think we all agree that the ACA sucks. I happen to believe that too much legislation, regulation, and getting away from the concept of the old fashioned family doctor is largely to blame.

 

What do you think?

That's exactly what I'm asking for and it is such a difficult question for folks to answer.

 

I'm not a fan of the aca as much as I'm a fan of something. What was happening before was people were using the emergency room as their primary care physician and then absconding on the bill. That was causing annual increases in costs because medical providers would just pass those unpaid bills along through the costs of their services to everyone else. Then insurance companies would just amortize the hit by passing along the costs to the premium paying population. So we were seeing the costs of a profoundly inefficient system, only just incrementally - almost as a tax every year or every few years.

 

And then there were regular threats of a big increase in medical costs coming to offset that above-mentioned pattern of inefficiency and the unsustainability of a shadow system that reluctantly provided medical care services to the underemployed and the millions who had just enough at the end of the month to make ends meet and those "ends" didn't include health care coverage.

 

Congress and most others were just ok going full on ostrich mode and not doing anything substantively to fix what has been the systemic and institutional equivalent of a functional alcoholic even though lip service had been paid to restructuring the medical care/cost dilemma since around the same time that Nixon and Haldeman were recording themselves conspiring to defraud the United States.

 

So my question again to everyone else ...

 

You hate the aca? ok. Good. Righty o then. I'm fine with that. It's not without its significant issues and problems. So let's talk about what you do like as a credible alternative?

 

The dysfunctional system as it existed before?

 

It's easy to just tear **** down and step away when the discussion of building it up is underway.

Edited August 15, 2016 by Juror#8

[ExiledInIllinois]

You would be one of the rare few that has seen a decrease but again you are not working in private sector.

Fair enough. My employer has always paid 60% of the premium... They had to be bled dry by the insurance companies.. It's their own doing too, they offer way too many choices of plans. Any wonder why they pushed ACA.

That's exactly what I'm asking for and it is such a difficult question for folks to answer.

 

I'm not a fan of the aca as much as I'm a fan of something. What was happening before was people were using the emergency room as their primary care physician and then absconding on the bill. That was causing annual increases in costs because medical providers would just pass those unpaid bills along through the costs of their services to everyone else. Then insurance companies would just amortize the hit by passing along the costs to the premium paying population. So we were seeing the costs of a profoundly inefficient system, only just incrementally - almost as a tax every year or every few years.

 

And then there were regular threats of a big increase in medical costs coming to offset that above-mentioned pattern inefficiency and the unsustainability of a shadow system that reluctantly provided medical care services to the underemployed and the millions who had just enough at the end of the month to make ends meet and those "ends" didn't include health care coverage.

 

Congress and most others were just ok going full on ostrich mode and not doing anything substantively to fix what has been the systemic and institutional equivalent of a functional alcoholic even though lip service had been paid to restructuring the medical care/cost dilemma since around the same time that Nixon and Haldeman were recording themselves conspiring to defraud the United States.

 

So my question again to everyone else ...

 

You hate the aca? ok. Good. Righty o then. I'm fine with that. It's not without its significant issues and problems. So let's talk about what you do like as a credible alternative?

 

The dysfunctional system as it existed before?

 

It's easy to just tear **** down and step away when the discussion of building it up is underway.

Single payer. Throw it all in one pool. Pick your ride. Don't like waiting, buy a fast pass.

[keepthefaith]

The dysfunctional system as it existed before?

 

 

A very good argument could be made that life under the ACA is more dysfunctional than before with the possible exception of allowing children on parents plans longer and pre-existing condition. The negatives far outweigh the few positives IMO.

 

Split the country in two. One country for those that believe in personal responsibility, lower taxation and limited government and another country that prefers the government to provide a wide range of services through taxation anf lots of government oversight. That should make everyone happy.

Edited August 15, 2016 by keepthefaith

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Let's cut the bull ****:

The ACA was, is and always will be a means to an end: the removal of private health insurance from the equation.

The bottom line here is that it's a steppingstone to Medicare for all.

[DC Tom]

A very good argument could be made that life under the ACA is more dysfunctional than before with the possible exception of allowing children on parents plans longer and pre-existing condition. The negatives far outweigh the few positives IMO.

 

Split the country in two. One country for those that believe in personal responsibility, lower taxation and limited government and another country that prefers the government to provide a wide range of services through taxation anf lots of government oversight. That should make everyone happy.

 

And even that's dysfunctional.

 

We keep pushing the definition of "adult" farther and farther out. By the time I'm dead, I wouldn't be surprised if "adulthood" legally began at 30.

[Boatdrinks]

A very good argument could be made that life under the ACA is more dysfunctional than before with the possible exception of allowing children on parents plans longer and pre-existing condition. The negatives far outweigh the few positives IMO.

 

Split the country in two. One country for those that believe in personal responsibility, lower taxation and limited government and another country that prefers the government to provide a wide range of services through taxation anf lots of government oversight. That should make everyone happy.

Agreed that the ACA in its final form had many more negatives than the few positives are worth. As for the country , I'm not sure that believing there is a better way to do health care( because our unfettered system has been ruined by vulgarian greed) means that one does not believe in personal responsibility. It just means that left to its own personal responsibility , greed has simply won out over virtue in health care and medicine. So something needs to be done. I'm all for personal responsibility , and as a result low taxation. To me, that means I do not wish to pay ( through taxes) for educating anyone else's children or subsidizing their existence. i.e. : children cost money, if you do not wish to absorb the cost yourself, don't have them. Theses things are never brought up by those who say they do not wish to "pay for my neighbors health care". Perhaps all roads should be pay as you go as well; I for one would love it. The freeways would be so less congested. There should be no deductions for dependent a beyond ones spouse. If the Government were to eliminate all these things , welfare, snap program etc, I figure my taxes should be reduced by over 50%. Ideally, Government would not need to be involved in health care either,but the system has shown that it cannot control itself. Only those who actually provide health care or produce medicines should profit ; why should the American citizenry support a huge "cottage industry" known as insurance? There should truly be only one or two providers of health insurance to manage the system. We spend so much supporting bean counters that perform no health care service at all.

[ExiledInIllinois]

 

And even that's dysfunctional.

 

We keep pushing the definition of "adult" farther and farther out. By the time I'm dead, I wouldn't be surprised if "adulthood" legally began at 30.

Great point.

 

Now... Realistically, I take my son to Iowa City on Thursday to start his freshman year of college. If the plan goes well, he will be in school for @ least 6 or more years. That puts him @ the youngest 24-25. Who will cover him while in school? Should the University of Iowa provide it?

 

I was 22 when I started w/the DoD & w/FEHBA.

Edited August 16, 2016 by ExiledInIllinois