From ACA to AHCA - ObamaCare to TrumpCare
- Thread starter AllenChicago
- Start date
No, **** them all. Dems are corrupt too. That doesn't mean that the repubs should be let off the hook. The current administration is more blatantly corrupt. This current proposal is so bad as to be insulting. Better that they just admit that they're making a tax grab and don't intend to do anything useful regarding insurance.
It is also laughable that any in government complain about Russian election interference. We routinely overthrow foreign governments. I don't like G. Gordon but at least he had the integrity to do the time and not roll over on his accomplices.
Trump is the swamp he promised to drain.
- 1,926
Trump's team are such bad marketers/salesfolks. Why hasn't he gone straight to constituents and sell direct. Premiums are not going down any time soon, more strain on the middle class. I thank Rand Paul and others standing up for what they believe.
The government has no business trying to manage the health care, and health insurance business. You and I both know that Ned.
Even folks in Congress like Paul and Price, both trained physicians, do not really understand the way health insurance works.
Obamacare screwed up the way health care was delivered and funded. Probably so badly it will never be fixed as long as there is govt oversight.
My suggestion from the start has been to let Obamacare die a natural death, create and fund a national risk pool, and let the free market return. But that won't happen. Carriers will continue to withdraw from the individual health insurance market and the only choices will be Medicaid or limited coverage plans.
Even folks in Congress like Paul and Price, both trained physicians, do not really understand the way health insurance works.
Obamacare screwed up the way health care was delivered and funded. Probably so badly it will never be fixed as long as there is govt oversight.
My suggestion from the start has been to let Obamacare die a natural death, create and fund a national risk pool, and let the free market return. But that won't happen. Carriers will continue to withdraw from the individual health insurance market and the only choices will be Medicaid or limited coverage plans.
Actually, they do have to put down some rules.
Once upon a time, small group could be declined and those with pre-ex couldn't change jobs or even have the employer change carriers.
The insurance industry thought the world was going to end when the gubmt interfered and made what was essentially a form of price competition and made pre-ex portable.
What needs to be stopped is the incessant 8-10% trend. No other industry runs on those numbers. People forget that "benefits" are essentially and only a form of competition and insurance indemnifies the insured. Premium inflation which is providing an ever shrinking protection is also taking an ever larger portion of a person's compensation.
Explain to the person making $10/hr, $400/wk, $20,000/yr that he should be happy that he actually receives another $400/month in the form of premium paid for a HDHP that doesn't pay anything except a wellness visit that is frequently not used and will cost him another $300 if an illness is discovered until he's met a $5,000 deductible. He really doesn't feel the love.
Healthcare run amuck is taking an ever increasing portion of total production. That needs to stop but Congress has no incentive to do anything. The current plan is a tax grab, nothing more.
Pinche Trump and Ryan.
This is what was voted on to proceed to amendments:
https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/REPEAL7.19.17.pdf
https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/REPEAL7.19.17.pdf
- Thread starter
- #137
- 8,448
Here is an Amendment. Free market health insurance for anybody who wants it and can qualify for it. Medicare for those who are turned down by health insurance and can pay the 300 to $600 a month cost. Medicaid for everyone else.
In case you weren't paying attention:
http://www.modernhealthcare.com/art...ntent=20170725-NEWS-170729944&utm_campaign=am
http://www.modernhealthcare.com/art...ntent=20170725-NEWS-170729944&utm_campaign=am
Some valid points, but that doesn't do much to control costs and make them more transparent. We already have damn near free health insurance for people who qualify from a federal level. The states decide what to do at that point....Medicaid/CHIPS/etc. So how exactly does the GOV distinguish between somebody getting free health insurance or Medicaid vs what they already do now?
Buying into Medicare is a great idea and I fully support it, but good luck telling most consumers they will pay $300-$600 a month to cover 80% of expenses p/person until they reach 65. Does that include dental? Is that per month?
Consumer: "WOW that GI Medigap plan is $400 a month too, how do I get one of those free Medicare plans?"
Agent: "I'm glad you asked!"
The good news is that Medicare reimbursement rates are transparent, although they aren't streamlined and easily understood. Generally speaking, it also really doesn't matter for most people because they don't care. YMMV.
One good thing that I liked about companies after ACA was implemented is how they provided some examples for pregnancy costs in brochures. GREAT, now include heart attack, stroke, cancer examples too for under 65/over 65 folks.
@Salpro, in my opinion Medicare plan design is up side down because it covers 1st dollar claims that are the most expensive because they have a high probability and leaves the insured with an unlimited liability. Premiums are highly subsidized and people walk around thinking "Medicare only costs $100 and change". It would be better to give those who can afford it some version of a HDHP with an out of pocket max. Lower incomes would qualify for something similar to what we have now. Providers still write off charges and shift costs to others even with the current plan design. I doubt for example that someone with no money would pay the 20% coinsurance owed after a 6 week hospital stay and follow up rehab.
Medicare reimbursement transparency does nothing 2 controll costs. People only care about what they pay and not total cost. Besides, they dont know the cost up front and use it for buying decisions.
Dems want everything free. Repubs want wild west of free market where they can rape and pillage.
We need regulation where most procedures are allowed charges. We need all eligible people enrolled. We need procedure prices to be known up front and to mean something with price competition at the provider level. We need everyone to pay something even if only a little.
We don't need the stripped down pay nothing plans that will result under current proposals.
I remember interviewing with and riding with a Moutal of Omaha agent. They sold hospital only policies that paid $0 in claims and 50% commission plus another amount in agency overrides.
I remember 1 old couple out in the country. Their place was immaculate. The wife had lots of health issues and her husband of 60 yrs or more took care of her. They'd had the contract for years and all claims were declined per the contract. The agent replaced the policy, made over $1,000 and the insured wasn't helped. Those contracts should be regulated out of existence.
Medicare reimbursement transparency does nothing 2 controll costs. People only care about what they pay and not total cost. Besides, they dont know the cost up front and use it for buying decisions.
Dems want everything free. Repubs want wild west of free market where they can rape and pillage.
We need regulation where most procedures are allowed charges. We need all eligible people enrolled. We need procedure prices to be known up front and to mean something with price competition at the provider level. We need everyone to pay something even if only a little.
We don't need the stripped down pay nothing plans that will result under current proposals.
I remember interviewing with and riding with a Moutal of Omaha agent. They sold hospital only policies that paid $0 in claims and 50% commission plus another amount in agency overrides.
I remember 1 old couple out in the country. Their place was immaculate. The wife had lots of health issues and her husband of 60 yrs or more took care of her. They'd had the contract for years and all claims were declined per the contract. The agent replaced the policy, made over $1,000 and the insured wasn't helped. Those contracts should be regulated out of existence.
Similar threads
