Can Obamacare be Fixed?

[Bern80]

Well, nothing you have presented is evidence of anything. Why should anyone else have to live up to a standard higher than the one you apply to yourself?

There is a funny story about two economics students. One announced his intent to switch majors to physics. His friend replies, “When you do, the average IQ for the physics department will go up and the average for the economics department will go down.” There is no “law of averages” that requires the average to be higher.

I've already provided my response to the presented article.

It is true that people whom would not have otherwise buy medical insurance will be paying more in terms of medical insurance. Not buying insurance doesn't have a direct insurance cost associated with it.

It is true that people that would not have purchased medical insurance and are lucky enough to not need substantial medical care will end up paying more than they might otherwise have, during the period of time for which they would not have otherwise purchased insurance.

Not purchasing health insurance and not getting sick or being in a sever accident doesn't have either insurance or medical costs associated with it.

The article sited doesn't definitively predict health care premiums. It does provide some insight into some of the effects that will affect health care premiums.

So, What evidence do you think can possibly be provided that will definitively predict prices in the future?

The community rating mandate does that. It perfectly predicts what will happen to the price of premiums. Again it's simply math. It's a mandate that requires insurance companies to avg. premiums across a given risk pool. Therefore some permiums MUST go up. That this regulation exists is your evidence that premiums are and must go up.

Oh billshit. You complain when others make statements without evidence, then you make a sweeping claim based on nothing except some unstated assumptions. Your math is simple, for sure. Unfortunately, it doesn't represent reality.

My question was, "what evidence do you think can possibly be provided that will definitively predict prices in the future?"

And your response makes it clear that evidence doesn't mean anything to you. You continue on this oversimplistic and inappropriately applied average.

Again I fail to understand how a mandate that says insurance companies must now average out rates across a risk pool doesn't predict what will happen to some people's rates. Hell the community rating mandate isn't even a prediction. It's essentially a flat out statement that some people's rates are going to go up as a result. You simply keep characterizing the above as simplistic because as a liberal you don't like the fact that it makes a liberal policy look bad. The community rating mandate isn't complicated. It says take number of insured on a given policy in a given region and average out the premium rate. The reality is not that I haven't provided evidence. You've admitted what I'm saying is true in theory you just don't believe that's how it works in practics and YOU haven't provided any evidence to support that. The evidence that supports my positions is in the news every day. There's your evdience. That you wish to remain obtuse to it is no refutation of the fact.

 

[PMZ]

Agreed, accept that isn't what we're talking about. We're not talking about the what the avg premium cost is doing regardless of risk pool. And further who cares about no increase in total premiums. What is that a measure of? That when you averaged across everyone in the country that single number might be lower than the national premium average previously? You're having to generalize so much at this point that that is meaningless. It tells us nothing.

Republicans, in an attempt to recover some of their lost relevance, are implying that Obamacare is costly to the nation rather than what it is. The measure of that would be total premium increase due to its mandates.

I think that on the short term the effects of it are economicly neutral and it's benefit is, over the long term, a necessary step to getting our completely out of control health care delivery system globally competitive.

Calling what you don't want to be true "meaningless" is not productive.

It is meaningless. I for one have not contended it will be expensive to the nation (though it will be). I have maintained it's going to be costly to a lot of individuals and this has been proven. It's going to be costly to young, healthy individuals on the individual market. Obama lied about that. He sold this as healthcare being less expensive for everyone. We clearly see now that isn't going to be the case. It's just another example of stupid liberal problem solving. You reward the negative and punish the positive. You know that and again you're just trying to change the subject.

Globally competitive is anther vague, meanignless term. Competitive in what exactly? Because in terms of delivering health outcomes the U.S. is ranked at the top by the WHO. It's the cost that causes us to get ranked lower. But any one that understands a market should obviously see that superior quality is going to cost more.

" I for one have not contended it will be expensive to the nation (though it will be)."

This oxymoron speaks for itself.

" He sold this as healthcare being less expensive for everyone."

Never. It isn't healthcare. It's health care insurance regulation. That's not going to change the price of healthcare at all.

" You reward the negative and punish the positive. "

Requiring people to be responsible for the cost of their families health care has no impact on responsible people, who have always been, and discourages irresponsibility with a non-compliance tax.

" Globally competitive is anther vague, meanignless term."

Not if you're in business.

America is spending about 10% of GDP more on health care than our global competition. That’s a huge obstacle to selling American products overseas. People blame wages, which we have always offset with productivity, but just paying that much more for mediocre health care results is a huge strike against American business success.

" Because in terms of delivering health outcomes the U.S. is ranked at the top by the WHO."

An absolute fabrication.

You keep sharing Republican propaganda in the hopes that some of it is true. It's just plain not.

 

[PMZ]

The community rating mandate does that. It perfectly predicts what will happen to the price of premiums. Again it's simply math. It's a mandate that requires insurance companies to avg. premiums across a given risk pool. Therefore some permiums MUST go up. That this regulation exists is your evidence that premiums are and must go up.

Oh billshit. You complain when others make statements without evidence, then you make a sweeping claim based on nothing except some unstated assumptions. Your math is simple, for sure. Unfortunately, it doesn't represent reality.

My question was, "what evidence do you think can possibly be provided that will definitively predict prices in the future?"

And your response makes it clear that evidence doesn't mean anything to you. You continue on this oversimplistic and inappropriately applied average.

Again I fail to understand how a mandate that says insurance companies must now average out rates across a risk pool doesn't predict what will happen to some people's rates. Hell the community rating mandate isn't even a prediction. It's essentially a flat out statement that some people's rates are going to go up as a result. You simply keep characterizing the above as simplistic because as a liberal you don't like the fact that it makes a liberal policy look bad. The community rating mandate isn't complicated. It says take number of insured on a given policy in a given region and average out the premium rate. The reality is not that I haven't provided evidence. You've admitted what I'm saying is true in theory you just don't believe that's how it works in practics and YOU haven't provided any evidence to support that. The evidence that supports my positions is in the news every day. There's your evdience. That you wish to remain obtuse to it is no refutation of the fact.

Community rating has been in use by the insurance business for decades. You would like to imply that it's an Obamacare invention. All alternatives, other than no insurance, have the same effect. All that changes is who pays slightly more and who pays slightly less.

Your Republican campaign advertising attempting to drag democrats and the country down to the level of incompetence demonstrated time after time by Republicans is just lies. It's not going to work any better than all of the other Obama lies told by the GOP over the last four years.

Hang it up.

 

[Bern80]

" I for one have not contended it will be expensive to the nation (though it will be)."

This oxymoron speaks for itself.

Nothing paradoxical about it. At no point in this overly long conversation, prior to the above, has the conversaton been about whether or not our health care expenses as a nation will go up. It's been about for what individuals will costs co up.

" He sold this as healthcare being less expensive for everyone."

Never. It isn't healthcare. It's health care insurance regulation. That's not going to change the price of healthcare at all.

Wow. That's pretty interesting spin. You're claiming that teh President was up front that insurance would cost more but the new regulations will be worth it? I don't think you're gonna find a soul that remembers that speech. No, the argument by Obama all along was if not but for what it cost, more people would receive the health care they need.

" You reward the negative and punish the positive. "

Requiring people to be responsible for the cost of their families health care has no impact on responsible people, who have always been, and discourages irresponsibility with a non-compliance tax.

Again. Not talking about the individual mandate here. We're talking about the community rating mandate which essentially holds the young and healthy responsible for the medical costs of the old and sick.

" Globally competitive is anther vague, meanignless term."

Not if you're in business.

America is spending about 10% of GDP more on health care than our global competition. That’s a huge obstacle to selling American products overseas. People blame wages, which we have always offset with productivity, but just paying that much more for mediocre health care results is a huge strike against American business success.

Again can't have it both ways. You said this wasn't about cost cutting. Rather it's about regulat, but complain about us spending more than other countries on health care. If it never was about cost cutting as you previously contended why bother bringing up how much we spend on health care.

" Because in terms of delivering health outcomes the U.S. is ranked at the top by the WHO."

An absolute fabrication.

No. Look at the report. I've studied it extensively and the rank any given country has in the report is based on subset of factors such as efficiency of delivery, outcomes and cost. In the former areas the U.S. ranks quite high. It's the cost to the individual that tends to drop our rank in the eyes of WHO.

 

[Bern80]

Community rating has been in use by the insurance business for decades. You would like to imply that it's an Obamacare invention. All alternatives, other than no insurance, have the same effect. All that changes is who pays slightly more and who pays slightly less.

Yes it has been around before. Except prior to Obamacare, risk could be factored into that community rating which is why prior to Obamacare sicker person was a paying a higher premium than a healthier person for the same policy on the individual network. Nor is it slightly more or slightly less. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are seeing their rates increase by double digit percentages or are being dropped all together and forced to purchase plans with higher premiums and deductibles. You liberals can keep your head in the sand. Not pay attention to ANY news outlet that is reporting these things on a daily basis, but that doesn't change the fact it is happening.

There is no part of Obamacare that provides a real mechanism of driving costs down anywhere. That was brutally obvious.

What on earth would make you think a mandate that forces insurance providers to charge the same rate for the same product to all comers would result in the cost of the premium going down for everyone?

What on earth would make you think a mandate that doesn't allow insurers to deny people with pre-existing conditions would make you think that would make premium costs go down?

What on earth would make you think that tax that makes medical devices cost more for providers would make the cost of services go down?

Those are established, known requirements of Obamacare not open for debate. Nor should it be open for debate as to what they do to the price of a good or service. The only people who will see their premiums go down are the unhealthy and elderly. To accomplish that the way this bill was crafted REQUIRES that the young and healthy pay more. You could have an actual debate over whether that's a legitimate obligation of society or not...for the haves to essentially pay for the have nots, but could we please stop pretending it's not happening and that Obama didn't lie about it?

 

[PMZ]

Community rating has been in use by the insurance business for decades. You would like to imply that it's an Obamacare invention. All alternatives, other than no insurance, have the same effect. All that changes is who pays slightly more and who pays slightly less.

Yes it has been around before. Except prior to Obamacare, risk could be factored into that community rating which is why prior to Obamacare sicker person was a paying a higher premium than a healthier person for the same policy on the individual network. Nor is it slightly more or slightly less. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are seeing their rates increase by double digit percentages or are being dropped all together and forced to purchase plans with higher premiums and deductibles. You liberals can keep your head in the sand. Not pay attention to ANY news outlet that is reporting these things on a daily basis, but that doesn't change the fact it is happening.

There is no part of Obamacare that provides a real mechanism of driving costs down anywhere. That was brutally obvious.

What on earth would make you think a mandate that forces insurance providers to charge the same rate for the same product to all comers would result in the cost of the premium going down for everyone?

What on earth would make you think a mandate that doesn't allow insurers to deny people with pre-existing conditions would make you think that would make premium costs go down?

What on earth would make you think that tax that makes medical devices cost more for providers would make the cost of services go down?

Those are established, known requirements of Obamacare not open for debate. Nor should it be open for debate as to what they do to the price of a good or service. The only people who will see their premiums go down are the unhealthy and elderly. To accomplish that the way this bill was crafted REQUIRES that the young and healthy pay more. You could have an actual debate over whether that's a legitimate obligation of society or not...for the haves to essentially pay for the have nots, but could we please stop pretending it's not happening and that Obama didn't lie about it?

You've made your point that you are sticking to the propaganda whether it's right or wrong. Your choice. Just don't pretend that it's rational or based on facts. You reject facts like water off a duck's back.

 

[Bern80]

Community rating has been in use by the insurance business for decades. You would like to imply that it's an Obamacare invention. All alternatives, other than no insurance, have the same effect. All that changes is who pays slightly more and who pays slightly less.

Yes it has been around before. Except prior to Obamacare, risk could be factored into that community rating which is why prior to Obamacare sicker person was a paying a higher premium than a healthier person for the same policy on the individual network. Nor is it slightly more or slightly less. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are seeing their rates increase by double digit percentages or are being dropped all together and forced to purchase plans with higher premiums and deductibles. You liberals can keep your head in the sand. Not pay attention to ANY news outlet that is reporting these things on a daily basis, but that doesn't change the fact it is happening.

There is no part of Obamacare that provides a real mechanism of driving costs down anywhere. That was brutally obvious.

What on earth would make you think a mandate that forces insurance providers to charge the same rate for the same product to all comers would result in the cost of the premium going down for everyone?

What on earth would make you think a mandate that doesn't allow insurers to deny people with pre-existing conditions would make you think that would make premium costs go down?

What on earth would make you think that tax that makes medical devices cost more for providers would make the cost of services go down?

Those are established, known requirements of Obamacare not open for debate. Nor should it be open for debate as to what they do to the price of a good or service. The only people who will see their premiums go down are the unhealthy and elderly. To accomplish that the way this bill was crafted REQUIRES that the young and healthy pay more. You could have an actual debate over whether that's a legitimate obligation of society or not...for the haves to essentially pay for the have nots, but could we please stop pretending it's not happening and that Obama didn't lie about it?

You've made your point that you are sticking to the propaganda whether it's right or wrong. Your choice. Just don't pretend that it's rational or based on facts. You reject facts like water off a duck's back.

Sorry. Again you're projecting. You can pretend hundreds of thousands and possibly millions by next year aren't or won't seeing their premiuns sky rocket. That doesn't change the fact it is happening. I am a far more objective person than you are clearly. I do recognize that there is plenty of room for improvement. I am not however a liberal partisan hack like you that will defend bad policy to the end out of party loyalty as you are doing. I am perfectly comfortable resting on what I've said because the outcomes I have said are observable here and now. You on the other hand have provided nothing to support any of your contentions. The bulk of your time as been spent telling me I'm wrong without any evidence as to why or unsubtatiable claims that I'm a parrot for someone. Instead it's been mostly excuses and back pedaling.

 

[PMZ]

Yes it has been around before. Except prior to Obamacare, risk could be factored into that community rating which is why prior to Obamacare sicker person was a paying a higher premium than a healthier person for the same policy on the individual network. Nor is it slightly more or slightly less. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are seeing their rates increase by double digit percentages or are being dropped all together and forced to purchase plans with higher premiums and deductibles. You liberals can keep your head in the sand. Not pay attention to ANY news outlet that is reporting these things on a daily basis, but that doesn't change the fact it is happening.

There is no part of Obamacare that provides a real mechanism of driving costs down anywhere. That was brutally obvious.

What on earth would make you think a mandate that forces insurance providers to charge the same rate for the same product to all comers would result in the cost of the premium going down for everyone?

What on earth would make you think a mandate that doesn't allow insurers to deny people with pre-existing conditions would make you think that would make premium costs go down?

What on earth would make you think that tax that makes medical devices cost more for providers would make the cost of services go down?

Those are established, known requirements of Obamacare not open for debate. Nor should it be open for debate as to what they do to the price of a good or service. The only people who will see their premiums go down are the unhealthy and elderly. To accomplish that the way this bill was crafted REQUIRES that the young and healthy pay more. You could have an actual debate over whether that's a legitimate obligation of society or not...for the haves to essentially pay for the have nots, but could we please stop pretending it's not happening and that Obama didn't lie about it?

You've made your point that you are sticking to the propaganda whether it's right or wrong. Your choice. Just don't pretend that it's rational or based on facts. You reject facts like water off a duck's back.

Sorry. Again you're projecting. You can pretend hundreds of thousands and possibly millions by next year aren't or won't seeing their premiuns sky rocket. That doesn't change the fact it is happening. I am a far more objective person than you are clearly. I do recognize that there is plenty of room for improvement. I am not however a liberal partisan hack like you that will defend bad policy to the end out of party loyalty as you are doing. I am perfectly comfortable resting on what I've said because the outcomes I have said are observable here and now. You on the other hand have provided nothing to support any of your contentions. The bulk of your time as been spent telling me I'm wrong without any evidence as to why or unsubtatiable claims that I'm a parrot for someone. Instead it's been mostly excuses and back pedaling.

"I am a far more objective person than you are clearly."

Only in your closed mind.

You're on your own. Not worth debating.

Sell your wares.

 

[dblack]

I don't really care what kind of impact ACA has on the market, or how it effects me personally. This is a matter of vital principle. I don't care what Congress says, what the President says, or what the Court says. I refuse to recognize the power of corporations to levy and collect taxes. And I'll do everything within my power to throw a monkeywrench in this shit.

 

[PMZ]

I don't really care what kind of impact ACA has on the market, or how it effects me personally. This is a matter of vital principle. I don't care what Congress says, what the President says, or what the Court says. I refuse to recognize the power of corporations to levy and collect taxes. And I'll do everything within my power to throw a monkeywrench in this shit.

I refuse to recognize the power of corporations to levy and collect taxes.

Is this somehow connected to ACA?

 

[dblack]

I don't really care what kind of impact ACA has on the market, or how it effects me personally. This is a matter of vital principle. I don't care what Congress says, what the President says, or what the Court says. I refuse to recognize the power of corporations to levy and collect taxes. And I'll do everything within my power to throw a monkeywrench in this shit.

I refuse to recognize the power of corporations to levy and collect taxes.

Is this somehow connected to ACA?

It's the heart and soul of ACA.

 

[Bern80]

You've made your point that you are sticking to the propaganda whether it's right or wrong. Your choice. Just don't pretend that it's rational or based on facts. You reject facts like water off a duck's back.

Sorry. Again you're projecting. You can pretend hundreds of thousands and possibly millions by next year aren't or won't seeing their premiuns sky rocket. That doesn't change the fact it is happening. I am a far more objective person than you are clearly. I do recognize that there is plenty of room for improvement. I am not however a liberal partisan hack like you that will defend bad policy to the end out of party loyalty as you are doing. I am perfectly comfortable resting on what I've said because the outcomes I have said are observable here and now. You on the other hand have provided nothing to support any of your contentions. The bulk of your time as been spent telling me I'm wrong without any evidence as to why or unsubtatiable claims that I'm a parrot for someone. Instead it's been mostly excuses and back pedaling.

"I am a far more objective person than you are clearly."

Only in your closed mind.

You're on your own. Not worth debating.

Sell your wares.

Whatever you need to tell yourself.

 

[PMZ]

I don't really care what kind of impact ACA has on the market, or how it effects me personally. This is a matter of vital principle. I don't care what Congress says, what the President says, or what the Court says. I refuse to recognize the power of corporations to levy and collect taxes. And I'll do everything within my power to throw a monkeywrench in this shit.

I refuse to recognize the power of corporations to levy and collect taxes.

Is this somehow connected to ACA?

It's the heart and soul of ACA.

If I were you I wouldn't send tax money to corporations. I certainly don't and wouldn't.

You guys keep saying that corporations are near God. That, as a consumer you just pick the company that you want.

Why the sudden change of heart?

 

[dblack]

I refuse to recognize the power of corporations to levy and collect taxes.

Is this somehow connected to ACA?

It's the heart and soul of ACA.

If I were you I wouldn't send tax money to corporations. I certainly don't and wouldn't.

You guys keep saying that corporations are near God. That, as a consumer you just pick the company that you want. Why the sudden change of heart?

What in the world are you talking about???

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's the heart and soul of ACA.

If I were you I wouldn't send tax money to corporations. I certainly don't and wouldn't.

You guys keep saying that corporations are near God. That, as a consumer you just pick the company that you want. Why the sudden change of heart?

What in the world are you talking about???

He's hoping the shotgun effect of say all kind of bullshit will confuse.

 

[dblack]

PMZ, you seem fixated on some really weird misconceptions of what libertarians advocate. It certainly isn't corporations colluding with government to control us.

Is ACA really your idea of a 'free market' approach to health care reform? If so, I'd suggest you do some reading.

 

[percysunshine]

When I buy a gallon of gasoline for my car, Shell collects a tax from me and sends it to the State of Texas Treasury, who levied the tax and suborned the oil company to collect it at the point of sale.

Like... am I the only human on the planet who has ever noticed this?

 

[PMZ]

PMZ, you seem fixated on some really weird misconceptions of what libertarians advocate. It certainly isn't corporations colluding with government to control us.

Is ACA really your idea of a 'free market' approach to health care reform? If so, I'd suggest you do some reading.

It is a free market. Just as free as before Obamacare. In fact more free as customers are empowered with better means to compare different offerings.

Responsible families will see no differences except whatever covered health care delivery cost increases there are.

Irresponsible families will see their options to push their costs off to others limited.

The problem with personal responsibility is........

 

[percysunshine]

A true free market in medical care would have medical care responding to demands for lower prices by consumers of medical care. It has not been a free market in a long time because of 3rd and 4th party influences on the transaction.

 

[PMZ]

A true free market in medical care would have medical care responding to demands for lower prices by consumers of medical care. It has not been a free market in a long time because of 3rd and 4th party influences on the transaction.

That need has not been addressed yet as Republicans would consider that objectionable socialism.

What's been addressed is free market insurance to cover health care delivery costs.