Majority of debtors to US hospitals now people with health insurance

Not sure who you think is getting cheap insurance with low deductibles and wide networks.

The subsidies work off a sliding scale, so that those who make a little more, pay a little more.

The biggest problem with the ACA is that there was a big cliff where subsidies just disappeared at 400% FPL, which Democrats fixed.

Do you know how subsidies are calculated? It’s pretty clever.
Yeah, it goes by percentages at or above the federal poverty line.

Still doesn’t tell me where the money is coming from to pay for all this subsidized insurance. I do know a) the people above the subsidy cap OVERPAY for their plans, and b) that Obama financed it in part by taking money away from the Medicare program, because… .well…. Marxists tend to value elderly people less.
 
Yeah, it goes by percentages at or above the federal poverty line.

Still doesn’t tell me where the money is coming from to pay for all this subsidized insurance. I do know a) the people above the subsidy cap OVERPAY for their plans, and b) that Obama financed it in part by taking money away from the Medicare program, because… .well…. Marxists tend to value elderly people less.
Obviously the subsidies are covered by the federal government. We both knew that. There were some cuts to Medicare Advantage, which we should all support since Medicare Advantage screws over the taxpayers for the benefit of insurance companies, but as far as I’m aware, those have been all delayed indefinitely.

ACA subsidies are a lot more complicated than you think. An individual or family is expected to pay 8.5% of their income for an insurance plan. They take a benchmark middle of the road plan and subtract 8.5% of your income. That remainder is your subsidy which you can apply to a bronze plan and pay considerably less than 8.5%.

So if you’re healthy, get a cheap plan and pay next to nothing. Invest in an HSA and when you do finally get sick, then switch to a higher tier plan.

That’s what a responsible person would do.
 
Obviously the subsidies are covered by the federal government.
THAT is always the answer from Dems: ”it doesn’t really cost anybody because the government pays!”

Well, the government is funded by American taxpayers. So when the government pays, Americans pay.

The question remains: who among the taxpayers is paying for more subsidies to other people?

We both knew that. There were some cuts to Medicare Advantage, which we should all support since Medicare Advantage screws over the taxpayers for the benefit of insurance companies, but as far as I’m aware, those have been all delayed indefinitely.

No, there were cuts to Medicare in the form of reduced reimbursements. Now they’re so low that doctors are limiting the number of Medicare patients they have. So, creating Obamacare did hurt elderly on Medicare - the very people who paid their dues for 40 years.
ACA subsidies are a lot more complicated than you think. An individual or family is expected to pay 8.5% of their income for an insurance plan. They take a benchmark middle of the road plan and subtract 8.5% of your income. That remainder is your subsidy which you can apply to a bronze plan and pay considerably less than 8.5%.

So if you’re healthy, get a cheap plan and pay next to nothing. Invest in an HSA and when you do finally get sick, then switch to a higher tier plan.

That’s what a responsible person would do.
So you wait until you’re sick and THEN get a good plan? And you think insurance companies can make a profit like that? Will a car auto policy cover you AFTER you crash your car?

No. The only way that health insurers can do it is that OTHER people are being forced to kick in a lot more.
 
Single payer was taken off the table faster that sh*t through a goose back in Obamaville

Anyone wonder why???

~S~
Because there's no consensus that we want government to be our insurance company.
 
Because there's no consensus that we want government to be our insurance company.
It gives government far too much control over people’s lives, and we’ve already seen the punishment the Dems meted out when Republican Grandma went into the Capitol at an officer’s invitation.

I don’t want Biden et al denying medical care to whom he calls MAGA Republicans, whoever they are.
 
THAT is always the answer from Dems: ”it doesn’t really cost anybody because the government pays!”

Well, the government is funded by American taxpayers. So when the government pays, Americans pay.

The question remains: who among the taxpayers is paying for more subsidies to other people?
It wasn’t my answer since I never claimed that it never cost anybody. There’s no free lunch. I agree. Anyone who pays any form of income tax would have some part in paying them. But the assertion I was arguing is that it made insurance unaffordable and that’s not the case. Now you’re switching topics, basically a motte and bailey defense.
No, there were cuts to Medicare in the form of reduced reimbursements. Now they’re so low that doctors are limiting the number of Medicare patients they have. So, creating Obamacare did hurt elderly on Medicare - the very people who paid their dues for 40 years.
The cuts were to reimbursements to Medicare advantage plans. Not sure how much you know about Medicare advantage but it was your typical Republican plan to introduce free market into Medicare. Well, it went badly. The private insurers sign up the healthiest seniors and take the average Medicare cost, which means traditional Medicare has to spend more to care for fewer and shareholders walk away with taxpayer dollars.

The problem is Medicare advantage is popular, so no one wants to screw with it.

Youre simply misled.
So you wait until you’re sick and THEN get a good plan? And you think insurance companies can make a profit like that? Will a car auto policy cover you AFTER you crash your car?

No. The only way that health insurers can do it is that OTHER people are being forced to kick in a lot more.
The insurance companies can and do make a profit. Switching insurance plans is a normal market activity. People do it all the time.
 
Because there's no consensus that we want government to be our insurance company.
True, yet anecdotally they already are in my >medicare< case DB

I would ask you aim higher, who would be the middle man cut out?

And would those meds that cost $$$$$$ a month for folks to simply stay alive be less a burden, were it all negotiable?

~S~
 
The problem is Medicare advantage is popular, so no one wants to screw with it.
It's 'effin great.....

I go slap that gub'mit card down at the pharmacy desk, and they'll give me anything to shut me up

Gotta love a country so willing to anesthetize their constituents.....

~S~
 
It gives government far too much control over people’s lives, and we’ve already seen the punishment the Dems meted out when Republican Grandma went into the Capitol at an officer’s invitation.

I don’t want Biden et al denying medical care to whom he calls MAGA Republicans, whoever they are.
That's more or less how I see it. But Republicans failed to repeal ACA when they had the chance, so don't give me the partisan crap.
 
True, yet anecdotally they already are in my >medicare< case DB

I would ask you aim higher, who would be the middle man cut out?

And would those meds that cost $$$$$$ a month for folks to simply stay alive be less a burden, were it all negotiable?

~S~
Sorry. Not a socialist. Government already has too much power over us.
 
It's just hard to imagine how miserably bad this so called great nation has failed to create a health care system that works. Fail fail fail fail fail.
 
Why does there need to be a "system"?
How’s this for a system:

1) Middle-class people with jobs buy health insurance through their employer.

2) Low-income people with jobs that don’t offer health insurance put away some of their meager earnings for a “rainy day” and buy a cheap catastrophic care plan. We set up cheap clinics for the routine things, for which they can pay from their rainy day fund.

3) We keep Medicaid for the really poor who are unable to work.
 
How’s this for a system:

1) Middle-class people with jobs buy health insurance through their employer.

2) Low-income people with jobs that don’t offer health insurance put away some of their meager earnings for a “rainy day” and buy a cheap catastrophic care plan. We set up cheap clinics for the routine things, for which they can pay from their rainy day fund.

3) We keep Medicaid for the really poor who are unable to work.
Why "cheap" clinics? Why not the same access as those elitist very wealthy folk?
 
How’s this for a system:

1) Middle-class people with jobs buy health insurance through their employer.

2) Low-income people with jobs that don’t offer health insurance put away some of their meager earnings for a “rainy day” and buy a cheap catastrophic care plan. We set up cheap clinics for the routine things, for which they can pay from their rainy day fund.

3) We keep Medicaid for the really poor who are unable to work.
What about people you call "vermin".?
 
How’s this for a system:

1) Middle-class people with jobs buy health insurance through their employer.

2) Low-income people with jobs that don’t offer health insurance put away some of their meager earnings for a “rainy day” and buy a cheap catastrophic care plan. We set up cheap clinics for the routine things, for which they can pay from their rainy day fund.

3) We keep Medicaid for the really poor who are unable to work.
Who sets up cheap clinics? Staffs them? Pays for them? Gets medications? Procedures?
 
Why "cheap" clinics? Why not the same access as those elitist very wealthy folk?
Because if you’re low-income you aren‘t entitled to the same level of services as affluent people who can afford to pay for them. Our grandparents understood that, and that’s why they wanted their children to succeed and earn decent money.

If low-income people get subsidized up to the same lifestyle as educated professionals, where’s the incentive to better oneself and earn more money?
 
Who sets up cheap clinics? Staffs them? Pays for them? Gets medications? Procedures?
That’s how they did it in the 1930s in New York. Seemed to work. When my dad got hurt and needed stitches, that’s where he went, and his parents paid for it. He didn’t go to the ER where everything is overpriced and unaffordable.
 
That’s how they did it in the 1930s in New York. Seemed to work. When my dad got hurt and needed stitches, that’s where he went, and his parents paid for it. He didn’t go to the ER where everything is overpriced and unaffordable.
Im sure you know this but medicine (not to mention the health of the population) has changed dramatically since the 1930s and a model from 100 years ago doesn’t work.

The main driver of health costs is management of chronic conditions (which affect poor people to a greater extent than anyone else), not people who need stitches.
 

Forum List

Back
Top