Obamacare.......the good stuff.

Third party confirmation would be great (Kaiser does not count....).

Could you provide the list of third party sources approved by deluded conspiracy theorist rightwingers?

I see.....you want third party confirmation...but they are deluded.

If they provided it, would they be any less deluded ?

That is my primary issue. There is not much out there that isn't agenda driven.

Getting an honest assesment seems next to impossible.
 
There is not much out there that isn't agenda driven.

Getting an honest assesment seems next to impossible.

Yes, the available answers aren't to your liking so there must be no answers! More people have insurance than ever before, and fewer people are having trouble with medical bills than ever before. Boy, I just don't know what to make of all this.
 
There is not much out there that isn't agenda driven.

Getting an honest assesment seems next to impossible.

Yes, the available answers aren't to your liking so there must be no answers! More people have insurance than ever before, and fewer people are having trouble with medical bills than ever before. Boy, I just don't know what to make of all this.

The available answers are not to my liking. If that implies that I have an ideological problem with the ACA, you would be dead wrong. But, let's not let your blindness get in the way.

The available answers from the right are no better.

Everyone has an agenda.

And my answers are empirical. They are not universal, but the more I talk to people on both sides, the more I am finding out that the program is a mess.

1. I know people who run hospitals who have stated (in spite of their support for the program) that adminstrative costs have gone up.
2. They also talk about the pressure to meet certrain requirements (like lengths between repeat visits) that are hurting people's care.
3. Within my own family, those who once had insurance can no longer afford it.
4. Those who were hurt by the implementation and who have found insurance are not only finding it more expensive, but finding it more expensive to utilize.

This seems to be a a pretty universal song.

I am aware of some who have been able to obtain insurance and who have benefited from it.

But, the claims that it's a great program don't wash in my little self contained world and that seems to be the case for many. You start to look at enough data and you can see a pattern.

Do I wish it "was O.K.". You bet I do. Do I wish all the promises had come true. You bet I do.

But the bald faced lies about lowering costs fly in the face of quotes like this (from an Obamacare advocate):

Did anyone think you can provide coverage to people who don’t have health insurance, especially those who are older and sicker, without some people (mainly the healthy young and wealthy of all ages) paying more through higher taxes and premiums? This is the way risk-sharing and pooling is supposed to work!

The ACP Advocate Blog: An Honest Assessment of Obamacare at Age 3

The answers are not to my liking ? How about reality not adding up.

Can't help that.
 
I have a very pointed question for you, what did Obamacare do to address healthcare costs??

Health care costs are a function of two things: the pricing of services and how much of those services we need to consume before we get well.

The ACA attacks the pricing side by 1) encouraging price sensitivity (and comparison shopping) in the consumer via deductibles and cost-sharing, and 2) creating competitive insurance markets that force insurers to bargain down provider prices if they want to offer competitive premiums.

That's why health care price growth over the past few year hasn't just hit record lows, hospitals prices actually fell for the first time earlier this year.

On the other side of the equation, it attacks the waste and inefficiency in the system by linking payment to results achieved (not just the volume of services delivered). Providers are coordinating care across settings to reduce unnecessary duplication of services and avoid missing potential complications, they're actively managing the health of the populations they serve, and they're redesigning care to do the things that make sense but weren't financially feasible under the old incentive structure. In other words, they're being paid to work together, be better, and achieve better results, all while slowing cost growth.
 
Chart number one is meaningless.

As has been shown repeatedly, having health insurance is meaningless if it is to expensive to use.

Then it's good to know the number of people struggling to pay medical bills has dropped by 12 million during the ACA era.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- For the fourth straight year fewer Americans are struggling to pay medical bills, according to a major government survey released Tuesday. Most of the progress has come among low-income people and those with government coverage.
Most of the improvement happened in the last two years, coinciding with the big coverage expansion under President Barack Obama's health care law. The results from the National Health Interview Survey are for people under age 65, since virtually all seniors are covered by Medicare.

Good news! The coverage expansions are meaningful.

Oh, and by the way Greenbeard, the article is a great start.

It would be good to see the actual metrics and resulting statistics.

Keep in mind that the ACA came about about a year after substantial job losses. If this is a year to year thing, it would be good to know somebody was able to take that bias out of the data.

Of course, the article provides no such information.

Is there more ?
 
Why would anyone here NOT consider Greenbeard to be an expert concerning this subject?

What are Greenbeard's credential's ?

Stupid question. He's consistently shown a command of the subject matter. For years.

I've not been on the board for years......

It is apparent that just knowing how to spell it seems to impress you.

When you can produce an argument that is convincing....I'll buy in.
 

Forum List

Back
Top