The ACA sees record enrollments his year!

[Greenbeard]

What does MAGA have to do with your reasoning or anything I posted?
Why can't you tell me why you think it is worth celebrating more people than before on government assistance?

Depends on whether you value Americans having access to health care. If not, then obviously record numbers of Americans having that access isn't going to seem significant.

 

[BlackSand]

Depends on whether you value Americans having access to health care. If not, then obviously record numbers of Americans having that access isn't going to seem significant.

.

No it doesn't ... I didn't say it wasn't a significant number, nor did I suggest anything ill about the ACA.
I asked the OP why they thought it was a good idea to celebrate a record number of people signing up for government benefits.

That's something they did not answer ... And if you think you can do a better job ... Give it shot.
But don't think that garbage you are trying to talk is going to answer it.

.​

 

[Greenbeard]

No it doesn't ... I didn't say it wasn't a significant number, nor did I suggest anything ill about the ACA.

You're just in the dark as to why more Americans having access to health care would be a good thing. You'll have to examine your own values to determine whether that is or isn't good.

 

[BlackSand]

You're just in the dark as to why more Americans having access to health care would be a good thing. You'll have to examine your own values to determine whether that is or isn't good.

.

I didn't ask you your opinion about me ...

Why do you think more people signing up for government assistance is a good thing.
Why do you think the government will help anyone ... When the best thing you can say about it is that more people than ever need assistance?
Why would you celebrate more people being too poor to afford their healthcare insurance?

If you can answer those questions ... Then maybe we can talk about values.

.​

 

[Greenbeard]

.

I didn't ask you your opinion about me ...

Why do you think more people signing up for government assistance is a good thing.
Why do you think the government will help anyone ... When the best thing you can say about it is that more people than ever need assistance?
Why would you celebrate more people being too poor to afford their healthcare insurance?

If you can answer those questions ... Then maybe we can talk about values.

.​

When the final enrollment data comes out in a few weeks, it'll almost certainly show that the average income of marketplace shoppers is higher now than ever, so these questions don't even make sense.

Premiums are more affordable now than ever because the premium tax credits do a better job of scaling premiums to household income than before (a long overdue change to the too-stringy ACA, given that the law ended up costing so much less than originally projected). That means more people today are shopping, more people are buying coverage, and more people face affordable premiums than ever before. All good things.

 

[GMCGeneral]

The repubs tried to kill the ACA man times and failed. Rather than try to improve the coverage and help those without adequate health insurance, they want to kill it, cause they hate America.

No, we don't want the government sticking its nose where it doesn't belong.

 

[BlackSand]

When the final enrollment data comes out in a few weeks, it'll almost certainly show that the average income of marketplace shoppers is higher now than ever, so these questions don't even make sense.

.

You cannot avoid the question by telling me people are doing so well they need to be on government assistance.
That doesn't make sense ... Nor does it answer the question.

.
​

Premiums are more affordable now than ever because the premium tax credits do a better job of scaling premiums to household income than before (a long overdue change to the too-stringy ACA, given that the law ended up costing so much less than originally projected). That means more people today are shopping, more people are buying coverage, and more people face affordable premiums than ever before. All good things.

.

That doesn't answer the question ... The question is why do you think it is a good thing to celebrate more people needing government assistance?
I didn't ask you to sell me insurance ...

.​

 

[Lisa558]

When the final enrollment data comes out in a few weeks, it'll almost certainly show that the average income of marketplace shoppers is higher now than ever, so these questions don't even make sense.

Premiums are more affordable now than ever because the premium tax credits do a better job of scaling premiums to household income than before (a long overdue change to the too-stringy ACA, given that the law ended up costing so much less than originally projected). That means more people today are shopping, more people are buying coverage, and more people face affordable premiums than ever before. All good things.

And who exactly pays the difference between the subsidized rate and the true rate for tens of millions of people? There’s no free lunch, and liberals only look at what is given out. Never what it costs to do so.

 

[JimH52]

No, we don't want the government sticking its nose where it doesn't belong.

You got it...they don't....screw them. The Repub MAGA mantra.

 

[JimH52]

And who exactly pays the difference between the subsidized rate and the true rate for tens of millions of people? There’s no free lunch, and liberals only look at what is given out. Never what it costs to do so.

Still waiting for the health insurance plan that stump trump promised. But he is a Serial Liar....so.....

 

[Greenbeard]

You cannot avoid the question by telling me people are doing so well they need to be on government assistance.
That doesn't make sense ... Nor does it answer the question.

They're obviously better off paying less in premiums than more, so what's confusing you here?

And who exactly pays the difference between the subsidized rate and the true rate for tens of millions of people? There’s no free lunch, and liberals only look at what is given out. Never what it costs to do so.

Sounds like you've discovered the concept of taxes. Wait til people find out about those!

 

[BlackSand]

They're obviously better off paying less in premiums than more, so what's confusing you here?

.

Nothing is confusing me other than you are attempting to tell me they are doing so well that they need government assistance ...

.​

 

[Lisa558]

Still waiting for the health insurance plan that stump trump promised. But he is a Serial Liar....so.....

So the answer is just to give away more money? At the expense of others who have to pay for it?

 

[Lisa558]

They're obviously better off paying less in premiums than more, so what's confusing you here?

OK, THEY are better off when someone else pays their insurance premiums for them. What about the people who have to pay for their OWN insurance, and then for other people’s too?

You libs have a very limited concept of government services. It’s not only about giving people more free stuff, and hey….ain’t that great? It comes at a cost to others.

Sounds like you've discovered the concept of taxes. Wait til people find out about those!

Only about half the people know that concept. The other half are the ones the taxpayers are forced to give free stuff to.

 

[JimH52]

So the answer is just to give away more money? At the expense of others who have to pay for it?

If it were left to the GOP...there would be no Medicare, no Social Security, women would not have a vote, and segregation would still be in place. The MAGA repubs are even worse.

 

[Greenbeard]

OK, THEY are better off when someone else pays their insurance premiums for them. What about the people who have to pay for their OWN insurance, and then for other people’s too?

What about them? We have a $4 trillion dollar health care system and we finance it with whatever people can contribute. Such is life.

You libs have a very limited concept of government services. It’s not only about giving people more free stuff, and hey….ain’t that great? It comes at a cost to others.

Profound insight, who knew.

 

[BlackSand]

If it were left to the GOP...there would be no Medicare, no Social Security, women would not have a vote, and segregation would still be in place. The MAGA repubs are even worse.

.

Woo-Hoo ... The Government will save you and make your life so much better by putting you on government assistance.
Shoot they are so awesome at their job ... There will be ten times more people requiring it in no time.

Vote for the Establishment ... They have your best interests at heart.

.​

 

[Seymour Flops]

Depends on whether you value Americans having access to health care. If not, then obviously record numbers of Americans having that access isn't going to seem significant.

The Affordable Care Act does not provide access to health care. It provides access to health insurance. Just because you have insurance doesn't mean you can afford health care.

The ACA allows plans to have a deductibles/co-pays of up to $8,700 and required them to have deductibles of at least $2,800. With those kind of deductibles, a worker at McDonald's is not going to be able to access much health care. Not unless he tell the hospital to bill him with a plan to declare bankruptcy. But we were told that the ACA was needed to prevent such financial ruin.

Even if you have a subsidy, you are in bad shape under the ACA:

Here is what the healthinsurance.org calculator says the subsidy would be for a working-class family in a small Texas city:

Will you receive an ACA premium subsidy? | healthinsurance.org

See who's eligible for the Affordable Care Act's premium tax credits (premium subsidies), how subsidies are calculated, and why they are more robust in 2023.

www.healthinsurance.org

Here is a little math:

17,244 (the average yearly premium for a family of four stated above)
Divided by
12 (the number of months in a year)
=
1,437 (the monthly premiums before subsidy is applied)
Minus 458 (estimated monthly subsidy as stated above)
=
979 (the monthly premium the family above would have to pay. Monthly. As in every month.

Nine hundred and seventy-nine dollars for a family of four earning $$3,500 per month before taxes and other deductions is the exact opposite of affordable.

Those are the exact type of people for whom the phrase "it is expensive to be poor" applies. It's not expensive to be a lifelong welfare dolee with no desire to break the dependancy cycle. Everything is free then. It is expensive to try and play by the rules and work hard to achieve the American dream. Those are exactly the people that Democratic policies seem designed to harm.

Suppose that somehow the family is able to afford $979 per month on a gross income of only $3,500 per month. Somehow. Now their daughter has a burst appendix and is rushed to the emergency room for treatment which is an emergency surgery. That treatment will cost well over the $7,767 deductable, leaving the family with that debt.

Again, financial ruin due to medical debt is what the ACA promoters promised to stop.

 

[Lisa558]

What about them? We have a $4 trillion dollar health care system and we finance it with whatever people can contribute. Such is life.



Profound insight, who knew.

No, it’s not financed by whatever people can contribute. It’s financed by forced redistribution of wealth from the middle class - and more national debt.

 

[Lisa558]

If it were left to the GOP...there would be no Medicare, no Social Security, women would not have a vote, and segregation would still be in place. The MAGA repubs are even worse.

That’s not true at all. Try your scare tactics on someone gullible.