14M lose coverage under GOP health bill: Congress’ analyst

[rightwinger]

Everyone is talking about the NCAA basketball tournament flacaltenn.

Costs are what is driving people out of healthcare coverage. It is more important to make the system work than throw money at premiums.

You have to do both

Why does neither side attack the doctors, hospitals and big pharm?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Anyone who claims that the Republican plan is a better alternative to Obamacare is either lying or living in an alt-reality:

Paul Ryan Calls Obamacare Repeal Plan An 'Act Of Mercy' | The Huffington Post

Selected excerpts....

Would the Republican plan make access better? Almost certainly not.

The Affordable Care Act Made Access Better
The GOP argument here rests on two premises, neither of which holds up well to scrutiny.

The first is that the Affordable Care Act is a misnomer ― in other words, it doesn’t really provide “affordable care” ― because the newly insured on Medicaid can’t find doctors who will see them, and the ones with private coverage are stuck with high out-of-pocket costs that make even modest medical treatment prohibitively expensive.

Each argument represents one piece of the larger truth. The big problem with Medicaid, as even staunch defenders admit, is that the program pays doctors very little ― and, as a result, it can be difficult to get specialist appointments. The big problem with the Affordable Care Act’s private plans is that they tend to have high out-of-pocket costs, enough to keep even people with insurance from getting care they need.

But researchers who have followed the Affordable Care Act closely have found that, on the whole, access has clearly improved ― perhaps because critics exaggerate the extent of the problems, and perhaps because even imperfect Medicaid or Affordable Care Act plans are superior to having no insurance at all.

People are less likely to struggle with medical bills, and more likely to have a regular source of care, according to a 2015 paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association that’s one of the most comprehensive studies of the Affordable Care Act.

• 
  Six in 10 of the newly insured said their coverage enabled them to get care they could not get before, according to a survey by the Commonwealth Fund. The same survey found that people with Medicaid or private coverage through the health care law were able to find new doctors with roughly the same ease as those who had insurance already.

• A slew of additional studies have reached similar conclusions. And all are consistent with two of the most thorough studies in the field ― one from Oregon and one from Massachusetts ― that found clear, solid evidence that giving people insurance improved their access to care and financial security. (The effects on health are more ambiguous, but that’s a story for another time.)

The main argument Republicans make about their proposal ― the reason they say it will improve access ― is that it would “reduce costs.” At first blush, the argument seems plausible.

Republicans would weaken or eliminate the Affordable Care Act’s new regulations on insurance ― like the requirement to cover all people regardless of pre-existing conditions, or the minimum standard for generosity of coverage. When these regulations took effect, insurers raised premiums; if the regulations become weaker or go away, it stands to reason, insurers will reduce premiums.

But premiums would be falling because insurance would be covering less, so that medical care was becoming cheaper on the front end (when people paid premiums), but more expensive on the back end (when they actually used medical services).

 

[Flash]

The government should never be in the business of making people buy health insurance, mandating health insurance requirements, taxing it or giving subsidies for it.

Obamacare sucks. Ryancare sucks a little less.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The government should never be in the business of making people buy health insurance, mandating health insurance requirements, taxing it or giving subsidies for it.

Obamacare sucks. Ryancare sucks a little less.

See above

 

[JimBowie1958]

Conservatives love this bill because it is a textbook example of how you widen the gap between rich and poor.

Actually, it is the conservative wing of the party that most opposes it, doofus.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The law was collapsing anyways so what future are you referring to?

Humana, Aetna, and others dropping out of the marketplace because they're sick of it.

People tired of the high deductibles and high premiums with little coverage.

But sure, let's expand Obamacare, which wouldn't have been an voted in by congress anyways.

Why do insurance companies drop out of a market? Because insurance companies are not in the business of paying claims. The short term game is to get back to higher profits, and that requires some political gamesmanship. They need to limit lifetime policies, they need to say no when a sick person with a chronic disease turns 27, and let no one fear socialism; what we must fear is a cartel of fewer insurance companies too big to fail. Then you will see death panels!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Conservatives love this bill because it is a textbook example of how you widen the gap between rich and poor.

Actually, it is the conservative wing of the party that most opposes it, doofus.

You're right. They oppose it because it does not do quite enough damage to the poor and elderly. Those damned tax credits are an outrage! Just another entitlement . Let the poor bastards die already and be done with it.

 

[Flash]

The government should never be in the business of making people buy health insurance, mandating health insurance requirements, taxing it or giving subsidies for it.

Obamacare sucks. Ryancare sucks a little less.

See above

My contention is that we don't need the the filthy ass government involved at all in healthcare. That should be between an individual and their doctor and the insurance company if the individual chose to have insurance.

All government interference is bad. We know how bad Obamacare was. It drove up the cost of premiums, co payments and deductibles to the paying customers while at the same time provided another freebee for the welfare queens and illegal aliens. It even increased taxes. How stupid was that? Pretty bad, huh? We know how it failed.

I suspect Ryancare will also not be very good either but we need to see the results of the three phases before we come to that conclusion. Anything except full blown socialized medicine would be better than Obamacare. Obamacare set such a low bar that it will be easy to improve on it.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The government should never be in the business of making people buy health insurance, mandating health insurance requirements, taxing it or giving subsidies for it.

Obamacare sucks. Ryancare sucks a little less.

See above

My contention is that we don't need the the filthy ass government involved at all in healthcare. That should be between an individual and their doctor and the insurance company if the individual chose to have insurance.

All government interference is bad. We know how bad Obamacare was. It drove up the cost of premiums, co payments and deductibles to the paying customers while at the same time provided another freebee for the welfare queens and illegal aliens. It even increased taxes. How stupid was that? Pretty bad, huh? We know how it failed.

I suspect Ryancare will also not be very good either but we need to see the results of the three phases before we come to that conclusion. Anything except full blown socialized medicine would be better than Obamacare. Obamacare set such a low bar that it will be easy to improve on it.

It's all horseshit and I have documented why. The free market/ health care for profit does not work except for those making the profit. And any one who claims to actually believes Ryan's 3 phases will become reality is either a sucker or a liar

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Devastating CBO Report Exposes The Empty Promises Of Obamacare Repeal | The Huffington Post

But the CBO report was much worse"}}'>worse than expected. The Republican bill would cut $880 billion from Medicaid over 10 years, steer federal tax credits away from lower-income consumers and undo some of the Affordable Care Act’s changes to the insurance market ― including the “individual mandate” that imposes financial penalties on people who decline to get coverage.

Together, the CBO predicted, these changes would produce an immediate spike in the number of uninsured, with 14 million losing coverage in just the first year.

 

[MisterBeale]

Yeah, 14 million young healthy people will no longer carry health insurance because they wont be under threat of imprisonment and fines for not carrying excessive amounts of insurance that they do not need.

You tards should have read up before making this bullshit claim that those who will lose their insurance will do so voluntarily.,

Affordable Care Act revision would reduce insured numbers by 24 million, CBO projects

The analysis predicts that the number of people without health coverage would rise to 52 million by 2026, compared with 28 million if the Affordable Care Act remains intact. That erosion would mean that about 1 in 5 U.S. residents would be uninsured by 2026 — compared to 1 in 10 uninsured now and 1 in 6 who were uninsured before the Affordable Care Act was enacted.

Keep reading until you get it, tard. MORE people will be uninsured than were BEFORE THE MANDATE.

What's worse, tens of millions of people losing their health care, or a nation buying a health care system that will bankrupt it and turn it into a banana republic?

Sure, we would all love to give the poor everything they desire, free health care, free college educations, a guaranteed living stipend, a place to live and clothing, etc. But who pays?

Don't you know that would destroy whatever is left of the value of the currency? Are you really so ignorant that you don't understand how economics work?


This isn't about whether or not we, as a society desire to give everyone everything for free. It would be terrific if we could afford to give all the poor in the nation free health care. As it is, considering the state of the art and technology of America's health care system? That is not a realistic goal. You are living in a fantasy land. All government meddling in the health care industry needs to be ended, or it will end the economic viability of the government.

 

[Flash]

[QU

It's all horseshit and I have documented why. The free market/ health care for profit does not work except for those making the profit. And any one who claims to actually believes Ryan's 3 phases will become reality is either a sucker or a liar

How in the hell do we know if the free market won't work? We haven't had that in a long time. For decades the government has been imposing stupid regulations that have screwed up the free market so we have no idea how good health care can be without government interference, do we?

A stupid bureaucrat, whose boss is a corrupt politician elected by special interest groups, will not provide good health care for you. If you think so then you are very naive. The best hope you have for good health care is for the frigging government to let free enterprise provide the best product for you at the lowest possible price. It works for everything else and it will work for health care. We don't need the stupid government telling us how to run our lives. Helath Cate is too important to have the inefficient and corrupt government involved, don't you think?

I can fire a doctor that doesn't do a good job. I can change insurance companies if my provider doesn't provide a good product. However, with government interference my choices evaporate pretty damn quickly, doesn't it?

Both Obamacare and Ryancare keeps the government from you having access to the best health that would be available. When the three Rayancare phases are completed we will see if it is better than Obamacare. I suspect it will be. Anything will be better than Obamacare.

 

[MisterBeale]

If the government doesn't get out of the healthcare business, the healthcare business will bankrupt the government, that is all there is to this discussion. The folks on the left want to frame this as a narrative about throwing folks off of insurance.

Oh well.

Either folks get thrown off of insurance because the government can't afford the rising rates it has caused because of it's interference in the market as healthcare is an unlimited want, or else the nation does not have enough for other expenses, like food and housing for the poor, education, infrastructure, national defense, etc.


Do other industrialized nations have nationalized health care? Sure. But let's look at their military spending, shall we?

Socialized health care, or hegemonic power. Choose, you can't have both.

 

[The Original Tree]

Turns out Lefty was lying again. Not only will the bill shave 350 Billion off of the deficit, but it will allow people who were forced to buy insurance to be relieved of "The Mandate"!

And that is where the 14 Million projected comes from. 14 Million who'd rather spend their money on other things than Health care they can't use and may not need.

 

[Skylar]

And now it gets better:

Newt Gingrich Says the Congressional Budget Office Is 'Corrupt' and Should Be Abolished


Newt Gingrich Says 'Corrupt' CBO Should Be Abolished

Anything that contradicts the right wing must be abolished, eh?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives love this bill because it is a textbook example of how you widen the gap between rich and poor.

Actually, it is the conservative wing of the party that most opposes it, doofus.

The conservatives who oppose it oppose it because it doesn't go FAR enough in widening the gap between rich and poor.

 

[brummelben]

Yeah, 14 million young healthy people will no longer carry health insurance because they wont be under threat of imprisonment and fines for not carrying excessive amounts of insurance that they do not need.

You tards should have read up before making this bullshit claim that those who will lose their insurance will do so voluntarily.,

Affordable Care Act revision would reduce insured numbers by 24 million, CBO projects

The analysis predicts that the number of people without health coverage would rise to 52 million by 2026, compared with 28 million if the Affordable Care Act remains intact. That erosion would mean that about 1 in 5 U.S. residents would be uninsured by 2026 — compared to 1 in 10 uninsured now and 1 in 6 who were uninsured before the Affordable Care Act was enacted.

Keep reading until you get it, tard. MORE people will be uninsured than were BEFORE THE MANDATE.

What's worse, tens of millions of people losing their health care, or a nation buying a health care system that will bankrupt it and turn it into a banana republic?

Sure, we would all love to give the poor everything they desire, free health care, free college educations, a guaranteed living stipend, a place to live and clothing, etc. But who pays?

Don't you know that would destroy whatever is left of the value of the currency? Are you really so ignorant that you don't understand how economics work?


This isn't about whether or not we, as a society desire to give everyone everything for free. It would be terrific if we could afford to give all the poor in the nation free health care. As it is, considering the state of the art and technology of America's health care system? That is not a realistic goal. You are living in a fantasy land. All government meddling in the health care industry needs to be ended, or it will end the economic viability of the government.

Does that mean the government should get out of VA, and Medicare?

 

[brummelben]

Conservatives love this bill because it is a textbook example of how you widen the gap between rich and poor.

Actually, it is the conservative wing of the party that most opposes it, doofus.

The conservatives who oppose it oppose it because it doesn't go FAR enough in widening the gap between rich and poor.

Maybe if the republican health care plan would have eliminated 50 million people, it would be a success

 

[NYcarbineer]

Turns out Lefty was lying again. Not only will the bill shave 350 Billion off of the deficit, but it will allow people who were forced to buy insurance to be relieved of "The Mandate"!

And that is where the 14 Million projected comes from. 14 Million who'd rather spend their money on other things than Health care they can't use and may not need.

It takes 350 billion (over 10 years) off the deficit because it takes 800 billion dollars worth of healthcare away from lower income Americans...

...the other 450 billion goes to tax cuts for the rich and near rich.

 

[bendog]

We should end your employer's tax deduction for your insurance too