ACA: Repeal and Delay?

[Edgetho]

It's not an analogy. It's just the nature of insurance.

As much as we really, really want it to be otherwise, private insurance can't serve as a public safety net.

It does in Switzerland. I encourage you to look into it. Their Health Insurance/Health Care system is the envy of the civilized world.

Germany's ain't half bad either.

The UK's is a bad joke. As is Canada's. France is working HARD to try to move to a Swiss-like system but Hollande has stymied it for the time. I think the Dutch are mostly there.

The ACA was initially sold as emulating the Swiss system. Of course, being dimocrap scum -- They lied.

Private Insurance isn't the best way to go, it is the ONLY way

 

[dblack]

It's not an analogy. It's just the nature of insurance.

As much as we really, really want it to be otherwise, private insurance can't serve as a public safety net.

It does in Switzerland. I encourage you to look into it. Their Health Insurance/Health Care system is the envy of the civilized world.

Germany's ain't half bad either.

The UK's is a bad joke. As is Canada's. France is working HARD to try to move to a Swiss-like system but Hollande has stymied it for the time. I think the Dutch are mostly there.

The ACA was initially sold as emulating the Swiss system. Of course, being dimocrap scum -- They lied.

Private Insurance isn't the best way to go, it is the ONLY way

Private insurance doesn't require '100% participation'. Social insurance does. That's why we, usually, have government perform that function - because they already have the power to force participation in the form of taxes. The only way private companies can provide public insurance is if, as you've suggested, everyone is required to buy in.

ACA is delusional at its heart. People want socialized health care but they want to pretend its not socialism. That fantasy has us diving head first into a middle ground that is truly the worst of both worlds - forced public participation fueling and private profits.

 

[Edgetho]

Private insurance doesn't require '100% participation'. Social insurance does. That's why we, usually, have government perform that function - because they already have the power to force participation in the form of taxes. The only way private companies can provide public insurance is if, as you've suggested, everyone is required to buy in.

ACA is delusional at its heart. People want socialized health care but they want to pretend its not socialism. That fantasy has us diving head first into a middle ground that is truly the worst of both worlds - forced public participation fueling and private profits.

Even if there were no 'Public Insurance' as you call it. Even if we returned to no, zero, government interference, or participation (however you choose to label it) Private insurance is in deep trouble.

Billy Bob and LaQuan don't want to, and WON'T buy Health Insurance unless they're FORCED to.

So Billy Bob wraps his 85 Camaro around a Tree one night at 3:00AM and gets carried to the E-Room by Ambulance. He has no Insurance, but they're required to stabilize him to the best of their ability.

Cost -- $200k.

Billy Bob don't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of. And he's gonna need lots more treatment. LOTS more.

LaQuan is on the corner, sittin' and spittin' and gets shot in a drive-by. He gets carried to the E-Room. Same scenario. LOTS of money spent to make him right and reasonable.

Who pays for this? You do. I do. We ALL do.

Either in the form of Cost-Shifting or in Welfare Dollars.

But if they had spent THEIR OWN MONEY to buy Health Insurance, like they should (but won't), then there wouldn't be any cost-shifting or Tax dollars spent on Medicaid, etc.

Of course, you have to understand that it might take 10,000 Billy Bobs and LaQuans participating in Health Insurance ot cover the one that is unlucky. Actuarial Tables and all that.

And let's not pick on the young.

Mature Adults get REALLY pissy when they're forced to buy Flood Insurance.

"I have lived here for forty years and never been flooded out!!"

To which a good reply is, "I have never been in a Plane Crash either. You only need one"

Then they get really pissy.

But people WILL NOT DO IT unless they're forced to. Or at least not enough people will do it.

It's why the Federal Government had to take over the Flood Insurance Program. Because only THEY have the power to FORCE you to buy it. Private Companies don't. It's ALL through FEMA.

Just human nature.

And I am one of the most Conservative people in here. But I know wherefore I speak on this topic

Sorry for the long post

 

[dblack]

Private insurance doesn't require '100% participation'. Social insurance does. That's why we, usually, have government perform that function - because they already have the power to force participation in the form of taxes. The only way private companies can provide public insurance is if, as you've suggested, everyone is required to buy in.

ACA is delusional at its heart. People want socialized health care but they want to pretend its not socialism. That fantasy has us diving head first into a middle ground that is truly the worst of both worlds - forced public participation fueling and private profits.

Even if there were no 'Public Insurance' as you call it. Even if we returned to no, zero, government interference, or participation (however you choose to label it) Private insurance is in deep trouble.

Indeed. I've always seen ACA as, first and foremost, and insurance industry bailout. They've oversold a product that can't possibly do what they claimed.

Billy Bob and LaQuan don't want to, and WON'T buy Health Insurance unless they're FORCED to.

It's not just 'Billy Bob', it's anyone with a triple digit IQ. Insurance as a means of financing regular expenses makes no sense. Used in that way, it's just really expensive credit. Intelligent consumers have been coming to the realization that, when it comes to insurance, less is more. The more you can pay out of pocket, and the less you rely on insurance, the better off you'll be. Their efforts to 'divest' from the insurance con-game is exactly why the insurance industry 'conceded' to health care reform. It's easier to lobby government than to change a failing business model.

 

[Edgetho]

Private insurance doesn't require '100% participation'. Social insurance does. That's why we, usually, have government perform that function - because they already have the power to force participation in the form of taxes. The only way private companies can provide public insurance is if, as you've suggested, everyone is required to buy in.

ACA is delusional at its heart. People want socialized health care but they want to pretend its not socialism. That fantasy has us diving head first into a middle ground that is truly the worst of both worlds - forced public participation fueling and private profits.

Even if there were no 'Public Insurance' as you call it. Even if we returned to no, zero, government interference, or participation (however you choose to label it) Private insurance is in deep trouble.

Indeed. I've always seen ACA as, first and foremost, and insurance industry bailout. They've oversold a product that can't possibly do what they claimed.

Billy Bob and LaQuan don't want to, and WON'T buy Health Insurance unless they're FORCED to.

It's not just 'Billy Bob', it's anyone with a triple digit IQ. Insurance as a means of financing regular expenses makes no sense. Used in that way, it's just really expensive credit. Intelligent consumers have been coming to the realization that, when it comes to insurance, less is more. The more you can pay out of pocket, and the less you rely on insurance, the better off you'll be. Their efforts to 'divest' from the insurance con-game is exactly why the insurance industry 'conceded' to health care reform. It's easier to lobby government than to change a failing business model.

With that thinking, we are doomed to a Single Payer plan.

And (no insult intended) people like you are the reason why.

Single Payer will solve the Medicare Problem. It will solve the VA problem. It will solve the Cost-Shifting problem.

Problem is -- It SUCKS. Really bad. I mean..... Really bad.

Get used to it. You're gonna be forced into it unless you wake up.

And that is doubtful from what I can gather in your posting.

Again.... No insult intended. You're just not getting it. You seem to mean well but The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intentions.

Say hello to Single Payer. You're gonna love it

 

[Doc1]

That would be political suicide since a lot of Americans would lose their insurance.

Most of whom already qualify for Medicare/Medicaid.

Folks who are Medicare Eligible do not qualify for ACA coverage except through an Employer.

 

[Doc1]

I'm not going to hold my breathe waiting for Republicorp to come up w/ anything other than give- aways to the already wealthy

Like Ocommiecare wasn’t already a big give-away to BigInsurance?

Is that why most carriers are pulling out of the ACA?

 

[Edgetho]

Health Insurance Companies have lost BILLIONS in the ACA.

Just a fact.

Obamacare Is in Trouble

With almost $2 billion in losses this year, big insurance companies are pulling out of the health-care program.

 

[Doc1]

Health Insurance Companies have lost BILLIONS in the ACA.

Just a fact.

Obamacare Is in Trouble

With almost $2 billion in losses this year, big insurance companies are pulling out of the health-care program.

They got less than 12% of the promised funds from the Risk Corridors. They've lost their asses.

 

[Coyote]

That would be political suicide since a lot of Americans would lose their insurance.

Most of whom already qualify for Medicare/Medicaid.

No, actually, they don't - unless you intend to keep the expanded Medicare coverage part of the plan?

 

[Vandalshandle]

There is nothing stopping insurance companies from crossing state lines. Aetna and Blue Cross are in every state

You just have to comply with state regulations and set up networks of doctors and pharmacies that will accept your rates. How hard can it be?

Well, no that's not true. At all.

Aetna to pull out of most Obamacare exchanges

And Blue Cross/Blue Shield in one State is not associated with others in any way. They are independent of each other. Completely. Some are 'For Profit' while many are 'Not For Profit' and all of them separate companies.

The Insurance Company also has to be approved/admitted by the State Insurance Commission(er).

Since Insurance Companies are regulated by States and not by Federal rules, the States would kinda like to make sure, you know, that they can pay Claims. Kinda important.

Insurance Companies also have to prove they're financially stable and they have to place Cash with the State Treasurer in the form of reserves. That way, if there's a dispute with a Customer, the Insurance Commissioner, who is most often also the State Treasurer, can just take the money and force the Insurance Company to prove their case.

Also a LOT of Companies just simply don't want to operate in some States.... Like New yawk..... Who in the **** want's to do business in that pushole? The whole State is corrupted by the City. And the whole City is just one big scam after another.

Our politicians have a layman's understanding of Insurance. Which is to say -- None.

And you have even less than that.

Health insurance companies set up a separate corporation to do business in New York, because New York has a statute that any insurance company that is approved to do business in the state must also agree to apply New York statutes to every person insured by that company, regardless of the state in which they reside. No other state does that.

 

[Edgetho]

Health Insurance Companies have lost BILLIONS in the ACA.

Just a fact.

Obamacare Is in Trouble

With almost $2 billion in losses this year, big insurance companies are pulling out of the health-care program.

They got less than 12% of the promised funds from the Risk Corridors. They've lost their asses.

It's much worse than most people are aware of..

the Lying **********'s regime was laying down against lawsuits by the Exchanges so dimocrap scum could shovel billions more into the program than they originally allowed for.

Billions.

But, like everything else.... dimocrap scum **** up everything they touch.

It was a good idea. A really good idea. But dimocraps FUCKED it up.

Because they're stupid.

I hope Trump brings in some bright people to fix it. Unless we can FORCE people to buy it, it ain't gonna get fixed. I can promise you that

 

[Edgetho]

No, actually, they don't - unless you intend to keep the expanded Medicare coverage part of the plan?

I think you mean 'Medicaid'......

And that is not available in MANY States. Hence a 'coverage gap' that is seriously hurting MILLIONS of people.

Millions.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The end result of all this posturing is that Republicans will change the name from ACA to TrumpCare, and stop subsidizing the poor who can not afford the premiums, end mandated coverage, and subsidize the insurance companies instead. Otherwise, the insurance companies will all pull out due to adverse selection , which is defined as sick people signing up, and healthy people not signing up.

This, of course, will work well for the republicans, since they are consistently in favor of corporate welfare, and opposed to citizen welfare. The end result will be that my stock in health insurance companies will continue to skyrocket. Thanks, Republicans!

 

[Edgetho]

Health insurance companies set up a separate corporation to do business in New York, because New York has a statute that any insurance company that is approved to do business in the state must also agree to apply New York statutes to every person insured by that company, regardless of the state in which they reside. No other state does that.

ummm, hokay.

I think the reason that most Insurance Companies set up separate Corporations to operate in New Yawk is so they can fold that Company if shit gets out of hand without harming the Parent Company.

All Insurance Companies in most States have to abide by that States statutes and rules in order to be admitted.

Many, if not most, Property Insurers in Florida have "Florida-Only" Companies. That's because we get hit so hard by Hurricanes and the parent Company wants the Florida Company to be forced to carry its own weight.

Insurance can get very complicated

 

[Doc1]

The end result of all this posturing is that Republicans will change the name from ACA to TrumpCare, and stop subsidizing the poor who can not afford the premiums, end mandated coverage, and subsidize the insurance companies instead. Otherwise, the insurance companies will all pull out due to adverse selection , which is defined as sick people signing up, and healthy people not signing up.

This, of course, will work well for the republicans, since they are consistently in favor of corporate welfare, and opposed to citizen welfare. The end result will be that my stock in health insurance companies will continue to skyrocket. Thanks, Republicans!

Nope, the Political realities will preclude full repeal. We are going to end up with Medicare style for all.

 

[Doc1]

There is nothing stopping insurance companies from crossing state lines. Aetna and Blue Cross are in every state

You just have to comply with state regulations and set up networks of doctors and pharmacies that will accept your rates. How hard can it be?

Well, no that's not true. At all.

Aetna to pull out of most Obamacare exchanges

And Blue Cross/Blue Shield in one State is not associated with others in any way. They are independent of each other. Completely. Some are 'For Profit' while many are 'Not For Profit' and all of them separate companies.

The Insurance Company also has to be approved/admitted by the State Insurance Commission(er).

Since Insurance Companies are regulated by States and not by Federal rules, the States would kinda like to make sure, you know, that they can pay Claims. Kinda important.

Insurance Companies also have to prove they're financially stable and they have to place Cash with the State Treasurer in the form of reserves. That way, if there's a dispute with a Customer, the Insurance Commissioner, who is most often also the State Treasurer, can just take the money and force the Insurance Company to prove their case.

Also a LOT of Companies just simply don't want to operate in some States.... Like New yawk..... Who in the **** want's to do business in that pushole? The whole State is corrupted by the City. And the whole City is just one big scam after another.

Our politicians have a layman's understanding of Insurance. Which is to say -- None.

And you have even less than that.

Health insurance companies set up a separate corporation to do business in New York, because New York has a statute that any insurance company that is approved to do business in the state must also agree to apply New York statutes to every person insured by that company, regardless of the state in which they reside. No other state does that.

Hence few companies do business in NY. Even before the ACA NY was simply too stringent.

 

[Vandalshandle]

As VB of Underwriting, and legal compliance for 50 years, I never bothered to file for approval in New York. But to get approval in any other state is a piece of cake.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The end result of all this posturing is that Republicans will change the name from ACA to TrumpCare, and stop subsidizing the poor who can not afford the premiums, end mandated coverage, and subsidize the insurance companies instead. Otherwise, the insurance companies will all pull out due to adverse selection , which is defined as sick people signing up, and healthy people not signing up.

This, of course, will work well for the republicans, since they are consistently in favor of corporate welfare, and opposed to citizen welfare. The end result will be that my stock in health insurance companies will continue to skyrocket. Thanks, Republicans!

Nope, the Political realities will preclude full repeal. We are going to end up with Medicare style for all.

I wish I agreed with you, but that solution is too logical.

 

[AntonToo]

It's not an analogy. It's just the nature of insurance.

As much as we really, really want it to be otherwise, private insurance can't serve as a public safety net.

It does in Switzerland. I encourage you to look into it. Their Health Insurance/Health Care system is the envy of the civilized world.

Germany's ain't half bad either.

The UK's is a bad joke. As is Canada's. France is working HARD to try to move to a Swiss-like system but Hollande has stymied it for the time. I think the Dutch are mostly there.

The ACA was initially sold as emulating the Swiss system. Of course, being dimocrap scum -- They lied.

Private Insurance isn't the best way to go, it is the ONLY way

lol, what did they lie about?

Switzerland requires everyone to have insurance and in fact 99.5% of people do. To conservatives that aspect of ACA has been described as nothing short of assault on freedom.

Everything else objectionable:

Government subsidizes coverage on means basis like ACA.

Insurance companies are NON-PROFIT and must cover pre-existing condition, cannot age-pricing-discriminate etc.

Minimum coverage standards are set by government.

Reimbursement rates are set by government, like we do in Medicare.

ACA law sets up a system that is in fact very much like Switzerland system and the biggest difference is not in the ACA but in the fact that 85% of people in our country get their insurance from their employer, compared to ZERO in Switzerland.

Why Switzerland Has the World's Best Health Care System