The law is failing in every state, some states are down to a single provider for the law and in those cases, the population may lose that single provider leaving them with nothing. The deductibles are so high that the 24 million who were forced onto the program are STILL paying for healthcare out of their pockets while the rest cannot afford the massive rate increases.
A few things to this:
1. No, the law is not failing in every state. California is cruising along. So is New York. Your claim that the law is failing is something a) you cannot even quantify if you wanted to, and b) not something you can prove.
2. While true that some insurers have dropped out of the exchanges, their reasons for doing so are not on the up-and-up.
Aetna was just recently caught lying about their reasons for leaving the Exchanges. They claimed it was because of the law. Yeah, they were lying. The reason wasn't because of the law, but because they weren't allowed to merge with Humana. So if Aetna lied about their reasons for leaving the exchanges, why would any other insurer be telling the truth?
3. So you are conflating
providers with
insurers. Providers won't go away if the number of insurers are reduced. In fact, we
want fewer insurers because that's how you keep premium costs low, that's how you keep drug costs low, and that's how you keep provider costs low. There are only two insurance plans in this country that actually employ doctors; the VA and Kaiser Permanente. All other providers
contract with insurers. It doesn't sound to me like you know the difference between an insurer and a provider. One performs the health care, the other administers reimbursement for that performance. There is no reason for privatizing the administration of reimbursement. It's wholly administrative and has nothing to do with your actual health care. All health insurance companies do is
restrict your care, not improve or enhance it.
4. Regarding high deductibles...I'm a bit confused by your position. You say that more people need to have more skin in the game when it comes to determining their use of health care. So OK, if we use that premise then don't higher deductibles address that issue? So why are you opposed to higher deductibles which force patients to put more skin in the game? You realize you guys talk out of both sides of your mouth, right? You think people should pay more for their health care, yet you oppose higher deductibles
which do exactly that. So it seems to me like you need to figure out what your position is before spamming the board with your bullshit, pal.
5. The rate increases post-ACA are lower than the rate increases pre-ACA. When an insurer would jack up your rates before Obamacare, what would you do? Because that happened
all the time. Would you sit and bitch and moan and complain like you're doing now? Or would you go find a better insurance plan in the marketplace? How would you be sure that insurance plan addressed your needs? And what would you do when that plan was unexpectedly and suddenly cancelled or you were kicked off it because of pre-existing conditions? I want to know...what would you have done?
