Seymour Flops
Diamond Member
Yes, of course. That's why we need to free market, not a market regulated by a congress that is for sale to the highest bidder.Before I post a detailed answer to your statement above, I want to say one thing "have you ever seen greed be put aside by anyone"? Greed is human nature, and the greed will always find ways to provide less and still keep profits up to what they want.
That is not a detailed answer to my statement above. It is a cut-and-paste of an article you appear not to have read and analyzed.Anyhow, here is the response:
Potential $32 Billion Revenue Loss for U.S. Healthcare if ACA Subsidies Expire
September 25, 2025
U.S. healthcare providers face a potential revenue loss exceeding $32 billion next year if the enhanced subsidies for Affordable Care Act (ACA) plans are not extended, according to an analysis by the Urban Institute. These subsidies, initially implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic to increase insurance coverage, removed the cap on tax credit eligibility and limited premiums for enrollees, thus making healthcare plans more affordable for low- and middle-income Americans. With over 24 million people currently covered by ACA plans, the expiration of these subsidies could lead to 4 to 5 million Americans losing their insurance coverage, significantly impacting hospitals and doctors who may see a rise in uncompensated care by an estimated $7.7 billion. Hospitals are projected to lose $14.2 billion, and spending on prescription drugs could decrease by $5.8 billion, among other impacts.
You know why it says "potential?" Because whoever wrote that knows that such a loss is not going to happen. Not unless NOTHING else changes except the reduction in subsidies. In otherwords, theoretically, if companies did nothing to respond to the loss of a part of the subsidies, they will lose $32 Billion in revenues. Of course they will respond.
I don't think that you are taking into account were that money comes from. Look at these two sentences from the article you linked:
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that extending these subsidies permanently would cost $358 billion over the next decade,
U.S. healthcare providers face a potential revenue loss exceeding $32 billion next year if the enhanced subsidies for Affordable Care Act (ACA) plans are not extended,
$32 billion per year over the next decade would be $320 billion. So continuing the subsidies will cost taxpayers $320 billion and give insurance companies 358 billion - according to the article you cited as authoritative.
Why should taxpayers give $320 billion of their hard-earned dollars to the insurance companies - along with the money they give them for health insurance premiums?
Why are you so eager to protect the corporate profits of this one industry? Really two, because much of that money goes to big pharma.
I have to say, this "debating" by cutting and pasting from articles you hastily look up is getting boring. You are interesting when you use your own words, so please do more of that.