Preimums rise faster under Obamacare than in piror 8 years combined!

[WackyDan]

Mind explaining how the "big pharma and health insurers" who you state wrote most of the ACA could in any way, shape or form be considered 'leftist'?

The liberals and progs in the house and senate let them write it and they then passed it. It makes the left seem somewhat hypocritical don't it?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I have no doubt that you hate yourself immensely.

Probably because your failed leader has fallen flat on his face, embarrassed our country, and has really reinforced what a modern progressive does in a leadership position.

Oh really...and a Republican or Conservative President would be better?

The Republican health care plan: Hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths every year from lack of health care. Hundreds of thousands of medical cost induced bankruptcies. Tens of millions uninsured or under-insured. "Don't get sick, and if you do get sick, die quickly and quietly."

The Republican social policy plan -- Big Government in The Bedroom!

The Republican foreign policy plan -- Invade Iran. Produce more fiction about WMDs.

 

[fskimospy]

Oh really...and a Republican or Conservative President would be better?

The Republican health care plan: Hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths every year from lack of health care. Hundreds of thousands of medical cost induced bankruptcies. Tens of millions uninsured or under-insured. "Don't get sick, and if you do get sick, die quickly and quietly."

The Republican social policy plan -- Big Government in The Bedroom!

The Republican foreign policy plan -- Invade Iran. Produce more fiction about WMDs.

You have to remember that you're arguing with the lunatic who thinks that throwing popcorn at someone is a legal justification for homicide. The guy isn't exactly rational.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Look at the estimated enrollment a by 2016. I know it is more than ten million, maybe more than 20.

First of all, 20 million is a crazy optimistic estimate. Secondly, 20 million is not even 10% of American society which isn't enough to swing the election especially when you consider that most belong to demographic groups with low voter participation rates. Finally, many of these people are concentrated in urban areas that vote Democrat anyway.

Victory for the ACA politically is not signing up 3 million Californians and New Yorkers. In order for it to build real political capital for the Democrats it need to be accepted in red flyover states. I don't see real evidence that is happening, but I would accept it if I was wrong and you have evidence otherwise.

And what percentage of those people do you think aren't happy they have Medicaid right now? Is there a single one?

Well considering most on Medicaid are children I don't think they have a concept about what it really is. And yes there are some people unhappy with Medicaid- the doctors:

http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/news/2014/01/22/survey-says-providers-not-happy-with.html

If enough of them opt-out then a Medicaid card has the same worth as monopoly money.

I know if I was poor and I have to chose between seeing the reject doctor six months from now that still takes Medicaid because thanks to his high complication rate no decent patient will see him, and going to the emergency room today to get care from the top doctor in my area that is chained to that emergency room in order to have admitting privileges at the hospital, then I would chose the ER. It is not like I pay the bill anyway.

I love how I don't have to worry that if my cancer comes back and I lose my job I don't have to worry about being ruined by it. I love how my brother with diabetes can finally afford the care he needs. I love how Medicare and Medicaid have the IPAB now. Etc, etc.

I am glad your brother can afford his care, and I am glad you don't have to worry about pre-existing conditions. I just don't like what was given to the insurance companies in trade for these changes.

The IPAB is going to destroy the progress of specialist care in America, but I guess if you were happy with the level of cancer care you got back when you don't care if nothing improves on that front for decades because the money to spur innovation in the system is being taken out. The foreign doctor the hospital hires to treat us instead of the private specialist we would have gone to (that retired instead of dealing with IPAB cuts) will probably be a nice person at least if you can understand them.

Once you get beyond the partisan sniping and the totem that republicans have made this law into you will see a lot to like for almost everyone, I imagine.

I am not coming from a partisan perspective. I bitch like crazy about Republicans.

I AM come from a medical perspective. I have doctors and nurses all throughout my family.

And they have made it very clear to me that it is not the Republicans that will "sabotage" the ACA, but instead the most talented doctors in America who will refuse to work for 60% or less of what they earn today with no benefits in return except more paperwork and regulation.

The problem with the ACA is that it completely ignores market forces. Doctors and patients are going to continue to do whatever benefits them the most, Obama's best intentions be damned.

 

[poofyhairguy]

the republican health care plan: if you are productive member of society you can get quality care from a specialist, if you are not a productive member of society you can get care from the er

fify

the republican foreign policy plan -- invade iran. Produce more fiction about wmds. And make sure opec can never hold america over a barrel again and that the us petrodollar continues as the world's most powerful currency.

fify

 

[Agent11]

First of all, 20 million is a crazy optimistic estimate. Secondly, 20 million is not even 10% of American society which isn't enough to swing the election especially when you consider that most belong to demographic groups with low voter participation rates. Finally, many of these people are concentrated in urban areas that vote Democrat anyway.

Victory for the ACA politically is not signing up 3 million Californians and New Yorkers. In order for it to build real political capital for the Democrats it need to be accepted in red flyover states. I don't see real evidence that is happening, but I would accept it if I was wrong and you have evidence otherwise.



Well considering most on Medicaid are children I don't think they have a concept about what it really is. And yes there are some people unhappy with Medicaid- the doctors:

http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/news/2014/01/22/survey-says-providers-not-happy-with.html

If enough of them opt-out then a Medicaid card has the same worth as monopoly money.

I know if I was poor and I have to chose between seeing the reject doctor six months from now that still takes Medicaid because thanks to his high complication rate no decent patient will see him, and going to the emergency room today to get care from the top doctor in my area that is chained to that emergency room in order to have admitting privileges at the hospital, then I would chose the ER. It is not like I pay the bill anyway.



I am glad your brother can afford his care, and I am glad you don't have to worry about pre-existing conditions. I just don't like what was given to the insurance companies in trade for these changes.

The IPAB is going to destroy the progress of specialist care in America, but I guess if you were happy with the level of cancer care you got back when you don't care if nothing improves on that front for decades because the money to spur innovation in the system is being taken out. The foreign doctor the hospital hires to treat us instead of the private specialist we would have gone to (that retired instead of dealing with IPAB cuts) will probably be a nice person at least if you can understand them.



I am not coming from a partisan perspective. I bitch like crazy about Republicans.

I AM come from a medical perspective. I have doctors and nurses all throughout my family.

And they have made it very clear to me that it is not the Republicans that will "sabotage" the ACA, but instead the most talented doctors in America who will refuse to work for 60% or less of what they earn today with no benefits in return except more paperwork and regulation.

The problem with the ACA is that it completely ignores market forces. Doctors and patients are going to continue to do whatever benefits them the most, Obama's best intentions be damned.

Many patients are very dissatisfied with medicaid as well. It is the worst healthcare available in the country.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Many patients are very dissatisfied with medicaid as well. It is the worst healthcare available in the country.

Well that would make sense, wouldn't it? And even at "the worst healthcare in the country" it is not all THAT bad.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Many patients are very dissatisfied with medicaid as well. It is the worst healthcare available in the country.

Well sure, but honestly it kinda doesn't matter what they think because they cannot afford better and they don't vote consistently enough to force the parties to care.

If poor people voted like old people then Medicaid participation would have been tied to licensing at this point to force participation among good doctors.

 

[fskimospy]

First of all, 20 million is a crazy optimistic estimate. Secondly, 20 million is not even 10% of American society which isn't enough to swing the election especially when you consider that most belong to demographic groups with low voter participation rates. Finally, many of these people are concentrated in urban areas that vote Democrat anyway.

Victory for the ACA politically is not signing up 3 million Californians and New Yorkers. In order for it to build real political capital for the Democrats it need to be accepted in red flyover states. I don't see real evidence that is happening, but I would accept it if I was wrong and you have evidence otherwise.



Well considering most on Medicaid are children I don't think they have a concept about what it really is. And yes there are some people unhappy with Medicaid- the doctors:

http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/news/2014/01/22/survey-says-providers-not-happy-with.html

If enough of them opt-out then a Medicaid card has the same worth as monopoly money.

I know if I was poor and I have to chose between seeing the reject doctor six months from now that still takes Medicaid because thanks to his high complication rate no decent patient will see him, and going to the emergency room today to get care from the top doctor in my area that is chained to that emergency room in order to have admitting privileges at the hospital, then I would chose the ER. It is not like I pay the bill anyway.



I am glad your brother can afford his care, and I am glad you don't have to worry about pre-existing conditions. I just don't like what was given to the insurance companies in trade for these changes.

The IPAB is going to destroy the progress of specialist care in America, but I guess if you were happy with the level of cancer care you got back when you don't care if nothing improves on that front for decades because the money to spur innovation in the system is being taken out. The foreign doctor the hospital hires to treat us instead of the private specialist we would have gone to (that retired instead of dealing with IPAB cuts) will probably be a nice person at least if you can understand them.



I am not coming from a partisan perspective. I bitch like crazy about Republicans.

I AM come from a medical perspective. I have doctors and nurses all throughout my family.

And they have made it very clear to me that it is not the Republicans that will "sabotage" the ACA, but instead the most talented doctors in America who will refuse to work for 60% or less of what they earn today with no benefits in return except more paperwork and regulation.

The problem with the ACA is that it completely ignores market forces. Doctors and patients are going to continue to do whatever benefits them the most, Obama's best intentions be damned.

I'll reply more later, but to be clear the flyover states are mostly not important. Colorado, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and New Mexico are. Guess what they have a lot of?

Also, if a panel that examines the cost effectiveness of treatments destroys innovation in our country our innovation sucks.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I'll reply more later, but to be clear the flyover states are mostly not important. Colorado, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and New Mexico are. Guess what they have a lot of?

Those states? Plenty of old people that aren't covered by Obamacare.

Also, if a panel that examines the cost effectiveness of treatments destroys innovation in our country our innovation sucks.

Our innovation is driven by the free market and a profit motive. Just like cell phones, computers, any other market. If you are a medical equipment company or a drug company, why innovate when the system won't pay any more for your new stuff than your old stuff?

Or more directly: Why would the panel embrace innovation, unless the innovation is tied to cost savings?

The worst thing possible for the ACA's popularity is if some new popular treatment is not covered because that would balloon the costs inside the system too much. You can tell the old person until they are blue in the face that they way we did it in the 80's was good enough, but if they see a new technique with better results they want it.

Medicare already goes out of its way to kill innovation in the elderly segment, to the point of not allowing out of pocket pay, if it will lead to an increase in expectations and costs. Here is an example:

Putting aside all the other issues about the femtosecond, cost still looms large. Dr. Packer says Medicare won't let providers charge extra for this new technology, except in one important instance. Medicare allows extra charges for cataract patients when premium intraocular lenses are inserted, so if the femtosecond is used in conjunction with premium IOL insertion, Dr. Packer says femtosecond providers would be able to cover their costs.



Instead of charging $2,000 an eye for the premium IOL, as cataract surgeons now generally do, Dr. Packer says they might raise the charge to $3,000 for a premium IOL plus femtosecond. "This can be justified because the femtosecond would reduce the chance of a miss in the refractive outcome, which is paramount to achieving independence from glasses," he says.



However, this loophole of a sort means femtosecond's costs could only be justified for cataract patients getting premium IOLs. "Medicare cataract patients who only want the femtosecond laser and no premium IOLs could not be charged extra," Dr. Packer says. The obvious solution, he says, is to convince CMS to carve out the same exception for femtosecond that it has made for premium IOLs. But he concedes it's not clear whether CMS is prepared to do that.

http://www.beckersasc.com/news-analysis/why-arent-surgery-centers-buying-femtosecond-lasers.html

And since that article is old I can give you an update: Not only does Medicare NOT allow carve-out or reimbursement increases for femtosecond, they have gone after those that push femtosecond as the new standard of care. That is what innovation by a panel gets you.

Do we want a bean counter deciding for all of insured America (since the private companies will follow along and use the panel's decisions like a shield) what procedures won't change for decades because a much better procedure with much better results costs too much?

 

[werepossum]

This may come as a huge shock to you...but we had severe rationing long before anyone had ever heard of Obama or Obamacare. Have you ever wondered what exactly "tens of millions of people uninsured or under-insured" meant? That's called rationing.

True. Everything desirable that require labor or materials to provide is inherently rationed, and limiting access for non-emergency care to those able to afford it is one form of rationing.

It will flop...because free market health care has proven itself to be a disaster and socialized medicine has proven itself to be a superior and more efficient system in all of the other first world nations where it has been implemented.

The evil sochulust Proggies aren't really backers of Obamacare; they just think it's a small improvement over what we had before.

I no longer believe they think it's a small improvement over what we had before. I believe they know it's going to destroy what we had before, leaving full government control the only remaining option.

Uh...you do realize that Obamacare and the ACA is not really the Left's plan, right? If anything, it's an implementation of a Republican plan designed to get in the way of the Left's implementing its real plan (actual socialized medicine and not the ACA garbage).

Obviously not designed to get in the way of the Left's implementing its real plan (actual socialized medicine and not the ACA garbage), since this was passed exclusively by the left. Not a single Republican vote passed this monstrosity, although a few courageous Democrats opposed it. It's designed to destroy the existing system in order that the Left can implement its real plan, actual socialized medicine. Only a complete idiot would believe that the Left almost unanimously passed and Republicans unanimously opposed a Republican plan. The very most one can say is that once upon a time some Republicans proposed some of the things in this horror as a less horrible alternative to the much worse Hillarycare, with its many ways to imprison people who committed the heinous sin of paying for their own health care with their own money.

Hint: The woman who asks her kidnapper to rape her instead of killing her is not desirous of being raped, merely recognizing that it's not as bad as being murdered.

 

[werepossum]

Those states? Plenty of old people that aren't covered by Obamacare.

Our innovation is driven by the free market and a profit motive. Just like cell phones, computers, any other market. If you are a medical equipment company or a drug company, why innovate when the system won't pay any more for your new stuff than your old stuff?

Or more directly: Why would the panel embrace innovation, unless the innovation is tied to cost savings?

The worst thing possible for the ACA's popularity is if some new popular treatment is not covered because that would balloon the costs inside the system too much. You can tell the old person until they are blue in the face that they way we did it in the 80's was good enough, but if they see a new technique with better results they want it.

Medicare already goes out of its way to kill innovation in the elderly segment, to the point of not allowing out of pocket pay, if it will lead to an increase in expectations and costs. Here is an example:



http://www.beckersasc.com/news-analysis/why-arent-surgery-centers-buying-femtosecond-lasers.html

And since that article is old I can give you an update: Not only does Medicare NOT allow carve-out or reimbursement increases for femtosecond, they have gone after those that push femtosecond as the new standard of care. That is what innovation by a panel gets you.

Do we want a bean counter deciding for all of insured America (since the private companies will follow along and use the panel's decisions like a shield) what procedures won't change for decades because a much better procedure with much better results costs too much?

This is why, like all proggie plans, they must have total control of everyone. With total control innovation can be ended so there is nothing for people to demand except what government decides is best for them.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I'm sorry, where is option 3: The law is terrible, as is the idea behind it, so lets get rid of it?

...and replace it with...?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Me and the rest of my friends who work take great pleasure in watching your Dear Leader's house of cards crashing all around you and your lapdogs.

 

[BoberFett]

That's quality spelling. Definitely the work of a Democrat. Wishful thinking perhaps?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

But why do they spend less?

That is the key.

The go-to is "well you cut out all the middle men." And that will bring some savings. But not enough. Not enough to cross that divide.

So the real answer is: "they don't have the American levels of expectations and entitlement when it comes to care."

You can't legislate away entitlement.

Cutting out the Insurance company middle men would result in a huge savings. Probably 40% of all health care dollars go to insurance-related issues. It's not just insurance company employees, but also hospital employees that deal with insurance, HR benefits managers at businesses, insurance brokers, TV advertising, etc.

 

[Jhhnn]

True. Everything desirable that require labor or materials to provide is inherently rationed, and limiting access for non-emergency care to those able to afford it is one form of rationing.


I no longer believe they think it's a small improvement over what we had before. I believe they know it's going to destroy what we had before, leaving full government control the only remaining option.


Obviously not designed to get in the way of the Left's implementing its real plan (actual socialized medicine and not the ACA garbage), since this was passed exclusively by the left. Not a single Republican vote passed this monstrosity, although a few courageous Democrats opposed it. It's designed to destroy the existing system in order that the Left can implement its real plan, actual socialized medicine. Only a complete idiot would believe that the Left almost unanimously passed and Republicans unanimously opposed a Republican plan. The very most one can say is that once upon a time some Republicans proposed some of the things in this horror as a less horrible alternative to the much worse Hillarycare, with its many ways to imprison people who committed the heinous sin of paying for their own health care with their own money.

Hint: The woman who asks her kidnapper to rape her instead of killing her is not desirous of being raped, merely recognizing that it's not as bad as being murdered.

Yeh, it's just another conspiracy like Benghazi, brought to us by a usurper who wasn't born in this county, right? Yes, yes... it's all coming together...

 

[WhipperSnapper]

That's quality spelling. Definitely the work of a Democrat. Wishful thinking perhaps?

Guess I should have proof read it first. But still, the retards equating Obama with Kim Jong Il are complete morons.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Like all proggie actions, undoing the action is simply not an option. So in your world, the Democrats refusing to consider repealing Obamacare somehow makes all its problems the fault of the Republicans.

...and if Obamacare is repealed...the alternative is?

To hear some people tell it, our health care system was near-perfect pre-ACA. There weren't any death panels at health insurance companies. No one went without care. The costs were minimal. There was no such thing as a medical cost-induced bankruptcy. Businesses didn't worry about insurance concerns.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

This is true. The greater Chattanooga area, serving roughly a million people, has as many MRI machines as the nation of Canada.

...So...what aren't Canadians dying in droves? How does the Canadian lifespan rate compared to the American lifespan?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

No, I'm saying that in the US if you even moderately try to succeed you can make a living wage within a few years and get employer subsidized healthcare. Within 10 years you can buy a house, have a family... With healthcare.

The only "poor" people without subsidized healthcare choose to work part times jobs long-term or are absolutely completely inept.

So what you're saying is that the economy is booming and that solid middle class and lower middle class jobs abound for anyone willing to put in the hard work to do them?

If everyone were willing to do that...to be responsible and put in that hard work and obtain skills in a useful field...then everyone would earn at least $15/hour right? No more Walmart or McDonalds employees? Poverty wage jobs would just simply disappear? Good jobs would magically materialize for everyone who is worthy and if everyone is worthy then everyone can have one of those good jobs?

The Republicans and Free Market Morons have you as deluded as a North Korean living under the Dear Leader. Perhaps Reince Priebus is the real Dear Leader!

 

[ivwshane]

First of all, 20 million is a crazy optimistic estimate. Secondly, 20 million is not even 10% of American society which isn't enough to swing the election especially when you consider that most belong to demographic groups with low voter participation rates. Finally, many of these people are concentrated in urban areas that vote Democrat anyway.

Victory for the ACA politically is not signing up 3 million Californians and New Yorkers. In order for it to build real political capital for the Democrats it need to be accepted in red flyover states. I don't see real evidence that is happening, but I would accept it if I was wrong and you have evidence otherwise.



Well considering most on Medicaid are children I don't think they have a concept about what it really is. And yes there are some people unhappy with Medicaid- the doctors:

http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/news/2014/01/22/survey-says-providers-not-happy-with.html

If enough of them opt-out then a Medicaid card has the same worth as monopoly money.

I know if I was poor and I have to chose between seeing the reject doctor six months from now that still takes Medicaid because thanks to his high complication rate no decent patient will see him, and going to the emergency room today to get care from the top doctor in my area that is chained to that emergency room in order to have admitting privileges at the hospital, then I would chose the ER. It is not like I pay the bill anyway.



I am glad your brother can afford his care, and I am glad you don't have to worry about pre-existing conditions. I just don't like what was given to the insurance companies in trade for these changes.

The IPAB is going to destroy the progress of specialist care in America, but I guess if you were happy with the level of cancer care you got back when you don't care if nothing improves on that front for decades because the money to spur innovation in the system is being taken out. The foreign doctor the hospital hires to treat us instead of the private specialist we would have gone to (that retired instead of dealing with IPAB cuts) will probably be a nice person at least if you can understand them.



I am not coming from a partisan perspective. I bitch like crazy about Republicans.

I AM come from a medical perspective. I have doctors and nurses all throughout my family.

And they have made it very clear to me that it is not the Republicans that will "sabotage" the ACA, but instead the most talented doctors in America who will refuse to work for 60% or less of what they earn today with no benefits in return except more paperwork and regulation.

The problem with the ACA is that it completely ignores market forces. Doctors and patients are going to continue to do whatever benefits them the most, Obama's best intentions be damned.

I stopped reading after your first scentence. The goal of the ACA isn't to have all Americans sign up for plans through ACA websites, a majority of people already have insurance through their employer or through the government.

 

[Darwin333]

Death panels you say?

It is simply a function of very basic mathematics. We do not have unlimited resources and therefore can not provide unlimited services.

 

[Darwin333]

It has always been that way. When you would hear the token "we have the best health care in the world," along with "people come to the US for medical care" may sometimes be true, but those people aren't going to some county hospital.

Don't get me wrong, I think Obamacare is crap and, personally, I'd love to see a system like the German one, but it's better than what we had. People can complain that their plans don't exist or that some had increased costs, but it's because of how horrible some plans actually were. Some people's insurance was only good enough to say they were at least insured. It didn't cover anything, but they had insurance!

Obama shouldn't have ever said people could keep their plans. Too many plans were utter garbage.

I still find it baffling that people harp about the cost of health insurance instead of the true problem which is the cost of actual health care which the health insurance is paying for. If it didn't cost a metric fuckton of money for rather simple procedures that should be easily 1/10th the cost insurance wouldn't be nearly as expensive.

 

[werepossum]

That's quality spelling. Definitely the work of a Democrat. Wishful thinking perhaps?

LOL That is classic.

...and if Obamacare is repealed...the alternative is?

To hear some people tell it, our health care system was near-perfect pre-ACA. There weren't any death panels at health insurance companies. No one went without care. The costs were minimal. There was no such thing as a medical cost-induced bankruptcy. Businesses didn't worry about insurance concerns.

The alternative would be to repeal Obamacare, give control back to the states to provide competition in ideas, and pass simple common sense mandates like "must issue".

...So...what aren't Canadians dying in droves? How does the Canadian lifespan rate compared to the American lifespan?

Two reasons. First, most uses of an MRI are not life-threatening conditions. Second, when it is life-threatening they have the option of coming to the United States for diagnosis and treatment.