Upcoming court case could soon "crush" the ACA entirely

[glenn1]

No use arguing. He's not smart enough to realize that he's already paying for everyone else that won't/can't. Does anyone really think that the hospital simply eats those bills?

You do realize there's reason to oppose "universal healthcare" for reasons other than the alleged cost savings? Perhaps the same government that does drone strikes of citizens without trial shouldn't be the ones deciding whether someone on a terrorist watch list gets life saving medicine. Or maybe the same government whose NSA spies on every communications you have shouldn't also be the ones with total access to your medical records, DNA profile, and every single piece of health information about you. And maybe, just maybe you might not people considering public service be afraid their government medical history files will magically be "leaked' during a political campaign; ditto for all other "enemies of the state" as well.

 

[OutHouse]

 

[Jhhnn]

You do realize there's reason to oppose "universal healthcare" for reasons other than the alleged cost savings? Perhaps the same government that does drone strikes of citizens without trial shouldn't be the ones deciding whether someone on a terrorist watch list gets life saving medicine. Or maybe the same government whose NSA spies on every communications you have shouldn't also be the ones with total access to your medical records, DNA profile, and every single piece of health information about you. And maybe, just maybe you might not people considering public service be afraid their government medical history files will magically be "leaked' during a political campaign; ditto for all other "enemies of the state" as well.

MMMmmm. Invoking the big gubmint boogeyman with thinly veiled conspiracy theory.

Nice. Very nice.

 

[Jhhnn]

Nice bit of propaganda.

Link us up to some real world stories, please, not projections of doom as fact.

 

[ivwshane]

Another fan of propaganda I see. When you can't bother thinking for yourself let the pictures do that for you!

Of course your little picture forgot the *, "in republican controlled states that refused Medicare expansion".

I'd ask what's it feel like to be ignorant but I've already seen your answer, it's bliss!

 

[ivwshane]

MMMmmm. Invoking the big gubmint boogeyman with thinly veiled conspiracy theory.

Nice. Very nice.

Just more crying that the government is broken, brought to you by those that support those that are for breaking it.

It's the rights self fulfilling prophecy. They don't know how to solve problems so they will ensure no one does!

 

[Jhhnn]

Besides, universal single payer is Medicare for all, not VA for all. It's amazing to me that right-wingers don't understand this basic concept but feel qualified to debate the issue.

They feel qualified to debate anything where they can project doom in change or project an evil conspiracy.

Ben-fucking-ghazi, fer crissakes.

 

[boomerang]

Actually from what I've read VA health care is extremely good. Its the back office wait times that ruin it. I'd bet if every American was in paperwork nightmare it would get changed. The problem with the VA is it only serves a smaller pool so complaint's are missed.

As I've gotten older I have come to realize that the world needs glass half full folks like yourself.

I have documented here my stepson's tribulations with the VA that resulted in him almost losing his leg. I also do not discount all the negatives nationwide across the VA network I read about with regularity. I also do not have any faith in feelings that lead people to say things like "I'd bet" because betting is gambling and the odds are in favor of the house. Moving to a single payer system run by our government is not confidence inspiring to me based upon their track record. I hold out no hope that they will suddenly and miraculously become efficient. Efficiency is an afterthought when there is no competition.

But keep seeing a glass half full and I will keep seeing a glass half empty. The truth might just lie somewhere in that infinitesimal location between the two.

 

[Matt1970]

Another fan of propaganda I see. When you can't bother thinking for yourself let the pictures do that for you!

Of course your little picture forgot the *, "in republican controlled states that refused Medicare expansion".

I'd ask what's it feel like to be ignorant but I've already seen your answer, it's bliss!

Medicaid expansion.

 

[glenn1]

MMMmmm. Invoking the big gubmint boogeyman with thinly veiled conspiracy theory.

Nice. Very nice.

Yeah, very nice. You keep on waiting for single payer. I'm sure it will be implemented right around when we put carbon taxes in place and hand over Dubya for war crimes trial. Kinda like how the comparable right wing fantasies of Balanced Budget Amendment, repeal of Roe v. Wade, and border fence are imminent as well.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yeah, very nice. You keep on waiting for single payer. I'm sure it will be implemented right around when we put carbon taxes in place and hand over Dubya for war crimes trial.

Yawn. The ACA was the best we could do at the time to deal with a growing problem. How well it will actually work remains to be seen. It's important to recognize that all the doom & gloom from the right wing noise machine has failed to materialize.

There is no political will for single payer, so we won't have it until & if there ever is. That's dependent on the success or failure of the ACA. That's reality. Deal with it.

 

[ivwshane]

Medicaid expansion.

Correct! Thanks.

 

[Oldgamer]

This picture is way inaccurate. Maybe some can't afford it because the Republicans in many states refuse to allow the state medicaid expansion? Hrmmm.. guess your picture doesn't show that bit of truth now does it?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Picking at the details doesn't condemn the entire system. The people who need the stuff get it, don't they?

Interesting you should put it this way. "Picking at the details". Well it used to work better, but it's been "fixed" so people don't always get their stuff. Elderly people living alone don't always have someone to go for them. The government wasn't getting charged. The people getting who need their stuff weren't either. Free, now illegal. Someone screwed up and people got screwed, but they aren't very important to you it seems. Your politicians at work.

Not that they would if it weren't for the system you condemn, which is exactly what the lawsuit in question attempts to accomplish.

Again they don't always get their stuff and the lawsuit doesn't address any of it. This is Medicare B, which isn't the ACA. None of the what you say is applicable at all. You don't know that? What it does apply to is that extremely simple and straightforward, commonsense things can get screwed up and break, but giving something which is infinitely more complicated is supposed to work. Sorry, that doesn't make sense.

 

[ivwshane]

What doesn't make sense is your incessant complaining about how broken things are while refusing to support anyone who, at the very least, acknowledges that the system we have now has issues. And then you complain about people who acknowledge the problems we have and instead of educating them, you complain that they don't know what they are talking about.

Last I checked whining wasn't a great strategy for achieving anything.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

What doesn't make sense is your incessant complaining about how broken things are while refusing to support anyone who, at the very least, acknowledges that the system we have now has issues. And then you complain about people who acknowledge the problems we have and instead of educating them, you complain that they don't know what they are talking about.

Last I checked whining wasn't a great strategy for achieving anything.

Unfortunately there isn't really much of a desire to fix problems well. Instead what's wanted is for the left to attack the right and vice versa. The person I responded to doesn't care if a thing works well or not. It's merely enough that someone does something even if it makes things worse. Republicans? They don't know anything. Democrats? Neither do they however around these parts they like to pretend they do. It is one thing to acknowledge a problem but it is entirely another to work them out correctly. I note a great many people whining about the situation, but how many have come up with ideas? Who among them have taken the time to think of unintended consequences or look at real life situations for existing problems and call for them to be fixed?

There does indeed seem to be a great deal of whining, but little examination of what we have, what we need, what it will cost and how to get what we already have right. Oh, a lot of excuses too.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

moving to full on single payer is what we should have done in the first place

Giving the Republicans what they wanted was the only option available at the time though even with a very near super-majority; such was how set they were in being sore losers and a destructionist party. The fact that it had to be so close to literally shoved down their throats that the only way it could have be more literal would be with an open-mouth gag is such a sad sign for this country.

 

[Jhhnn]

Interesting you should put it this way. "Picking at the details". Well it used to work better, but it's been "fixed" so people don't always get their stuff. Elderly people living alone don't always have someone to go for them. The government wasn't getting charged. The people getting who need their stuff weren't either. Free, now illegal. Someone screwed up and people got screwed, but they aren't very important to you it seems. Your politicians at work.

That's completely incoherent w/o context.

Again they don't always get their stuff and the lawsuit doesn't address any of it. This is Medicare B, which isn't the ACA. None of the what you say is applicable at all. You don't know that? What it does apply to is that extremely simple and straightforward, commonsense things can get screwed up and break, but giving something which is infinitely more complicated is supposed to work. Sorry, that doesn't make sense.

So why are you talking about medicare part B in the first place? That's not how the ACA works. It's just a different way to get health insurance, not a whole new way of doing things. Once enrolled, it's not more complicated for participants at all. It's the same as it ever was. I'm sure that people will still have the same problems with their insurance Co's that they've always had, other than those nasty bits about pre-existing conditions & paying for policies that cover jack & shit.

It means that if you're in between jobs & can't afford COBRA then you can still protect your family because you're subsidized. It means that independent businessmen & contractors can now afford coverage when they previously could not. It means that low wage workers in fully compliant states can receive care under medicaid rather than just at the ER.

If this suit is successful, it means that all the people in states who didn't buy into the exchanges & medicaid expansion will no longer be able to receive subsidized coverage and will often therefore have no coverage at all.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That's completely incoherent w/o context.



So why are you talking about medicare part B in the first place? That's not how the ACA works. It's just a different way to get health insurance, not a whole new way of doing things. Once enrolled, it's not more complicated for participants at all. It's the same as it ever was. I'm sure that people will still have the same problems with their insurance Co's that they've always had, other than those nasty bits about pre-existing conditions & paying for policies that cover jack & shit.

It means that if you're in between jobs & can't afford COBRA then you can still protect your family because you're subsidized. It means that independent businessmen & contractors can now afford coverage when they previously could not. It means that low wage workers in fully compliant states can receive care under medicaid rather than just at the ER.

If this suit is successful, it means that all the people in states who didn't buy into the exchanges & medicaid expansion will no longer be able to receive subsidized coverage and will often therefore have no coverage at all.

The posts I had been responding to weren't about the ACA, but a "single payer" system, which would of necessity be far more reaching and presumably government run. Citing recent and harmful changes in a major program which is not being addressed is relevant since these people would be designing what is effectively a new system. I'll put it this way. There is little chance that someone who can't lance a boil properly will suddenly become a competent neurosurgeon.

Politics and ignorance make for bad medicine. Now if someone were to come up with an independent body which doesn't answer to the Democrats or Republicans and has an idea of what health care is about then I'd be all ears.

 

[Jhhnn]

The posts I had been responding to weren't about the ACA, but a "single payer" system, which would of necessity be far more reaching and presumably government run. Citing recent and harmful changes in a major program which is not being addressed is relevant since these people would be designing what is effectively a new system. I'll put it this way. There is little chance that someone who can't lance a boil properly will suddenly become a competent neurosurgeon.

Politics and ignorance make for bad medicine. Now if someone were to come up with an independent body which doesn't answer to the Democrats or Republicans and has an idea of what health care is about then I'd be all ears.

Oh. So it was an off topic rant tearing down de ebil gubmint, which was pretty much what I offered in the first place. Never pass up the chance for that, huh?

 

[Matt1970]

This picture is way inaccurate. Maybe some can't afford it because the Republicans in many states refuse to allow the state medicaid expansion? Hrmmm.. guess your picture doesn't show that bit of truth now does it?

How about the truth of the matter that if you are on Medicaid you still can't afford health insurance. That's tax payers paying for your health insurance. The ACA has done little to make health insurance affordable, Judging from what I have seen it does the opposite. The ACA is more about shifting the burden from those who can't afford it to those who can, or in other words income redistribution.

 

[ivwshane]

How about the truth of the matter that if you are on Medicaid you still can't afford health insurance. That's tax payers paying for your health insurance. The ACA has done little to make health insurance affordable, Judging from what I have seen it does the opposite. The ACA is more about shifting the burden from those who can't afford it to those who can, or in other words income redistribution.

Except for the fact that healthcare costs have been increasing at a slower pace than they were previously...so yeah I guess it's done a little since four years since it's passage and 1 year since 90% implementation.

 

[Matt1970]

Except for the fact that healthcare costs have been increasing at a slower pace than they were previously...so yeah I guess it's done a little since four years since it's passage and 1 year since 90% implementation.

Increasing slower is not a decrease in cost as we were promised and we won't have 90% implementation till Obama decides to implement the business mandate.

 

[ivwshane]

Increasing slower is not a decrease in cost as we were promised and we won't have 90% implementation till Obama decides to implement the business mandate.

Can you think of another time health care cost increased at a slower rate? Can you think of another law that reduced healthcare costs despite not being fully implemented?

You better get to a shelter! The sky is falling!

 

[Engineer]

The ACA is more about shifting the burden from those who can't afford it to those who can, or in other words income redistribution.

Those who could not / would not have always had their bills passed on to those that pay, whether it's higher taxes, higher insurance premiums, or most likely, higher hospital/doctors prices. Just as in taxes, those that don't have skin in the game don't care about costs...those that do have skin in the game pay attention.

Using the ole taxation line, everyone should have some skin in the game, especially if they are going to be playing in it.