OT: AHCA

[iceheart08]

CBB should be fired. not many CBB apologists left on the board. Am curious to see if anyone can come up with a good argument for obamacarelite, or the AHCA?

Seriously. nobody is happy about this thing. democrats hate it. most conservatives think it doesnt go far enough. AARP came out against it. In my state, 7 rural hospitals are going to close, forcing literally hundreds of thousands to travel across treacherous mountain passes to get health care. It will also cost thousands of jobs in the healthcare industry in Colorado. Hospital CEOS are against it, medical research companies are against it, patient advocacy groups are against it, and doctors groups are starting to come out against. There is almost nobody attached to our healthcare system that thinks this is a good idea.

As a diabetic, I know this is going to be a disaster for me, and add at least 1k a month in costs for testing supplies and/or increased premium's, even though, study after study after study tells us that low-cost testing supplies and insulin drive down long-term costs significantly and improve health outcomes.

And sure, if you dont ever want to buy insurance, you no longer have to, but, instead, if you dont want to buy insurance for a year, then you want it next year, youll have to pay a massive penalty, and not to the federal government, but to health insurance companies.

They couldnt even come up with a real new name, and they know how popular the ACA is, so all they did was add an H? This is insanity.

they are going to give credits to EVERYONE, with no need or means testing. Do you seriously believe that 30 year old CEO making $3,000,000 per year should get the exact same subsidy as a 30 year old making $14,000. How does that make any sense at all.

Who likes this thing?

EDIT: and holy crap. if you are an old person on a fixed budget, or a poor old person, you are totally ****ed. AARP estimates that a senior earning 15k a year could see a 8000 premium increase as a result of the loss of sliding scale subsidies, and the new allowable ratio of premiums going up from 3-1 to 5-1. How is that acceptable to anyone?

 

[SimpsonvilleTiger]

CBB should be fired. not many CBB apologists left on the board. Am curious to see if anyone can come up with a good argument for obamacarelite, or the AHCA?

Seriously. nobody is happy about this thing. democrats hate it. most conservatives think it doesnt go far enough. AARP came out against it. In my state, 7 rural hospitals are going to close, forcing literally hundreds of thousands to travel across treacherous mountain passes to get health care. It will also cost thousands of jobs in the healthcare industry in Colorado. Hospital CEOS are against it, medical research companies are against it, patient advocacy groups are against it, and doctors groups are starting to come out against. There is almost nobody attached to our healthcare system that thinks this is a good idea.

As a diabetic, I know this is going to be a disaster for me, and add at least 1k a month in costs for testing supplies and/or increased premium's, even though, study after study after study tells us that low-cost testing supplies and insulin drive down long-term costs significantly and improve health outcomes.

And sure, if you dont ever want to buy insurance, you no longer have to, but, instead, if you dont want to buy insurance for a year, then you want it next year, youll have to pay a massive penalty, and not to the federal government, but to health insurance companies.

They couldnt even come up with a real new name, and they know how popular the ACA is, so all they did was add an H? This is insanity.

they are going to give credits to EVERYONE, with no need or means testing. Do you seriously believe that 30 year old CEO making $3,000,000 per year should get the exact same subsidy as a 30 year old making $14,000. How does that make any sense at all.

Who likes this thing?

You and I don't agree politically normally, but this is total crap. I'm sick of it. Either we jump all the way in and go total socialized medicine with the option to buy supplemental on the open market OR get gov't the hell out of it. This "half pregrant" approach is a disaster and has been for 50 years.

The GOP in Congress make me sick - other than Rand Paul.

 

[CUAngler]

Without the mandate, I don't really see how it's going to be adequately funded.

It seems like they wanted to keep some of the parts that had the most public support like kids stay on until age 26 and no denial of pre-exising conditions, but the mandate is really what made those possible.

 

[johnhugh]

Hey OP let me give you a piece of my mind about this with a well thought argument as to why this health plan is going to work. The following is a summary of both all of my individual thoughts about this particular political issue and how it is going to affect the broader population of this country as a whole:






MAGA!!!!!!





I hope that wasn't too much for your tiny libtard brain you stupid socialist. Why don't you go worship Crooked Hillary, maybe read about her on your stupid MacBook at a Cat Café




Also,




@amynhop

 

[iceheart08]

Without the mandate, I don't really see how it's going to be adequately funded.

It seems like they wanted to keep some of the parts that had the most public support like kids stay on until age 26 and no denial of pre-exising conditions, but the mandate is really what made those possible.

it wont be. without healthy young people paying into the system, premiums are going to skyrocket. it literally makes no sense.

 

[poates6]

Haven't read it but know I'll hate it. There are many better options available.

 

[TigerDutch]

It's going to universal healthcare, only a matter of a few years.

Trump is gonna moderate and completely freak out the right wing.

 

[iceheart08]

It's going to universal healthcare, only a matter of a few years.

Trump is gonna moderate and completely freak out the right wing.

republicans have been claiming that this was the Dems aim, to destroy the healthcare system such that universal was necessary, well, this bill literally accomplishes that feat. its beyond unsustainable. Seniors are going to be swimming in medical debt, that will never be repaid.

 

[rogue booster]

rand paul's plan is the only way to go. no mandates, no coverage for pre-existing coverages (otherwise it's not really insurance), legalize interstate insurance sales, and let individuals that don't have employer coverage pool by association. Tired of this back and forth nonsense.

 

[rogue booster]

republicans have been claiming that this was the Dems aim, to destroy the healthcare system such that universal was necessary, well, this bill literally accomplishes that feat. its beyond unsustainable. Seniors are going to be swimming in medical debt, that will never be repaid.

take your hyperbole to an indivisible meeting

 

[poates6]

rand paul's plan is the only way to go. no mandates, no coverage for pre-existing coverages (otherwise it's not really insurance), legalize interstate insurance sales, and let individuals that don't have employer coverage pool by association. Tired of this back and forth nonsense.

I am on board with this

 

[utgolfer]

it wont be. without healthy young people paying into the system, premiums are going to skyrocket. it literally makes no sense.

How much subsidy should a wealthy older person who needs maintenance treatment get from the healthy, younger, less well off part of the population?

Serious question. It's the elephant in the room that no one seems to want to address, on either side of the aisle. Once that question is addressed, then the actual plans should easily flow from there.

 

[amynhop]

Hey OP let me give you a piece of my mind about this with a well thought argument as to why this health plan is going to work. The following is a summary of both all of my individual thoughts about this particular political issue and how it is going to affect the broader population of this country as a whole:






MAGA!!!!!!





I hope that wasn't too much for your tiny libtard brain you stupid socialist. Why don't you go worship Crooked Hillary, maybe read about her on your stupid MacBook at a Cat Café




Also,




@amynhop

 

[TigerDutch]

republicans have been claiming that this was the Dems aim, to destroy the healthcare system such that universal was necessary, well, this bill literally accomplishes that feat. its beyond unsustainable. Seniors are going to be swimming in medical debt, that will never be repaid.

Seniors? They have Medicare. The middle age post 50 pre 65 are gonna take this brunt.

The over 85 are really gonna get their share.

 

[Jokes On You]

Also, fats. @Ron Munson

 

[iceheart08]

rand paul's plan is the only way to go. no mandates, no coverage for pre-existing coverages (otherwise it's not really insurance), legalize interstate insurance sales, and let individuals that don't have employer coverage pool by association. Tired of this back and forth nonsense.

no coverage for pre-existing conditions? what? 1-3rd of america has a "pre-existing condition". These people dont get healthcare? they have to pay entirely out of pocket?

 

[TigerDutch]

You're the brain surgeon. Chime in...

 

[rogue booster]

here is a summary of rand paul's plan:

Since the passage of Obamacare, Americans have seen their premiums skyrocket, coverage they liked terminated, and dwindling choices of in-network healthcare providers. Many individuals who gained coverage through Obamacare are still, for all practical purposes, without insurance because the deductibles are beyond the reach of low income workers. It is essential that Obamacare be replaced with a plan that achieves what Obamacare failed to do - insure the most people possible at the lowest price.

Legalize Inexpensive Insurance Plans:

• Obamacare not only told individuals that they must purchase insurance, but defined specifically what that insurance must be. The first order of business should be to ensure that Americans can purchase the health insurance coverage that fits their needs.
• By imposing a variety of requirements on what plans can cover and how much they pay out in claims, Obamacare significantly increased premiums. By eliminating Obamacare’s essential health benefits requirement, and other restrictive coverage and plan requirements, low-cost insurance options will again be available to American consumers.

Help People Save To Buy Health Insurance:

• Authorize a tax credit (up to $5,000 per taxpayer) for individuals and families that contribute to HSAs to further incentivize health savings.
• Remove the maximum allowable annual contribution limit to HSAs, so that individuals may make unlimited contributions to an HSA.
• Currently, HSA funds may not be used to purchase insurance or cover the cost of premiums. Allowing the use of HSA funds for insurance premiums will help make health coverage more affordable for American families.
• Allowing HSA funds to be used for a broader range of health-related expenses give Americans the freedom to choose the type of health care they wish to receive. Eligible expenses are expanded to include prescription and OTC drugs, dietary supplements, weight loss programs and physical exercise expenses, and direct primary care and concierge medicine services, among others.

Fair Tax Treatment of Health Insurance

• Equalize the tax treatment of the purchase of health insurance for individuals and employers, by allowing individuals to deduct the cost of their health insurance from their income and payroll taxes, they will be empowered to purchase insurance independent of employment.

Help Individuals Join Together to Purchase Insurance:

• Expand Association Health Plans (AHPs) allow small business owners and individuals to band together across state lines through their membership in a trade or professional association to purchase health coverage for their families and employees at a lower cost.
• In addition, we should allow individuals to pool together through any organization to purchase insurance.
• These new pooling mechanisms increase the buying power of individuals and small businesses to decrease costs, increase administrative efficiencies, and protect individuals with pre-existing conditions by giving them access to the group market.

Allow the Purchase of Insurance Across State Lines

• Increase access to health coverage by creating an interstate market for health insurance that allows insurers licensed to sell policies in one state to offer them to residents of any other state.

State Medicaid Flexibility

• Provides states new flexibilities for Medicaid waivers for innovative state plan designs.
  
  

 

[SaltyMeatBallsOO]

@Cris_Ard Time to send this thread to...

 

[TigerEE91]

OP, trust in Dear Leader. MAGA. etc. They've got this all figured out. The most brilliant people in America (Trump and his kids) are all over this and it will be beautiful.

 

[FreeSC]

CBB should be fired. not many CBB apologists left on the board. Am curious to see if anyone can come up with a good argument for obamacarelite, or the AHCA?

Seriously. nobody is happy about this thing. democrats hate it. most conservatives think it doesnt go far enough. AARP came out against it. In my state, 7 rural hospitals are going to close, forcing literally hundreds of thousands to travel across treacherous mountain passes to get health care. It will also cost thousands of jobs in the healthcare industry in Colorado. Hospital CEOS are against it, medical research companies are against it, patient advocacy groups are against it, and doctors groups are starting to come out against. There is almost nobody attached to our healthcare system that thinks this is a good idea.

As a diabetic, I know this is going to be a disaster for me, and add at least 1k a month in costs for testing supplies and/or increased premium's, even though, study after study after study tells us that low-cost testing supplies and insulin drive down long-term costs significantly and improve health outcomes.

And sure, if you dont ever want to buy insurance, you no longer have to, but, instead, if you dont want to buy insurance for a year, then you want it next year, youll have to pay a massive penalty, and not to the federal government, but to health insurance companies.

They couldnt even come up with a real new name, and they know how popular the ACA is, so all they did was add an H? This is insanity.

they are going to give credits to EVERYONE, with no need or means testing. Do you seriously believe that 30 year old CEO making $3,000,000 per year should get the exact same subsidy as a 30 year old making $14,000. How does that make any sense at all.

Who likes this thing?

EDIT: and holy crap. if you are an old person on a fixed budget, or a poor old person, you are totally ****ed. AARP estimates that a senior earning 15k a year could see a 8000 premium increase as a result of the loss of sliding scale subsidies, and the new allowable ratio of premiums going up from 3-1 to 5-1. How is that acceptable to anyone?

If you're talking about healthcare, you have to identify what the problem is.

I have a story for you.
About 1 1/2 year ago, I was talking to a lady who was married to a guy from the country of Columbia.
She needed spinal surgery, and priced it here. The part of the surgery that her insurance DIDN'T pay was in excess of $60K.
Her husband's sister was a doctor in back in Columbia. She asked around who was the best surgeon there.
The lady has the surgery done in Columbia for $40k. Total. No insurance.

Look, costs in this country have just gone berserk! We're talking 20, 25% cost increases in an age of 5% inflation. The costs HAVE to be decreased, DRAMATICALLY.
The problem is government regulations, our littiginous(sp) society, the medical special interests (doctors shouldn't be writing your prescriptions, the pharmacist who KNOWS the drugs should just be selling you the best product for your problem with NO doctor involvement) have all worked to drive the system nuts!

We have to get back to a competitive, free market system. That means getting regulation and the insurance companies OUT of the business as much as possible.

Really, I think costs in the medical industry could be cost 75% with the right program.

Is this it? No, but it's closer than the ACA.

A lot of people against it? Oh, heck yeah. Anytime you cut off the government gravy train, people are gonna cry like babies. But the government gravy train is EXACTLY part of what drives up costs.

We need to study costs vs. quality of service, WORLD WIDE, and borrow the best ideas from others.
One thing I know for sure: a government monopoly on healthcare, like any monopoly on ANYTHING, is never, NEVER good.

 

[vinotiger]

CBB should be fired. not many CBB apologists left on the board. Am curious to see if anyone can come up with a good argument for obamacarelite, or the AHCA?

Seriously. nobody is happy about this thing. democrats hate it. most conservatives think it doesnt go far enough. AARP came out against it. In my state, 7 rural hospitals are going to close, forcing literally hundreds of thousands to travel across treacherous mountain passes to get health care. It will also cost thousands of jobs in the healthcare industry in Colorado. Hospital CEOS are against it, medical research companies are against it, patient advocacy groups are against it, and doctors groups are starting to come out against. There is almost nobody attached to our healthcare system that thinks this is a good idea.

As a diabetic, I know this is going to be a disaster for me, and add at least 1k a month in costs for testing supplies and/or increased premium's, even though, study after study after study tells us that low-cost testing supplies and insulin drive down long-term costs significantly and improve health outcomes.

And sure, if you dont ever want to buy insurance, you no longer have to, but, instead, if you dont want to buy insurance for a year, then you want it next year, youll have to pay a massive penalty, and not to the federal government, but to health insurance companies.

They couldnt even come up with a real new name, and they know how popular the ACA is, so all they did was add an H? This is insanity.

they are going to give credits to EVERYONE, with no need or means testing. Do you seriously believe that 30 year old CEO making $3,000,000 per year should get the exact same subsidy as a 30 year old making $14,000. How does that make any sense at all.

Who likes this thing?

EDIT: and holy crap. if you are an old person on a fixed budget, or a poor old person, you are totally ****ed. AARP estimates that a senior earning 15k a year could see a 8000 premium increase as a result of the loss of sliding scale subsidies, and the new allowable ratio of premiums going up from 3-1 to 5-1. How is that acceptable to anyone?

I stopped reading this post after AARP hates it. Ya think? They are in bed with the Dems! lol

 

[rogue booster]

no coverage for pre-existing conditions? what? 1-3rd of america has a "pre-existing condition". These people dont get healthcare? they have to pay entirely out of pocket?

it incentivizes people to get insurance when they are healthy. we had this like 8 years ago, if you recall. premiums were lower for most of us back then. What am I insuring against if I already have an illness that requires ongoing treatment?

 

[tigertommy1]

Why does the gov't, or healthy people, have to provide insurance, either free or greatly reduced, for people?

 

[bizlat]

I don't know anything about the plan, but if it doesn't do something to radically control costs, it's never going to work. Health care costs have been out of control for decades. That's where any plan must start or its just a waste of everyone's time.

 

[rogue booster]

Why does the gov't, or healthy people, have to provide insurance, either free or greatly reduced, for people?

simple and well stated. Compulsion generally is not an underlying principle of a free society

 

[vinotiger]

I don't know anything about the plan, but if it doesn't do something to radically control costs, it's never going to work. Health care costs have been out of control for decades. That's where any plan must start or its just a waste of everyone's time.

This is similar to education. When gov't get's involved and removes the middle man prices skyrocket.

 

[amynhop]

You're the brain surgeon. Chime in...

At my place in the Hamptons, sipping margaritas and basking in the sun.

Not going to engage.....

 

[bizlat]

it incentivizes people to get insurance when they are healthy. we had this like 8 years ago, if you recall. premiums were lower for most of us back then. What am I insuring against if I already have an illness that requires ongoing treatment?

Yes, what we have now is more of a medical payment plan than actual insurance.

 

[1Clemson]

Haven't read it but know I'll hate it. There are many better options available.

You're not alone. there are at least 435 folks that live in Dc that haven't read it either, but like last time we can find out what's in it after it passes. That worked of so well....

 

[TigerDutch]

Spoiler

turd

Wow. Is that medical terminology doctor or just redneck talk?

 

[Ron Munson]

Sweet Gentle Jesus.

 

[CU Alumnus]

When it comes to insurance and government interference, like most things, less is more IMO.

I think the government's role should primarily be to ensure that the contract that is between insured and insurer, is followed. Not to mandate what kind of insurance you can get, etc. The free market will do that. If a carrier sucks, they will lose business.

Where this has issues is with the uninsured. The only REAL way to fix the system would be to allow hospitals to refuse those without insurance. Not ever gonna happen, if for no other reason than it takes a while to verify insurance for someone.

The dumbest thing Obamacare did was eliminate the "catastrophy-only" plans that were offered by Blue Cross, Fortis, etc. These were great for the unemployed or underemployed. They sucked if you got the sniffles, but if you had a major accident, heart attack, cancer, etc - they would save your life.

 

[toolucky52384]

CBB should be fired. not many CBB apologists left on the board. Am curious to see if anyone can come up with a good argument for obamacarelite, or the AHCA?

Seriously. nobody is happy about this thing. democrats hate it. most conservatives think it doesnt go far enough. AARP came out against it. In my state, 7 rural hospitals are going to close, forcing literally hundreds of thousands to travel across treacherous mountain passes to get health care. It will also cost thousands of jobs in the healthcare industry in Colorado. Hospital CEOS are against it, medical research companies are against it, patient advocacy groups are against it, and doctors groups are starting to come out against. There is almost nobody attached to our healthcare system that thinks this is a good idea.

As a diabetic, I know this is going to be a disaster for me, and add at least 1k a month in costs for testing supplies and/or increased premium's, even though, study after study after study tells us that low-cost testing supplies and insulin drive down long-term costs significantly and improve health outcomes.

And sure, if you dont ever want to buy insurance, you no longer have to, but, instead, if you dont want to buy insurance for a year, then you want it next year, youll have to pay a massive penalty, and not to the federal government, but to health insurance companies.

They couldnt even come up with a real new name, and they know how popular the ACA is, so all they did was add an H? This is insanity.

they are going to give credits to EVERYONE, with no need or means testing. Do you seriously believe that 30 year old CEO making $3,000,000 per year should get the exact same subsidy as a 30 year old making $14,000. How does that make any sense at all.

Who likes this thing?

EDIT: and holy crap. if you are an old person on a fixed budget, or a poor old person, you are totally ****ed. AARP estimates that a senior earning 15k a year could see a 8000 premium increase as a result of the loss of sliding scale subsidies, and the new allowable ratio of premiums going up from 3-1 to 5-1. How is that acceptable to anyone?

i've thought it was stupid ever since trump said we would keep care for pre existing conditions... don't get me wrong, i think that needs to be a part of whatever solution to health care our country decides on, however, that is what made obamacare expensive... republicans like to pretend it was birth control for women and other crap, but they are forgetting that before obamacare, health insurance essentially had huge holes in it that just let you die if your company had picked the wrong plan and pre-existing conditions were out of pocket for practically everything.

the fact that the gop then limitted the medicare expansion but kept the pre existing condition protection guaranteed that the only low income people with insurance would be those who were sick.

you cannot provide coverage for pre existing conditions without a universal coverage mandate. that or you need to severely cut the cost and the cost growth of health care, and i just don't see that happening in an age of constant discovery of new therapies and medicines.

 

[bizlat]

This is similar to education. When gov't get's involved and removes the middle man prices skyrocket.

Yep, It's just human nature. When you are spending other people's money, you just aren't going to be as efficient or care as much. That applies to all organizations not just government.

 

[TigerDutch]

When it comes to insurance and government interference, like most things, less is more IMO.

I think the government's role should primarily be to ensure that the contract that is between insured and insurer, is followed. Not to mandate what kind of insurance you can get, etc. The free market will do that. If a carrier sucks, they will lose business.

Where this has issues is with the uninsured. The only REAL way to fix the system would be to allow hospitals to refuse those without insurance. Not ever gonna happen, if for no other reason than it takes a while to verify insurance for someone.

The dumbest thing Obamacare did was eliminate the "catastrophy-only" plans that were offered by Blue Cross, Fortis, etc. These were great for the unemployed or underemployed. They sucked if you got the sniffles, but if you had a major accident, heart attack, cancer, etc - they would save your life.

They did not eliminate that, it reality, and in SC, under Obamacare, that's the only option you have unless you want to pay huge premiums.

 

[toolucky52384]

here is a summary of rand paul's plan:

Since the passage of Obamacare, Americans have seen their premiums skyrocket, coverage they liked terminated, and dwindling choices of in-network healthcare providers. Many individuals who gained coverage through Obamacare are still, for all practical purposes, without insurance because the deductibles are beyond the reach of low income workers. It is essential that Obamacare be replaced with a plan that achieves what Obamacare failed to do - insure the most people possible at the lowest price.

Legalize Inexpensive Insurance Plans:

• Obamacare not only told individuals that they must purchase insurance, but defined specifically what that insurance must be. The first order of business should be to ensure that Americans can purchase the health insurance coverage that fits their needs.
• By imposing a variety of requirements on what plans can cover and how much they pay out in claims, Obamacare significantly increased premiums. By eliminating Obamacare’s essential health benefits requirement, and other restrictive coverage and plan requirements, low-cost insurance options will again be available to American consumers.

Help People Save To Buy Health Insurance:

• Authorize a tax credit (up to $5,000 per taxpayer) for individuals and families that contribute to HSAs to further incentivize health savings.
• Remove the maximum allowable annual contribution limit to HSAs, so that individuals may make unlimited contributions to an HSA.
• Currently, HSA funds may not be used to purchase insurance or cover the cost of premiums. Allowing the use of HSA funds for insurance premiums will help make health coverage more affordable for American families.
• Allowing HSA funds to be used for a broader range of health-related expenses give Americans the freedom to choose the type of health care they wish to receive. Eligible expenses are expanded to include prescription and OTC drugs, dietary supplements, weight loss programs and physical exercise expenses, and direct primary care and concierge medicine services, among others.

Fair Tax Treatment of Health Insurance

• Equalize the tax treatment of the purchase of health insurance for individuals and employers, by allowing individuals to deduct the cost of their health insurance from their income and payroll taxes, they will be empowered to purchase insurance independent of employment.

Help Individuals Join Together to Purchase Insurance:

• Expand Association Health Plans (AHPs) allow small business owners and individuals to band together across state lines through their membership in a trade or professional association to purchase health coverage for their families and employees at a lower cost.
• In addition, we should allow individuals to pool together through any organization to purchase insurance.
• These new pooling mechanisms increase the buying power of individuals and small businesses to decrease costs, increase administrative efficiencies, and protect individuals with pre-existing conditions by giving them access to the group market.

Allow the Purchase of Insurance Across State Lines

• Increase access to health coverage by creating an interstate market for health insurance that allows insurers licensed to sell policies in one state to offer them to residents of any other state.

State Medicaid Flexibility

• Provides states new flexibilities for Medicaid waivers for innovative state plan designs.
  

lots of good points here.. but i do think a major problem still exists with the legalization of inexpensive insurance plans... namely, 95% of people wouldn't be smart enough to understand the options and their needs, not with the diversity of thousands of products to pick from, and not when employers are going to control the plans. now there are ways to fix this... keeping a simplified ratings agency that applied bronze, silver, gold, platinum classfications on plans could help.

 

[dbjork6317]

CBB should be fired. not many CBB apologists left on the board. Am curious to see if anyone can come up with a good argument for obamacarelite, or the AHCA?

Seriously. nobody is happy about this thing. democrats hate it. most conservatives think it doesnt go far enough. AARP came out against it. In my state, 7 rural hospitals are going to close, forcing literally hundreds of thousands to travel across treacherous mountain passes to get health care. It will also cost thousands of jobs in the healthcare industry in Colorado. Hospital CEOS are against it, medical research companies are against it, patient advocacy groups are against it, and doctors groups are starting to come out against. There is almost nobody attached to our healthcare system that thinks this is a good idea.

As a diabetic, I know this is going to be a disaster for me, and add at least 1k a month in costs for testing supplies and/or increased premium's, even though, study after study after study tells us that low-cost testing supplies and insulin drive down long-term costs significantly and improve health outcomes.

And sure, if you dont ever want to buy insurance, you no longer have to, but, instead, if you dont want to buy insurance for a year, then you want it next year, youll have to pay a massive penalty, and not to the federal government, but to health insurance companies.

They couldnt even come up with a real new name, and they know how popular the ACA is, so all they did was add an H? This is insanity.

they are going to give credits to EVERYONE, with no need or means testing. Do you seriously believe that 30 year old CEO making $3,000,000 per year should get the exact same subsidy as a 30 year old making $14,000. How does that make any sense at all.

Who likes this thing?

EDIT: and holy crap. if you are an old person on a fixed budget, or a poor old person, you are totally ****ed. AARP estimates that a senior earning 15k a year could see a 8000 premium increase as a result of the loss of sliding scale subsidies, and the new allowable ratio of premiums going up from 3-1 to 5-1. How is that acceptable to anyone?

I would be pretty surprised if this plan actually passed. The conservatives hate it, Democrats won't support it, and there are some Republicans who simply can't support it because it would likely cost them in 2018.

I don't see this getting to the President's desk. Like it or not the ACA will stay the law of the land for the time being.

 

[vinotiger]

I would be pretty surprised if this plan actually passed. The conservatives hate it, Democrats won't support it, and there are some Republicans who simply can't support it because it would likely cost them in 2018.

Same exact thing happened with Obamacare. There were plenty of bluedog Dems not willing to back it either for fear of being voted out of not agreeing with the language. This is the same exact thing just on the opposite end of the spectrum. Obama and his cronies had to shell out a lot of money and political capital to "sway" the few votes to get it passed.

 

[dandeman330]

it incentivizes people to get insurance when they are healthy. we had this like 8 years ago, if you recall. premiums were lower for most of us back then. What am I insuring against if I already have an illness that requires ongoing treatment?

No it doesn't. If people can't afford insurance, they won't buy it. They will then go to the emergency room and be treated for something that could have been dealt with inexpensively earlier in the process. They won't pay the hospital so in order to recoup their losses the hospital passes it on to the insurance companies and then to people. So people w/insurance still pay for the uninsured, they just pay at the highest possible cost.