And once again there is the avoidance of what the average really shows, in reality most people in combination do either approve of the ACA **or **do want to keep it with modifications. The ones that want to completely get rid of it are actually in the minority and recently Gallup reported that a lot of the opposition to the ACA is because many do want to have a better and larger intervention by the government. That there is a need to stop avoiding the issue and finally do like most developed nations on earth do and have single payer or universal access with less dependence on private medicine or insurance groups.
I am neither strongly for or against the ACA, but it does seem to be having a bad few months:
From CNN:
“Aetna is reconsidering its participation in Obamacare, making it the latest large insurer to cast doubts on the future of the individual exchanges”
and
“UnitedHealthcare (UNH), the nation’s largest insurer, is exiting most Obamacare exchanges in 2017. Humana announced last month that it was pulling out of nearly 1,200 counties in eight states next year. Afterward, it will only be selling insurance on the exchanges in 156 counties in 11 states. Others, including several Blue Cross Blue Shield companies, are also scaling back.”
I do find these huge threads strange though. Does anyone actually read them all? I know I sure didn’t. Does anyone think health care will be solved once we get to page 79 or page 80? Why continue to argue in these things?
Hm, I guess I am part of the problem since I just posted in it. :smack:
Most of the people who post in this thread have been following it since the beginning three years ago. If you read it frequently, it is not a daunting task to keep up, even if it grows to hundreds of pages and thousands of posts.
I had forgotten about this thread but it does appear that “tens of millions” have gained coverage under the ACA.
According to a new study by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Obamacare has reduced patient out of pocket expenses by 30% in Kentucky, Arkansas and Texas, along with significant improvements in patient care in more than a dozen categories.
Obamacare drives down the rate of uninsured in California for the third consecutive year:
So what will be the effect of Aetna and other large insurers pulling out? As for United Health, I’ve had some experience with them. Good riddance.
IIRC in a past discussion I found/reported that almost all the states mentioned had a few things in common: The most expensive places to get health care. Tea Party Politicians in the pockets of that heath care industry.
It does not matter to them what the evidence shows, their bottom line and their ideology goes always over doing the right thing.
So Obamacare is a synonym for Medicaid?
this may become big issue before Nov 8. ?
new premium notice increases due by Nov. 1.
bet that gets mysteriously delayed. :rolleyes:
Oh yeah, no question. And it’s not a death spiral yet, but insurers are just about done taking losses:
So the answer is to allow insurance companies to become bigger to fail or to become monopolies in many areas of the country?
After lying about whether you could keep your old coverage, turns out you can’t keep your new coverage either.
There are two possible answers:
- Let premiums rise so that insurers aren’t taking losses.
- Enforce the mandate
Neither is politically palatable, so the President will vote “present” again.
Again, using the arguments of an insurance company that is abusing of their power to get even more is more like a red herring regarding the issue in this thread. This episide looks more to me as a company tring to use politics to justify their road to a monopoly.
- Add a public option. Again this is because it should be a cold day in hell if we allow a company to abuse of their power to get into a monopoly.
The non profits are also losing money. A public option would have to raise rates just like the rest of them.
Are you claiming that Obama never intended for the PPACA to include ways to keep your old coverage? If you are, do you have a cite for that?
So, how do they compete? After all, competition is the miracle of capitalism and free enterprise, its what ensures that we consumers get the best quality and the least price!
WeSaySo Health Insurance looks at the Stencil family…father, mother, 2 children…and they take how much coverage they want and take the actuarial tables risk assessment, and that’s the bottom line, the balance point between risk and benefit. With just a spoonful of profit so they can build an office building with a huge metal grotesque in the plaza. By famous sculptor Whats-his-face.
GreedCo Health Insurance takes the same Stencil family, the coverage they want, the same tables and get a different number? They can offer the Stencil family a lesser premium because their numbers are smarter?
Or do they offer the cheaper premium but find…creative ways to lower their payout? (Ah! Innovation! Another of the miracles of capitalism which assures us the best quality at the lowest prices!)
Assuming that everyone has the same numbers, the same facts, on what basis do they compete? And without that incentive which we find so reassuring, why do we even put up with them at all? Their profit benefits their investors, but what do the rest of us get out of it? More medicine, better service? Nope. Just the warm satisfaction of knowing that investors do not suffer.
Feh.