Maybe a conservative can explain, the Repiblicans are going to "repeal" the ACA,

[Bigdog]

If those companies wanted to join exchanges, why didn't they do it already?(I know the answer) What keeps one state's rates lower than another? Risk. That risk won't change in the new state that a new company enters.

States have differing laws that regulate insurance companies. They all need to be on the same page for ins.cos. to be able to compete from State to State.

 

[Bigdog]

They;ll work it out.
Single Pay was the best way- but the Dems didn't demand it ( Bernie did -Clinton dithered around the idea)-
and the Repubs were politically wed to killing it. Honestly it was always a compromised program with insane costs

It's politically popular -that will win out to get some type of replacement

Free healthcare removes any financial incentive to eat right and exercise.

It also removes incentives to invest in medical research.

 

[Althea]

States have differing laws that regulate insurance companies. They all need to be on the same page for ins.cos. to be able to compete from State to State.

Great. Assume those regulations disappear. What makes the risk in a given state change? I didn't call for erasing lines....Trump did. I merely challenged the efficacy of doing it.

So you deny that the risk corridor program defund didn't cause 13 non profits to go under?

 

[Ralph]

Too funny, the ACA is Obamacare, the law I guarantee you have no understanding of beyond what you heard on the radio, and if it is "the most ill conceived piece of legislation" how come the Republocans have been unable to come up with an alternative in six years, and still can't given they have to repeal and delay?"

Actually.....conservatives have presented several alternatives to Obama care and its uselessness....simply because you don't like the idea of running big government out of the health care industry and replacing the waste and mismanagement with privatized oversight does not mean that conservatives have no ideas.

Here are but a few ideas proposed and shot down by the demwits in congress. 1. Tax Incentives 2. Break up the government controlled monopolies and allow insurance carries to cross state lines. 3. Tort reform 4. Health savings accounts 5. Creation of high risk pools 6. Allow health care co-ops by allowing groups of private citizens to purchase insurance in groups like employers do.

And that supposed 20 million that will not have coverage? That's a lie....those 20 million readily qualify for medicare and or medicade under existing laws before Obama care even took effect. The one's that really need the coverage...the working poor still are un-insured under Obama Care...and the cost is exponentially raising every year....making the real purpose of Obama care a reality.....STATE RUN HEALTHCARE..single payer...big Brother to the rescue. The plan failed....you lost...get over it.

 

[Bigdog]

Great. Assume those regulations disappear. What makes the risk in a given state change? I didn't call for erasing lines....Trump did. I merely challenged the efficacy of doing it.

So you deny that the risk corridor program defund didn't cause 13 non profits to go under?

Risk should not be assessed by State, it should be according to the individual.

I'm not denying anything. Taxpayers should not be paying for private company losses, like the dems did with the bank bailout.

 

[Althea]

YOU called for erasing those lines in your post. But to answer you, it would increase competition.

Re: funding
" Furthermore, the program hasn’t been "wiped out." At best, Rubio and Congress have temporarily limited one potential way CMS could have covered insurance companies' losses."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...we-wiped-out-obamacare-bailout-fund-insuranc/

You do realize that the citation above only grades Rubio's remarks, and not the defunding of the risk corridors?

 

[Bigdog]

You do realize that the citation above only grades Rubio's remarks, and not the defunding of the risk corridors?

Look, you couldn't make your case. All you could do is tell me to google it, so I did.

I served in the military, so I didn't have to screw with obamacare. I always paid cash for medical services, and never even bothered the gov't for my military benefits. I finally signed up for them because the new law forced me to.

 

[anatta]

Free healthcare removes any financial incentive to eat right and exercise.

It also removes incentives to invest in medical research.

no it doesn't -and there can be fees -not pure Medicare. People try to stay healthy because they don't want illness-
insured or not.

Removing insurance companies profits saves money.Take the premiums you pay now -and pay into SP.

 

[Althea]

Risk should not be assessed by State, it should be according to the individual.

I'm not denying anything. Taxpayers should not be paying for private company losses, like the dems did with the bank bailout.

From the beginning:

Cost sharing is an essential part of any insurance. They do it with auto insurance too. As such, nobody would be covered unless healthier people bought insurance. That's why a public option would have been the best plan instead of ACA.
It might have killed the private ins. industry, so Obama chose other avenues.

If you are going to force insurers to take people with pre existing conditions, you have to guarantee them remuneration for expected losses for the first few years. In theory, after about 5 years, losses should shrink as a healthier nation incurs fewer illnesses. That's why ACA added numerous preventive procedures without any extra OOP.

The taxpayer will ultimately pay for these losses as more and more uninsured become destitute under the weight of medical bills.

There is no easy solution. ACA was meant to be a foundation. Imagine what could have been, if Republicans actually worked to craft a better plan with Democrats?

 

[Bigdog]

no it doesn't -and there can be fees -not pure Medicare. People try to stay healthy because they don't want illness-
insured or not.

Removing insurance companies profits saves money.Take the premiums you pay now -and pay into SP.

And yet we have an obesity epidemic and an opioid epidemic.

 

[Althea]

Look, you couldn't make your case. All you could do is tell me to google it, so I did.

I served in the military, so I didn't have to screw with obamacare. I always paid cash for medical services, and never even bothered the gov't for my military benefits. I finally signed up for them because the new law forced me to.

IF you were a combat vet,then you didn't have to sign up for anything. If you weren't, then you could still sign up for the cheapest plan, and still pay cash until you met your deductible.

Just because you got lazy, and stopped your Google search at an article that had nothing to do with 'my case', doesn't mean I didn't make my case. Republicans bragged about defunding risk corridors in their first successful move toward taking everyone's health insurance away.

That's not even up for debate.

 

[Althea]

And yet we have an obesity epidemic and an opioid epidemic.

Without question, our nation's 'profits first' approach to everything has made us the unhealthiest country in the 'civilized' world

 

[Bigdog]

Without question, our nation's 'profits first' approach to everything has made us the unhealthiest country in the 'civilized' world

I disagree Althea. Americans don't eat right and exercise.

In Orwell's novel, 1984, the State forces people to exercise to keep healthcare costs down. The ACA can be used to justify all kinds of onerous legislation in order to "keep costs down".

 

[Darth Omar]

I disagree Althea. Americans don't eat right and exercise.

In Orwell's novel, 1984, the State forces people to exercise to keep healthcare costs down. The ACA can be used to justify all kinds of onerous legislation in order to "keep costs down".

Such a simple thing as a good diet and regular exercise would go along way towards cutting costs. Americans have become too sedentary.

 

[Althea]

I disagree Althea. Americans don't eat right and exercise.

In Orwell's novel, 1984, the State forces people to exercise to keep healthcare costs down. The ACA can be used to justify all kinds of onerous legislation in order to "keep costs down".

Actually, we do indeed agree. We push soda on everyone, when in fact, soda should be illegal. We put corn syrup in everything, in order to keep the Midwest growing too much corn.

We push sugar infused breakfast foods, chemical laced fake food, and any number of other poisonous fake meals on unsuspecting fools....all in the name of profits.

Progress has made it unnecessary to think, or even move our bodies anymore. All in the name of profits.

 

[Althea]

States have differing laws that regulate insurance companies. They all need to be on the same page for ins.cos. to be able to compete from State to State.

The states with the lowest rates tend to have rate regulators that assess each company's request for rate hikes.

If we remove these regulations, you expect rates to go down?

I'll admit to not being aware of other glaring regulations.

 

[Bigdog]

Actually, we do indeed agree. We push soda on everyone, when in fact, soda should be illegal. We put corn syrup in everything, in order to keep the Midwest growing too much corn.

We push sugar infused breakfast foods, chemical laced fake food, and any number of other poisonous fake meals on unsuspecting fools....all in the name of profits.

Progress has made it unnecessary to think, or even move our bodies anymore. All in the name of profits.

Do you think it would be practical to ban all unhealthy foods? Prohibition created gang violence and wealthy criminals. And the current war on drugs is doing the exact same thing.

Progress? ... the ruling elite, kings queens pharoahs emperors, etc. have always been able to be lazy. America's free enterprise system has allowed more and more of us to live even better than the kings and pharoahs of old

 

[Lightbringer]

They'll come up with squat.

Probably.

Overwhelmingly, Americans want to keep ACA.

Not even close to true.

If House Republicans hadn't removed all funding from the risk corridors, there would be plenty of insurers on the exchanges.

Why do you believe this? Subsidizing failures is never a good idea and those companies will eventually die no matter how much help you try to give them. I also find this concept to be odious. If I have a bad year I can't go to my competitors and demand profit sharing, why should anyone else be able to?

So...Republicans removed key funding from ACA, and cannot replace it with anything that doesn't require large Fed. grants. They'll just have another name for the same program, but they won't have to give Obama credit.

Key funding is debatable, whatever they come up with probably will rely on grants to some extent, why anyone at all would want credit for this horrible, irresponsible piece of shit law in the first place is beyond me.

The first thing they should do, is prove Trump wrong. Open those 'imaginary lines' we heard so much about, and let insurance companies sell across state lines. Watch how it does nothing to change rates.

Go into this a little more please. I think you're right but I'm not sure you understand why you're right.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

does any entity get played more than conservatives?

you idiots voted for hillary. i'd say you got played worse

 

[SmarterthanYou]

The right has said that about every program that benefits the working class.

how did the ACA benefit the working class? I heard it certainly benefited the lower income classes, but the 'working' class suffered greatly with loss of coverage or reduced coverage in the millions.