Passage of the ACHA Lays Bare The Hatred and Contempt in The Hearts of GOP Voters

[highland145]

The ACA has tons of things in it explicitly designed to control and/or reduce health care costs. How do you not know this?

Health care inflation has been at the lowest rates in decades since the ACA passed.

It didn't work. Under the ACA, I'll pay $16.8K in premiums with a $12K deductible. 2011 my premiums were $3K. So I'll have to disagree. If I were 60 y.o., I was quoted $24K in premiums.

 

[fskimospy]

The end result, people are paying more and more each year regardless.

That's inflation for you.

That's news to me, and I bet for a great many.

This wouldn't surprise me at all, but sadly that's just another symptom of the kind of media bubble so many people are in.

Now it's important to note that this extremely low inflation has been in an era of generally low inflation, but regardless it's much lower than it has been in the past.

 

[highland145]

Apologize for lying. Or being so dumb. Whichever prompted this reply.

No, you.

 

[Blackjack200]

That's news to me, and I bet for a great many.

It's true, but they still rose quite a bit.

In 2008, the average employer-sponsored family plan cost a total of $12,680, with employees footing $3,354 of the bill, according to Kaiser data. By 2016, the cost of the average employer family plan was up to $18,142 for the year, with workers picking up $5,277 of the tab.

These increased costs for employers and employees alike may seem steep—up around 50% over the past eight years—but they could have risen far higher had the Affordable Care Act never passed. The Kaiser study shows that average family premiums rose 20% from 2011 to 2016. That rate of increase is actually much lower than the previous five years (up 31% from 2006 to 2011) and the five years before that (up 63% from 2001 to 2006).

Pointing to data from Kaiser, a White House press release recently stated, "The average premium for a family with employer coverage is now almost $3,600 lower than if premium growth since 2010 had matched the decade preceding the Affordable Care Act."

http://time.com/money/4503325/obama-health-care-costs-obamacare/

If you're serious about containing health care costs, singly payer is the only real option.

 

[highland145]

@highland145: earlier in the thread, the "haha, you're poor!" meme. In most circumstances I wouldn't mind that, as most people posting it would be doing it ironically. But I've seen enough of Herr Nudelmann to know he means it and is actually taking pleasure in the suffering of those worse off than him.

I sincerely hope he reincarnates poor, and preferably one of more of Muslim, black, female, gay, and disabled, after he's done the stint in Hell he's set himself up for.

Got it.

 

[fskimospy]

It didn't work. Under the ACA, I'll pay $16.8K in premiums with a $12K deductible. 2011 my premiums were $3K. So I'll have to disagree. If I were 60 y.o., I was quoted $24K in premiums.

Of course it worked. It might not have worked for YOU, but the number of people it did work for vastly exceeded the number it didn't. Hence, it worked. I don't know your individual circumstances but the data supporting the effectiveness of the act as a whole is not ambiguous. It has been very successful. Public policy is about everyone in the country, not just you.

It sounds to me like you're one of those people who makes too much money for subsidies but doesn't have employer insurance and for you I agree the ACA sucks. It's something that could have easily been fixed but unfortunately Republicans adamantly refused to make ANY changes to make the ACA work better.

 

[Fern]

The only realistic path to controlling costs is single payer. Medicare pays the lowest reimbursement rates, and they could probably be lowered quite a bit further if reimbursement rates in other countries are any indication.

That won't lower "costs". Might lower what any single individual must pay, but the remainder of those costs will be born by others.

Fern

 

[UNCjigga]

I just found out my wife has 2 pre-existing conditions...she had a baby, and she delivered via C-section. Thank God she didn't have that dreaded 3rd condition known as post-partum depression or she would've hit the trifecta!

Hope my employer's provider of choice doesn't raise our premiums...

 

[Blackjack200]

That won't lower "costs". Might lower what any single individual must pay, but the remainder of those costs will be born by others.

Fern

Yes, of course it lowers costs. The government has enormous leverage to determine prices in that scenario. They pay way less for diagnostics. They pay way less for drugs. Etc. on down the line.

 

[fskimospy]

That won't lower "costs". Might lower what any single individual must pay, but the remainder of those costs will be born by others.

Fern

This is pretty obviously contradicted by the empirical data. What analysis are you using to say that single payer doesn't reduce costs?

 

[Pens1566]

Can't wait to see the CBO score next week. Should be a bloodbath. '18 ad campaigns are already writing themselves.

 

[FIVR]

This is seriously the best thing that has happened this year in terms of actual consequences to Trump supporters for their terrible decisions. I hope it gets through the senate and we have real live death panels in rural Oklahoma and Ohio Those pensioners are gonna love paying 17k/mo for insurance and never lapsing for more than 63 days.

 

[MixMasterTang]

This is pretty obviously contradicted by the empirical data. What analysis are you using to say that single payer doesn't reduce costs?

He's just looking out for the poor insurance companies that would suffer under single payer!

 

[highland145]

It sounds to me like you're one of those people who makes too much money for subsidies but doesn't have employer insurance and for you I agree the ACA sucks. It's something that could have easily been fixed but unfortunately Republicans adamantly refused to make ANY changes to make the ACA work better.

That right there. Sadly I don't have access to your (or anyone elses (?)) paycheck or HC so don't expect me to be a big fan.

And, like I've already said, the Rs aren't going to make the situation any better for me. The house bill removes the cap on older people's premiums....really? Dickheads.

 

[highland145]

This is seriously the best thing that has happened this year in terms of actual consequences to Trump supporters for their terrible decisions. I hope it gets through the senate and we have real live death panels in rural Oklahoma and Ohio Those pensioners are gonna love paying 17k/mo for insurance and never lapsing for more than 63 days.

And don't forget the 30% up charge if they do.


Dickheads.

 

[FIVR]

Pretty sure they can outright deny you care after 63, the fee is "optional". It's BS, but people voted for it... so much like the Prez it is what we'll get.

 

[hal2kilo]

A lot of both, I think. Paul Ryan certainly knows he's lying his ass off when he says this bill is about offering "choice". He knows people are going to lose their insurance. He just doesn't care.

Bordering on sociopathy, that one. Then there are some others in Congress who are just morons.

All Ryan cared about was wrapping a 1 trillion dollar tax cut for the wealthiest in something he could call repeal and replace.

 

[hal2kilo]

Pretty sure they can outright deny you care after 63, the fee is "optional". It's BS, but people voted for it... so much like the Prez it is what we'll get.

Definitely, not retiring until I can sign up for Medicare at 65 now. 2+ years and counting every second.

 

[Blackjack200]

Yes: https://twitter.com/leyawn/status/860199590599020544

 

[lopri]

The way they "passed" the bill is also disgusting to say the least. No public hearings, no CBO scoring, not even a press conference to let people know what they are passing. Too bad there is no law against reckless governing.

 

[Fern]

Yes, of course it lowers costs. The government has enormous leverage to determine prices in that scenario. They pay way less for diagnostics. They pay way less for drugs. Etc. on down the line.

I understand that (price fixing). Again, "price fixing" lowers what you pay, not the cost of the service. If price fixing actually worked Venezuela would be a successful country.

As with any other business, a service provider (HC in this case) cannot continue providing the service if the price received does not cover the expenses of such service. E.g., my doctor is also an oncologist. The medicare/medicaid price rates he receives for the cancer drugs he prescribes for patients is less than his costs and therefore results in a loss to his practice of +$1 million per year. He must take funds from other HC services to cover that $1M. No costs are reduced, merely transferred elsewhere. This 'model' can be pushed only so far before it becomes unsustainable.

Fern

 

[Blackjack200]

I understand that (price fixing). Again, "price fixing" lowers what you pay, not the cost of the service. If price fixing actually worked Venezuela would be a successful country.

Oh, is that supposed to be some kind of "lol socialism" own when we live in the country with the least efficient and most capitalist healthcare system in the world?

As with any other business, a service provider (HC in this case) cannot continue providing the service if the price received does not cover the expenses of such service. E.g., my doctor is also an oncologist. The medicare/medicaid price rates he receives for the cancer drugs he prescribes for patients is less than his costs and therefore results in a loss to his practice of +$1 million per year. He must take funds from other HC services to cover that $1M. No costs are reduced, merely transferred elsewhere. This 'model' can be pushed only so far before it becomes unsustainable.

Single payer should cover the costs of the drugs too. Why can it work all over the world, but not here?

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

This crap always hurts the poor. I'm not doing well financially but at least don't have pre-existing conditions...but I do work with survivors of sex trafficking--commercial rape, God damn it--and even at the best of times they are horribly sick and un-cared for.

A close friend of mine is 50 and suffering from debilitating illnesses, including 33+ years of partial incontinence because of what a pimp did to her when she was 16, SIXTEEN!, and had by that point been a sex slave for four years!, and if this passes she'll surely lose what little coverage she just managed to get not 3 months ago. She had a botched surgery trying to correct this problem and that sure as hell will be a "pre-existing condition."

One of *her* friends is trying, at age 46, to recuperate from brain surgery. On the streets of Seattle. As a single mother. With a teenage son.

If any of you wonder why i swear so much, why i hate know-nothing no-goodniks like Glenn1, this shit is why. I've seen enough to give a lesser woman PTSD and it's only my blazing hatred of evil that keeps me going.

 

[kage69]

Damn.

Southerners voting for their own demise, and the republicans making sure their party follows.

Historically, when a party controls everything, the next midterms hurt. Add that to public opinion on Dump's questionable mental state and republican ineptitude and sleaze. And then there's Russia.

 

[glenn1]

Damn.

Southerners voting for their own demise, and the republicans making sure their party follows.

Historically, when a party controls everything, the next midterms hurt. Add that to public opinion on Dump's questionable mental state and republican ineptitude and sleaze. And then there's Russia.

Hey, you progressives could always increase your personal charity so they don't suffer. Or volunteer your time to something like rural medical missions.

LOL I'm kidding everyone knows you don't do personal charity and will just say "collective action problem" when asked why not. This is the kind of problem you expect undefined "rich" people and not you to solve. The limits of your action are voting for someone who says they'll tax the rich guy on your behalf.