Trump signs order to eliminate ACA insurance rules, undermine marketplaces

Drop the insurance. Pay the tax penalty. Sign up for insurance if one of you gets sick or something. :cool:

Fuck that, I'd rather eat rice and beans 7 days a week than not have good health insurance, personally. That just seems like an extremely high price.
 
To answer your question, you have to realize that most working Americans get their insurance through their employer. And employers leverage the size of their labor pool to negotiate favorable insurance plans on their behalf.

The nature of that dynamic means that the smaller the employer, the less leverage available for insurance negotiation. Which means more expensive plans. In many cases where incomes are modest, this means that small employers and the self-employed are effectively priced out of the health insurance marketplace because insurers have no incentive to craft affordable plans that also meet most of someone's healthcare needs.

Obamacare essentially aimed to address that group of people by combining them into a single labor pool, like you would find at a large corporation, and thus leveraging that scale to eventually reduce the cost of insuring them. That's the group it's aimed at and, yes, there are millions of such people.
But it fucked way more people in the process.

If we weren't willing to go universal healthcare, we should of just kept what we had. At least people had a choice to get a cheap and affordable catastrophic plan. Now you pay way more and since the deductibles are so high, it might as well be a catastrophic plan since that is how they are being used.

So know you are paying way more, but not really getting anything better since it is unaffordable to use.
 
If aca was never passed he probably would of never lost his insurance. It doesn't really matter what is legal and what isn't. The mere fact that the ACA was passed changed everything and for a lot of people, not for the better.

Obamacare has been a disaster.

You can't say that for sure. Insurance companies canceled plans and raised prices all the time. In the end it was not the ACA fault he lost coverage, that is the fault of his insurance company.

Furthermore the ACA helped far more people then it hurt. The shear idea that it hurt any great number of those in the middle class is ridiculous to start with seeing as most middle class folks get insurance from their employer to start with.
 
Or get a job and have your employer pay for it...geez

Me and my wife both have great jobs and employer provided health insurance. We get insurance through her job, and I'd have to check, but I want to say they pay 60%, and it's still very expensive. It's very good health insurance, an hmo, co-pays are very low, no deductible, covers everything as far as I know, all tests and stuff.
 
You can't say that for sure. Insurance companies canceled plans and raised prices all the time. In the end it was not the ACA fault he lost coverage, that is the fault of his insurance company.

Furthermore the ACA helped far more people then it hurt. The shear idea that it hurt any great number of those in the middle class is ridiculous to start with seeing as most middle class folks get insurance from their employer to start with.
If it was so good it wouldn't of fallen apart and most people wouldn't be so happy to get rid of it.

In other words, if Obamacare was a huge success the entire country would be backing it and they aren't.

Obamacare has failed.
 
Me and my wife both have great jobs and employer provided health insurance. We get insurance through her job, and I'd have to check, but I want to say they pay 60%, and it's still very expensive. It's very good health insurance, an hmo, co-pays are very low, no deductible, covers everything as far as I know, all tests and stuff.

Weird because I have a family of 4 and I have employer based insurance and my portion is just over 450/month. I have the same, great insurance, covers everything
 
But it fucked way more people in the process.

If we weren't willing to go universal healthcare, we should of just kept what we had. At least people had a choice to get a cheap and affordable catastrophic plan. Now you pay way more and since the deductibles are so high, it might as well be a catastrophic plan since that is how they are being used.

So know you are paying way more, but not really getting anything better since it is unaffordable to use.

Why don't you just get a plan that doesn't have deductibles?
Weird because I have a family of 4 and I have employer based insurance and my portion is just over 450/month. I have the same, great insurance, covers everything

That sucks for me I guess, lol.

Edit: but good for you.
 
If it was so good it wouldn't of fallen apart and most people wouldn't be so happy to get rid of it.

In other words, if Obamacare was a huge success the entire country would be backing it and they aren't.

Obamacare has failed.

No, just around 50% of the country are backing it. Not to mention all the people that would lose insurance if it was repealed are backing it. The idea that the ACA has failed is conservative fantasy. There is a reason the GOP could not get it repealed.
 
But it fucked way more people in the process.

If we weren't willing to go universal healthcare, we should of just kept what we had. At least people had a choice to get a cheap and affordable catastrophic plan. Now you pay way more and since the deductibles are so high, it might as well be a catastrophic plan since that is how they are being used.

So know you are paying way more, but not really getting anything better since it is unaffordable to use.

No, it didn't. To claim that it fucked more people, you'd have to start with the premise that what they had before was better than what they had after.

Let me craft an example: John owns a car with no seatbelts. The government passes a law saying that seat belts are required. John's car no longer meets the government's standards and he has to buy a new car. Did the government fuck John? That entirely depends on whether or not you think John is better off with no seat belts than with.

The mathematical reality is that people with cheap and affordable catastrophic plans were making healthcare decisions that reflected that their insurance didn't cover shit. The assumption that those choices were "better" for them than the decisions that they would make with adequate coverage is a false one. You would have to take a look at the pre- and post- adequate insurance decisions and decide which ones were actually superior for those people.

In a purely economic sense, better insurance leads to greater productivity (I'll try to find the research). It leads to less crime (more recent research). It impacts decision making in a variety of ways that go beyond just the premiums and deductibles themselves.

You can't say it fucked more people unless you're looking at those variables in some detail...and most people, pro/con, aren't..
 
i guess i should stop buying the 4 iphones a year this health insurance costs

I thought your boy Chaffetz said dont buy Iphones to buy health care instead???

What kind of half-assed Republican are you?
 
All Obamacare did is force a bunch of people to pay more for insurance they can't afford to use when they where just happy as can be with their cheap catastrophic plan.
 
Why don't you just get a plan that doesn't have deductibles?

An excellent question.

People say the new plans suck because of high deductibles that prevent use but they're often (not always but often) arguing for a return to old plans that also had high deductibles that prevented use...but also covered less even if they did meet the deductible.
 
No, it didn't. To claim that it fucked more people, you'd have to start with the premise that what they had before was better than what they had after.

Let me craft an example: John owns a car with no seatbelts. The government passes a law saying that seat belts are required. John's car no longer meets the government's standards and he has to buy a new car. Did the government fuck John? That entirely depends on whether or not you think John is better off with no seat belts than with.

The mathematical reality is that people with cheap and affordable catastrophic plans were making healthcare decisions that reflected that their insurance didn't cover shit. The assumption that those choices were "better" for them than the decisions that they would make with adequate coverage is a false one. You would have to take a look at the pre- and post- adequate insurance decisions and decide which ones were actually superior for those people.

In a purely economic sense, better insurance leads to greater productivity (I'll try to find the research). It leads to less crime (more recent research). It impacts decision making in a variety of ways that go beyond just the premiums and deductibles themselves.

You can't say it fucked more people unless you're looking at those variables in some detail...and most people, pro/con, aren't..
But people aren't using it when they have to pay deductibles so high. So where is the benefit? Sure, the person who gets it for practically free because they are dirt poor loves it, but the rest are looking at coverage they can't afford to even use.
 
All Obamacare did is force a bunch of people to pay more for insurance they can't afford to use when they where just happy as can be with their cheap catastrophic plan.

It also got millions of people who did not have insurance of any kind before coverage, and slowed the rate of increase in insurance premiums.
 
But people aren't using it when they have to pay deductibles so high. So where is the benefit? Sure, the person who gets it for practically free because they are dirt poor loves it, but the rest are looking at coverage they can't afford to even use.

I just listed 2 benefits and the research is out there if you're willing to look.
 
An excellent question.

People say the new plans suck because of high deductibles that prevent use but they're often (not always but often) arguing for a return to old plans that also had high deductibles that prevented use...but also covered less even if they did meet the deductible.
But they covered what they wanted to be covered and where very affordable to pay for with respect to the monthly payment.

Now they are very expensive and sure, they cover a bunch of stuff but if you can't afford it, especially the deductible, then what good is it.

If obamacare is so good, why do so many still choose not to buy it?
 
An excellent question.

People say the new plans suck because of high deductibles that prevent use but they're often (not always but often) arguing for a return to old plans that also had high deductibles that prevented use...but also covered less even if they did meet the deductible.

I don't know if my experience is atypical or what, but when I've gotten new insurance, I'm presented with like 10 different plans, I immediately skip over the ones with deductibles........and pick one that has no deductibles. I don't recall them being that much more expensive.
 
my thoughts are once Trump is done with the US Sub Saharan Africa will start looking a whole lot more appealing.

If that were the case, can we all assume you will move there in year 2 of Trump's presidency?
 
But they covered what they wanted to be covered and where very affordable to pay for with respect to the monthly payment.

Now they are very expensive and sure, they cover a bunch of stuff but if you can't afford it then what good is it.

If obamacare is so good, why do so many still choose not to buy it?

You mean the millions of people who went from uninsured to insured through the exchanges? C'mon, you have to see the absurdity of claiming that because everyone didn't sign up we can ignore the millions of people who did.
 
Back
Top