View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17748 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2016 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It doesn't surprise me to see chatter about Obama care, with widely divergent views expressed--without attribution. Earlier this weak there was a report issued by a task force associated with Kaiser, reported in the SF Chronicle and referenced i the US News and World Report, that concluded Obama care costs were dramatically lower than had been predicted.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-06-22/us-health-spending-has-slowed-dramatically
So I am sure that the conservative sources got their version of reality out there, and Ryan said that the Republicans finally had an alternative plan. It only took 8 years. Of course, no details of Ryan or Trump's plans are available.
The difficulties in getting beyond the talking points on both sides are myriad. I think we need to wait a little more to get some data that is not limited in value because of the recession. This is a very interesting, only slightly dated and non-partisan article that illustrates the difficulty of teasing a trend from daya through 2014. http://www.factcheck.org/2014/02/aca-impact-on-per-capita-cost-of-health-care/
As of 2015, even the Economist acknowledged that the rise in healthcare costs had slowed and Obama care was at least partially responsible.
But costs continue to rise, and some insurance companies are either losing money or have lower profits. It is impossible to tell whether those costs would have been higher without the ACA, and it is hard to tell which insurance companies have simply made bad business decisions. It is clear that increasing drug prices are a major part of those increases. In some recent years the profit margin for big pharma has been obscene (over 30%). The US pays far more for drugs than any other country, and the only way to secure the votes for the ACA was to agree not to go after pharma prices. A policy initiated by Bush with the expansion of Medicare, and agreed to by Obama to secure the votes of pro-big pharma Democrats.
I can't see any real progress in controlling costs without using the purchasing powere of Medicare to drive drug prices down. Can you conservatives name a single Republican willing to apply the business practices used by Amazon and Walmart to our prescription drug purchases? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2016 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Condensed excerpt from ObamaCare Death Spiral Update, by Jenkins in the WSJ 6 days ago ... Increasingly, the only customers for ObamaCare policies are those who are already very sick*. That's just one of many reasons ObamaCare is such a pending disaster that big insurers like Aetna, Anthem, Humana and UnitedHealth Group, initially supporters because they assumed taxpayers would make them rich, are dropping it like flies. In fact, however, ObamaCare policies have proved so unattractive and expensive (including deductibles and copays) that even customers eligible for subsidies are rejecting them as not being insured at all.
* i.e., those who understand that preexisting condition health care "insurance" is not insurance at all but is just unearned welfare. The classic Obamacare winners are those of us with a preexisting terminal disease. How many of you believe a cancer patient should be even allowed, let alone coerced, to sign up, collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in drug costs plus MANY other expenses, AFTER diagnosis ... just to extend his life by four miserable months? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jp5
Joined: 19 May 1998 Posts: 3394 Location: OnUr6
|
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2016 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
At last report, all the Blue plans across the nation have lost 8 billion since inception. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When I wrote: | How many of you believe a cancer patient should be even allowed, let alone coerced, to sign up, collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in drug costs plus MANY other expenses, AFTER diagnosis ... just to extend his life by four miserable months? | ... I wasn't actually considering the idea. But now that I think of it wouldn't that be a great way to get back at voters if they elect Shrillary? By Obama's decree, I could wait until my out-of-pocket expenses look really big, get an O-care policy in accord with his mandate, and get reimbursed for the many thousands in out-of-pocket costs I'm already incurring for my health care plus scores to hundreds of thousands more. How better could I stick it to the morons who want a socialist in the White House and mandatory socialized health care in our nation?
I'll answer that question myself: Live for several more years at 6 figures per in Obamacare payouts for peanuts in premiums, all because, at his insistence, I can wait until I'm sick as hell before even buying his so-called "insurance". |
|
Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588
|
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2016 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry Charlie, Obamacare is only for folks under 65. It's only Tri-care or the Medicare system for you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
In a windsurfing injury thread, windward1 wrote: | under Obamacare they were now enforcing the rule that when you die, they take what they paid out in medical insurance out of your estate. I investigated to see if I incurred the debt from Medical could I pay it back and free up my estate. There was no mechanism for so doing.
Not wanting my heirs to have to put up with the hold up of any money left while the government figured out what they were owed (I have found the government can take a while to do things), I paid for it all myself. I did negotiate on each and every bill. Made a huge difference.
The irony came when the IRS fined me for not having insurance under the new Obamacare rules. Here I pay for it myself and the government fines me for so doing. What a world we live in now.... |
So not only are ACA premiums and deductibles going through the roof and providers and states bailing out, but now we learn -- if he's right -- that any insurance benefit is a LOAN to be paid back out of your family's pocket. For those Lefties who can't understand this, for tens of thousands per year in MANDATORY Ocare costs, we are GUARANTEED to get nothing ... NOTHING ... in return if Windward1 is correct.
Even the new, reformed Teleprompter Trump may not say it, but I will, as that is the last straw: Anyone who votes for a Democratic candidate deserves to get cancer or diabetes or some other such permanent, very expensive illness or injury (it's his survivors who foot the bill, so he deserves SOME penalty for his brainless act). I can think of nothing more fitting for such irresponsibility on a national scale. And hell, yes, you're welcome to quote me on that, as long as it's in full context. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001 Posts: 4161
|
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hard to find details on this, but it looks like the estate recovery plan - death/estate tax is for Medicaid recipients, not ACA subsidized persons.
However - Quote: | Since the plans at the Obamacare exchanges are income-based, you may be put into Medicaid when you apply for insurance. Or, you may start off enrolled in a subsidized plan, confident that estate recovery won’t apply to you, but several months or a year later, due to a change in your circumstances, find you have been tossed into Medicaid |
More later. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001 Posts: 4161
|
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
some more details:
Quote: | You won’t find estate recovery in the ACA. It’s in the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1993 (OBRA 1993)–a federal statute which applies to Medicaid, and, if you are enrolled in Medicaid, it will apply to you.
Estate Recovery
OBRA 1993 requires all states that receive Medicaid funding to seek recovery from the estates of deceased Medicaid patients for medical services received in a nursing home or other long-term care institution, home- and community-based services and related hospital and prescription drug services regardless of age. It also allows, at state option, recovery for all services used in the Medicaid state plan at age 55 or older. At minimum, states must pursue recovery from the probate estate which includes property that passes to heirs under state probate law, but states can expand the definition of estate to allow recovery from property that bypasses probate. This means states can use procedures for direct recovery from bank accounts and other funds. The state keeps a running tally, and even if you have a will, your heirs are chopped liver. Estate recovery can be exempted or deferred in certain situations after your death, but the regulations for this are limited and complicated with multitudes of conditions.
|
Quote: | Estate recovery was not an unintended consequence of Obamacare. The House Ways & Means Committee and The House Energy & Commerce Committee share jurisdiction over health care, including Medicare and Medicaid, and both worked extensively on Obamacare. So, don’t bother thinking that the members of these committees didn’t know that estate recovery would impact millions of Americans who would be tossed into Medicaid. The asset test was dropped and the age limit was increased explicitly in order to expand Medicaid. Yet, did We the People hear any concern about estate recovery? Certainly not in the many floor speeches given by Democrats as well as Republicans or from the media.
Obama stated during his 2008 presidential campaign that transparency would be the leverage needed to ensure that people stay involved in the national health care reform process. The expansion of Medicaid was part of the process. Did Obama or your representatives tell you that Medicaid, depending on your age, is a loan subject to deferred payment by your estate? Did they tell you the government subsidy for a private plan at an exchange is a loan, that must be repaid if your income increases? Transparency was highly selective. The bait was shown but not the hook.
Obama also often made the point that the public should receive the same level of coverage and care as members of Congress. Medicaid is hardly the same level of coverage and care, but, aside from that, tell us, Mr. Obama, because your health care is funded by taxpayers, will your estate be subject to recovery?
The fact that Obamacare did not revise existing federal statute–in other words, it retained estate recovery–most certainly undermines the compassionate rhetoric about helping low-income and poor Americans. |
From: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/02/08/obamacare-final-payment-raiding-assets-low-income-poor-americans/
Last edited by techno900 on Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:43 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
windward1 also wrote: | I did negotiate on each and every bill. Made a huge difference. ... |
Correct. Hospital charges for even canned procedures in the same city can vary by hundreds of percent even before negotiation. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 Posts: 5180
|
Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Obamacare is in a death spiral. The major insurers are bailing because of massive losses. Enrollment is way below predictions. Premiums and deductibles keep moving up. For most, the choice of companies is much smaller than before the law. By any rational measure, it is a failure. Why on earth didn't anyone foresee this outcome?.........Oh, wait! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|