The news is reporting that the average aca premium in Florida will be going up 45% next year.

Part 236: Battered, bruised, but still standing.

Cuse,

Solid!

they have no choice

There's a pretty easy fix, but lol @ implementing it when your representatives would rather just take away your insurance entirely.

236: On Recess. Check Back Later.

http://amp.miamiherald.com/news/heal...175550671.html

My ventures into politics threads have not been pretty. But, I'm interested in this stuff. I'm not pushing anything really, just curious.

Is it sort of reasonable to say that pre-obamacare it was getting harder and harder to get insurance. Costs kept going up and there was that whole pre-existing condition thing.

Is it sort of reasonable to say that obamacare didn't really solve the problems that pre-obamacare had. Costs would continue to go up but it was just that the government helped subsidize those costs. Along with the fact that the pool got bigger and maybe some of those costs could be spread to some that wouldn't have had insurance before. But, nevertheless it didn't really fix the core problem?

Isn't the real solution ultimately single payer? I mean, the fight seems to be to get rid of a sort of bandaid or keep the bandaid, right? Either way, it doesn't seem like we really fundamentally make this situation a lot better.

Or am I missing something.

A broader perspective regarding the insurance companies having the jitters.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/con...y-done-n804956

@biggerboat: Almost all regulars here favor single payer / Medicare For All. We talk about it itt, but also in the Tragic Death thread.

Yup.

Obamacare was really a half-measure: a compromise between the needs of millions of uninsured Americans and the lobbying power of healthcare providers. It solved some problems but left others either poorly solved or not solved at all. It wasn't the be-all, end-all for health care reform. Rather it was a large step towards a single-payer system.

When the Republicans gained control of The House and gained six Senate seats in 2010, they started working to strip away facets of Obamacare that made it work by trying to strip the individual mandate and then working to block the enforcement of consumer protections mandated under ACA. Basically, weakening it to the point where people would be where they are now: clamoring for a replacement bill. Then they would be so desperate for any alternate that the Republicans could use it to pass basically whatever they want and people wouldn't complain.

Yes. Single-payer is the ultimate solution. However, healthcare began as a service to be bought and sold and 1/6 of our economy is based on it staying that way. They're not going down easily and they have billions to bribe Republican politicians with.

There are 3 types of single-payer 'concern trolls' — and they all want to undermine universal healthcare

Max which of these would you say fits you best? I've got this one:

Or maybe:

Or?

Boy howdy that Bernie Medicare for all sure backfired on the dems and pushed repeal and replace over the top huh? Was so sad to see Bernie get slaughtered with it on the CNN debate. Good call on that one for sure. If only dems would just listen to the gutless corporate-ballcuffed centrists more often.

When you were posting your blather on here, I checked chiefsplanet. Guess how many threads about Graham Cassidy they had ... 0. Literally they weren't even talking about it until McCain came out as no. Even now there's one thread with like 150 posts - started by a liberal.

NFL kneeling on the other hand? - 9 separate threads on the front page. Thousands of posts. Unless the black guy is ramming his throbbing agenda down their throats, when it comes to healthcare THEY JUST DON'T CARE.

So yeah - the idea that the RWNJs are all terrified of single payer and that's going to be a rallying cry is laughable. The last discussion the GOP wants is for people to even know singer-payer is an option and start asking questions about it. Turns out people generally like the idea. The infotainment outrage complex has a tough chore to terrify people of single payer, and they have more important fish to fry right now - like Hillary. The goldfish can only focus on a small number of boogeymen at once.

Obamacare went a long way toward solving problems like not being able to get affordable insurance because of pre-existing conditions.

Meantime, today Trump announced that he'll sign an executive order next week allowing people to shop for insurance across state lines. I'm still not understanding what that exactly means. Even with the current number of insurance companies, its not unusual for health-care providers to reject certain companies. Are providers now going to be expected to deal with all kinds of insurance companies from across the country? Buying my insurance from a company in another state isn't going to help me if my providers don't accept those companies.

Just what we need - more complication and variation in the health insurance claims process.

Welcome... I think if you're actually asking genuine questions and keeping an open mind, people here will welcome you and be glad to converse. There are a lot of trolls who come in here and start non-sense by saying they're "just asking questions," so you can get some harsh responses if people think that's what you're doing.

Yes. Anecdotally, I was about to graduate college, had asthma and allergies, and was priced out of coverage by a mile (I think it was like $1400-$1,800 a month on the low end). That was due to (relatively minor, obviously) pre-existing conditions. The ACA not only protected people from those, but also allowed kids to stay on their parents plan til they were 26 - pretty key with what was going on in the economy at the time (the recession).

Costs of care were going up rapidly as well, driving up costs of insurance.

It fixed the core problem of access, but put a band aid on the core problem of rising costs. It did some things to contain them, but not enough. There's not much you can do to contain the costs of healthcare in the free market. As you point out, it mostly subsidized them.

The solution is definitely single payer. It eliminates a couple layers of profit margin that drive up costs, it gives the consumer collective negotiating power and it gives everyone coverage.

The negotiating power is the key to costs, in my view. Conservatives will sometimes say we just need price transparency, but you have no bargaining power in a medical emergency... So the costs of things like emergency care for a heart attack, for example, must be bargained for collectively in advance.

Also, you'll see where hospitals have an official rate and what they give insurance companies. Individuals without coverage get screwed and hit with the higher rate because they have no bargaining power, no transparency, and no ability to make consumer decisions while receiving care. The insurance companies get lower rates because they negotiate what they'll pay in advance, and otherwise they'll leave providers out of their network.

I'm all for free markets on almost everything else, but not for healthcare. Single payer is the best way to provide universal coverage and quality care as affordably as possible.

Can confirm that if behavior in other subforums is any guide, that bigger is being genuine here.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/katenocera/...oMA#.leVk34lEL

The Great ObamaCare Debate, Part 236: Mission:Healthpossible – Rogue TRUMP Nation The da Vinci Code

This is a realistic and cogent analysis of the infotainment complex. I've largely been converted. Its not going to be close in 2018 and 2020 after watching that debate for like 2 min. Passing the bill will be even easier. Or maybe both sides will run largely on an honest single payer plans for the next few elections? I mean, people really like it!

And if it doesn't happen you can just blame me, so you win anyway

So what kinda shenanigans are going to occur when Trump signs the executive order next week?

The solution is definitely single payer. It eliminates a couple layers of profit margin that drive up costs, it gives the consumer collective negotiating power and it gives everyone coverage.

I'm going to disagree a little here, but it's (I think) more of a semantic issue than anything else. Single payer is not the same as Universal coverage. Germany, Austria, South Korea and some other 1st world countries get along fine with an insurance mandate system. Some others (New Zealand, Denmark etc.) have a two tier system. And others have single payer. Pretty much any of those would be an improvement on the tire fire we have at present - but there ARE reasonable options to single payer systems....

MM MD

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...ppi-hhs-events

These guys are just pure pieces of sh*t. They're not campaigning anymore, they're supposed to be running this program and they're blatantly sabotaging it, driving up people's costs just so they can blame it. It's the whole Republicans want an inefficient government to cut it cranked up to 11.


The cherry on top is I get that's its commonly called Obamacare but the HHS should call it by its official name. Calling it Obamacare is just unprofessional.

I'm on Medicare. I can confirm single payer is great. I get told how much a bill would be and how much I would have to pay. There will be a line that says "The most you will have to pay is...." and it gives the amount. I don't go to a doctor a lot but I've never had a bill higher than $100. I got a CAT Scan about 3-4 years ago and I think the bill was about $75. Usually doctor bills are like $10-20. I'm 42, BTW.

the real fear of Single Payer is probably that the GOP base will see that "socialism" can actually be a really good thing in certain contexts, which could explode the entire bootstrap ideology alienating conservatives from government

it is not that it won't work, at least not so far as I've heard any conservatives argue

the biggest substantive issue I've heard on the topic is the "death panel" scare, which is head-scratching considering this is basically what private insurance companies are already doing except without any public input

the biggest complaint coming out of canada is "wait times" for non-emergency procedures

that's a pretty good "worst problem" to have imo