|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On May 04 2016 04:59 zlefin wrote:
American healthcare is pretty pricey; and poorly managed. It's especially bad if you have to buy insurance on your own, and can't get it through a job or some other group rate.
Some price increases are just due to eexpensive health care; some are because the ACA makes it not really true insurance, just health coverage. i.e. people who're sick can sign up and get benefits, which means to subsidize that everyone else in that group ends up paying more. Often that's the people buying insurance on their own set, which means for them everything gets a lot more expensive as they subsidize the insurance for sick people.
Some insurers are dropping out of some markets because the general (non-work/group based) policies just lose too much money, even at high monthly payments ($500+)
The whole point of health insurance is to have healthy people pay for sick people. Its why there is a punishment for not signing up.
Spreading the costs is the only way it is affordable and America's insistence to not do this is one of the reasons why its so expensive for you.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
risk pooling prevents death spiral of plans but it is sort of still spiral-able if insurance doesnt pay out and lead to providers not taking the plan. this leads to high risk pool gravitating towards a particular plan that eventually has to drop out for being unprofitable. also there are review processes for big operations that can potentially be messy.
i dont see a lot of optimism about aca cost in the short term given the provider side power
|
|
|
On May 04 2016 05:12 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 04:59 zlefin wrote:
American healthcare is pretty pricey; and poorly managed. It's especially bad if you have to buy insurance on your own, and can't get it through a job or some other group rate.
Some price increases are just due to eexpensive health care; some are because the ACA makes it not really true insurance, just health coverage. i.e. people who're sick can sign up and get benefits, which means to subsidize that everyone else in that group ends up paying more. Often that's the people buying insurance on their own set, which means for them everything gets a lot more expensive as they subsidize the insurance for sick people.
Some insurers are dropping out of some markets because the general (non-work/group based) policies just lose too much money, even at high monthly payments ($500+) The whole point of health insurance is to have healthy people pay for sick people. Its why there is a punishment for not signing up. Spreading the costs is the only way it is affordable and America's insistence to not do this is one of the reasons why its so expensive for you.
A big issue in america is double dipped systems stretching an already stretched paycheck.
Church groups for example: Tithing rules for many groups in the US fluctuates between 10%-25%. These tithes helps pay for lots of medical bills, car repairs, house repairs, food, scholarships, trips, etc... When you go to this conservative anti-tax group and ask them "I would like to add another 10%-25% of taxes to your already overtaxed paycheck" they flip their lids. What do they need the ACA for when their pastor has helped them pay for emergency bills in the past? What do they need police presence for when the 2nd amendment already allows them to protect each other?
To many of these conservatives they already have a welfare system in place build on the backs of their peers. Why double up on things you already have help for?
Now, can these churches actually afford all these things? No, most don't. And most become very selective of who they give that help to. And while those who are liked by the churches will fight tooth and nail to defend their system that they believe is working (at least for them) they will vilify any attempt to break up their local communities by big government intrusion usually pushed by big cities who want to enforce their big city ideals to the local community.
|
your Country52797 Posts
I wonder if Trump will break 50% today.
|
On May 04 2016 05:12 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 04:59 zlefin wrote:
American healthcare is pretty pricey; and poorly managed. It's especially bad if you have to buy insurance on your own, and can't get it through a job or some other group rate.
Some price increases are just due to eexpensive health care; some are because the ACA makes it not really true insurance, just health coverage. i.e. people who're sick can sign up and get benefits, which means to subsidize that everyone else in that group ends up paying more. Often that's the people buying insurance on their own set, which means for them everything gets a lot more expensive as they subsidize the insurance for sick people.
Some insurers are dropping out of some markets because the general (non-work/group based) policies just lose too much money, even at high monthly payments ($500+) The whole point of health insurance is to have healthy people pay for sick people. Its why there is a punishment for not signing up. Spreading the costs is the only way it is affordable and America's insistence to not do this is one of the reasons why its so expensive for you.
I'd just prefer that the cost be spread more evenly.
I'd also prefer a name change to make clear it's no longer properly insurance (which is something that is a hedge against risk).
|
Ted Cruz hurled every slight in the book at Donald Trump on Tuesday, but it might not be enough to stave off a debilitating defeat in Indiana.
The Texas senator is bracing for a loss that could cripple his chances to block Trump’s ascent to the Republican presidential nomination. He spent his morning skewering the New York billionaire -- “utterly amoral,” “a serial philanderer,” “a pathological liar” and even ridden with venereal disease. But it only served to underscore the political reality: Trump could be close to a knockout blow. And he knows it.
“Ted Cruz is a desperate candidate trying to save his failing campaign,” Trump said in response to Cruz’s tirade. “Today’s ridiculous outburst only proves what I have been saying for a long time, that Ted Cruz does not have the temperament to be President of the United States.”
Trump’s campaign, meanwhile, has taken on a new swagger. Though polls are notoriously spotty in Indiana, the few reliable ones showed Trump coasting to an easy victory over Cruz, dampening any optimism about a resurgent anti-Trump movement.
Indiana could be a back-breaker for those still hoping to stop the mogul. A strong finish by Trump would earn him most of the state’s 57 allocated delegates and put him on a trajectory to clinch the Republican nomination without the threat of a contested national convention. A big win in Indiana, combined with victories in New Jersey and California next month, would likely seal the nomination.
But the state could also be an unlikely comeback story if Cruz beats expectations and tops Trump. Despite Trump's polling lead, Indiana has seen hundreds of thousands of early votes cast since April 5, which included a two-week period in which Trump found himself embroiled in controversy and appeared to be struggling before an April 19 win in New York reinvigorated his campaign.
Seeking to project confidence, the Cruz campaign on Tuesday announced events later in the week in Nebraska and Washington, which hold primaries later this month.
Source
|
On May 04 2016 05:12 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 04:59 zlefin wrote:
American healthcare is pretty pricey; and poorly managed. It's especially bad if you have to buy insurance on your own, and can't get it through a job or some other group rate.
Some price increases are just due to eexpensive health care; some are because the ACA makes it not really true insurance, just health coverage. i.e. people who're sick can sign up and get benefits, which means to subsidize that everyone else in that group ends up paying more. Often that's the people buying insurance on their own set, which means for them everything gets a lot more expensive as they subsidize the insurance for sick people.
Some insurers are dropping out of some markets because the general (non-work/group based) policies just lose too much money, even at high monthly payments ($500+) The whole point of health insurance is to have healthy people pay for sick people. Its why there is a punishment for not signing up. Spreading the costs is the only way it is affordable and America's insistence to not do this is one of the reasons why its so expensive for you.
Actual costs are also higher. If procedures cost 5x what they would in Thailand, someone has to foot the extra expense no matter what system you've got.
|
On May 04 2016 06:28 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 05:12 Gorsameth wrote:On May 04 2016 04:59 zlefin wrote:
American healthcare is pretty pricey; and poorly managed. It's especially bad if you have to buy insurance on your own, and can't get it through a job or some other group rate.
Some price increases are just due to eexpensive health care; some are because the ACA makes it not really true insurance, just health coverage. i.e. people who're sick can sign up and get benefits, which means to subsidize that everyone else in that group ends up paying more. Often that's the people buying insurance on their own set, which means for them everything gets a lot more expensive as they subsidize the insurance for sick people.
Some insurers are dropping out of some markets because the general (non-work/group based) policies just lose too much money, even at high monthly payments ($500+) The whole point of health insurance is to have healthy people pay for sick people. Its why there is a punishment for not signing up. Spreading the costs is the only way it is affordable and America's insistence to not do this is one of the reasons why its so expensive for you. I'd just prefer that the cost be spread more evenly. I'd also prefer a name change to make clear it's no longer properly insurance (which is something that is a hedge against risk).
The cost would be spread more evenly if you didn't have dumb people pay 900 bucks in penalties rather then buy an insurance for 600.
The whole point of the penalty is to get every single person to sign up for coverage. To more people signed up, the more the cost is spread, the lower the cost can be.
It also makes the "sick people can sign up to get benefits" a moot point since you want every citizen to be covered from birth to death. There should never be a moment where you "sign up to enjoy benefits".
On May 04 2016 06:49 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 05:12 Gorsameth wrote:On May 04 2016 04:59 zlefin wrote:
American healthcare is pretty pricey; and poorly managed. It's especially bad if you have to buy insurance on your own, and can't get it through a job or some other group rate.
Some price increases are just due to eexpensive health care; some are because the ACA makes it not really true insurance, just health coverage. i.e. people who're sick can sign up and get benefits, which means to subsidize that everyone else in that group ends up paying more. Often that's the people buying insurance on their own set, which means for them everything gets a lot more expensive as they subsidize the insurance for sick people.
Some insurers are dropping out of some markets because the general (non-work/group based) policies just lose too much money, even at high monthly payments ($500+) The whole point of health insurance is to have healthy people pay for sick people. Its why there is a punishment for not signing up. Spreading the costs is the only way it is affordable and America's insistence to not do this is one of the reasons why its so expensive for you. Actual costs are also higher. If procedures cost 5x what they would in Thailand, someone has to foot the extra expense no matter what system you've got.
Which is why I said one of the reasons.
The costs still reflect a time (that has sadly not passed yet) where a significant enough amount of the population did not have coverage and left the hospital to pay the bill. Which made them increase costs to compensate.
Plus much higher chance and payout for suing, plus salary compensation for silly high tuition plus ect ect.
Individuals have no bargaining position in healthcare and the US is to afraid of the big bad government to involve them in the price negotiations so insurance basically asks whatever it wants, regardless of realistic cost projections and so hospitals charge whatever they can aswell because there is not enough pressure on them from insurers to reduce costs ect.
|
Gors -> I know; but the penalties are a lot lower (that 900 is per year, as opposed ot the 600 per month). There's still a lot of people without coverage (around 30 million as a guess, not really sure).
Also, a lot of people are exempted from the penalty due to not having enough income.
So, in practice it's still the case that many people can sign up to enjoy benefits; but not sign up the rest of the time, and not have to pay the penalty or anything.
I'd rather just have single payer, or just have the government pay directly for the sick poor people who can't afford insurance.
|
On May 04 2016 07:04 zlefin wrote:
Gors -> I know; but the penalties are a lot lower (that 900 is per year, as opposed ot the 600 per month). There's still a lot of people without coverage (around 30 million as a guess, not really sure).
Also, a lot of people are exempted from the penalty due to not having enough income.
So, in practice it's still the case that many people can sign up to enjoy benefits; but not sign up the rest of the time, and not have to pay the penalty or anything.
I'd rather just have single payer, or just have the government pay directly for the sick poor people who can't afford insurance.
Certainly, there are many things that could be done better but it is important to remember what existed before the ACA and how much of a fight it was to even get this implemented.
And it certainly didn't help that a ton of red states with large poor communities decided to not expand medicare despite the federal government covering the cost for the first few years because making Obama a loser was more important then taking care of their own citizens 
|
Numbers are starting to flow in! Very pleasing results so far! Imagine how many cucks are angry, realizing lyin' ted is toast.
|
Looks like Trump is about to curbstomp Cruz in Indiana.
|
Is it just me, or is Clinton supposed to be doing the opposite of what we're seeing? Rural bumfuck area of Indiana all going to our warrior goddess?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
lol mohdoo im actually pretty flabbergasted by that. did they switch the ballots???
|
On May 04 2016 06:56 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 06:49 oBlade wrote:On May 04 2016 05:12 Gorsameth wrote:On May 04 2016 04:59 zlefin wrote:
American healthcare is pretty pricey; and poorly managed. It's especially bad if you have to buy insurance on your own, and can't get it through a job or some other group rate.
Some price increases are just due to eexpensive health care; some are because the ACA makes it not really true insurance, just health coverage. i.e. people who're sick can sign up and get benefits, which means to subsidize that everyone else in that group ends up paying more. Often that's the people buying insurance on their own set, which means for them everything gets a lot more expensive as they subsidize the insurance for sick people.
Some insurers are dropping out of some markets because the general (non-work/group based) policies just lose too much money, even at high monthly payments ($500+) The whole point of health insurance is to have healthy people pay for sick people. Its why there is a punishment for not signing up. Spreading the costs is the only way it is affordable and America's insistence to not do this is one of the reasons why its so expensive for you. Actual costs are also higher. If procedures cost 5x what they would in Thailand, someone has to foot the extra expense no matter what system you've got. Which is why I said one of the reasons. The costs still reflect a time (that has sadly not passed yet) where a significant enough amount of the population did not have coverage and left the hospital to pay the bill. Which made them increase costs to compensate. Plus much higher chance and payout for suing, plus salary compensation for silly high tuition plus ect ect. Individuals have no bargaining position in healthcare and the US is to afraid of the big bad government to involve them in the price negotiations so insurance basically asks whatever it wants, regardless of realistic cost projections and so hospitals charge whatever they can aswell because there is not enough pressure on them from insurers to reduce costs ect.
Yes, that's why I said "also." Tuition is actually a big thing, it has a domino effect on rising nurse and doctor (especially GP) shortages. Though that's also the AMA's fault. You can make insurance compulsory but the healthcare market has to have fair competition at every level.
|
On May 04 2016 07:32 oneofthem wrote:
lol mohdoo im actually pretty flabbergasted by that. did they switch the ballots???
I'm just sitting here terrified out of my mind that the numbers are actually the opposite.
|
On May 04 2016 07:27 Mohdoo wrote:
Is it just me, or is Clinton supposed to be doing the opposite of what we're seeing? Rural bumfuck area of Indiana all going to our warrior goddess?
I'm living in rural bumfuck Indiana currently, and from the few Democrat voters that I've met, the vast majority have been for Hillary, so it doesn't really surprise me.
|
Were either going to see the somber Cruz or the Religious power hungry Senator tonight.
|
CNN calling it for Trump.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
