US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4768

On August 18 2016 10:06 TheYango wrote:
She's an experienced medical professional with clearly enough knowledge and experience to answer the question definitively. Her answer of "don't trust studies where the researcher has a vested interest in the results" is not at odds with saying that vaccines don't cause autism. It in fact corroborates it because the study that started the entire anti-vaxx scare was proven to be tainted by outside interests. The only reason she skirts around saying straight up "no, vaccines don't cause autism and you're all fucking idiots for thinking that" is because she doesn't want to alienate that part of her base. Implicitly, saying "don't trust studies where the researcher has a vested interest in the results" actually means the anti-vaxx thing is all a farce, but none of the anti-vaxxers would ever read it that way, which is exactly what she wants.

TBH I think this is true of every physician-politician who's skirted around the issue e.g. Rand Paul and Ben Carson in the GOP debates. And I personally hold it against all of them for not having the balls to just say what they know to be true.

The big health care news this week came from Aetna, which announced on Monday it was dramatically scaling back participation in the Affordable Care Act ― thereby reducing insurer competition and forcing customers scattered across 11 states to find different sources of coverage next year.

Aetna officials said the pullout was necessary because of Obamacare’s problems ― specifically, deep losses the insurer was incurring in the law’s health insurance exchanges.

But the move also was directly related to a Department of Justice decision to block the insurer’s potentially lucrative merger with Humana, according to a letter from Aetna’s CEO obtained by The Huffington Post.

Paired with some looming rate increases for next year’s health plans, the abrupt departure of Aetna has triggered new worries that Obamacare ― a subsidized public-private system of health insurance plans competing for beneficiaries ― is in serious trouble and may even be unsustainable.

That’s despite millions who have obtained coverage through these marketplaces, contributing to a historically low uninsured rate. It’s also despite optimism about Obamacare from at least some insurers and experts ― optimism that Aetna’s own leaders had expressed just a few months ago.

Publicly, Aetna representatives this week framed their about-face as a reaction to losses the company was taking on Obamacare customers, and in particular figures from the second quarter of 2016 that the company had just analyzed, showing them to be sicker and costlier than predicted.

When reporters on Monday asked whether Aetna was also reacting to the administration’s attempt to thwart its merger with Humana, company officials brushed off the questions, according to accounts in the Hartford Courant, Politico and USA Today.

On August 18 2016 10:58 xDaunt wrote:


If I recall correctly, opponents, prior to Obamacare's passing, were predicting massive rate hikes and the demise of Obamacare as a consequence of fiscal unsustainability in 2017. As just one example, Colorado is getting fucked hard, and the exchanges are going to fail next year.

On August 18 2016 11:01 Plansix wrote:

Except the company that is threatening to pull out said the exact opposite of what they claimed during an investor call.

On August 18 2016 10:58 xDaunt wrote:


If I recall correctly, opponents, prior to Obamacare's passing, were predicting massive rate hikes and the demise of Obamacare as a consequence of fiscal unsustainability in 2017. As just one example, Colorado is getting fucked hard, and the exchanges are going to fail next year.

On August 18 2016 11:11 farvacola wrote:
"Here's this thing that Aetna did, it's a clear signal that Obamacare is failing."

"Actually, Aetna has leveraged market pullouts before and there's reason to believe that that is what is happening here."

"Yeah well clearly Obamacare is failing anyhow!"

Lol ok

On August 18 2016 11:06 xDaunt wrote:

Then they are free to be sued by shareholders. Doesn't change the fact that Obamacare is going down in flames as predicted.

On August 18 2016 11:15 farvacola wrote:
Don't misunderstand me, it's clear that Obamacare needs to change; what that change looks like is where the disagreement comes about, and this Aetna debacle isn't a great example either way.

On August 18 2016 10:52 Dan HH wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd_GOEMz3og

Amusingly awkward exchange between CNN anchor and Trump lawyer

On August 18 2016 11:09 Sadist wrote:
I still am for the ACA as it was needed for a start. It just didn't go far enough. The health insurance plans that were made illegal by the ACA was a great thing. Thats the biggest victory I see in this thing.

On August 18 2016 11:19 LegalLord wrote:
Meh, the failings of Obamacare so far seem mostly to be the standard fare of difficulties in adjustment that inevitably follow such a large scale change. Perhaps its biggest fault is that it didn't end up implementing the public option which would have probably made everything run much more smoothly overall.

On August 18 2016 11:25 farvacola wrote:
Get single payer finally and take states out of the process entirely, I say.

On August 18 2016 11:19 LegalLord wrote:
Meh, the failings of Obamacare so far seem mostly to be the standard fare of difficulties in adjustment that inevitably follow such a large scale change. Perhaps its biggest fault is that it didn't end up implementing the public option which would have probably made everything run much more smoothly overall.