Does the bother you liberals at all? Question on the Affordable Care Act?

Favorite Answer

Going from 18% uninsured to 8% is an accomplishment. The number might be even lower if all states had approved the Medicaid Expansion. Implementing the Republican proposals would not achieve that.

Republicans have no clue how their solutions will be ineffective. Republicans suggest tort reform, or selling insurance across state lines will lead to more affordable insurance. At best, these solutions will save pennies. At worst, the costs of health care will not slow down. States like Texas have enacted tort reform but that has not slowed raise of health care costs or made health insurance more affordable. We have been leaving to the States and the marketplace since 1953. They have not solved the problem of adverse selection. Medicare and Medicaid has solved the problem for elderly and poor. Increasing competition by allowing sales across state lines will not solve that problem for everyone else. Republicans want affordable insurance for all but they do not understand how to provide it. They do not understand the economics behind it.

Consider what happens when you did increase the number of insurers. For doctors and hospitals, they will waste time in finding which one pays better. The one that pays better is one that charges higher premiums or spends less on health care costs. Before Obamacare, insurance companies spent less mostly by denial of service, cherry-picking patients or having high deductibles.

However, that is not only issue. The important issue is accountability. All the health insurers would move to the state that allows the least in benefits and the least in accountability. The health insuers would choose a state with the least consumer protection and the strictest tort laws. The health insurers would choose state that would allow them to invalidate a contract for the smallest reason like mispelling an address on their application.

Medicare has a voucher program called Medicare Advantage. These private companies have not proven they can deliver the same or better medical outcomes at the lower cost.

No one expected 100% coverage. Only a single payer system will do that. The Swiss system that Obamcare and Romneycare is based only covers 92% of residents in Switzerland.

EDIT
If you like Romneycare, you will like Obamacare. It is the same thing. Everyone state is required to implement it and if they do not, the federal government will implement a version of Romneycare. The new law allows a loophole for state to implement their own plan if their plan can cover more people at a lower cost.

The new law allows insurance sales across state lines if they meet the requirements of each state where the insurance is sold. The new law addresses tort reform by finding ways to avoid torts. Block granting to states will lead to States rewriting the rules to increase the number of uninsured. Health saving accounts are available now; they are not replacing traditional health insurance. I have no problem with Medicare vouchers as long as the premium supports floats at the same rate as the lowest health insurance premium in a region and allows the market to set the growth rate. The Medicare vouchers in the Paul Ryan Plan did not do that.

"How would offering dozens of more companies to buy from not reduce prices greatly?" I answered that question before you asked. Read the paragraph that starts, "Consider what happens when you did increase the number of insurers."...Show more

No, it doesn't bother me. I'd much rather have the Democrats' imperfect solutions to our problems than the Republicans' non-solutions to our problems. Obamacare isn't perfect, but at least it's a step closer to an answer than anything the Republicans offer. I'm tired of watching my country suffer at the hands of Republican incompetence just because we've been brainwashed to fear what might happen if we try anything the Democrats want.

I already know Democrats aren't that bright and will offer flawed solutions. I have yet to see any evidence that Republicans are any brighter or have any better solutions. What you are asking is basically the same as throwing away the bird we already have in hand in order to chase after two we hear in the bush. Obamacare is the law of the land; Republicans would be better off working on fixing its problems than trying to unwind the clock and pretend it never existed in the first place.

Edit: I recall similar proposals being offered in Obama's alternative to the recent budget sequester, which Republicans completely ignored just like everything else Obama has tried to do to work with Republicans. This tells me that Republicans aren't serious about finding better solutions; they only care about the political optics of denying Obama any credit. Republicans can't keep credit for proposals they turn on just as soon as Obama backs them....Show more

I would recommend one to visit this site where you can get quotes from the best companies: http://COVERAGEFINDER.NET/index.html?src=2YAtepeaQE26

RE :Does the bother you liberals at all? Question on the Affordable Care Act?
Asking this again, because I love seeing desperate liberal attempts to explain away failure.

Ignore all the conservative and libertarian arguments that Obamacare will hurt growth, reduce jobs, cut hours, decrease doctor availability, hurt Medicare, add to the debt and deficits, increase the price of premiums, and is a challenge to our civil liberties with the individual mandate. Also, that it is at an all time low in the polls, and many unions even hate it now.

Look at this CBO study:
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/c...

Direct from the table:
Number of Uninsured Nonelderly Peopled (In millions of people):
2013 - 55
2014 - 44
2015 - 37
2016 - 31
2017 - 30
2018 - 30
2019 - 30
2020 - 30
2021 - 31
2022 - 31
2023 - 31

Granted, these numbers include illegals, but most of them are't illegals. According the table in the link, 8% of legal noneldery Americans will still lack insurance. 11% if you include illegals. That means roughly 22.5 million legal citizens will still be without insurance even by 2023.

So as you can see, Obamacare will reduce the number of uninsured initially, but MANY people will still be uninsured. The bill doesn't look like it will accomplish its goal, let alone all the negative side effects. Since premiums are growing so much, it may be cheaper for poor people to pay the penalty than to buy insurance.

By the way, the CBO has also revised it's initial scoring of Obamacare, saying it is no longer deficit neutral, and will add to the deficit. By billions and billions, and it is on track to grow in cost every consecutive year.
Update: @ Death Walker - Yes, it means we should scrap it. Obamacare was proposed as a solution to both the rising cost of health insurance and getting people without insurance, the "coverage they need." The opposite of the former has been happening, and the ladder is only succeeding in a half assed manner. if it is going to cost the economy jobs, add very large amounts to the budget deficit, and create a massive bureaucracy, then we should scrap it and start over with a better plan. No?
Update 2: @ Chewy Ivan 2 - I''l list some republican proposals for you, since you seem to forget them.
1. Buying insurance over state lines to improve competition and lower costs.
2. TORT reform
3. Block granting Medicaid back to the states where it can be run more efficiently
4. Health saving accounts as a possible replacement
5. Medicare voucher programs for future retirees. It has worked great at keeping costs down so far for Medicare part D, because vouchers bring the market into the system, and reduce costs.
Update 3: @ Chewy Ivan 2 Citation on Obama offering ANY of the things I listed?
Update 4: @ R - wouldn't that make food also non-viable? Should we do away with our free market food system too? Countries that did that in the past starved their people.
Update 5: @ Kiran C - Citation on allowing competition over state lines saving only pennies? In some of these states, there are duopolies at best. How would offering dozens of more companies to buy from not reduce prices greatly?

I live in Mass. Romneycare is a much better solution than Obamacare. Mostly because it is in fact at the state level. Republican plans focus on reducing prices. Let the states manage their own systems.
Update 6: @ Kiran C - For starters, Romneycare didn't raise taxes, it hasn't drastically added to the state's budget deficit like Obamacare will to the Federal budget deficit, and it didn't seriously decrease employment in Mass. Also, my main point was that states can run their own plans more effectively without a massive federal bureaucracy running it all. Which will be the case regardless if states run their own exchanges or not.

Hospitals do not choose plans, people who purchase the insurance do, so you still didn't answer why question. All those negative things like denial of services, would be reduced by competition to attract more customers. If there is only one or two major insurers in your state, you can't exactly shop around so easily. I would have liked a citation on your claims regarding pennies saved.
Follow 10 answers...Show more

Get and compare quotes from different companies at - INSURERATESME.INFO-

RE Does the bother you liberals at all? Question on the Affordable Care Act?

Asking this again, because I love seeing desperate liberal attempts to explain away failure. Ignore all the conservative and libertarian arguments that Obamacare will hurt growth, ...show more...Show more

Dont know what your question is here ? Medicare has improved under Obamacare. Unions already have negotiated health benefits in their contracts, so they are not affected by Obamacare....Show more