• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

ACA Running Thread

71, you were in the biz for decades. Here's a question for you, if companies can save 10-20% on healthcare costs and get more for their money by purchasing a Medicare based coverage would they choose that over private insurance products?
 
The thing is if we simply make a robust Medicare policy available to everyone and every business we wouldn't need any additional funding other for potential subsidies. Call the Republicans out on "letting the market decide".

Within a few years, it's unlikely that private insurance would exist for anything other than supplemental plans.
 
71, you were in the biz for decades. Here's a question for you, if companies can save 10-20% on healthcare costs and get more for their money by purchasing a Medicare based coverage would they choose that over private insurance products?

Depends on the quality of benefits. Healthcare packages can be a big recruitment tool.
 
why would a politician suddenly find the need to explain how an expenditure will be funded? and on what basis would Trump be logically able to criticize an increase in deficit spending?

Warren needs to do a better job of explaining that its not about funding, its about cost. Who cares if you're paying for healthcare through taxes or out of your pocket. We spend 3.5 trillion a year on healthcare, and that number is only going up. So $34 trillion over 10 years is actually a savings.
 
Medicare benefits are usually ranked as the top insurance coverage in the country by the customers.

By taking millions of people away from private companies, prices would dramatically increase for those left behind.
 
Medicare benefits are usually ranked as the top insurance coverage in the country by the customers.

By taking millions of people away from private companies, prices would dramatically increase for those left behind.

There are lots of companies that offer plans without co-insurance requirements, which would beat Medicare.
 
That’s a disingenuous article. It misstates the problem by ignoring what we already spend on health care and then pitches a ridiculous solution. It also ignores that the ridiculous solution is actually the reality for many Americans facing medical debt. More dumbassery from the people who gave us the death panels hysteria.
 
That’s a disingenuous article. It misstates the problem by ignoring what we already spend on health care and then pitches a ridiculous solution. It also ignores that the ridiculous solution is actually the reality for many Americans facing medical debt. More dumbassery from the people who gave us the death panels hysteria.

That article is bad, but the underlying report he is citing from the CRFB is actually good and worth reading. And I'm sympathetic to the argument that Zucman is making, but he is making it sound *MUCH* easier than it actually is to design a tax system that will replace ALL private spending without causing significant harm. And those at the highest risk would be the working poor currently on medicaid. The closest is the PERI analysis, but their tax plan isn't fleshed out, and their cost estimates for M4A are dramatically lower than other groups. I'll try to write more later.

http://www.crfb.org/papers/choices-financing-medicare-all-preliminary-analysis
 
Meanwhile, providers who are charging $10 for a Tylenol are taking the poors to court when they can't pay their deductible. Sometimes they are taking their own employees to court.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/cant-pay-medical-bill-hospital-170819820.html

It's practices like this that make people go "yeah, Medicare for all." Provider greed is literally killing the goose that laid the golden egg.
 
I bet she loves her private insurance.

“But patient and consumer advocates say hospitals are making faulty assumptions about insured patients’ ability to pay. They also argue that the lawsuits and wage garnishments hit middle- and low-income populations, who struggle to keep up with the lost income. A cashier at a Providence Health hospital in Oregon reported having wages garnished for outstanding medical debt to her own employer. For one paycheck for 80 hours of work, she took home 54 cents after a garnishment and other deductions.”
 
Warren needs to do a better job of explaining that its not about funding, its about cost. Who cares if you're paying for healthcare through taxes or out of your pocket. We spend 3.5 trillion a year on healthcare, and that number is only going up. So $34 trillion over 10 years is actually a savings.

ehhhhhh there's no way anyone but a select few is ever going to equate out of pocket costs with paid through taxes costs. I mean I just found out today we pay $150 billion a year in foreign aid to the fucking Ukraine. Bury it in taxes and no one will notice.
 
ehhhhhh there's no way anyone but a select few is ever going to equate out of pocket costs with paid through taxes costs. I mean I just found out today we pay $150 billion a year in foreign aid to the fucking Ukraine. Bury it in taxes and no one will notice.

Where the fuck did you hear that?

Our entire federal budget for foreign aid is about $49B. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/how-does-us-spend-its-foreign-aid

That organization is run by Bush family associate Richard Haas. He's hardly a liberal.

Did you get this info from the same place that you got equating Richard Steele to bribing a foreign government?
 
Back
Top