ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 19th June 2017, 01:16 PM   #1
Fast Eddie B
Illuminator
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 4,498
$2,500 a year?

In another thread, Skeptic Ginger said this:

"First, if you think Obama said people's insurance premiums would go down $2500/yr, you weren't listening."

I was listening, and hoping he knew something I didn't - saving money on premiums sounded nice.

I'll just put this out there...

https://youtu.be/66bgpRRSDD4
__________________
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that...I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” - President Donald J. Trump, January 20, 2017.
"And it's, frankly, disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it." - President Donald J. Trump, October 11, 2017.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 01:23 PM   #2
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 18,900
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
In another thread, Skeptic Ginger said this:

"First, if you think Obama said people's insurance premiums would go down $2500/yr, you weren't listening."

I was listening, and hoping he knew something I didn't - saving money on premiums sounded nice.

I'll just put this out there...

https://youtu.be/66bgpRRSDD4
Wasn't that based on single payer?

ETA: And so I can understand the context of what Skeptic Ginger said, what thread was that?
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon

Last edited by Spindrift; 19th June 2017 at 01:24 PM.
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 01:25 PM   #3
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
 
TheL8Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,544
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
In another thread, Skeptic Ginger said this:

"First, if you think Obama said people's insurance premiums would go down $2500/yr, you weren't listening."

I was listening, and hoping he knew something I didn't - saving money on premiums sounded nice.

I'll just put this out there...

https://youtu.be/66bgpRRSDD4
"Up to", a"as much as" ... so yes, perhaps some peoples premiums went down that much, or that was the projection, probably from the CBO.

What's your point ?
__________________
"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States...nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
TheL8Elvis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 02:25 PM   #4
Fast Eddie B
Illuminator
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 4,498
The thread was the one about the congressman being shot in Alexandria. It had gotten hijacked into a discussion of Obamacare and the Republican health plan
__________________
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that...I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” - President Donald J. Trump, January 20, 2017.
"And it's, frankly, disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it." - President Donald J. Trump, October 11, 2017.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 02:29 PM   #5
Fast Eddie B
Illuminator
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 4,498
Point was I think Obama's statements were meant to leave an impression of lower premiums going forward. Even with "up to" and "as much as" as qualifiers.

If lower premiums was a goal of Obamacare, on at least that goal it failed. By a lot.
__________________
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that...I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” - President Donald J. Trump, January 20, 2017.
"And it's, frankly, disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it." - President Donald J. Trump, October 11, 2017.

Last edited by Fast Eddie B; 19th June 2017 at 02:30 PM.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 03:59 PM   #6
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,317
Obama made all those promises to reduce premiums by 'up to $2500 per family' in 2008, before he was elected.

Why didn't he deliver on this promise? Republicans blocked his every move. Nobody expected that. Obama also said he would close Gitmo - another promise that failed because Republicans blocked it. In fact considering the opposition it's a miracle that he got anything done at all.

It's true, Obama's plan to reduce the cost of healthcare didn't turn out as well as expected. But let's put the blame where it lies - Republicans who refused to work with a Democrat president, no matter what the cost. Obama thought he could work with them, and no doubt his projections were based on at least some cooperation. He got none.

Quote:
If lower premiums was a goal of Obamacare, on at least that goal it failed. By a lot
But did it fail? When Obama took over healthcare costs were already ballooning - so the question is not whether premiums were reduced in absolute terms, but relative to what they would have been.

If I was a republican and Obama was a Republican president, I would argue that he saved us from total economic collapse and that Obamacare was an essential part of that - that without it there would have been hyperinflation and premiums would would have gone up by 1000% or more. In fact that's exactly that republicans were saying would happen - and since it didn't happen it proves that Obama reduced the cost of everything!
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.

Last edited by Roger Ramjets; 19th June 2017 at 04:01 PM.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 04:29 PM   #7
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,823
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
In another thread, Skeptic Ginger said this:

"First, if you think Obama said people's insurance premiums would go down $2500/yr, you weren't listening."

I was listening, and hoping he knew something I didn't - saving money on premiums sounded nice.

I'll just put this out there...

https://youtu.be/66bgpRRSDD4
"We will work to"

"Up to $2500/year per family"


Bloomberg - Ezra Klein Column
Quote:
But the number wasn’t derived from the ether. It came from an actual study, by Harvard University researchers and Obama advisers David Cutler, David Blumenthal and Jeffrey Liebman. The three had added up plausible savings from a slew of health-care delivery-system reforms and then divided that number by the size of the U.S. population....

Even without Obama’s oversimplification, the $2,500 target was extremely optimistic. So here’s the shocking revelation: The savings are actually materializing. Over e-mail, Cutler pointed out that in January 2009, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services projected that national health spending would equal 19.3 percent of gross domestic product in 2016. Their 2012 projection cuts the 2016 estimate to 18.3 percent.

“One percent of GDP turns out to be -- surprise -- $2,470 for a family of four given expected GDP that year,” Cutler wrote, “or basically $2,500.”
So Obama's biggest mistake besides not realizing grandfathering in plans didn't guarantee the insurers would keep them, was saying the savings would be in premiums.

On the negative side, politicians are forced to spoon feed the public slogans.
Quote:
The reduction isn’t, as Obama promised, in insurance premiums. It’s the cumulative savings across all health-care spending. That’s the measure that, in the long run, really matters. When wonks talk about “bending the cost curve,” that’s what’s being bent.

Obama’s mistake, condensing the entire health-care system’s spending into the shorthand of “premiums,” is now being repeated by some of his critics -- but worse. When they speak broadly of premiums, they’re not talking about the average American’s premiums, as Obama was. They’re really talking about the premiums in the Affordable Care Act’s new insurance exchanges. Sometimes, they’re speaking even more narrowly of the premiums for young, healthy men in those exchanges. That’s what a recent debate over “rate shock” was about.

Forbes - The Rebuttal
Quote:
But whether you agree with this depends a lot on your baseline and what you use to measure savings. Cutler refers to estimates from 2009, and looks at health spending as a share of GDP. If instead, we look at estimates made in 2010, and look at health expenditures per capita, the savings aren’t really there. CMS estimated $10,048 for 2014, while the actual number turned out to be $9,695 – a far cry from $2,500 in savings per family!

Because of the difficulty in answering this question (partly because candidate Obama’s promise was intentionally vague) it makes sense to look at different measures of health care costs that are less vague. In this article, I’ll examine two of them – premiums for employer-sponsored coverage, and medical inflation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 05:51 PM   #8
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,298
I quoted something on healthcare recently where president obama said the law would bend the cost curve.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 06:41 PM   #9
Ray Brady
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,109
Hmm. My premiums did indeed go down when the ACA was implemented. About $1200 a year on a plan that covers me and my wife. I'm now putting those savings into a Healthcare Savings Account, with partial matching from my company.
Ray Brady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 07:17 PM   #10
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 28,067
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
Point was I think Obama's statements were meant to leave an impression of lower premiums going forward. Even with "up to" and "as much as" as qualifiers.

If lower premiums was a goal of Obamacare, on at least that goal it failed. By a lot.
It was a goal, it did fail. Why did it fail? Because Republicans sabotaged the funding.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2017, 10:29 PM   #11
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,444
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
Why didn't he deliver on this promise? Republicans blocked his every move. Nobody expected that. Obama also said he would close Gitmo - another promise that failed because Republicans blocked it. In fact considering the opposition it's a miracle that he got anything done at all.
IIRC both Democrats and Republicans blocked it.

Senate blocks transfer of Gitmo detainees

Quote:
WASHINGTON — In a rare, bipartisan defeat for President Barack Obama, the Senate voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to keep the prison at Guantanamo Bay open for the foreseeable future and forbid the transfer of any detainees to facilities in the United States.

Democrats lined up with Republicans in the 90-6 vote that came on the heels of a similar move a week ago in the House, underscoring widespread apprehension among Obama's congressional allies over voters' strong feelings about bringing detainees to the U.S. from the prison in Cuba.
And there were other votes, but generally they were large veto-proof majorities, which you can't have unless both Democrats and Republicans agree.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 05:28 AM   #12
Fast Eddie B
Illuminator
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 4,498
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
Obama made all those promises to reduce premiums by 'up to $2500 per family' in 2008, before he was elected.

Why didn't he deliver on this promise? Republicans blocked his every move. Nobody expected that.
If memory serves, did not Obama have a Democratic Senate and House for his first 4 years? If that's the case, it seems to take some pretty motivated reasoning to place the blame for the failure of Obamacare on Republicans.

If, in fact, you're stipulating it's a failure!
__________________
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that...I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” - President Donald J. Trump, January 20, 2017.
"And it's, frankly, disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it." - President Donald J. Trump, October 11, 2017.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 05:35 AM   #13
Fast Eddie B
Illuminator
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 4,498
Originally Posted by Ray Brady View Post
Hmm. My premiums did indeed go down when the ACA was implemented. About $1200 a year on a plan that covers me and my wife. I'm now putting those savings into a Healthcare Savings Account, with partial matching from my company.
That's great! There were clear a lot of "winners" under the plan.

But are you arguing that your particular case argues against the large increases others have had? They are quite real - and onerous - for a large swath of the American public.

Let's scrap the whole convoluted mess and institute Medicare for everyone! I've been on Medicare for almost 4 years and wonder why we can't use "American Exceptionalism" to provide its benefits to more than just the "elderly". Seems almost like age discrimination to deny younger people at least the option of government-provided coverage.
__________________
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that...I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” - President Donald J. Trump, January 20, 2017.
"And it's, frankly, disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it." - President Donald J. Trump, October 11, 2017.

Last edited by Fast Eddie B; 20th June 2017 at 05:36 AM.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 05:57 AM   #14
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 28,067
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
If memory serves, did not Obama have a Democratic Senate and House for his first 4 years?
Your memory failed you.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 06:22 AM   #15
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,298
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post

But are you arguing that your particular case argues against the large increases others have had? They are quite real - and onerous - for a large swath of the American public.
I would argue the onerous point. More specifically, I would argue the argument about it being onerous.

If we read the internal logic of the ACA as trying to keep premiums below 10% of income, under the premise that is not onerous, it probably has not been onerous for a large swath of the American public.

If you are arguing with some supporters, it is important to also make a case why the premise of 10% is wrong.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 06:35 AM   #16
Spock Jenkins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 491
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped....S._Senate.png

The linked chart shows Obama enjoyed at minimum two years of house and senate control. He had another four years of control of the Senate. It wasn't until the last two years of his final term that he lost both.

So his memory was off, but not by much.
Spock Jenkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 06:40 AM   #17
Spock Jenkins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 491
The whole discussion of premiums is pointless anyway. I can reduce premiums significantly tomorrow. Just cover less. That's all they're doing now to stem the increase.

It's about cost. 10% or 20% co-insurance, co-pays, increasing deductibles, increasing out of pocket max, changing billing rules allowing them to bill separately for items and no longer include them in the co-pay. It's to the point now where I will put off going because of the out of pocket. I don't even care about the premium.
Spock Jenkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 06:42 AM   #18
Fast Eddie B
Illuminator
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 4,498
Originally Posted by Spock Jenkins View Post

So his memory was off, but not by much.
And I stand corrected.
__________________
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that...I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” - President Donald J. Trump, January 20, 2017.
"And it's, frankly, disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it." - President Donald J. Trump, October 11, 2017.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 06:45 AM   #19
Spock Jenkins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 491
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
And I stand corrected.
Those two years were nearly bullet proof. 59% majority in both houses after Arlen Spector switched parties shortly after the inauguration. The two independents have always caucused with the Democrats. Just one RINO and everything passes.
Spock Jenkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 07:18 AM   #20
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 18,900
Originally Posted by Spock Jenkins View Post
Those two years were nearly bullet proof. 59% majority in both houses after Arlen Spector switched parties shortly after the inauguration. The two independents have always caucused with the Democrats. Just one RINO and everything passes.
One is all it takes to make it far from bullet proof.
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 07:36 AM   #21
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,298
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
One is all it takes to make it far from bullet proof.
I think another point to remember is that it was a 15 month process that started with 4 competing proposals. Unlike republicans who don't care about healthcare and can do the stuff they are doing right now to get a win, that democratic majority was made up of people that actually had opinions and voices on health care. That means actual negotiation in your own party.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 07:42 AM   #22
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,566
Perhaps he hadn't yet gotten the memo that modern politics is about ramming your agenda down everyone's throat the instant you get enough political clout to do it, using any underhanded tactic you can find and consensus be damned because they sure as hell aren't going to give you an inch when it's their turn to bat.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 01:49 PM   #23
mgidm86
Illuminator
 
mgidm86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,669
Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis View Post
"Up to", a"as much as" ... so yes, perhaps some peoples premiums went down that much, or that was the projection, probably from the CBO.

What's your point ?

You missed the clips where he said "an average of $2500 per year". Did that happen? If not, oops.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 03:56 PM   #24
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 8,851
Those of you arguing that ACA is working fine, that the savings are currently materializing need to take a good long look at what's coming down the pipes for 2018.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 04:03 PM   #25
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 18,900
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Those of you arguing that ACA is working fine, that the savings are currently materializing need to take a good long look at what's coming down the pipes for 2018.
Who's arguing that the ACA is working fine?
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 04:12 PM   #26
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,317
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Your memory failed you.
Not memory, Republican talking points.

Debunking the Myth: Obama’s Two-Year Supermajority
Quote:
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.

He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken’s election in Minnesota and he didn’t get seated for seven months.

The President’s cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania’s Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.

That gave the President 59 votes — still a vote shy of the super majority.

But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.

So while the President’s number on paper was 59 Senators — he was really working with just 58 Senators.

Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 — but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.

In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy’s seat in September.

Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 04:25 PM   #27
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,430
The idea that they were going to cut costs is a non-starter. It's first week microeconomics. If you have more people covered, you are going to have more people showing up at the doctor's office. Increased demand=increased prices. Of course, the way the bill was designed it was virtually certain that sick people would sign up and healthy ones would pay the penalty, and that is exactly what happened, so the price increases have been pretty breathtaking.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 05:09 PM   #28
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,970
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Those of you arguing that ACA is working fine, that the savings are currently materializing need to take a good long look at what's coming down the pipes for 2018.
You have to remember though that 2018's pricings are based on the uncertainly of what Trump and Co are going to do with subsidies and other things that help keep the Industry from imploding.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2017, 06:09 PM   #29
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 22,673
So basically the Democrat lawmakers pushed the car to the top of the hill, and the Republican lawmakers cut the brakes. Then Obama gave it one final nudge, took his hands off the wheel, and rolled out the door. "It'll be fine as long as the car stays on the road," he says on his way out. "You're welcome!"
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 08:36 AM   #30
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 8,851
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
Who's arguing that the ACA is working fine?
It is my impression (which could certainly be fine) that the articles posted by Skeptic Ginger indicated that s/he believes ACA is doing well.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 08:41 AM   #31
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,298
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
It is my impression (which could certainly be fine) that the articles posted by Skeptic Ginger indicated that s/he believes ACA is doing well.
I would say it kinda is.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 08:50 AM   #32
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 8,851
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
You have to remember though that 2018's pricings are based on the uncertainly of what Trump and Co are going to do with subsidies and other things that help keep the Industry from imploding.
The pricing isn't based on uncertainty about Trump - that's not something we're allowed to price for. They're based on the CSR reimbursements being withdrawn (but the requirement to offer lower cost shares is still there), combined with an inability to convince provider groups to lower their negotiated rates to a level that allows for reasonable pricing.

On the other hand, however, that uncertainty is very likely part of why some carriers have exited the market.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 09:38 AM   #33
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,565
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
Who's arguing that the ACA is working fine?
Nobody -- including it's strongest supporters -- says it's working "fine." But it is generally accomplishing the goal of making health insurance available to a lot of people who couldn't get it previously, and it would have worked a lot better if the Republicans hadn't sabotaged it at every step by refusing to expand Medicaid in many states, and by stunts like pulling all advertising just before this year's exchange enrollment deadline.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/27/news...ump/index.html
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/10/news...llment/?iid=EL
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/evidence...re-is-working/
https://newrepublic.com/article/1196...ow-law-working
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...ibly-well.html
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 11:57 AM   #34
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,317
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
...inability to convince provider groups to lower their negotiated rates to a level that allows for reasonable pricing... that uncertainty is very likely part of why some carriers have exited the market.
So the pricing is partly based on uncertainty about Trump.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 12:21 PM   #35
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,841
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
Obama made all those promises to reduce premiums by 'up to $2500 per family' in 2008, before he was elected.

Why didn't he deliver on this promise? Republicans blocked his every move.
That, and the fact that Obama was promising something for nothing, which never really works out.

We were going to provide more health care to more people and as a result, people wouldn't have to pay as much. What could possibly go wrong?
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 01:56 PM   #36
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 8,851
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
So the pricing is partly based on uncertainty about Trump.
1) Don't snip my post to make it look as if two completely unrelated statements somehow go together. That's outright and transparently dishonest.

2) The inability to negotiate sustainable costs from providers has been around for decades, and ACA did nothing to address it. For ACA to be sustainable, lower cost-side pricing has been needed since inception, and it hasn't materialized. This is not something new, it's not something that can be attributed to a political party.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 06:34 PM   #37
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,970
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
The pricing isn't based on uncertainty about Trump - that's not something we're allowed to price for. They're based on the CSR reimbursements being withdrawn (but the requirement to offer lower cost shares is still there), combined with an inability to convince provider groups to lower their negotiated rates to a level that allows for reasonable pricing.

On the other hand, however, that uncertainty is very likely part of why some carriers have exited the market.
This is exactly what I mean. If you are uncertain about what is going to happen to them, then you have to plan as if you are going to lose them, and set pricing accordingly.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 07:16 PM   #38
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,211
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
Let's scrap the whole convoluted mess and institute Medicare for everyone! I've been on Medicare for almost 4 years and wonder why we can't use "American Exceptionalism" to provide its benefits to more than just the "elderly". Seems almost like age discrimination to deny younger people at least the option of government-provided coverage.
Works for me, but the practice of ordering more tests and procedures because that's how providers are paid should be tempered, and many in the insurance industry would become redundant. Perhaps some could go to work as health care communicators who work with doctors and patients to use health care resources more efficiently. But someone's ox is always gored. If you own an MRI machine, you want to keep it busy. So there are lots of marginal tests, IMO.

ETA: America's "exceptionalism" is why we don't have UHC or a public option. Most other rich countries do. Our employment-based system is the exception. If you have a full-time job with benefits, great. Otherwise you're premiums will probably be pretty high.

Last edited by Minoosh; 21st June 2017 at 07:23 PM.
Minoosh is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 07:43 PM   #39
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,298
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
That's great! There were clear a lot of "winners" under the plan.

But are you arguing that your particular case argues against the large increases others have had? They are quite real - and onerous - for a large swath of the American public.

Let's scrap the whole convoluted mess and institute Medicare for everyone! I've been on Medicare for almost 4 years and wonder why we can't use "American Exceptionalism" to provide its benefits to more than just the "elderly". Seems almost like age discrimination to deny younger people at least the option of government-provided coverage.
Seems like a really bad idea to put everyone on a program for the elderly and disabled. I don't think Medicare is really set up to cover a young, healthy population.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2017, 07:59 PM   #40
Kestrel
Philosopher
 
Kestrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,848
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Works for me, but the practice of ordering more tests and procedures because that's how providers are paid should be tempered, and many in the insurance industry would become redundant. Perhaps some could go to work as health care communicators who work with doctors and patients to use health care resources more efficiently. But someone's ox is always gored. If you own an MRI machine, you want to keep it busy. So there are lots of marginal tests, IMO.
MRI tests don't have to be that expensive. In Japan an MRI scans costs around $100. Prices are set by the government. Clinics are privately run and operate at a profit.

Routine tests don't have to be expensive.
Kestrel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:59 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.