As a person who works in the industry I can safely say that the ACA was the worst of both private and public insurance. But as a person who works in the industry I can also say that at least ACA was an ATTEMPT to fix a decades long problem. The Dems implemented a poorly thought out plan while the Republicans ignored the problem and then sat in the back of the class throwing spitballs. The ACA is bad and the GOP alternatives were as bad. You don't get credit for ignoring a problem and then whining about the efforts at a solution. The GOP has had 8 years to come up with "replace" AND there's still nothing but crickets. This is why despite the ACA being awful the GOP has no credibility when it comes to attacking the ACA.
As a person who works in the industry I can safely say that the ACA was the worst of both private and public insurance. But as a person who works in the industry I can also say that at least ACA was an ATTEMPT to fix a decades long problem. The Dems implemented a poorly thought out plan while the Republicans ignored the problem and then sat in the back of the class throwing spitballs. The ACA is bad and the GOP alternatives were as bad. You don't get credit for ignoring a problem and then whining about the efforts at a solution. The GOP has had 8 years to come up with "replace" AND there's still nothing but crickets. This is why despite the ACA being awful the GOP has no credibility when it comes to attacking the ACA.
Where IS Greenbeard, anywho? I figuredhe'd be in here trying to explain how growth rates had actually fallen, doing the old "take credit for Medicare part D" schtick, again.
Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
It's a vast right wing conspiracy. Where's Greenbeard? He can explain it all.
Where IS Greenbeard, anywho?
I figured he'd be in here trying to explain how growth rates had actually fallen, doing the old "take credit for Medicare part D" schtick, again.
He's here! The Indians are having their deepest playoff run in two decades, but no game tonight so hello again. What do you need explained?
Health spending growth rates have fallen (particularly in Medicare) significantly. What does that have to do with exchange premiums?
previously you have attempted to use it as evidence of Obamacare's success, and so I've had to point out that it predates that unfortunate program.
previously you have attempted to use it as evidence of Obamacare's success, and so I've had to point out that it predates that unfortunate program.
Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
Health spending growth rates have fallen (particularly in Medicare) significantly
It's not deniable that a significant chunk of the ACA is aimed at delivery system reform--changing the volume-driven incentive for ever-greater spending that have guided clinical practice for a half century or more. That's a big deal.
:lol: you are confusing your intent with your executionIf you want to argue it's a happy coincidence that health care cost, price, and spending growth hit the lowest values on record while health care providers were undergoing that transition, that's fine. (Regardless of the cause, that's part of the reason the costs of the ACA have fallen precipitously and come in well below what was "sold" back in 2010.) I'm not sure how that's an argument against re-orienting the health care system around quality and efficiency instead of around service/revenue volume.
Well I couldn’t speak to “mine”, but I would say that generally both sides overreached on their predictions, but Conservatives were correct about the direction – fewer people working, higher premiums, etc.Vern said:CP, you and yours have " pointed " out many things over the years I've been here.
I don’t have any “obedient” posts about Obamacare. I simply have “my” posts about Obamacare.I wouldn't bring that up if your trying to make a point. anyhoo CP, can you do me a favor, can you start your obedient posts about Obamacare with
To separate the effects of the ACA’s coverage provisions from those broader estimates, CBO and JCT compared their current projections with estimates of what would have occurred if the ACA had never been enacted. In 2016, those provisions are estimated to reduce the number of uninsured people by 22 million and to result in a net cost to the federal government of $110 billion. For the 2017–2026 period, the projected net cost of those provisions is $1.4 trillion. ."sure, 20 million more people are covered, its increased the quality of care and lowered the deficit but.........".
Let’s talk about facts. Those who pushed Obamacare claimed that premiums would be lower and choice would be broader as a result: Yes, or No?I think it would help me know you at least acknowledge the facts.
Gosh. Were there any major structural changes to Medicare at the beginning of this trend (back in oh, say, 2003-2004 time frame) that might help explain this?
It's not deniable that the system is producing an older, sicker, insurance populace than the planners expected because they were wrong
URL="https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-2016/reports/51385-HealthInsuranceBaseline_OneCol.pdf"] To separate the effects of the ACA’s coverage provisions from those broader estimates, CBO and JCT compared their current projections with estimates of what would have occurred if the ACA had never been enacted. In 2016, those provisions are estimated to reduce the number of uninsured people by 22 million and to result in a net cost to the federal government of $110 billion. For the 2017–2026 period, the projected net cost of those provisions is $1.4 trillion. .[/URL]
The estimates address only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA, which do not generate all of the law’s budgetary effects.17 Many other provisions—such as various tax provisions that increase revenues and reductions in Medicare payments to hospitals, to other providers of care, and to private insurance plans delivering Medicare’s benefits—are, on net, expected to reduce budget deficits
For example, if you don’t score the costs of the Medicaid Expansion under Obamacare, you can reduce the cost.
Dittoes if you count in the “Doc Fix” that everyone knows gets stripped out every year as “producing savings”.
Let’s talk about facts. Those who pushed Obamacare claimed that premiums would be lower and choice would be broader as a result: Yes, or No?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?