The infinite wisdom of the Blue Party, for the last 4 years, really came shining through. Not that I want peopel to get sick or anything. I just simply disagree with some of their views. Despite my views on the Affordable Care Act, I am actually sad that the website is giving people too many problems. The goal was that our government would provide equality for those uninsured but instead, our Federal government simply makes it a law that you must buy health insurance. A law? What is so "equal" about forcing people to buy a crappy deal called health insurance?
I'm sorry, but isn't this a problem to begin with? Our government is appealing to the ideals of crony-capitalist's (the lobbyists) under the premise that it will create "equality."
This same pressure from lobbyists were one of the many causes of the last recession....(the housing boom and bust). Yes, banks were given quotas to give the underserved home loans when they couldn't afford them, under the guise that these mortgages would be secured from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
Same story!!!!
Sure, there are great ideas in the ACA that a lot of people thought of several years before but some of it's parts are potentially disastrous.
But forcing people to buy health insurance? (I will only dive into few flaws, despite there are more) (Also, there are plenty of GOOD things within the ACA, which a lot of the GOP had something to do with. Yes.)
What's worse is the proponents suggest that the younger crowd should opt in this program, so they can help pay for the elders with the worsening diseases. The idea is that the younger crowd pays into the "risk pool" and it helps pay for the rest. First flaw is that rising healthcare costs are unavoidable until you fix the root of the problem, instead of subsidizing it. Second flaw....
Contradiction: the ACA also imposes a law that 26 year olds and under remain on their parents plan. How can we get the younger folds (er uh, force them to buy insurance) when they're already able to be on their parents plan? So, how are we to pay for those attached to the newly formed Medicaid programs when tax revenue is getting lower and lower? How are we going to afford to pay for our elders under this new exchange when so many of our younger crowd refuse to pay into such a program (because of how expensive it is).
Now their government website is down for the health care exchange? All of these millions spent on advertising the ACA and the website is down? I thought this was supposed to help, not hinder.
America is need of healthcare and particularly, preventive medicine. How can we get there if our government is forcing people to buy something they can't afford?
Also, if you believe socializing is better, get this: the healthcare costs will remain the same and continue to grow.
And if you still disregard that last statement, then please do not vote for "fixing" the prices of healthcare costs. Keep in mind that it causes shortages which absolutely result in a lack of equity because only the rich could afford the actual services.
And if you still disregard the last two statements, don't forget how inefficient the government is with your tax dollars....
I'm sorry, but isn't this a problem to begin with? Our government is appealing to the ideals of crony-capitalist's (the lobbyists) under the premise that it will create "equality."
This same pressure from lobbyists were one of the many causes of the last recession....(the housing boom and bust). Yes, banks were given quotas to give the underserved home loans when they couldn't afford them, under the guise that these mortgages would be secured from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
Same story!!!!
Sure, there are great ideas in the ACA that a lot of people thought of several years before but some of it's parts are potentially disastrous.
But forcing people to buy health insurance? (I will only dive into few flaws, despite there are more) (Also, there are plenty of GOOD things within the ACA, which a lot of the GOP had something to do with. Yes.)
What's worse is the proponents suggest that the younger crowd should opt in this program, so they can help pay for the elders with the worsening diseases. The idea is that the younger crowd pays into the "risk pool" and it helps pay for the rest. First flaw is that rising healthcare costs are unavoidable until you fix the root of the problem, instead of subsidizing it. Second flaw....
Contradiction: the ACA also imposes a law that 26 year olds and under remain on their parents plan. How can we get the younger folds (er uh, force them to buy insurance) when they're already able to be on their parents plan? So, how are we to pay for those attached to the newly formed Medicaid programs when tax revenue is getting lower and lower? How are we going to afford to pay for our elders under this new exchange when so many of our younger crowd refuse to pay into such a program (because of how expensive it is).
Now their government website is down for the health care exchange? All of these millions spent on advertising the ACA and the website is down? I thought this was supposed to help, not hinder.
America is need of healthcare and particularly, preventive medicine. How can we get there if our government is forcing people to buy something they can't afford?
Also, if you believe socializing is better, get this: the healthcare costs will remain the same and continue to grow.
And if you still disregard that last statement, then please do not vote for "fixing" the prices of healthcare costs. Keep in mind that it causes shortages which absolutely result in a lack of equity because only the rich could afford the actual services.
And if you still disregard the last two statements, don't forget how inefficient the government is with your tax dollars....
And if you disregard anything that I say then...ah never mind.
While I'm mostly with you on the ACA and it's intentions vs the outcomes, the health care debate reminds me of the old saying, "You can't please everybody." At some point, somewhere down the road, something was going to change. And no matter what changed, some group or groups somewhere were going to be celebrating, and some were going to be cursing at their television screens.
ReplyDeleteWhenever I think about this problem, I think about potential. I generally agree with this statement that you made: "How can we get there if our government is forcing people to buy something they can't afford?" It's quite correct to say that a lot of people cannot afford to buy health insurance. Why can't they afford it though? Is the cost too high? Do they not make enough money? Would their employers cap benefits? Is there some combination of factors at work here?
Because even IF you could address the costs of healthcare, would that still make it "affordable" to most people? That's an issue that I never hear anyone discuss. We hear about root causes of healthcare inflation all the time. But I've never heard that addressed in relation to poverty. Because what's the price floor on healthcare? How does the price floor relate to the poverty line? Because that's the real issue here. Most of those 40 some odd million people we heard so much about during this debate live close to, at, or below the poverty line. Currently, for someone my age and being single, the poverty line is $11,344/year (1). Can addressing the root causes of healthcare inflation lower the price enough to make it affordable to someone like that? Let's say I manage to find a studio apartment for $300/month (good luck in Portland). I'm automatically out $3,600 bucks. Now lets say that since I live alone, I never go out, and I spend $100/month on food. There goes another $1,200. And let's also say that I never ever turn on the heat. So I only pay an electric bill, and maybe W/S/G. Let's say that, all total, that comes to $150/month for all utilities. Another $1,800 gone. And for the sake of argument, let's say that I'm responsible and do not own a car--I bus everywhere. A one month pass is $100--another $1,200 is gone. At this point I've run through about three quarters of my money. And, mind you, that $11k is BEFORE taxes.
So it's not enough to simply say that "addressing causes of inflated prices" can create a solution. Even at a reduced price, it still may not be affordable for Americans living in poverty. I would be more interested in data that spoke to healthcare costs adjusted for inflation relative to the poverty level.
1. http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/
As for regular inflation? There are many causes to that. When it comes to healthcare inflation, there are many causes of that as well. If, let's say, we had ideas to curb inflation and somehow make it affordable. This would require massive reforms in healthcare. You and I both know that competition amongst businesses (however immoral you see this) will eventually drive down costs, especially costs relative to the quality of the goods/services. Not just not technology. Cosmetic surgery is a great example. We don't "need" cosmetic surgery but it's available (though some people take it too far) and the costs have been reduced over the years.... Lasik is a great example of free-market oriented healthcare.
ReplyDeleteSo, after implementing....an actual heavy basis of free trade in healthcare, I think we would see the positive results. We don't have a free market healthcare system. Most of if subsidized. The rest is paid by a bad idea in the first place: insurance. Although needed in case of disasterous things, it is now used differently.
You are correct about many still unable to afford healthcare after implementing these ideas. Government and charities should take over. Instead of mostly government that controls what laws, regulations, (now) prices, taxation, etc. which is contributing to this inflation. Not to mention lawsuits and malpractice insurance.....
I see local/state/federal government as a response to their own doing.