The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

[Old Pio]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Yep, I'm sure one has died under such circumstances. That totally justifies a massive. un-read, poorly thought out, more poorly implemented, partisan overhaul of the entire system

"If even one injun is offended by the term "redskin,". . . . . ."

[Old Pio]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Nothing has happened, except knowing all the price increases coming, and of course those who got cancellation notices. I was given a letter that clearly states premiums are going up as a direct result of ACA. So I don't consider that nothing. When will we see the premiums go down like we were all promised?

I wonder if the genius who designed a "health care" plan that relies heavily on younger, healthier people joining up (to keep rates from skyrocketing) but allowed "children" up to age 26 to be enrolled on their parents' plans will step forward to take a bow?

[Old Pio]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Good, catch on all they want. They've already caught on to the alternative (Cruz) and they don't like that either. One thing is for certain in all this mess. Obama would have been better off if he had let the Republicans kill this bill before it ever became law.

Seems Microsoft and Amazon offered to help with the website and the Government turned them down. Whoever made the decisions about who to hire to develop this website might be the most incompetent moron ever to serve in Washington.

That's all it is with you *******s isn't it? Politics. Winning and losing. What's good for the country is a distant second (if considered at all). Fire up the base. Keep the lofos ignorant. Scream racism every chance you get and keep yourself and your pals (including Mooshell's) feeding at the public trough. The real goal here is a single payer system. And almost none of the *******s will admit it. Benny Hill's humor was based significantly on how lousy British socialized medicine is. Pretty soon, if you guys have your way, we'll be laughing at ourselves.

[Old Pio]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Maybe if the ama encouraged more medical schools rather than shoring up their monopoly, I'd be sympathetic. But since med schools, unlike law schools, are not money makers for colleges, the shortage is not lack of qualified people but lack of placement opportunities. I have no problem with nurse practitioners taking over more duties.

An expert on medical schools, too. Who'd a thunk it? Naturally you want to expand the role of nurse practitioners. More work (and fees) for bottom feeders. Besides, those "medical" schools in the Bahamas churn out lots of "doctors" for you to chose from.

[Tiggsy]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

At this very moment nothings happened. Policies don't even end till Jan. 1.

And given that the kids till 26 and can't lose insurance for pre-existing is already in place I'd have to say yes, we are better off at this very moment.

Nothing has happened, except knowing all the price increases coming, and of course those who got cancellation notices. I was given a letter that clearly states premiums are going up as a direct result of ACA. So I don't consider that nothing. When will we see the premiums go down like we were all promised?

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

From the Huffington Post:

The document, obtained by The Associated Press, shows that administration officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services were concerned that a lack of testing posed a potentially "high" security risk for the HealthCare.gov website serving 36 states. It was granted a temporary security certificate so it could operate.

Security issues are a new concern for the troubled HealthCare.gov website. If they cannot be resolved, they could prove to be more serious than the long list of technical problems the administration is trying to address.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

So does that mean you think this, at this very moment, is better than had we done nothing? I'm not so sure you'll find a whole lot of agreement on that one.

At this very moment nothings happened. Policies don't even end till Jan. 1.

And given that the kids till 26 and can't lose insurance for pre-existing is already in place I'd have to say yes, we are better off at this very moment.

[Tiggsy]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

That did wonders for the millions of uninsured and the 3 out of 5 bankruptcies that occur due to Health Care. Try again.

So does that mean you think this, at this very moment, is better than had we done nothing? I'm not so sure you'll find a whole lot of agreement on that one.

[unofan]

, partisan overhaul of the entire system

A plan based on a heritage foundation proposal in response to HillaryCare and first implemented by a republican governor is partisan alright. Just not the way you think.

[LynahFan]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Cause no one in America has ever died due to lack of treatment caused by an inability to pay or an insurance company screwing them over.

Yep, I'm sure one has died under such circumstances. That totally justifies a massive. un-read, poorly thought out, more poorly implemented, partisan overhaul of the entire system

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Here's a non-partisan, non-sectarian plan that would work for many people and not for everyone.

It seems to me that we would be far better off segmenting the delivery system so that we use what works best for each group, rather than force everyone into an inferior result that doesn't work at all for anyone.

Two basic concepts:

-- the risk premium that people pay is proportionate to their risk profile.
-- we pay attention to what already works well

So, for people with high-risk conditions, they are segregated into a high-risk pool and receive supplemental support from some other source, be it charity or government (I'd prefer the former over the latter but let's not get distracted over that detail for now).


The basic design of life insurance works very well. People are going to die someday, that's a given. The risk of dying increases as one gets older, with only a few exceptions. Therefore, a well-designed life insurance policy works as follows:
-- at the outset, the premium is higher than is needed to cover the pure risk. A relatively small portion of the premium covers the pure risk, the rest goes to "self-insurance" in the form of policy reserves.
-- the second year, only the difference between the insurance benefit and the cash value is the risk amount. In other words, the risk amount has gone down slightly. At the same time, the cost to insure the risk, per unit, has gone up. The difference between the risk premium and the total premium adds to the "self-insurance" in the form of higher policy reserves.
-- every year, the process repeats in a virtuous circle. The risk amount declines as the risk premium for unit of risk increases, the "self-insurance" in the form of policy cash values keeps growing, until eventually the policy is almost all cash value and very little pure risk. The premium has remained level and affordable throughout the entire life cycle of the policy.


For health insurance, you break the linkage between employment and coverage, and open up the marketplace to association-sponsored insurance, so that people can pool risk into categories, just like it works with life insurance: smokers pay more than non-smokers, etc.

You start with a relatively low deductible and the premium exceeds the pure risk profile so that the excess builds up in a cash reserve that you carry forward on a tax-deferred basis year after year. As the cash reserve ("self-insurance") builds up, you increase the deductible proportionately, so that the risk premium per unit of risk declines commensurately.

It's beyond the scope of a few paragraphs to outline all the technical details (for example, in a life insurance policy, the self-insurance portion is allocated by policy; in the group health program, the self-insurance portion is allocated proportionately across the covered group, since some people never submit claims while others submit claims more than once in their lifetimes). This plan might also break our reliance on Medicare to insure all people over 65; instead people would get an option (you also can program a life insurance policy to last a lifetime or to last for a limited number of years).



The main issue of PPACA was never about helping people, it is only about controlling people, making sure everyone behaves as Our Great Leader dictates. That should be obvious by now.

[unofan]

Correct-and the government's answer to the last part of your post will be to allow non qualified people to practice as if they were doctors and provide what they (the government) feels is what you need as care. Funny thing, when the government does this, is it not practicing medicine without a license?

Maybe if the ama encouraged more medical schools rather than shoring up their monopoly, I'd be sympathetic. But since med schools, unlike law schools, are not money makers for colleges, the shortage is not lack of qualified people but lack of placement opportunities. I have no problem with nurse practitioners taking over more duties.

[unofan]

So much better to be solvent but dead? Like Canadians.

Cause no one in America has ever died due to lack of treatment caused by an inability to pay or an insurance company screwing them over.

[goldy_331]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Perspective? Perspective is every other westernized country had socialized medicine that works. We have socialized medicine for retirees that works. Yet You want me to accept that medically caused bankruptcies are okay because at least the person isn't dead? Fark that.

So much better to be solvent but dead? Like Canadians.

[DrDemento]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Very similar to my experience living in the UK for 3 years. Long delays for appointments is just another form of rationing, which is unavoidable in a resource-limited environment. The US's current (previous?) system simply rations by ability to pay or obtain health insurance. It's not entirely clear what will end up being the "rationing" factor under Obamacare (but there will be one, or more) - long delays will probably be a part of it, as fewer people choose to become doctors due to the decreased profitability and increased regulation.

Correct-and the government's answer to the last part of your post will be to allow non qualified people to practice as if they were doctors and provide what they (the government) feels is what you need as care. Funny thing, when the government does this, is it not practicing medicine without a license?