Page 59 of 64
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 1:40 pm
by studentper
KCMax wrote:The conservative alternative I've heard floated (by pundits, not by politicians) is tax credits for catastrophic coverage (essentially making the premiums free), and making the tax credit for employer-provided care flat, so there is not an incentive to get expensive plans. In theory, employees would be "cost-conscious" and competition would drive down prices.
But there's no mandate, so I would guess the catastrophic coverage would get pretty expensive (on the taxpayer dime), and many people still wouldn't get it, leaving them SOL when they get their hospital bill.
I don't think the catastrophic coverage would get expensive. It's fairly cheap in the 2013 market with no incentive, so the tax credit for purchasing shouldn't increase the price.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 1:44 pm
by KCMax
Wouldn't the tax incentive get more risky people into the pool? If you're lowering the cost, you're drawing in more people. But there's no mandate. So the people likely to sign up are those with families, older people, more people with a health risk. I can't imagine young, healthy people are going to sign up for catastrophic coverage even if its free.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:00 pm
by studentper
I don't think a catastrophic policy would benefit someone with a chronic condition. I would think that person would use the tax credit to pay for part of a better policy. I think you're right that almost nothing will convince a young, healthy person to buy insurance. At some incentive point, though, you would start getting BCBS giving away something to young healthy people to get their tax incentive money.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:30 pm
by KCMax
studentper wrote: almost nothing will convince a young, healthy person to buy insurance.
ORLY?
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:44 pm
by FangKC
90 percent of those who were invited to visit healthcare.gov a second time have been able to set up accounts.
http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/n ... 9&page=all
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:09 pm
by FangKC
Enrollments exceeding expectations in states that set up their own health care exchanges.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-oba ... z2l5OEYWmJ
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:55 pm
by FangKC
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 12:23 pm
by grovester
I bet you could!
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 12:58 pm
by chingon
harbinger911 wrote:
I could give you a specific list of millions that want Obamacare destroyed and their insurance coverage back.
And, amazingly enough, said list of millions would be a better read than your average post.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 1:31 pm
by aknowledgeableperson
The ACA will only succeed if enough young folks sign up for coverage instead of paying the fine. To paraphrase one person's comments on TV:
"Thank you young folks for supporting the older generation with your generous donations to Medicare, Social Security, and now health care for those under 65. It couldn't be done without you."
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:16 pm
by chaglang
aknowledgeableperson wrote:To paraphrase one person's comments on TV
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:31 pm
by KCMax
aknowledgeableperson wrote:The ACA will only succeed if enough young folks sign up for coverage instead of paying the fine. To paraphrase one person's comments on TV:
"Thank you young folks for supporting the older generation with your generous donations to Medicare, Social Security, and now health care for those under 65. It couldn't be done without you."
Fun fact #1: young people, often become old people
Fun fact #2: when young people without insurance get emergency care, we all get to pay for it!
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:52 pm
by aknowledgeableperson
"Fun fact #1: young people, often become old people"
But that is years down the road. Thought the creed for the young was YOLO and this takes money from that.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 5:02 pm
by KCMax
aknowledgeableperson wrote:"Fun fact #1: young people, often become old people"
But that is years down the road. Thought the creed for the young was YOLO and this takes money from that.
YOLO is so 2010. Now its "where's the beef?" and "too legit to quit."
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 5:09 pm
by aknowledgeableperson
I used YOLO because it was applied by many to Miley and why she did what she did at that infamous awards show.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 5:46 pm
by FangKC
In almost every society, and period of history, it has been the responsibility of the young and healthy to take care of the old and sick. It's just a basic part of human existence. We age everyday, and eventually we start to fail. There is no getting around it. Humans of all periods have recognized that.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:30 pm
by phuqueue
harbinger911 wrote:
Not a personal attack at you specifically Fang, but the left just doesn't seem to get it.
From the article..."
In short, Americans are showing more patience than the lawmakers and talking heads who have declared the law an unmitigated disaster. After all, the exchange marketplace is barely six weeks old — and it's now showing signs of improvement."
The insane insensitivity from the left towards the tens of millions of people that have had their insurance cancelled is appalling.
Tens of millions of Americans have had their coverage dropped and millions feel like killing this failed Govt over it.
Does that sound like Americans are showing more patience than lawmakers and talking heads?
Just "who" (specifically) are the Americans showing patience with it?
They are an anonymous majority of careless and low-information people who want to seem "nice" when polled with a carefully worded question.
I could give you a specific list of millions that want Obamacare destroyed and their insurance coverage back.
12-15 million people with garbage policies will be forced to buy real insurance. Boo fucking hoo. I've never heard you rail against the insane insensitivity from the right towards the 50 million people who never had insurance in the first place.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 9:41 am
by knucklehead
FangKC wrote:In almost every society, and period of history, it has been the responsibility of the young and healthy to take care of the old and sick. It's just a basic part of human existence. We age everyday, and eventually we start to fail. There is no getting around it. Humans of all periods have recognized that.
Excellent point - what you have to understand is the owners of our political and economic systems detest anything that smacks of the population becoming self-aware and organizing. They push the "everyone is trying to steal from you" meme to keep the population divided. In this case they are litterly trying to convience people that their own parents are stealing from them.
These tactics have been honed over hundreds of years. Colonialism was the laboratory. How do you think a small country like England controlled half the world? The tactics work at an emotional level. They don't have to make sense. All they need is a dedicated bunch of collaborators in high places (especially the media) to push the themes. Large parts of the population understand the tactics are total BS - but the collaborators in high places work hard to create the impression that the BS themes are the "concensus view" and any one that disputes them is some kind of weirdo.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 11:23 am
by pash
.
Re: The Health Care Debate
Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 7:25 pm
by FangKC
We also have to realize that society has changed. Parents and adult children prefer not to live together any longer. In many cases, it's impractical because adult children don't even live in the same city as their parents, because we are a mobile society. People no longer take in their poor relatives, aging aunts and uncles, out-of-work siblings and their families, etc.
In addition, in most households, both spouses work, so it would be hard for one of them to stay at home taking care of an aging relative.
Our society has thus adjusted to how we care for others in society: the aged and the poorer members of our families and communities.
People are also becoming more and more fed up with having their health insurance, and retirement benefits, tied up with working for one single employer. In many situations, it stifles innovation and keep people slaves to their current job. People can't leave a job in many cases because of the insurance plan offered. Even if they hate the job. They can't leave to start businesses, because of the insurance issue.
Many employers are also wanting to get out of the providing health insurance game. It requires too much in financial resources, and time, to provide that benefit.
I find it amusing that so many people are freaking out about 5 percent of the population having to buy health insurance. I don't know why they want people to remain uninsured. These people end up using the emergency room like a free clinic. It costs everyone who is paying for health care an average of $1,200 annually in extra fees and higher billed prices for health care services to provide this uncompensated care to uninsured people, because hospitals just end up raising prices on paying customers and those with insurance. I don't fault the uninsured per se, especially when four of the top 10 richest Americans are Wal-Mart heirs, who don't provide a living wage, or health insurance to the vast majority of Wal-Mart workers, who then have to turn to food stamps, Medicaid, and emergency rooms to survive.
So just remember, every month, most Americans are paying $100 extra just so five percent of the population can have the freedom of being uninsured.