Responses to GOP Congresspersons Facebook request for ACA horror Stories....

a reply to: FyreByrd

I'm sure some might be.

Can you show a couple?

Maybe some are HMOs?

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: FyreByrd

I'm sure some might be.

Can you show a couple?

Maybe some are HMOs?

No but I can so you the LAW

The ACA establishes that the maximum deductible in a non-grandfathered benefit plan be no greater than $2,000 for an individual and $4,000 for a family. This requirement goes into effect with a group’s first effective date on or after Jan. 1, 2014.

so if you want your old, non-compliant plan with a higher dectible, you can have it as long as it meets the other minimum requirements.

www5.cbia.com...

a reply to: FyreByrd

I've been saying since the beginning that this system CAN'T convert to a single payer. This system was implemented because a single payer system would put all the insurance companies out of work. This translates into thousands of lost jobs across the country, which with the way our economy was when this bill went into effect, would have destroyed what was left of it.

I wouldn't count on a single payer system out of this system. Instead, I'd count on the politicians trying to make this system work as desperately as they can. I really don't see the ACA getting better until politicians are willing to gut the health insurance industry.

originally posted by: Metallicus
The Obama shills are active. These are people are paid to post these fake stories.

Indeed...and you would be surprised how many are them..

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: FyreByrd

I've been saying since the beginning that this system CAN'T convert to a single payer. This system was implemented because a single payer system would put all the insurance companies out of work. This translates into thousands of lost jobs across the country, which with the way our economy was when this bill went into effect, would have destroyed what was left of it.

I wouldn't count on a single payer system out of this system. Instead, I'd count on the politicians trying to make this system work as desperately as they can. I really don't see the ACA getting better until politicians are willing to gut the health insurance industry.

I do understand that concern. As with modern government pactise a large part of administating any single payer system would probably be outsourced to the very companies that are administrating them now - a very bad idea (outsourcing what should be government employees work - in any industry). So not all that many jobs will be lost. What will be lost would be the "business administrative & executive" jobs. In some instances - actual medical people could or would go back into patient care positions (of which we are saddly lacking).

It would not be throwing the Insurance Industry under the bus. But companies and industries do have cycles and die. And Health Care is a case where it needs to die. Railroads were abdondoned with the lost of jobs, Manufacturing nearly in toto was abandoned.

I don't really think it's a valid agrument against a single payer system.

a reply to: FyreByrd

That's not for me or you to determine though. That is for the politicians to determine and frankly, I see it unlikely that a politician in this political climate will willingly vote to destroy an industry. That is unless who knows that the bill he is voting for won't go through and he does it for pandering points.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: FyreByrd

That's not for me or you to determine though. That is for the politicians to determine and frankly, I see it unlikely that a politician in this political climate will willingly vote to destroy an industry. That is unless who knows that the bill he is voting for won't go through and he does it for pandering points.

You are correct that's it will not be decided by either of us. And agree that in this day of Mega-Dollar Lobbying and Corporate sponsered representatives (mostly), it's unlikely that an wealthy industry would be dismantled as were rail and manufacturing and other less wealthy industries of the past. It's what is so scary about 'too big to fail', it really should read 'too rich and lobbyiest heavy to fail.

And, for me, just giving up isn't an option. Somethings are worth fighting for even when you know you can't win; however this one can be won - it's done around the world, succesfully - why is the US so dreadfully backwards and becoming more so everyday.