It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obamacare Premiums Rise as Insurers Fret Over Law’s Shaky Future

page: 3
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2017 @ 03:58 PM
link   
the minute the conversation came up everyone that has ever had to deal with the VA pretty much went... F#$% ..

the fed has failed at healthcare for what 50+ years..in a much smaller pool of users.

Once they started the bleeding heart think of the children style conversation this was inevitable... it needed to be 100% federal control or leave it to the free market, this gawd awful hybrid that we have was doomed to kickbacks, payoffs, and back room deals before the ink was even used to write it.




posted on May, 9 2017 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Edumakated

Medical insurance is an issue too.

There is a reason you can get both eyes lasik'ed for $600. Those are your EYES.
We don't hear tort reform,
we don't hear no one can afford it,
we don't hear regulations raise prices.
It just gets done at a price the market can afford.

Anyone that does not want single payer needs to endorse an out law on any medical insurance.

The free rein of insurance/medical must come to an end, and it will when it collapses. Just look at costs in other nations. Evidence is right there.


What you are missing is that insurance = third party payor. Prices of elective medical care have gone down because there is no third party involved whether it is government or an insurance company. In other words, people are paying out of pocket so the market is functioning because the purchaser (YOU) are incentivized to shop around for the best price because it is actually your money that is being spent.

With insurance, single payor, or any kind of third party payor that might be involved, the consumer has little to no incentive to care what the services costs because in their mind, they aren't footing the bill. As a result, you see price inflation.

This is also why college is out of control because tuition reflects third party payor in the short term (student loans) not what people can actually pay out of pocket.



Except in other countries (taxpayer funded) that have better health outcomes than the US. and do it for less than 1/2 the cost.

And the regulations for lasik surgery must still be huge and damning like with any medical procedure. And that would lead to it being prohibitively expensive----but it isn't.

The only real solution (from evidence in other countries) is single payer-or out law insurance and let the free market adjust.


You need to stop believing that snip about other countries having better outcomes. Single payor does not lower costs. It just hides it better. The free market lowers costs.

My sister in law needs fertility treatments. It is an experimental procedure. Insurance won't cover it. The Doctor quoted her $45k at one point cash. She said screw that and started shopping around. The doctor got wind that she was calling other doctors (he had to forward her medical records) and now all of a sudden is saying he can do it for $15k because he rather not lose her as a client (he'd get great publishing and other kudos) if it is successful.

This is the power of the free market. This is who Lasik, Boob Jobs, and all the other non-covered surgeries have been able to lower costs to something reasonable.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

We are at a tipping point.

The costs in the US far outweigh the costs in other countries. The only thing I question I have is are the corps willing to drive the whole system into the ground? Or are they going to control their insatiable desire for constant profit growth?

I think it will crash. The monthly costs are now not doable, and people will start to stop paying.

We need to look at what works our system does not work from a cost and medical outcome stand point.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 04:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: seasonal

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Edumakated

Medical insurance is an issue too.

There is a reason you can get both eyes lasik'ed for $600. Those are your EYES.
We don't hear tort reform,
we don't hear no one can afford it,
we don't hear regulations raise prices.
It just gets done at a price the market can afford.

Anyone that does not want single payer needs to endorse an out law on any medical insurance.

The free rein of insurance/medical must come to an end, and it will when it collapses. Just look at costs in other nations. Evidence is right there.


What you are missing is that insurance = third party payor. Prices of elective medical care have gone down because there is no third party involved whether it is government or an insurance company. In other words, people are paying out of pocket so the market is functioning because the purchaser (YOU) are incentivized to shop around for the best price because it is actually your money that is being spent.

With insurance, single payor, or any kind of third party payor that might be involved, the consumer has little to no incentive to care what the services costs because in their mind, they aren't footing the bill. As a result, you see price inflation.

This is also why college is out of control because tuition reflects third party payor in the short term (student loans) not what people can actually pay out of pocket.



Except in other countries (taxpayer funded) that have better health outcomes than the US. and do it for less than 1/2 the cost.

And the regulations for lasik surgery must still be huge and damning like with any medical procedure. And that would lead to it being prohibitively expensive----but it isn't.

The only real solution (from evidence in other countries) is single payer-or out law insurance and let the free market adjust.


You need to stop believing that snip about other countries having better outcomes. Single payor does not lower costs. It just hides it better. The free market lowers costs.

My sister in law needs fertility treatments. It is an experimental procedure. Insurance won't cover it. The Doctor quoted her $45k at one point cash. She said screw that and started shopping around. The doctor got wind that she was calling other doctors (he had to forward her medical records) and now all of a sudden is saying he can do it for $15k because he rather not lose her as a client (he'd get great publishing and other kudos) if it is successful.

This is the power of the free market. This is who Lasik, Boob Jobs, and all the other non-covered surgeries have been able to lower costs to something reasonable.



Where do you get your health outcome info from--I mean a source. And all the procedures you are talking about are heavily regulated with govt regs. They are still affordable. So is the regs not really a reason for out of sight costs?

How is the costs hidden in single payer? The taxes they pay are on products---what is hidden?



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: SBMcG

Result of the supreme court is they did not strike it down, and at he end of the day that is what matters.


The SCOTUS ruling on Obamacare had nothing to do with it being made constitutional for the Federal government to provide healthcare nor did it establish healthcare as an individual right.

All it did was agree that Obamacare (which is not a single-payer "universal" system to begin with) was a tax and that Congress has absolute authority to levy taxes.

Again, if you want to prove that fact to yourself, take the Obamacare SCOTUS ruling with you as case law and sue the Federal government in Federal Court claiming that the ruling granted you an individual right to healthcare and mandated the Federal government (in other words, the top 20% of tax payers who already pay all the taxes) pay for it.

If that were possible, the liberal wealth-redistribution thieves would have done it long ago.

As of today, there exists no constitutional authority, legal precedent, Federal case law, or Federal statute mandating the Federal government provide healthcare to anyone or granting the right of Federally-provided healthcare to the individual.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: SBMcG

regardless of the SC doing what they did, the ACA really made people realize how much medical is in the US.

I think O did want to have a single payer-medicaid-care for all.

Seems like we have 3 roads

1. Status quo- medical collapse

2. Remove insurance and let the market adjust

3. Tax payer funded medical system

The US has the most expensive medical system by far and worse medical outcomes than Columbia.
edit on 9-5-2017 by seasonal because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-5-2017 by seasonal because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 06:58 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

The US has more effective care than basically any country on the planet.
www.commonwealthfund.org...

What you refer to is garbage. People all over the world come here because our outcomes are the best. It just costs too much, preventing a large portion of the population from utilizing it, giving those who are not using the system bad outcomes.



posted on May, 15 2017 @ 10:55 PM
link   
The LIBERAL state of New York has been unable to stop double-digit ObamaCare premium increases the past 3 years. It's looking like 2018 will be the fourth year in a row.

NY Insurers seek big rate increases for 2018: nypost.com...



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 10:45 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 10:45 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 10:45 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 10:46 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 10:46 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 18 2017 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: seasonal

The US has more effective care than basically any country on the planet.
www.commonwealthfund.org...

What you refer to is garbage. People all over the world come here because our outcomes are the best. It just costs too much, preventing a large portion of the population from utilizing it, giving those who are not using the system bad outcomes.


Your link shows that the US , despite spending twice as much per capita as most other countries, comes dead last overall.

It's highest result is third place for one metric ( let's mention again spending twice as much).



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join