Obamacare is bad for health cost

I studied economics. Demand and supply determine price. The supply is fixed in the health sector. The number of hospitals don't change. The number of doctors don't change. The number of nurses don't change. The number of medical supplies and equipment don't change. So if more people are forced to buy health insurance because of the ACA individual mandate tax penalty, then demand rises without a change in supply. More demand, same supply, results in higher price, not lower price as Obama promised.

Are you posting from the past?

Obama is done. If big hero Trump really wanted to, Obamacare would be gone. He could've started day one. But Twitter is so much fun, right?

originally posted by: Jefferton
Are you posting from the past?

Obama is done. If big hero Trump really wanted to, Obamacare would be gone. He could've started day one. But Twitter is so much fun, right?

Presidents don't make laws.

a reply to: zupdo

So you studied economics? Did you pass? Cause your simplistic model is as flawed as it could possibly be. Here is the reality and all the mechanisms you either overlooked or failed to consider. The uninsured seek care at hospital ED's and the hospital absorbs most of the cost of that care. Hospitals (especially EDs) are closing at an unprecedented rate --- especially in the lower socio-economic areas. That's a bad thing --- unless you don't mind driving for 2hrs to find the nearest ED when your child gets sick in the middle of the night. Also, as you mentioned, the costs of providing service are more or less fixed. Insurance companies also cap what they will pay. The entire concept behind the dreaded 'Mandate' (we have one here in MA created by Romney --- you know, that Republican guy) is that healthier people (who consume less healthcare) would pay into the system so the insurance company payout/intake ratio would go down and they would be able to keep premiums under control. But take away the mandate, younger/healthier people who don't feel they need insurance won't buy it, the payout/intake ratio goes up, and premiums for the pool who do buy insurance will have to go up to make up the difference. That's how it works. And buckle-up cause premiums WILL go up now.

a reply to: jtma508

I'm a Master's graduate. And Romney is a fool. The free market is the most efficient. Any perturbation to the free market, such as an arbitrary tax, will decrease efficiency.

a reply to: zupdo

Gee, you're just figuring this out now?????

Is 'Delayed Reaction' a course topic in Economics?

a reply to: zupdo

You need to study more. The people who own the hospitals own the healthcare insurance providers. When you have a cartel or monopoly, it is in the shareholder's interest to gouge the consumer. THERE ARE NO FREE MARKETS IN THIS COUNTRY.

The lobbyists force the politicians to pass laws creating cartels and monopolies in exchange for campaign financing. The lobbyists own the politicians. The CEOs own the lobbyists. You seem like a smart guy. But money talks, everything you post about market idealism is naive BS.

The ACA did absolutely nothing to curb or cause the rise of healthcare costs. Before and after the ACA healthcare premiums have been rising 5 to 10 times more than inflation for the last 35 years. Our healthcare system makes Pentagon $20,000 toilet seat corruption look like child's play.

a reply to: zupdo

Want to fix health care?

Start looking at the legal and justice system!

The ONLY thing health care can use to hang its hat on to justify the extreme (outrageous) costs of healthcare is insurance and lawsuits. If it wasn't for that...you'd have a competitive free-market in healthcare.

Fully 80% of healthcare costs are based on legal issues, not the healthcare itself.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: zupdo
Want to fix health care?
Start looking at the legal and justice system!
The ONLY thing health care can use to hang its hat on to justify the extreme (outrageous) costs of healthcare is insurance and lawsuits. If it wasn't for that...you'd have a competitive free-market in healthcare.

Any real evidence to support your assertion. I hear this one a lot but other than conjecture can you point to anyone who has actually analyzed what is going on. Maybe the number of lawsuits has been dropping has hospitals do a better job protecting themselves.

The highest estimates I've seen is tort reform would lower premiums by 2% to 3%. A drop in the bucket compared to what is else that is cause the consumer to be gouged and reamed up the butt requiring MORE healthcare.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Yeah...TONS!! But don't ask me...go ask your doctor!

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: dfnj2015
Yeah...TONS!! But don't ask me...go ask your doctor!

Again, pure conjecture. The highest estimates I've seen is tort reform would lower premiums by 2% to 3%. A drop in the bucket compared to what is else that is cause the consumer to be gouged and reamed up the butt requiring MORE healthcare.

Maybe you are right. But I think it needs to be studied to determine if tort reform would be effective public policy. You know, big government sciencee kinds of stuff.

originally posted by: zupdo
I studied economics. Demand and supply determine price. The supply is fixed in the health sector. The number of hospitals don't change. The number of doctors don't change. The number of nurses don't change. The number of medical supplies and equipment don't change. So if more people are forced to buy health insurance because of the ACA individual mandate tax penalty, then demand rises without a change in supply. More demand, same supply, results in higher price, not lower price as Obama promised.

Amount of medical equipment is not fixed.

Hospital capacity not fixed.

Number of doctors/ nurses not fixed.

Also if really you got a Master in economics and belief the market is always the best solution then you should ask for a refund. Economics does not make that claim.

a reply to: dfnj2015

The highest estimates I've seen is tort reform would lower premiums by 2% to 3%. A drop in the bucket compared to what is else that is cause the consumer to be gouged and reamed up the butt requiring MORE healthcare.

That is categorical BULL-S#! You know who came up with that figure? Healthcare insurance providers and legislators...and who are they??? Attorneys. (mic drop)

originally posted by: zupdo
I studied economics. Demand and supply determine price. The supply is fixed in the health sector. The number of hospitals don't change. The number of doctors don't change. The number of nurses don't change. The number of medical supplies and equipment don't change. So if more people are forced to buy health insurance because of the ACA individual mandate tax penalty, then demand rises without a change in supply. More demand, same supply, results in higher price, not lower price as Obama promised.

Awww look. Someone just finished their Macro Economics 201 class and thinks they know everything about how government policy affects the economy. Cute!

a reply to: zupdo

Better late than never!

Obamacare was designed and created to be costly and bad.

It was supposed to usher in single payer.

That, right there, is probably the single-most reason why it was a good thing Hillary was not elected.


That being said, it appears as though congress will try to replace Obamacare with another big-government spending boondoggle.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: zupdo

Better late than never!

Obamacare was designed and created to be costly and bad.

It was supposed to usher in single payer.

That, right there, is probably the single-most reason why it was a good thing Hillary was not elected.


That being said, it appears as though congress will try to replace Obamacare with another big-government spending boondoggle.

You make a good point. Even if everyone is forced to buy health insurance, it is the industry that sets the price. The industry can charge 1 million dollars for each person's health insurance and the government can charge each person 2 million dollars for refusing to buy health insurance.

a reply to: zupdo

The worst provision of Obamacare (other than the mandate) was government setting the price for treatment.

If a doctor or medical facility charged less then the government would not reimburse for Medicare.

a reply to: zupdo

Why doesn't employee numbers change? Why would the number of doctors nurses or hospital employees remain stagnant.
I live in a military area but the health care industry is our biggest employer. Sentara and Riverside are both hugh health conglomerates. They advertise every single day for employees.
They are also building. A few years ago they built a thirty acre medical center for Sentara. This year they are expanding an existing complex and refurbishing hospitals at others for Riverside. There are also smaller medical installations and what we call doc in a box emergency offices in many neighborhoods. This area is also a big golf and retirement community and us old folk need our doctors.
It seems those numbers aren't as stagnant as you want to think. I notice you didn't say you're an economist...Only that you studied economics. You don't even say at what level you studied.

Obama care had people lined up as late as last week to enroll. Despite the fact that trump keeps chipping away at it.
trump only wants to destroy everything Obama ever did because he's jealous that the black dude is more well liked and was more effective as a president.
SORRY...

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: zupdo

Why doesn't employee numbers change? Why would the number of doctors nurses or hospital employees remain stagnant.
I live in a military area but the health care industry is our biggest employer. Sentara and Riverside are both hugh health conglomerates. They advertise every single day for employees.
They are also building. A few years ago they built a thirty acre medical center for Sentara. This year they are expanding an existing complex and refurbishing hospitals at others for Riverside. There are also smaller medical installations and what we call doc in a box emergency offices in many neighborhoods. This area is also a big golf and retirement community and us old folk need our doctors.
It seems those numbers aren't as stagnant as you want to think. I notice you didn't say you're an economist...Only that you studied economics. You don't even say at what level you studied.

Obama care had people lined up as late as last week to enroll. Despite the fact that trump keeps chipping away at it.
trump only wants to destroy everything Obama ever did because he's jealous that the black dude is more well liked and was more effective as a president.
SORRY...

Doctors take talent and many years of training. Very few people can ever become doctors. That's why supply does not change when demand rose when individual mandate SUDDENLY forced EVERYONE to buy health insurance. The shock to the system was so big and so sudden that price rose rapidly. Maybe, given decades, the system can adjust, but voters won't have it.

a reply to: Jefferton

Obama is done doing what? He's not president any longer, of course. He was elected by a majority vote in both the popular and electoral college votes, which I know is so important to some people...for the maximum amount of time allowable by law and he still is relevant and received by world leaders as a civilian guest.
I don't think they will extend those curtesies to trump once he's no longer president. The UK doesn't even want him to pay a visit as president. They sure won't receive him as a civilian guest. He's like your drunk uncle no one wants to host because he pees on the furniture. (Oops did I go there...Yup I did)