http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/15/news/economy/aetna-obamacare/ This is the reason EVERYONE was forced to buy insurance, because the money from the healthy was required to offset the outlay of costs of the sick. Wait a minute, a few more years??? I thought this fiasco was supposed to be self-funding by reducing the cost of health care? Huh, so those vilified experts that were saying this would actually cost the taxpayer billions more were actually right? And those experts that pointed out that it was more likely to be the sicker uninsured that received subsidized healthcare, seem to have been correct as well?
For those of us that manage a business the self-funding idea made you scratch your head and say "Right"....Now of course this will get thrown to the political pundits pointing fingers at each other to whose fault this is but the reality is it was never going to work on the basis offered. The vilified experts who were labeled as uncaring and out of touch seemed to know what they were talking about doesn't.... Great topic Kes..
To make it "budget neutral" they relied on 10 yrs. of premiums for 6 years of coverage. Anyone see a little problem? And then there's the "risk" problem. "Insurance" is purchasing protection against a POSSIBLE future risk occurring. When you allow those that have already experienced the risk ie. pre-existing conditions it is not really insurance but subsidized occurrence reimbursement. The model requires the young healthy portion of the population to pay premiums to offset claims by the unhealthy. However they can choose to pay a fine much smaller than the premium and if they do become ill they can always purchase insurance later even though they have a pre existing condition.
Now that we've seen the CNN take, here's the WSJ: http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-unstable-economics-in-obamas-health-law-1471452938 And yet, you see the Left trying to paint the 11 million people that now have insurance that they say otherwise would have gone without, as success. And here is the REAL reason behind the ACA: a baby step toward nationalized healthcare. The predicted failure of this system is starting to be laid at the feet of Conservatives (surprised?). To fix it, we must throw more money at it, and give even more control over to the government that forced the problem on us in the first place.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2016/08/18/obamacare-and-the-increasing-politicization-of-health-care/#6f5ef3e91bb3 This is new. Before yesterday, I didn't realize that Obama was paying the insurance companies under a separate line item to ensure the premiums stayed low for the exchange plans. Incredible.
:roll: Our country is now paying the price for impeaching Nixon and Bill Clinton for trivial reasons. We now have a rogue president who is making up laws and rules out of thin air and spending public money as if it were his own, but the impeachment process will never be used again...
I'm not sure what is trivial about lying under oath as President but it is always the coverup more than the "crime". If the healthcare market was completely portable I think competition would bring costs under control. I know competition sure works in my field.
Krebs, welcome back. Agreed, which was one of the pillars of the Republican plan. The problem has been that the innate shortcoming of how Obamacare was put together has actually REDUCED competition, not improved it.
If he sent you a PM here on theskybox, just look up between the hyperlinks for Profile and Log Out... there should be something about you having a message.
Kes, Thank you. Good to be back. My insurance guy used to visit me at my business every year with a spreadsheet with 10-12 health insurance options to consider representing at least eight different carriers. Now I am reduced to two options from two carriers.