CBO report finds Republican healthcare bill will lead to 22 million Americans losing insurance

So in other words, ACA forced 45 million people who didn't want insurance to pay for it as a "tax", and now only half of those are able to get rid of it under the current Senate plan (or at least the CBO says so, though they were MASSIVELY wrong about Obamacare)?

Differential news reader wrote:

(or at least the CBO says so, though they were MASSIVELY wrong about Obamacare)?

The present system is unsustainable.

Differential news reader wrote:

So in other words, ACA forced 45 million people who didn't want insurance to pay for it as a "tax", and now only half of those are able to get rid of it under the current Senate plan (or at least the CBO says so, though they were MASSIVELY wrong about Obamacare)?

One reason they didn't want "insurance" is that (contrary to the opinion of rent-seeking AMA) they know that health insurance does not equal health care access.

Differential news reader wrote:

So in other words, ACA forced 45 million people who didn't want insurance to pay for it as a "tax", and now only half of those are able to get rid of it under the current Senate plan ... ?

Yep, that's the reason CBO gives.

CBO: primarily because the penalty for not having insurance would be eliminated

The other half pay double? wrote:

Differential news reader wrote:

So in other words, ACA forced 45 million people who didn't want insurance to pay for it as a "tax", and now only half of those are able to get rid of it under the current Senate plan ... ?

Yep, that's the reason CBO gives.

CBO: primarily because the penalty for not having insurance would be eliminated

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDRr1DkUAAEBhZn.jpg:large

Yup, and fewer healthy young people buying health insurance will force premiums up for everyone else. Dictionary definition of death spiral.

Combine this with deep cuts to medicaid subsidies (Obamacare subsidies 400 percent of poverty line up to silver plans, which cover 75 percent of costs -- ACA will subsidise 350 percent of poverty line only up to bronze plans, which covers 58 percent of costs), and you'll see poor and elderly people saddled with prohibitively high premiums.

And when many of those 22 million inevitably do get sick - it will be the public that foots the bill anyway - since hospitals will not leave someone untreated even is they can't pay. The hospital will absorb the loss and pass on the additional cost to others with insurance or who can pay and the cycle continues.

The best way to reduce medical costs is through monitoring and preventive care. Having insurance can help with both by increasing communication and lowering the costs of preventive care.

Survival of the fittest. Life is a competition. Be competitive. If you can't afford it, work towards it. If you can't cause you're sick, well, survival of the fittest

Congress could try to fix obama care.

exthrower wrote:

Obamacare has failed....Something has to be done....We are 20 trillion in debt which rules out single payer...What is your solution?

This seems like insanity...

The issue is healthcare costs. Insurance isn't healthcare.

Deciding to what degree it will be subsidized puts an over-emphasis on who pays what, but it doesn't do anything directly to reduce healthcare costs.

In my mind there are two components to healthcare - those issues that are created by our choices/behaviors and those that we have no control over.

The care for the former should have costs for each individual that encourage prevention/healthier behaviors yet are also based on ability to pay so that minor issues don't become major issues that are much more expensive and will eventually be borne by society.

The costs for those things we have no control over such as genetic problems (Kimmels's kid), should be subsidized but medications here in the US shouldn't cost many times what they cost in other countries.

We need to be looking at things that drive the costs of office visits, hospital stays, medications, etc. to astronomical levels. Deciding how to pay for things that are far too expensive to being with puts our attention on the wrong things.

There are have been very insightful previous threads on this topic by people far more informed and insightful that myself that clearly explain why healthcare in the US is not market driven and shouldn't be as long as we choose to be humane.

This discussion on who pays (government/individuals) for insurance seems like arguing over how to arrange chairs on the deck of the Titanic. We're not focused on the right things.

Those people will just have to get jobs, and with the booming economy from all the coal jobs that are coming back and the infrastructure jobs from building the wall, that shouldn't be a problem.

diet snapple wrote:

Congress could try to fix obama care.

exthrower wrote:

Obamacare has failed....Something has to be done....We are 20 trillion in debt which rules out single payer...What is your solution?

That would mean admitting that the AHCA though flawed has some good elements, and that cannot be allowed.

Insurance companies provide nothing, but take massive profits. They don't actually provide care, just move some paper around and create a massive amount of inefficiency in the system.

Form a quasi-governmental not-for-profit "insurance" company which provides a basic level of plan that is affordable for all, or is subsidized for low-income people, whatever. These plans may not be very good, you may have to wait months for non-urgent care, but they will provide something.

This is a NATIONAL thing. Enough of the 50 different exchanges or plans for 50 different states bullshit. All that does is create more paperwork, more inefficiency, more waste.

Those who want a better plan can buy coverage through an existing health insurance company for whatever they want. If employees want to band together and force their employers to provide better coverage, they will.

Cut college athletics at public universities.

exthrower wrote:

Obamacare has failed....Something has to be done....We are 20 trillion in debt which rules out single payer...What is your solution?

Differential news reader wrote:

So in other words, ACA forced 45 million people who didn't want insurance to pay for it as a "tax", and now only half of those are able to get rid of it under the current Senate plan (or at least the CBO says so, though they were MASSIVELY wrong about Obamacare)?

I'm yet to meet the person who says, "I don't want health insurance." When I do, I will know that I have met the world's stupidest person.

exthrower wrote:

RossiCheated wrote:

I'm yet to meet the person who says, "I don't want health insurance." When I do, I will know that I have met the world's stupidest person.

I don't want the government involved and dictating to me about the choices I have to make.

But you WILL want free care when you show up uninsured with an injury/heart attack/cancer?

Differential news reader wrote:

So in other words, ACA forced 45 million people who didn't want insurance to pay for it as a "tax", and now only half of those are able to get rid of it under the current Senate plan (or at least the CBO says so, though they were MASSIVELY wrong about Obamacare)?

It's amazing people like you exist in this world. Please jump off a bridge. And if you have kids, please take them with you. You're lack of logic is astounding.

Marksch wrote:

exthrower wrote:

I don't want the government involved and dictating to me about the choices I have to make.

But you WILL want free care when you show up uninsured with an injury/heart attack/cancer?

Free care, eh? Sounds like we already had single payer then - so why did we get rid of it? BOOM.

An Econ Major wrote:

Differential news reader wrote:

So in other words, ACA forced 45 million people who didn't want insurance to pay for it as a "tax", and now only half of those are able to get rid of it under the current Senate plan ... ?

Yup, and fewer healthy young people buying health insurance will force premiums up for everyone else. Dictionary definition of death spiral.[/quote]

Too bad car insurance is not optional for many people. I could easily accept millennials males paying $10k per year to be allowed to drive while older people forgo it all together. Let millennial boys eat "beautiful" cake.