Minnesota Network for Progressive Action


 
Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites

Listed on BlogShares

 
site search

Site Meter
 
  Progressive Political Blog

Progressive Politics in Minnesota, the Nation, and the World

"I'm Not On Obamacare, I'm On The ACA!"

Category: Health Care
Posted: 01/13/17 14:33

by Dave Mindeman

There is a Reddit thread that is going viral that I believe is typical of the misinformation that many people have been given about their health care.

This comment thread started when a critic of Obamacare began praising the Senate vote that begins the repeal process. Here are the pertinent excerpts.
(Forgive some of the language...you know, comments)

OCare Opponent: Jesus, where to start? First, we're talking about Obamacare, not the ACA. Secondly, my healthcare is through the ACA, so I'm definitely not the kind of person to look down on others for needing help. I'm just saying that I am glad this is finally happening because Obamacare was a failure from the start. Remember Healthcare.gov? All of this was the brainchild of liberals and they couldn't even get the site run right. We didn't and they couldn't. Again it was a mistake that is finally being fixed.

1st Responder: Wait if you're on Obamacare, why the f--- are you celebrating the outcome of this vote? If the Republicans get what they want, you will lose your insurance.

OCare Opponent: I'm not on Obamacare. My insurance is through the ACA (Affordable Care Act), which was what they had to come up with after Obamacare crashed and burned as bad as it did. So, I'm going to be fine.


2nd Responder: Holy Sh--!

1st Responder: No, seriously, are you f---ing kidding me? THEY'RE THE SAME F---ING THING! Obamacare is just a stupid name for the ACA that the Republicans came up with to make moronic voters like you automatically despise the idea of it just by hearing the name. And it f---ing worked I guess.


2nd Responder: Je--- Chr---! Seriously. All this time and you never once checked for yourself to see what was up with this whole Obamacare controversy? Didn't once bother asking if relying solely on Glen "f---ing" Beck for your political commentary might not be the best use of all the resources you have at your disposal?

The whole thread is on Reddit here.

It is kind of discouraging that we had voters going into this election with that kind of polluted information.

Sigh.
permalink
09/07/17 10:07



 
Ford
01/17/17 21:17
Fair enough. But a 27% compounded growth rate serves to illustrate how messed up this is.

What I find most distressing is that the big appeal to expanding the risk pool was supposed to reduce or eliminate the need for public assistance. Yet we don't see the promised "dividend." If general revenues were being used to fund the needs for the poor, and now that risk pool funds it, then there should be some benefits accruing to the general revenue funds. All those people paying in so much extra should be visible in reductions in the rate of confiscation of income.

Seriously, the notion that a married couple is considered rich and unworthy of help happens with a household income of $67,000. If that was my household income, then my medical needs would represent nearly 40% of my gross income! If that income comes from wages, you can add the medicare payment at 2.9% or an additional $1943 of costs.

Military and medical ethics would demand a cost/benefit analysis. Scarce resources get applied to those with the greatest opportunity to provide a return for those paying for the costs. It sounds Orwellian but I assure you those conversations are going on all over D.C.--Sarah Palin's death panels are working overtime trying to figure out the winners and losers.

Donald said he wants to provide everyone with health care. I suspect this is going to manifest itself as the free clinics we see in rural poor areas--currently funded by charity.

Or perhaps they intend to exhume Richard Nixon's price controls. that has been tried before. Declaring pricing on procedures is a recipe for those creative medical coders to assign values to additional procedures or sub-procedures.

Either we figure this out or we will see another Orwellian feature--mandatory euthanization--or the old fashioned way--euthanize by way of denial of care.

I don't like it. I'm just sayin'...


 
01/17/17 20:32
Well, Ford. As I understand it, the Republican plan relies heavily on HSA accounts - so you are ahead of the curve. But really, Comparing premiums 10 years ago, to today is kind of absurd - when you factor in that insurance was increasing double digits well before the ACA went into effect. The inflationary increase comes from the health insurance providers. Obamacare increases only come from forcing them to give us real, honest insurance.
 
Ford
01/17/17 16:28
My Blue Cross payment for my wife and myself was $1132/month in November. Today they took $1501. My 8th grade public school education taught me that is a 33% increase.

No subsidy. I get to deduct it against my self employment income. This is a high deductible HSA plan, which means funding my 2017 HSA is another $7200. $18000 in premiums plus $7200 in HSA is over $25,000/year. And all I get for it is a physical, free medical portion of an annual eye exam.

10 years ago I covered my whole family for $240/month. Now the two of us spend roughly $2100/month and they call it the "Silver HSA."

My 12th grade education says that is a 27% year-over-year growth rate. My retirement accounts are lucky to earn 4%!

You can call this turd by whatever name you want. It is seriously broken.




 


« First « Previous

Calendar

« December 2017 »
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31


Archive

(one year)

Categories


Latest posts



Links


RSS Feeds

RSS 0.91
RSS 2.0

 
 
 
Powered by
Powered by SBlog
 
Copyright © Minnesota Network for Progressive Action. All rights reserved. Legal. Privacy Policy. Sitemap.