The health insurance 'death spiral' hitting more and more Americans

T. A. Gardner said:
I am suggesting that. like with everything the government runs, there is no competition and the costs to bureaucrats is irrelevant. In a pay-as-you-go system where there is competition in the market providers are forced to deliver a quality product at a cost the market will bear. None of that is present in a Socialized medical system. Quality is irrelevant, or nearly so. Delivery of services has no urgency. Cost for what you get is irrelevant too. What matters to those running a socialized medical system is that the services delivered are, at least on paper, available and that the budgeted funding is what is spent.

So, for example, if you needed an MRI in a free-market healthcare system, you'd pay what it costs to do the MRI plus some profit margin. The wait time would be minimal because long waits increase chances of the competition outdoing you. In a socialized system, the MRI may have to be offered because the government rules say so. But you might have to wait six-months to a year to get one because equipment, technicians, and costs have to be controlled. The bureaucrats don't care if you die. They care that their budget is met and that the process is offered on paper.

Thus, in a for profit, free market system competition, quality of outcomes, and doing that at a price customers will pay is what's important. In a socialized system, meeting budget and required processes along with documentation are what's important. Customers are just a nusiance.
Click to expand...
If you ever worked for the government, you would find mostly dedicated professionals. Remove fleecing the rubes from the equation, and you find people trying to do the best job they can.
 
Life is Golden said:
That's impossible because the entire insurance industry was destablized by it.
Click to expand...
No it wasn't. Only the individually purchased policies were. Company plans were largely unaffected. Insurance companies had a big part in designing it and they did so to maximize their profits without pissing big corporations off. They played the Democrats and Obama like a $3 fiddle.

The expanded Medicaid on the other hand, was a Democrat classic bait and switch. They wanted states to buy in offering huge subsidies at first. These would later be phased out, and the states would have to raise taxes massively to pay for it. The Democrat run states fell hook, line, and sinker for it while the Red states were far more reluctant to opposed to adopting it. The Democrats played that as the red states being arrogant fools and pawns of the rich. Today it's the blue states that are in desperate need of more taxes and money to pay for what was a for shit plan.
 
Nordberg said:
If you ever worked for the government, you would find mostly dedicated professionals. Remove fleecing the rubes from the equation, and you find people trying to do the best job they can.
Click to expand...

Is that so, Nerdsperg?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
No it wasn't. Only the individually purchased policies were. Company plans were largely unaffected. Insurance companies had a big part in designing it and they did so to maximize their profits without pissing big corporations off. They played the Democrats and Obama like a $3 fiddle.

The expanded Medicaid on the other hand, was a Democrat classic bait and switch. They wanted states to buy in offering huge subsidies at first. These would later be phased out, and the states would have to raise taxes massively to pay for it. The Democrat run states fell hook, line, and sinker for it while the Red states were far more reluctant to opposed to adopting it. The Democrats played that as the red states being arrogant fools and pawns of the rich. Today it's the blue states that are in desperate need of more taxes and money to pay for what was a for shit plan.
Click to expand...

The "law" restricted insurance companies from assessing risk; from underwriting. What would happen to car insurance or homeowner's insurance companies if they were legally forbidden to assess risk? You could wreck a car, buy a policy the next day and the company would have to pay for it. That's the exact concept which happened to health insurance. It destroyed their business, they literally had to DEPEND on gubmint subsidies to stay afloat when previously, they could assess risk, and deny coverage to someone with terminal cancer or another pre-existing expensive condition.

Stop buying the lies that insurance companies"wanted" this and profitted, it is false. All it did was destablize the entire industry and that was by design.
 
Life is Golden said:
The "law" restricted insurance companies from assessing risk; from underwriting. What would happen to car insurance or homeowner's insurance companies if they were legally forbidden to assess risk? You could wreck a car, buy a policy the next day and the company would have to pay for it. That's the exact concept which happened to health insurance. It destroyed their business, they literally had to DEPEND on gubmint subsidies to stay afloat when previously, they could assess risk, and deny coverage to someone with terminal cancer or another pre-existing expensive condition.

Stop buying the lies that insurance companies"wanted" this and profitted, it is false. All it did was destablize the entire industry and that was by design.
Click to expand...
That applies to individual policies. Group policies used by businesses were unaffected.

Obamacare brought health insurance companies historic profits​

A Just the News analysis of public financial records from four of the nation's largest health insurance companies found that net earnings ballooned about 216% from 2010 to 2024.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/...made-billions-at-taxpayer-expense/ar-AA1QbJ7u


Health insurers’ stock prices doubled from the ACA’s inception in 2014 through 2018, with the top five health insurers’ annual profits jumping by 230, 000 percent, with much of that going to UnitedHealthcare.
 
We are paying hard for never fixing our very expensive shit medical system.....Obama lied......he never even attempted to fix the system.....he only was interested in increasing its cost.....the wrong direction.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
You do know that only 7% of Americans buy a plan off the Obamacare (ACA) marketplace don't you?


So, 7% of Americans are getting fucked over by that shitty Obamacare insurance plan. Maybe it's time we just dumped it and went back to what it was before because it would lower the cost of plans for 7% of Americans.
Click to expand...


If we dump Obama's fascist care, can we cut healthcare cost to the consumer by 75% - back to where it was before the Marxists started fucking with it?
 
Nearly 50 million Americans have gained health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplaces at some point since its major coverage provisions took effect in 2014. When combining the ACA marketplaces with the law's Medicaid expansion program, the legislation has expanded healthcare access to tens of millions of citizens over more than a decade of implementation
 
Guno צְבִי said:
Nearly 50 million Americans have gained health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplaces at some point since its major coverage provisions took effect in 2014. When combining the ACA marketplaces with the law's Medicaid expansion program, the legislation has expanded healthcare access to tens of millions of citizens over more than a decade of implementation
Click to expand...

Then, there's nothing for you to worry about, is there, Jew?No!?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top